The goal-setting motive of our world online congress is the actualization of discussion about multipolarity on a global scale at a high intellectual level.

By multipolarity, we mean not just loyalty to the Westphalian system based on the recognition of national sovereignty, but the balance of "great space", states-continents that unite various peoples and political entities on the basis of belonging to a particular civilization - Chinese, Russian, Islamic, Indian, Western European, Latin American, African, etc.

United under the auspices of the thesis that the peoples of the world are essentially thoughts of God, the event will feature politicians, experts, scientists, philosophers, journalists, writers and public figures from around the globe, including the states of East, South and West Asia, Pacific Ocean, Eurasia, Europe, Africa, South and North America.

The meeting is organized with the support of Nova Resistência (Brazil), the New International Order Initiative (Turkey), the International Eurasian Movement (Russia), the Thinkers Forum (China) and the International Movement of Russophiles.

We invite you to become spectators of the conference, which will bring together representatives of various civilizations and cultures, embodying the diversity of the world.

Our common goal is to imagine this coming, new and better world order, to propose its outlines, to formulate ideological principles - beyond the obsessive Western ideologies of the New Age.

The detailed program of the webinar can be found below.

1. Opening of the conference – 7.00 a.m. (Moscow time), 12.00 p.m. (Beijing time)

Presentations:

1. Nikolay Malinov – Chairman of the International Rusophile Movement and Chairman of the National Rusophile Movement in Bulgaria

4. Alexander Dugin (Russia) – Head of International Eurasian Movement, Director of Tsargrad Institute

4. Rafael Machado – Head of Nova Resistência (Brazil) – initiator of the conference.

2. East and South Asia and the Pacific

7.20 am Moscow time (12.20 pm Beijing time). Duration: 2 hours.

Moderator: Wenqing Wu – China (Thinkers' Forum).

Speakers:

Zhang Weiwei (China)- professor of international relations at Fudan University in Shanghai.

Li Xiguang (China)- professor of Tsinghua University, director of Tsinghua University International Center for Communication Studies.

Vivek Valapoil (India) — independent researcher,  co-founder of "Smart Haiti" project

Atul Aneja (India) –  journalist and writer. The Strategic Affairs Editor at The Hindu newspaper.

Shahzada Rahim (Pakistan)  –  journalist and commentator, political scientist

Cynthia McKinney (USA-Bangladesh) – an American politician and activist, former member of the US House of Representatives and the Green Party's nominee for President in 2008.

Dr. Tawfique Haque (Bangladesh) – Professor, Department of Political Science and Sociology (Chair), South Asian Institute of Policy and Governance (Director),  the founder of the Mercy Mission movement.

Maram Susli (Australia) – aka "Syrian Girl," is a Syrian activist and commentator, who lives in Australia.

Connie Bakrie (Indonesia) – Indonesian entrepreneur and philanthropist. The founder of the Bakrie Center Foundation, which supports education and entrepreneurship programs in Indonesia.

Dr. Naing Swe Oo – founder and Executive Director of the Thayniga Institute for Strategic Studies, Senior Advisor of the Myanmar Institute of Strategic and International Studies

Senator Sehar Kamran (Pakistan) – politician and former member of the Senate of Pakistan.

Kimura Mitsuhiro (Japan)- thistorian and professor at the University of Tokyo

Ross Alexander Cameron  (Australia) – political scientist and commentator. A research fellow at the University of Canberra's National Security

Matthew Robson (New Zealand) — former deputy leader of the Progressive Party, and served in the Parliament for about 10 years. Former Minister for Disarmament and Arms Control and former Deputy Foreign Minister of New Zealand (1999-2002)

Khin Maung Zaw (Myanmar) – Joint Secretary of the Myanmar Institute of Strategic and International Studies

Mukadda Bruce Shillingsworth (Australia) – Native Australian activist, participant in numerous protests for indigenous rights in Australia, human rights defender.

3. West Asia

Starts at 9.20 Moscow time (9.20 Ankara time). Duration: 1 hour.

Moderator: Berke Mustafa Berkil – Turkey (The New International Order Initiative)

Speakers:

dr. Doğu Perinçek (Türkiye) – chairman of the Patriotic Party (Vatan)

Hanieh Tarkian  (Iran) – Geopolitical analyst&Islamic Lecturer

Amal Wahdan (Palestine) – Civil rights activist

Farid Al-Shohof (Syria) – independent researcher

Zeinab Mehanna (Lebanon) – journalist, Islamic scholar

Zeinab al Safar (Iraq) – Iraqi-Lebanese TV Host, Chief Editor, Executive Producer & Academic Researcher.

Erol Ugurlu (Turkey) – Head of the Turkish-Russian Friendship House

Bouchra Al Khalil (Lebanon) – lawyer, ex-defenders of former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein

Foad Izadi (Iran) –  Associate Professor of Faculty of World Studies (Tehran University)

4. Eurasia

Starts at 10.20 a.m. Moscow time. Duration – 2 hours

Moderator: Leonid Savin – Russia (Tsargrad Institute)

Speakers:

Ardzinba Inal Batovich (Abkhazia) – Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Abkhazia

Sergey Glazyev (Russia) – current member of the board for integration and macroeconomics of the Eurasian Economic Commission. Adviser to the President of the Russian Federation.

Konstantin Malofeev (Russia) – Deputy Chairman of the World Russian People's Council, founder of Tsargrad TV, Chairman of Tsargrad

Vladimir Berezovsky (Uzbekistan) – journalist, editor in chief of the Internet publication vesti.uz, human rights defender

Rishabh Sethi (India) – Master scholar of International relations, Tver state university, Expert analyst of International relations

Mirbashirooglu Elshad (Azerbaijan) – Member of Parliament (Milli Majlis) of the Republic of Azerbaijan, Member of Board of the New Azerbaijan Party.

Mammadov Elshad  (Azerbaijan) – Professor, Odlar Yurdu University.

Regina Sysoeva (Kazakhstan) – international expert

Maxim  Kramarenko (Kazakhstan) – Deputy Chairman of the World Coordination Council of Russian Compatriots.

Babukhanyan Hayk (Armenia) – Leader of "Strong Armenia with Russia. For a New Union", Chairman of the "Constitutional Right" Union

Tagaev Mamed  (Kyrgyzstan) – Director of Institute of Russian Language of KSUU, Dr. Philological sciences, professor – "Dialogue of languages and cultures in Great Eurasia".

Irina Tadtaeva (South Ossetia) – Scholar at A. Tibilov South Ossetian State University

Erdenechuluun Lusan (Mongolia) – former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Mongolia.

Azarenok Grigory  (Belarus) – journalist, broadcaster

Lushch Sergey  – (Belarus), head of public organization "Young Russia", deputy chairman of the Coordination Council of Russian Compatriot Organizations

Kornilov Alexander (Estonia) -Head of Baltija.eu.

Rosca Yuri (Moldova) – journalist, former Deputy Prime Minister of the Republic of Moldova.

Shirinov Olim  (Tajikistan) – blogger

Pepe Escobar (Brazil), international journalist, geopolitical analyst (now in Moscow, coming to the studio at 12.00).

12.00 – Lanfranco Cirillo (Russia-Italy) – architect, businessman.

5. Europe

Starts at 12.30 p.m. Moscow time. Time in Rome (GMT+2) – 1.20 p.m. Duration: 4 hours.

Moderator: Lorenzo Pacini (Italy) – political scientist, expert of the International Eurasian Movement.

Speakers:

Jan Carnogursky (Slovakia) – Prime Minister of the Slovak Republic within Czechoslovakia in 1991-1992

Roger Jürg Köppel (Switzerland) – publisher and editor-in-chief at the weekly magazine Die Weltwoche

Srđan Mazalica (Bosnia and Herzegovina) – A member of the National Assembly of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina

Waldemar Herdt (Germany) – Businessman, former member of the German parliament (Bundestag)

Alexander Markovics (Austria) – Editor-in-chief of Agora Europa, historian, Secretary General of the Suvorov Institute.

Johann Bäckman (Finland) – Human rights activist, scholar, sociologist, criminologist

Markku Siira (Finland) – Geopolitical analyst

Refoyo Enrique (Spain) – political scientist, translator

Marvin Atudorei (Romania) – President of Non-Aligned Countries Forum, PhD in Philosophy, writer, journalist. Romania Civica TV.

Lorenzo Pacini (Italy) – professor of political philosophy and geopolitics, and Italian referee for International Eurasian Movement

Robert Steuckers (Belgium) – essayist and politician.

Mateusz Piskorski (Poland) – Polish politician, lecturer, political scientist and journalist, member of the Fifth Sejm

Juan Antonio Aguilar (Spain) – Director of Spanish Institute of Geopolitics

Guy Mettan (Switzerland) – politician, political scientist and journalist, the founder of the Swiss Press Club in Geneva.

Alexander Wolfheze (Netherlands/Hungary) – philosopher, writer

Andreja Lovic (Serbia) – Political scientist, security policy analyst

Javier de Lara (Spain) – independent researcher

Diego Fusaro (Italy) - philosopher and lecturer in history of philosophy

Dimitrios Konstantakopoulos (Greece) – independent researcher, Former adviser to the Greek Prime Minister Andreas Papandreou and former Member of Secretariat of the Central Committee of the SYRIZA Party

Yannis Rachiotis (Greece) – Lawyer, public figure

Nikola Avreiski (Bulgaria) – an international scholar

Alastair Crooke (Great Britain) – Former British diplomat, founder and director of the Conflicts Forum

Keith Bennett (Great Britain) – Co-Editor of Friends of Socialist China and also the Editor of the International Manifesto Group

Pierre Tonna (Malta) – Entrepreneur

Mikis Filaniotis (Cyprus) – Member of the International Russophile Movement

Eliseo Bertolasi (Italy) – Anthropologist, political scientist, independent journalist

Luís Ribeiro (Portugal) – Journalist and Geopolitical Analyst

Alexandre Guerreiro (Portugal) – Political and Security Analyst Academic, UNHRC TV Commentator

Zmago Jelinčič Plemeniti (Slovenia) – Chairman of the Slovenian National Party (Vodja stanka SNS)

Nuño Rodríguez (Spain) – Political Scientist & Analyst

Gonzalo Collado (Italy-Argentina) – Analyst, specialist in Geopolitics, International Security and Global Affairs

Guillermo Rocafort (Spain) –  PhD in economics, specially in predatory funds. University professor

Joaquin Flores (US) – Mexican-American journalist and analyst and director of Center for Syncretic Studies.

Bobana Andjelkovic (Serbia) – independent researcher

Branislav Tapuskovic (Serbia) – Lawyer, former defender of Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic

Vladimir Kršljanin (Serbia) – Vice President of the International Slavic Academy of Sciences, Education, Arts and Culture, High Advisor to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Serbia

Elie Hatem (France) – international lawyer

Fabrice Sorlin (France) – political scientist, journalist.

Laurent James (France) – philosopher and writer

Lucien Cerise (France) – author, geopolitician

Arnaud Develay  (France) – an international human rights lawyer, member of the Washington State Bar (USA) and the Paris Bar (France).

Youssef Hindi (France) – Political analyst, journalist, philosopher

Pierre-Antoine Plaquevent (France)  – author, journalist

Eftim Kletnikov (North Macedonia) – poet, translator.

6.  Africa

Starts at 16:30 Moscow time. Time in West Africa (GMT 0) is 1.30 pm. Duration: 1 hour.

Moderator: Souleymane Anta Ndiaye – Senegal (Vice-President of the International Russophile Movement).

Speakers:

Kemi Seba (Benin) – a Pan-Africanist political leader, the head of his NGO Urgences Panafricanistes

Dr. Franklin Nyamsi (Cameroon) – philosopher, writer

Barré Osman (Somalia) – independent researcher – speaker in doubt

Smaine Djella (Algeria) –  professor, permanent researcher in CRASC (Centre of Research in Social and Cultural Anthropology)

Amadou Tidiane Wone (Senegal) – Former Senegalese Ambassador to Canada, former Senegalese Minister of Culture

Dr. Abdelaziz Messaoudi (Tunisia) – Vice-President of the International Association of Friends of Crimea

Adama Diabate (Mali) – Activist in the non-governmental organisation Group of Patriots of Mali (GPM)

Fatoumata Sidibe (Mali) – Chairman of the Sports Medicine Commission of the National Olympic and Sports Committee of Mali

Younoussou Doukansy (Mali) – Youth Secretary of the Group of Patriots of Mali.

Amadou Sekou Gambi (Mali) – Chairman of the Malian Association of Students and Lovers of the Russian Language

Souleymane Ndiaye (Senegal) – Vice-President of the International Russophile Movement

Osvaldo Mboko (Angola) – Political columnist, TV commentator

Khule Skosana (South Africa) – Member of the interim leadership of the youth league of the ruling African National Congress (ANC) party

Tapsoba Ludovic (Burkina Faso) – Chairman of the association of former Soviet/Russian university students

Dereck Meriton (Seychelles) – Youth empowerment Seychelles (YES) activist

Patricia Kalinga (Zambia) – Head of the ZAMRUS Association of Soviet/Russian Graduates

Iubinda Habazoka (Zambia) – President of the Economic Association of Zambia

Mekki Mohamed Said (Algeria) – Professor at Algiers 3 University

7. South and North America block.

Starts at 17.30 Moscow time. 11:30 am Eastern Brazil (GMT-3).
Duration: 2 hours 30 minutes

Moderator: Raphael Machado – Nova Resistência (Brazil)

Participants:

Israel Lira (Peru) writer, director of the Center of Crisolist Studies of Peru.

Raphael Machado (Brazil) – Head of Nova Resistência

Lucas Leiroz (Brazil) journalist, secretary of foreign relations of Nova Resistência.

Juan Gabriel Caro Rivera (Colombia) –  metapolitical and geopolitical analyst, founder of Vanguardia Colombia

Carlos Mamami  (Peru) –  geopolitical analyst, Director of the think-tank Proyecto Patria

Vicente Quintero (Venezuela) – Venezuelan social scientist

Alberto Buela (Argentina) — philosopher, geopolitician

Luis Bozzo (Chile)-  philosopher and national director of Chilean Center of Patriotic Studies

Manuel Espinoza (Nicaragua) – geopolitical analyst, Director of the Regional Center of International Analysis of Nicaragua

Mauricio Ramirez (Costa Rica) –  journalist, director of the think-tank AsiaTV

Sergio Arria (Venezuela) – Vice-Minister of Culture of Venezuela

Jose Francisco Herrera (Costa Rica) — independent researcher

Gabriela Cultelly (Uruguay)  – historian, economist and member of Intelectuals and Artists in Defense of Humanity Network.

Dr. Scott Bennett (USA) – Distinguished Professor of Political Science at the Pennsylvania State University.

Prof. Alexandre Hage (Brazil) – independent researcher

Juan Miguel Díaz Ferrer (Venezuela) – professor, ex-Vice-Minister of Culture of Venezuela

Marcelo Ramírez (Argentina) — independent researcher

Mario Padilla (Cuba) – professor of the Center of the investigations of international politics.

Hugo Moldiz (Bolivia) –  journalist, ex-Minister of Government of Bolivia

8. Closing of the conference: 20.00-20.10 (Moscow time) — 14.00 — 14.10 Eastern Brazil (GMT-3).:

Rafael Machado, Head of Nova Resistência (Brazil)

Dear Colleagues,

I warmly welcome the participants and organisers of the Online World Conference on Multipolarism. It is gratifying that your forum has brought together leading political, public and academic representatives from several dozen countries from almost every continent in the world. We can only welcome this interest in a frank and depoliticised exchange of views.

The importance of such discussions cannot be overestimated. It is obvious that the 'end of history' proclaimed after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the USSR did not take place. Attempts to establish a unipolar model of the world order - with the decision-making centre in Washington - failed.

Today, the movement towards global multipolarism is a geopolitical fact and reality. We see how the new world centres, especially in Eurasia, Asia-Pacific, the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America, are making impressive progress in various fields - based on independence, state sovereignty, and cultural and civilisational identity. At the same time, they are guided by their national interests and pursue independent policies in domestic and foreign affairs. They no longer want to be hostages to alien geopolitical games and executors of alien wills.

The facts speak for themselves. The share of G7 states in the global economy has shrunk significantly over the past three decades. And the weight of emerging market economies is steadily growing. Now the world's leading economic power - in terms of purchasing power parity - is China, which skilfully combines market mechanisms and state regulation methods.

We are witnessing the continuous renewal of the infrastructure of international relations. A striking example of multipolar diplomacy are the activities of new types of multilateral associations, such as the SCO and BRICS. Within them, countries with different political and economic systems and different value and civilisation platforms cooperate effectively in a variety of areas. The BRICS can rightly be described as a kind of cooperative 'mesh' that crosses the old North-South and West-East demarcation lines. It is no coincidence that more and more countries in the global South are seeking to establish links with these associations and become full members.

As Russian President Vladimir Putin noted, 'the trend towards multipolarism in the world is inevitable, it will only intensify. And those who do not understand this and do not follow this trend will lose'.

It seems logical that the efforts of Washington and its satellites to reverse the course of history, to force the international community to live according to an invented 'rules-based order', are failing. I will only mention the complete failure of the Westerners' line to isolate Russia. The world's majority states, in which about 85% of the Earth's population resides, are unwilling to 'pull the chestnuts out of the fire' of the former colonial metropolises.

Friends,

in today's multipolar world, with its cross-border challenges and threats, the only sensible alternative to confrontation, from which the promoters stand to lose, is to unite the efforts of the world's major centres on the principles of the UN Charter, including practical respect for the sovereign equality of states. Today we must all recognise the irreversibility of a more equitable polycentric world order. It is in our common interest to ensure that the multipolar architecture is not based on a 'balance of fears', but on a balance of interests, on universally recognised norms of international law, on a mutually respectful dialogue between different civilisations, religions and cultures.

Russia remains at the forefront of international efforts to strengthen multipolar, legal and democratic principles of communication between states. To this end, we will continue to work actively within the United Nations, including the Group of Friends in Defence of the UN Charter. Of course, we will continue to closely coordinate our steps with many like-minded friends, allies and people, including those in the CSTO, the EAEC, the CIS, the BRICS, the SCO and other regional groupings in the developing world.

Source: mid.ru

 Video messaggio del ministro degli Esteri russo Sergey Lavrov ai partecipanti e agli organizzatori della Conferenza mondiale sul multipolarismo online, Mosca, 29 aprile 2023

  Mensaje en vídeo del ministro ruso de Asuntos Exteriores, Serguéi Lavrov, a los participantes y organizadores de la Conferencia Mundial sobre Multipolaridad en Línea, Moscú, 29 de abril de 2023

 ΒΙΝΤΕΟΣΚΟΠΗΜΕΝΟ ΜΗΝΥΜΑ ΤΟΥ ΡΩΣΟΥ ΥΠΟΥΡΓΟΥ ΕΞΩΤΕΡΙΚΩΝ ΣΕΡΓΚΕΙ ΛΑΒΡΟΦ ΠΡΟΣ ΤΟΥΣ ΣΥΜΜΕΤΕΧΟΝΤΕΣ ΚΑΙ ΤΟΥΣ ΔΙΟΡΓΑΝΩΤΕΣ ΤΟΥ ΠΑΓΚΟΣΜΙΟΥ ΔΙΑΔΙΚΤΥΑΚΟΥ ΣΥΝΕΔΡΙΟΥ ΓΙΑ ΤΗΝ ΠΟΛΥΠΟΛΙΚΟΤΗΤΑ, ΜΟΣΧΑ, 29 ΑΠΡΙΛΙΟΥ 2023

 Mensagem do Ministro de Relações Exteriores da Rússia, Sergey Lavrov, aos participantes e organizadores da Conferência Global Multipolar

 Rusya Dışişleri Bakanı Sergey Lavrov'un Dünya Çevrimiçi Çok Kutupluluk Konferansı katılımcıları ve düzenleyicilerine yönelik video mesajı, Moskova, 29 Nisan 2023

 रूसी विदेश मंत्री सर्गेई लावरोव द्वारा बहुध्रुवीयता पर विश्व सम्मेलन के प्रतिभागियों और आयोजकों के लिए वीडियो संदेश ऑनलाइन, मॉस्को, 29 अप्रैल 2023

  خطاب وزير الخارجية الروسي سيركي لافروف في المؤتمر الدولي للتعددية

 多極化に関する世界会議 スピーチ ① セルゲイ・ラヴロフ外相 参加者と主催者へのビデオメッセージ。（モスクワ、2023年4月29日）

Dear colleagues,

Dear friends,

You have already listened to the speech of the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, in which he outlined the main prospects for building a multipolar world, the irreversibility and the objective reasons for this process. I would like to emphasise that for the first time the new Russian Foreign Policy Concept systematically sets out the principles of a more just and multipolar world order and aims to facilitate its implementation. I believe that in the long run such provisions will be included in the conceptual strategic documents of other states as well. This depends, among other things, on the participants in our forum - influential political scientists and thinkers.

For my part, I would like to address the communicative and informational aspect and partly the values and meaning of this process. We live in a world where media and communications have today not only a key role, but also a crucial role in certain areas of life. Please note that we are in different cities, countries, continents and time zones and, at the same time, we are communicating almost in real time. All this has become possible not only because of technology (by the way, I would like to emphasise that we communicate on a national platform, not on a western equivalent), but also because of the willingness of people from all walks of life around the world to communicate.
There is not and cannot be a single information management centre, as some Western elites aspire to. Under the present conditions, only polyphony and a compromise between many voices is possible. And, as in our "polylogue" with you, everyone's voice can and must be heard.

Unfortunately, not everyone agrees with this objectively fair approach. We are well aware that political elites in the US and Europe use information and communication technologies not for the noble purpose of bringing objective information to a wide audience, but for provocation, propaganda and sometimes even indoctrination. And this without taking into account the norms and traditions of different countries and societies.

Multipolarity based on the true sovereignty of peoples and civilisational diversity will not only help to resolve political conflicts, build a just order for all and every participant in international relations, confront attempts to establish diktat and hegemony, but also create a truly democratic society, free from interference in the internal affairs of independent states, both politically and ideologically.

Among dozens of speakers participating in the current event, it is unlikely to find a significant number who would support the agenda promoted by neoliberal circles in the West through the "tamed" media: changing gender norms, reverse LGBT discrimination, deliberate involvement of children and adolescents in queer culture. Moreover, as studies show, people in the US, Canada, the Netherlands and other countries in the collective West are far from happy that their public figures and elected officials have chosen this topic for their civic and political activity. Of course, we cannot and will not support or even accept this. As Russian President Vladimir Putin noted at the last meeting of the Valdai Discussion Club, "the difference between traditional values and so-called neoliberal values is that they are unique in each case, as they derive from the tradition of a specific society, its culture and historical experience. That is why they cannot be imposed on anyone - it is enough to respect them and to treat with care what each people chose over the centuries. This is how we understand traditional values and we are convinced that the majority of humanity shares and accepts this approach.

Dear colleagues,

I ask all participants in the current polylogue to assume that such events have an important synergetic function in building a multipolar system of international relations.

Have you noticed the importance attached by Washington to the two "democracy summits" in 2021 and 2023? However, in reality, these summits had nothing to do with democracy. We cannot exclude that all the theses delivered by the world leaders invited by the Americans were previously approved in the US. And the media effect of these events was, to be honest, extremely modest. In any case, the Americans tried to draw general attention to their initiative, but people feel the artificiality and exhaustion of this pseudo-democracy. The idea was clear: to show that the whole world, or at least a large part of it, supports the approaches dictated by the US. This is the kind of "synergy" that Washington was trying to achieve. Of course, their initial plan was doomed to failure. That's why, I think, in the media landscape, even in the West, the second "summit" received much more moderate coverage than the first. The trend is clear.

Now, notice how our initiative contrasts with this background: truly international, not imposed from above, born in the political circles of many countries around the world. I would like to thank our Chinese comrades and our friends from Brazil for their conceptual work and their boldness in promoting it on the international scene.

In conclusion, dear colleagues, I would like to express my gratitude for your attention and emphasize that we are ready to continue supporting such projects. I am convinced that many interesting speeches are still to come and we are looking forward to the final collection of reports after the Marathon.

I wish all the best to the participants and listeners.

 Thèses pour l'intervention de Maria Zakharova lors du Marathon sur la multipolarité (29 avril 2023)

 Discorso di Maria Zakharova alla Conferenza Globale sulla Multipolarità del 29 aprile 2023

 Discurso de Maria Zajárova en la Conferencia Mundial sobre la Multipolaridad, 29 de Abril de 2023

 ΟΜΙΛΙΑ ΤΗΣ ΜΑΡΙΑ ΖΑΧΑΡΟΒΑ ΣΤΗΝ ΠΑΓΚΟΣΜΙΑ ΔΙΑΣΚΕΨΗ ΓΙΑ ΤΗΝ ΠΟΛΥΠΟΛΙΚΟΤΗΤΑ, 29 ΑΠΡΙΛΙΟΥ 2023

 MARİA ZAKHAROVA'NIN KÜRESEL ÇOK KUTUPLULUK KONFERANSI'NDAKİ KONUŞMASI, 29 NİSAN 2023

 बहुध्रुवीयता पर वैश्विक सम्मेलन में मारिया ज़खारोवा का भाषण, 29 अप्रैल 2023 

 Discurso de Maria Zakharova para a Conferência Global Multipolar

 خطاب ماريا زاخاروفا في المؤتمر الدولي للتعددية القطبية 

 多極化に関する世界会議 スピーチ① マリア・ザハロワ

Speaker:  Alexander Dugin (Russia) – Head of International Eurasian Movement, Director of Tsargrad Institute

Liberalism, global liberalism, is dead. We are now witnessing its agony. What Francis Fukuyama recently believed to be the end of history, what was presented to the peoples of the world as not just the end of history, but its pinnacle, as reaching the final destination, an absolutely ideal society of liberal Western democracy, has turned out to be a lie. It turned out that the world of liberal democracy is a world of chaos, violence, segregation, racism and universal hatred. It is a world ruled by minorities. To begin with, the Western minority itself was going to rule the world's majority. One billion were going to dictate their will to seven billion. This has been the case for the last 200 years. For 200 years the European colonial powers have segregated, exploited, and abused, exporting natural resources, as well as slaves, from Africa, Asia, and Latin America.

But that time has passed. The time of the domination of this globalist hegemon, which geographically was located in the West, but also could not unite all the Western nations. That time has passed. We see this system falling apart before our eyes. The life of the American hegemon is coming to an end. And it is clinging to this world. It is trying to wage a world war to preserve the existing world order. But did the British colonial empire, as the predecessor of the American pseudo-Empire, succeed in such an endeavor? The answer is no. Both World Wars I and II, which should have served to further glorify the British Empire, ended with the United States growing in power after World War I. After World War II, during the 50s and 60s, the British Empire simply demised. And the former British colonies became independent states.

Now the United States, which colonial empire is made out of the whole world, is dictating its rules to the peoples of the world, making them pay with their American dollars, and at the same time imposing its very questionable, sometimes anti-Christian so-called liberal values, and is going to rule the world. They even called it Pax Americana. But at the same time as Fukuyama, who said that this is the end of history, that history is nearing its pinnacle, the same America was home to Samuel Huntington, who wrote that there is a world made up of civilizations. And this made him a successor not only of Arnold Toynbee, an English thinker, but also of Nikolai Yakovlevich Danilevsky, a pathbreaker, who discovered a civilizational approach to human history, a Russian thinker, philosopher, who would have turned 200 years old last year.

The civilizational approach implies that different civilizations are equal. And enjoy mutual respect. It proceeds from the fact that the Creator of the universe, the Lord God, created our world so that mankind, which once emerged from one progenitor Adam, but took different paths, could reach its historical mission and discover its civilizational talent, which manifests differently, in different peoples, in different continents. Today's world calls this civilizational approach multipolarity. Each civilization is distinctive. It has its own values, it has its own dreams, and its own ideals. And now the founding blocks of the globalist liberal rule, which was imposed on the world by American hegemony, are loosening to give way to beautiful flowers - flowers of the future 21st century, that will equally prioritize all civilizations.

Each of these civilizations, each of these poles will have its own destiny. Each of these poles will have its own future. But it must rest on mutual respect for each other. This is the essence of a multipolar world, for which Russia is now fighting in the fields of Ukraine. It is fighting not with the Ukrainian people, and not even with Ukraine, but with the entire Western minority. With the whole of NATO bloc. So that all of you, the people of different continents can regain their freedom, and forget, turn the page on this western colonialism.

 Rede von Konstantin Malofeev für die Global Multipolar Conference

 Discours de Konstantin Malofeev à l'occasion de la Conférence mondiale sur la multipolarité

 Discorsi di Konstantin Malofeev alla Conferenza Globale su Multipolarità del 29 aprile 2023 

 Toespraak van Konstantin Malofeev voor de Wereldwijde Multipolaire Conferentie

 Discurso de Konstantin Malofeev en la Conferencia Mundial Sobre la Multipolaridad del 29 de abril de 2023

 Discurso de Konstantin Malofeev para a Conferência Global Multipolar

 KONSTANTİN MALOFEEV'İN KÜRESEL ÇOK KUTUPLULUK KONFERANSI'NDAKİ KONUŞMASI, 29 NİSAN 2023

 ΟΜΙΛΙΑ ΤΟΥ KONSTANTIN MALOFEEV ΣΤΗΝ ΠΑΓΚΟΣΜΙΑ ΔΙΑΣΚΕΨΗ ΓΙΑ ΤΗΝ ΠΟΛΥΠΟΛΙΚΟΤΗΤΑ, 29 ΑΠΡΙΛΙΟΥ 2023

 बहुध्रुवीयता पर वैश्विक सम्मेलन में कोंस्टेंटिन मालोफीव का भाषण, 29 अप्रैल 2023

 خطاب قسطنطين مالوفييڤ في مؤتمر التعددية القطبيةِ العالمي

 多極化に関する世界会議 スピーチ ① コンスタンチン・マロフェーエフ

Akhundzada Arif Hasan Khan: Multipolarity and the Af-Pak Situation: 1

Akhundzada Arif Hasan Khan : Multipolarity and the Af-Pak Situation: 2

Akhundzada Arif Hasan Khan: Multipolarity and the Af-Pak Situation: 3

Zhang Weiwei (China), professor of international relations at Fudan University in Shanghai, addresses the participants and organizers the Global Conference on Multipolarity (29.04.2023).

Multipolarity and the Rise of Civilizational States

By Zhang Weiwei (Fudan Universtity)

On the eve of Chinese President Xi Jinpin’s visit to Russia on 19 March, I was interviewed by Russia Today, and I was asked how I viewed the Western heavy-handed sanctions against Russia, I said that Russia has been isolated by the West, and the West has been isolated by the rest. Why so? the reason is simple: while Russia’s military operation in Ukraine is controversial, one of Russia’s professed objectives is to change the multipolar world order led by the USA into a multipolar world order, and this objective is widely supported or at least understood by the non- Western world.

Their support for or understanding of this objective is buttressed by the fact that now major non-Western powers like China, Russia, India and Iran and more openly call themselves civilizational states. They may differ on how to define exactly the term civilizational state, yet they seem to agree on at least three themes, first, they are all respectively a unique civilization, and second, they are fed up with the Western imposition of its values on them in the name of “universal values” and third, they resist the Western interference in their internal affairs.

These rising civilizational states are indeed challenging the so-called liberal unipolar world order, and the world is thus witnessing a shifting global order from a vertical one, in which the West is above the rest, to a horizontal one, in which the West and the rest are on a par with each other in terms of wealth, power and ideas. Not to mention other non-Western powers, China alone has contributed more to world economic growth than G7 countries combined (38% vs 25%) over the past ten years. The US weaponization of US dollars in its sanctions against Russia has only led to ever more non-Western countries to abandon the use of dollars in their international trade, a huge blow to the existing unipolar economic order. Last year, 70% of Sino-Russian trade was made in their local currencies, and India, Brazil, Iran, Turkey, Indonesia and other major non-Western countries are all promoting trade in their local currencies.

It’s also ture that in international relations, Western powers have long pursued a strategy of “divide and rule” since the colonial times. In contrast, major non-Western powers, notably China, following its tradition of a civilizational state, pursues just the opposite, i.e. “unite and prosper” as shown in its massive Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which proves to be popular with most countries, and China also believes that this ideal of Unite and Prosper represents the best interests of the Chinese as well as most other peoples.

With Washington’s political power and moral authority waning fast both at home and abroad, it’s only natural for the non-Western countries to draw inspirations from their own cultures and civilizations as a way to distinguish themselves from the discredited American liberal model and its unipolar hegemony.

Interestingly, the idea of civilizational state is also appealing to many in the Western world. For instance, facing with the daunting challenges of Eureope’s “re-nationalization”, French president Macron almost openly admired the ideal of civilizational state when he referred to China, Russia and India as such examples and declared that France’s historic destiny was to guide Europe into a civilisational renewal.

For the Right in the West, the model of civilizational state is one way to defend traditional values and resist the excess of ultra-liberalism and widely perceived cultural degeneration, and for the Left, the model shows due respect for indigenous cultures and traditions as a way to reject Western imperialism and the excess of neo-liberalism.

Indeed, the rising civilisation-states of Eurasia define themselves mostly against the liberal West, while the West is now struggling to define its own identity, which seems harder than it is for China or Russia. For one thing, the liberals have long preached universal values beyond national or civilizational boundaries and believe their values are universal, neither Western, nor European, nor Judeo-Christian, yet as European political scientist Bruno Maçães claims that the liberal “West” is now dead, reflecting his sympathy for “a revolt against global rootlessness”.

However, can the West exist as an independent civilizational entity? British scholar Christoph Coker notes, “neither the Greeks nor sixteenth-century Europeans… regarded themselves as ‘Western’, a term which dates back only to the late eighteenth century.” Some Western liberals advocate a return to Europe’s Enlightenment, yet it was obvious that the Enlightenment liberalism with its universalizing tendencies led the West to its current dilemma, which have severed the West, and Europe particularly, from its own cultural roots, as Macaes notes “Western societies have sacrificed their specific cultures for the sake of a universal project.” Indeed, a culturally, socially and politically divided West, as is the case today, still has an uphill battle before shaping a common civilizational identity, if any.

In a medium-to-long term perspective, as the world order becomes increasingly more horizontal than vertical, and as the West and the rest, are more on a par with each other in terms of wealth, power and ideas, we are likely to witness the rise of more civilizational communities or states, self-claimed or genuine, of which there may well be a Western civilizational community on a par with other ones. Hopefully, the Western unilaterally defined “universal values” will be gradually replaced by certain common values endorsed by the whole international community such as peace, humanity, international solidarity and one human community, and all civilizational communities should make their contributions to this noble endeavor in the interest of all mankind.

 多極化に関する世界会議 スピーチ「多極化と文明国家の台頭」

 Multipolaritas dan Kebangkitan Negara-negara Peradaban

 La multipolarité et la montée des États civilisationnels

 Il multipolarismo e l’ascesa degli Stati civilizzatori

 Multipolariteit en de opkomst van beschavingsstaten

 Multipolarität und der Aufstieg der Zivilisationsstaaten

 Η ΠΟΛΥΠΟΛΙΚΟΤΗΤΑ ΚΑΙ Η ΑΝΟΔΟΣ ΤΩΝ ΠΟΛΙΤΙΣΜΙΚΩΝ ΚΡΑΤΩΝ

 La multipolaridad y el auge de los Estados civilizacionales

  A Multipolaridade e a Ascensão dos Estados Civilizacionais

The speech of Li Xiguang (China), professor of Tsinghua University, director of Tsinghua University International Center for Communication Studies, during the Global Conference on Multipolarity (29.04.2023).

Multi-modernity and Chinese-style modernization

Professor of School of Journalism

Tsinghua University

After the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China was held, "Chinese modernity”, “new form of human civilization", "diversity of civilizations", "coexistence of civilizations surpassing the superiority of civilizations" were written into the congress report or the newly revised party constitution. This is a brand-new way of thinking of intellectuals since European modernity was copied in the beginning of last century.

In an era when Western ideology and capitalism are fully infiltrating our lives, Chinese modernity and the new form of civilization are an important step in the production of knowledge of a new modernity.

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States and the West have been talking that only when China fully accepts Western ideological paradigms can China be qualified to become a member of modern society.

Especially in recent years, the Western media and politicians have joined hands in using racist media language to enhance a totally negative narrative of China. ”By manipulating the agenda of the international  community, the West is stepping up its speed in internalizing their ideology in non-Western societies. Any country that deviates from the Western value system, and takes an independent system from the West, it will be labeled as a "rogue nation" or "pariah".

Over the past centuiry, the Communist Party of China has fulfilled its mission, uniting the Chinese people to draw a magnificent picture in the human development on the vast land of China, and made people who have been slaved both physically and mentally by the Western colonialists for more than 100 years stand up with a brand new modernity.

Chinese modernity is defined by maintaining close ties with the people and practicing a people-centered development philosophy.For example, the common prosperity that China has emphasized is in its definition of Chinese modernity. But this key message is not in the mind of the people who hold the banner of Western modernity since European enlightenment.

After more than 40 years of reform and opening up, when we talk about Chinese-style modernization, it is no longer just the four modernizations of industry, agriculture, national defense and science and technology initiated by Premier Zhou Enlai in the 10th National Congress of CPC in 1974 At the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China in 2012, Chairman Xi on the basis of summarizing experience and in-depth analysis of the Chinese actual situation, he has formulated a plan for the overall promotion of the new modernization from the five aspects of civilization which include economy, politics, culture, society, and ecology.

The strategic goal of the "five in one" blueprint is a new version of modernity.

China was forced to start its westernization since 1840 But the Chinese modernity proposed by the 20th Party Congress was not only defined in terms of economy and society, but politics, culture, and even ecology. And the standards of the new modernity are localized in China.

Chairman Xi in his report at the 20th Party congress proposed a brand new definition of the socialism with Chinese characterisitc which is a combination of China’s actual national conditions with China's thousands of years of tradition and balue system.

The West inheriting the their colonialist tradition, continue using their colonial mentality to enslave the  developing countries economically but also ideologically by "Orientalizing" and "demonizing" southern countries.

Former U.S. Secretary of State Pompeo warned China that to keep China in its proper place. He sounds like a slave owner talking to his slaves.

In the 18th century,Europeans were deeply impressed by the wealth and style of governance of China. In the meantime, the ideas of the British classical economists like Adam Smith were woven into the story of the rise of the West: the concept of capitalist industry is " Progress” while Asia is “backward” and “authoritarian”.

German sociologist Max Weber proposed at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century that India and China lacks the cultural values necessary for capitalism. Even so, they can be "modernized," but only through a painful process of cultural transformation, removing their cultural "barriers" to capitalist development.

In the eyes of some historians, Europe has some unrivaled characteristics that make it the first to modernize. Europe thus obtained the morality and power to spread "modernity" to the whole world, while places outside Europe could not produce "modernity" independently due to cultural, political or economic "obstacles".

Many people think that these concepts, especially market capitalism and democracy, can only come from Western civilization.Because of their "perfection",the European civilization is universal, not only for the West, but for everyone.

This way of looking at the rise of the modern world is based on an imagined cultural superiority of the West. Eurocentric thinking represents the soft power of the US and the West, and believes that all advanced and excellent new ideas and practices can only come from the West.

By 2020, the last 6 million poor people in China were lifted out of poverty, and China, the most populous country in the world, have become a society out of poverty.

However, the West never regards poverty alleviation as the goal of human rights, but uses human rights as a political weapon to maintain its ideological and political  hegemony in the world, and demonizes countries whose interests may run counter to those of the West.

By wielding the big stick of "human rights", the United States is trying to maintain the political and military alliances of the West, and at the same time engage in large-scale Westernization of ideology and values around the world. But the Western modernity and neoliberalism are no longer growing. We are witnessing an expansion of Chinese spiritual power. This is a Chinese modernity and a new form of human civilization.

マルチモダンと中国的近代化

 Li Xiguang: alternatif untuk Modernitas Barat

 MULTIMODERNIDAD Y MODERNIZACIÓN CHINA

 ΠΟΛΥ-ΝΕΩΤΕΡΙΚΟΤΗΤΑ ΚΑΙ ΕΚΣΥΓΧΡΟΝΙΣΜΟΣ ΚΙΝΕΖΙΚΟΥ ΤΥΠΟΥ

Senator Sehar Kamran (Pakistan) – politician and former member of the Senate of Pakistan – addresses the Global Conference on Multipolarity (29.04.2023).

Multipolarity and perspectives of the Global South

The Importance of a Multipolar World and Equality in International Relations

BISMILLAH IRAHMAN-IRAHIM

“In the name of Allah, the most Gracious, the most Merciful”

Excellencies and Distinguished Guests,

Members of the organizing team,

Ladies & Gentlemen,

Assalam-o-Alaikum - May Peace be upon you all

Let me commence by extending felicitations to the organizers of Global Multipolarity Conference Nova Resistência (Brazil), the New International Order Initiative (Turkey), the International Eurasian Movement (Russia), the Thinkers' Forum (China), and the International Russophile Movement, for arranging this international conference on ‘Global Polarity’. My esteemed gratitude to the Embassy of the Russian Federation for providing me an opportunity to participate in this very important discourse.

This conference is being held at a time when the world is becoming increasingly multipolar, with various centres of powers emerging globally.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Multipolarity as a concept refers to a global system in which there are multiple centres of power, as opposed to a unipolar or bipolar world dominated by one or two major powers. It emphasizes upon the importance of equality and balance in international relations which is significant for maintaining peace in the world.

Multipolarity is a shift away from a unipolar world dominated by the United States to a more balanced power structure with multiple centres of influence. The Western dominance over the world is rapidly deteriorating, and the signs of a new international order can be seen on the horizon. It seems for the first time in modern history, Russia and China will be at par with the US and its Western allies, in the upcoming few years.

Distinguished Guests,

A multipolar world encourages the formation of strategic partnerships among states, as they seek to maintain a balance of power in the world. Russia and China have already formed such a strategic partnership, known as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which includes several other countries in Central Asia. BRICS is another such organisation in this regard.

According to the data from the World Bank, as of 2021, 3.6 billion people reside in the SCO and BRICS countries, approximately. Whereas the combined GDP of SCO and BRICS countries stands around approximately 24.38 trillion US dollars.

These statistics cannot be ignored. They are indicative of the new emerging power centres, outside the Western capitals. In September 2022, the SCO bloc agreed to take steps to increase the use of national currencies in trade between their countries to reduce its reliance on the U.S. dollar and other Western currencies. Whereas the BRICS alliance is already working to create its own currency which ‘does not defend the dollar or euro'.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

In recent years, we have witnessed the expansion of the SCO to include countries across Asia. Today, the Central, South and West Asian countries have become a part of this organisation as members and dialogue partners. Just last year, Iran became a full member, and recently the Kingdom of the Saudi Arabia became a dialogue partner. These developments have significant implications as it showcases the multilateralism of the organisation, and the trust they have in SCO.

Riyadh’s decision to join the SCO was not a stand-alone development but took place after China brokered a historical reconciliation deal between Saudi Arabia and Iran, to restore full diplomatic relations that were severed seven years ago. This development is a clear indication of a globally changing geo-political and geo-economic order.

The latest agreement between the Russian and Chinese President to use the Chinese yuan as a settlement currency with emerging economies, as well as the Saudi declaration to begin trading oil with China in the Yuan currency are a demonstration of the de-dollarisation and partitioning of the global economy.

Distinguished Guests,

These developments will have significant implications for the world in general and global South in particular. It presents both opportunities and challenges. On one hand, a more balanced power structure could mean greater representation and influence for developing countries in international affairs. This could lead to more equitable and just global governance arrangements that consider the needs and interests of the global South.

On the other hand, the rise of multiple centres of power could also lead to increasing competition and conflict among nations. This could intensify existing conflicts and inequalities, particularly if developing countries are caught in the crossfire or forced to choose sides, if they do not follow the path of cooperation.

Unfortunately, the power parity between the global north and south has always been skewed in favour of the former. The countries of the global south have historically been marginalized in the global order for a long time.

History is witness that the implementation of unilateral sanctions, both economic and diplomatic, by powerful states in their bid to control the international power hierarchy and to intimidate other states has always backfired, to say the at least. Because when countries feel that they are being treated unfairly or unequally, they may become resentful and hostile towards other nations, leading to tension and even violence.

Distinguished Guests,

The countries in the global south have diverse perspectives on the concept of multipolarity. The perception varies depending on the specific country and its geopolitical context. Many factors, such as economic development, political ideology, and historical relationships with powerful nations, influence how they approach the concept of multipolarity.

Pakistan being a country of the global south has been a victim of unfair policies of the global north, and has faced discrimination as well as unilateral international sanctions which has impacted its economy. But today, owing to the changing global order, Pakistan has an opportunity to make the right choices which can contribute to the growth and prosperity of the country.

Islamabad has historically enjoyed a strong strategic relationship with Beijing spanning over decades. The two countries share bilateral cooperation in different sectors, especially in defense and economy, which is evident in the form of joint coproduction of JF-17 thunder jets, as well as the China Pakistan Economic Corridor.

It is no secret that Pakistan is an energy deficient country and as a result the CPEC has focused primarily on investing in energy projects in the country. As a result, since its initiation, as many as 11 power projects with accumulative capacity of 6,369MW have been completed, while 10 more projects are under various stages of development.

On the other hand, Pakistan has also expressed its desire to extend cooperation in the field of energy with Russia as it is a resource rich country. When Pakistan needed to import oil at discounted rates, the Russian market offered the opportunity.

As a result, just last week, Pakistan placed its first order for discounted Russian crude oil, and its imports are expected to reach 100,000 barrels per day. This is a significant development and will further strengthen relations between Islamabad and Moscow, in the coming days.

Dear Friends,

A world in which multiple great powers coexist as equals can promote stability, cooperation, diversity, and competition, while also promoting fairness, reducing conflict, enhancing legitimacy, and increasing cooperation. The challenges we face today are humongous and multifaceted. And they can only be tackled through cooperation and collective efforts. And this conference is an important milestone in carrying forward this debate.

Thank you once again to the organisers for arranging this timely conference of international importance. I look forward to an engaging and productive exchange. Thank you.

Senator Sehar Kamran (TI)

The address of Inal Ardzinba, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Abkhazia, to the participants of the Global Conference on Multipolarity (29.04.2023).

Welcome address in the Abkhazian language: «Бзиара шәымаз ҳаҭыр зқәу аконференциа алахәылацәа! Иахьатәи ҳаиҧылара акыр зҵазкуа иреиуоуп, ақәҿиарақәа амангьы имҩаҧысуеит ҳәа сгәы иаанагоит».

Its translation: Hello, dear participants of the conference! Our meeting today is very important, and I hope it will be fruitful.

Good afternoon, dear participants of the Global Conference on Multipolarity.

The topic, chosen by the organizers for this event, emphasizes the importance and relevance of multipolarity in today's world. The modern system of international relations goes through a turbulent period. We all see now how the world is undergoing serious changes, as we see attempts by the collective West to resist the transition to a multipolar system.

The world cannot be unipolar. And history makes this clear. World War II resulted in setting up a bipolar world order, but the collapse of the Soviet Union was followed by a collapse of such a system of international relations. In fact, it was the United States that dominated both economically and politically in the world. It believed it could impose its dictatorial will on various countries of the world, such as Ukraine, Iraq, Libya, Yugoslavia and others. In this context, we have to pay special attention to NATO expansion, which undermined the system of international security. A new geopolitical reality has emerged as a result of the illegitimate and unjust actions of the Collective West at the turn of the XX-XXI centuries.

Has U.S. hegemony and unipolarity led to setting up a fair, UN Charter-based international system? The obvious answer is no.

We are witnessing how the U.S. is trying in every way to preserve its former leadership, to prevent the formation of a multipolar system of international relations. The West is clinging to its archaic institutions, that are unable to ensure the sovereign equality of states and the interests of developing countries. These global governance institutions, like the World Bank, are using such governance methods that fail to reflect the growing role of the developing world in the world economy and world politics. Outdated institutions of global governance are being replaced by such associations as BRICS, which give impetus and ensure justice in the modern system of international relations. More and more sovereign actors seek to accede to such equitable alliances. Meanwhile, the total economic, political and demographic potential of BRICS significantly exceeds the one of the G7 countries taken together. Thus, new centers of political and economic power are arising.

I emphasize that today more and more countries declare their adherence to a polycentric world, which must rest on the principles of international law, equality, respect for the rights of small peoples and nations. I believe that this transition is inevitable. Of course, it is not quick, but no one can argue that it is taking place.

Friends! We sincerely and completely share the position of our ally, the Russian Federation, and have supported the Russian decision to start the Special Military Operation.

Bandits and neo-Nazis have seized power in Ukraine. For eight years they carried out terrorist attacks against Russians in southeastern Ukraine. I explicitly note that volunteers from the Republic of Abkhazia are also taking part in the Special Military Operation, thus bringing the goals of the campaign closer.

Abkhazia believes that the Special Military Operation will trigger the inception of a new system of international relations. The one, that will respect the rights of nations, including small ones, their national identity and history.

Dear colleagues, I would like to stress the fact that Abkhazia stands up for integration processes in the post-Soviet space, which have been initiated and supported by the Russian Federation. Such approaches are enshrined in the Foreign Policy Concept of the Republic of Abkhazia, the Grand Treaty between the  Republic of Abkhazia and the Russian Federation of 2014 We believe that faster integration in the former USSR can bring about an bigger Union of Sovereign States.

The people of Abkhazia lived through the hardships of the Patriotic War of 1992-1993. We know what it is feels when you have to take arms to defend the legitimate right to life and development in a free state.

Abkhazia has experienced first-handedly the policy of double standards, which is so widely used by both Western countries and some multinationals. On the one hand, they zealously defend the rights of Kosovars, and on the other, they turn a blind eye on the rights of the Abkhaz people, who have a thousand-year history of statehood.

Friends, I emphasize that multipolarity impacts the international economic system, where a major transformation of the world monetary system is taking place. There is a tendency to settle more in national currencies. I am referring first of all to the currencies of developing countries. This brings another evidence that the world has changed and these processes are inevitable.

Dear participants, I am sure that such discussions are very timely and I wish you fruitful work.

Kimura Mitsuhiro (Japan)- the leader of the Japanese patriotic group Issuikai speaks for the Global Conference on Multipolarity (29.04.2023).

First of all, I would like to express my sincere respect to all participants of the International Eurasian Movement’s Global Online Conference on Multipolarity, which is devoted to seeking justice and telling the truth about the world.

My name is Mitsuhiro KIMURA of the Japanese patriotic organization Issuikai. I am a patriotic social activist.

Let me begin with a few words on the current position of Japan. Japan has been under the umbrella of the United States since its defeat in the war with the U.S. and Great Britain 77 years ago.

We, however, seek complete independence of the Japanese nation and the sovereignty of Japan without subordination or limitation.

We also call for fair, just, and equal respect for each sovereign nation in international relations. In particular, we oppose imposing on the world that only U.S. values are universal. This is nothing but the situation created by the dollar reserve currency system and Pax Americana.

In this context, first of all, I would like to confirm that the current military action of Russia against Ukraine was set up by the Ukrainian reactionary regime’s plot to dismantle Russia, orchestrated by NATO’s eastward expansion. That plan comes from the desire to demolish traditions, culture, and unique values by force.

We believe that the traditions, cultures, and language values of each country and region must be respected. This pluralistic respect for international values is what the world needs today.

My second point is about the "Summit for Democracy" held earlier by the United States. The only aim of the summit was to support the U.S. world order. It tried to give the impression that the countries participated in it were healthy states, while the rest were labeled as "undemocratic" ones.

In the article "On the U.S. Summit for Democracy" published in the Russian newspaper "Rossiyskaya Gazeta" on March 27, 2023 Mr. Nikolay Patrushev, Secretary of the Russian Security Council, made a deeply insightful point about the deception of U.S. double standards.

"The U.S. emphasizes the beauty of its democracy only to cover up the crisis of its system, in order to maintain a world order that protects U.S. interests, while ignoring and deceiving the rights of ordinary U.S. citizens. They say there is freedom of speech, but it is nothing but an illusion, dominated by an elite group of powerful corporations, and the media has become their megaphone”.

“I'm tempted to say, what in the world is democracy?"

This is part of the interview, and it is exactly right. One should not be fooled by this U.S. propaganda.

Thirdly, I would like to dwell on the current situation in Japan.

Today, Japan is clearly a "colony" of the United States. This has not changed over the past 75 years.

Most Japanese people may not be convinced by this statement. It is understandable, because it is generally considered that "Japan’s sovereignty was restored" after the end of World War II and the signing of the Peace Treaty.

In addition, although U.S. military bases exist in our daily lives, they are viewed as "tomodachi" (“friends”) and have become a natural part of the Japanese landscape. The truth is that Japan is governed by the U.S. in a way that cannot be visualized, but it has been cleverly manipulated so that we do not feel it.

Therefore, most Japanese do not consider their country a "colony," and other countries also recognize Japan as an independent nation, albeit only to a certain extent. However, I repeat that Japan is unquestionably a "colony" of the United States.

Speaking of the last war, on March 10, 1945, 77 years ago, 100,000 people were burned to death overnight in a massive air raid on Tokyo. Moreover, Hiroshima and Nagasaki experienced the first use of atomic bombs in the history of mankind. But the occupation policy instilled a sense of self-flagellation in us that it was Japan that provoked all those bombings, and that the Japanese were to blame. This is the tragedy of Japan and the reason why there are still 100 U.S. military bases on Japanese territory.

The reason why there are Japanese who see it as a product of the democratic system is because they have been brainwashed by the War Guilt Information Program, as well as the reality of postwar politics that has been tied to the interests of the United States.

Japanese patriots cannot be content with the fact that 77 years after the end of the war, foreign troops are still stationed on Japan’s territory, half of the airspace over the capital, Tokyo, is controlled by the Yokota base, and Japanese commercial aircrafts are not allowed to fly freely.

In conclusion, I would like to point out that although the air raid on Tokyo and the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were nothing but war crimes committed by the United States in defiance of international law, these facts were not pointed out and were subject to oblivion. As a result, the US grew impudent, which led to the Korean War, the Vietnam War, repression against Central American countries, interventions and wars against Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, Syria, etc.

The arrogant position of the US government stating “this is democracy”, “this is freedom”, “the democratic summit values are universal, and the USA is the world leader” must be judged as a war crime.

We hope today to see the formation of a fair and equitable international community that recognizes the value of international pluralism. And in order to end the postwar monopolistic dollar reserve system and Pax Americana, we must first legally form an international tribunal to try the U.S. war crimes in Iraq and elsewhere. The idea of a Eurasian movement with an international conscience that establishes a moral compass is important.

In this respect, we support the position of Brazilian President Lula, who proposed to announce a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine. It is the United States that must first realize its responsibility to stop the war, and we urge it to do so.

We, the Issuikai, a Japanese social patriotic organization, hereby declare our stance at this International Eurasian Movement’s Conference.

Thank you for your kind attention.

 多極化に関する世界会議 スピーチ ① 木村三浩 日本国愛国者団体「一水会」代表

  Pidato Mitsuhiro Kimura di Konferensi Global Multipolaritas, 29 April 2023

 Conférence mondiale sur la multipolarité: discours de M. Mitsuhiro Kimura, représentant de l'organisation patriotique japonaise "Issuikai"

 Il rispetto pluralistico dei valori internazionali è ciò di cui il mondo ha bisogno

 Conferencia Mundial sobre la Multipolarización. Discurso de Mitsuhiro Kimura, de “Issuikai” Organización Patriótica Japonesa.

 Wereldconferentie over Multipolariteit: Toespraak van Mitsuhiro Kimura, vertegenwoordiger van de Japanse patriottische organisatie "Issuikai"

 Weltkonferenz über Multipolarität: Rede von Mitsuhiro Kimura, Vertreter der japanischen patriotischen Organisation "Issuikai"

Younoussou Doukansy: Youth Secretary of the NGO "Groupe des Patriotes de Mali

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen

Distinguished participants, distinguished guests.

I am very pleased to participate in this first Global Conference on Multipolarity held with the support of the New Resistance movements (Nova Resistencia) (Brazil); the New International Order Initiative (Turkey); the international EURASIAN movement (Russia); the Forum of Thinkers (China) and the International Movement of RUSSOPHILES which I am coordinating in Mali (G.P.M.).

The world is changing at a rapid pace; the globalization of the economy; the United States loses its monopoly; the emergence of fast-growing developing countries and the proliferation of bilateral or regional agreements after the failure of the WTO.

Let’s give rise to a multipolar world consisting of:

• Regional geopolitical blocs.
• Free trade zones created outside the WTO
• Informal spheres of influence
• Developing countries with strong growth.

For the first time in history we are to witness a confrontation between Asia and the Western world, that have equal economic power amid the naissance of a "new world order"

This order is characterized by several major centers of power

Such centers of power can be states, international business organizations.

In such a system no one actor completely dominates the others, and relations between different actors may be characterized by cooperation and competition.

A multipolar world is often considered more stable than a unipolar or bipolar world, because no single actor can exercise hegemonic influence over the others.

However; it can also be more complex and difficult to manage; because it implies need for more coordination between different actors.

In a multipolar world, states must be able to adapt to changing conditions and enter into diplomatic and economic relations with many different actors.

International organizations and multinational companies must learn to navigate a complex and often contradictory environment.

A multipolar world is a challenge for all actors; but it also offers many opportunities for cooperation and economic and social development on a global scale.

And I urge everyone to see Africa as an actor, not a second-rated entity, which has its own role and place in this world of the 3rd millennium.

Its heavy colonial legacy has turned Africa into an "island of poverty in the middle of an ocean of wealth”

Speech at 1-st Global Multipolarity Conference

Erdenechuluun Luvsan – former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Mongolia - speaks for the Global Conference on Multipolarity (29.04.2023).

Хүндэт оролцогчид оо,

Эрдэнэчулуун миний бие Монгол орноос олон улсын энэхүү чуулга уулзалтад оролцож байгаадаа баяртай байна.

Уважаемые участники, Прежде всего, хочу выразить благодарность инициаторам международного онлайн -- мероприятия -- организациям Бразилии, Турции, России, Китая и Международного движения Русофилов за приглашение выступить на этом мероприятии по тематике многополярного мира. Я ограничусь некоторыми политическими аспектами, предложенными нам вопросами о многополярности. Как я понимаю, на форуме отсутствует синхронный перевод и с вашего позволения я продолжу свое краткое выступление на английском языке.

Dear participants,

It would probably be an overly gross understatement if I say that we live in a highly complex and rapidly changing world.

There's little doubt that the fundamental changes which shook the world during the last decade of the 20th century triggered an overpowering movement toward democracy, freedom and justice.

At that point in time, there has been a palpable sense of euphoria that the world scene will in no time change for the better, that the acute political and security problems, such as curbing the arms race, specific steps toward nuclear and conventional disarmament will free enormous resources for development, for the betterment of living conditions of peoples around the world, for the fight to preserve our planet for our posterity.

To our great regret, those expectations were not destined to come to fruition. Bipolar world order that has, for several decades, ensured a fragile balance of power between the two opposing political and military alliances, turned into a unipolar world with a single most powerful country -- the United States at the head. A mortal enemy of NATO the Warsaw Pact was there no longer. And one would probably reckon that an only proper and sensible reciprocal gesture on the part of the West would be the dissolution of NATO. But what happened instead. With 12 members at the start back in 1949 it has, surprisingly, grown to embrace 31 countries. The world had expected that NATO would not expand to the East and pose a threat to Russia. As I recall vividly, at that particular time the US at the very high level repeatedly assured President Gorbachev that NATO shall not move an inch toward East. And what happened instead. NATO is in the doorsteps of Russia. A very short memory indeed, isn't it. The US took advantage of the weakened Russia at that time and broadened its sphere of influence on the European continent. Then, how can we talk about trust if one is playing tricks and is trying to outsmart the other. It would be naive to think that such a trick will go unnoticed. And the consequences usually will not be kept waiting.

What happened in the ensuing years is not very hard to see.

Russia, with its enormous human and natural resources, is assuring itself on the world stage again. And the political and economic developments in this country, despite serious pressures in the form of external economic sanctions, could not put Russia on its knees. There's little doubt that this momentum will be held quite definitively in the foreseeable future.

I am tempted even to add here that the intended purpose of the sanctions may have had a counter effect.

Furthermore, the emergence of autonomous powerhouses in different parts of the world is making an overriding impact on the very structure of international relations which is seen in the distinctive shift in the division of world power. The unipolar world is, in many ways, becoming irrelevant, a matter of the past.

China, our southern neighbor, has become the 2nd largest economic power in the world. It is simply a matter of time for it to outrun the one and only superpower. It has been developing large development projects by reaching out countries in Africa, Latin America, the Middle East and its own continent Asia.

India, the largest democracy in the world, is playing an ever-increasing stabilizing role in world affairs.

Centers of gravity are appearing on other continents, namely Africa and Latin America.

Thus, a new world configuration is taking shape in the form of a multi-polar system that will, from now on, determine the course of events of world affairs in the years ahead.

Having said that, I wish to say that the European continent, which had seen the horrors of two world wars during the past century, became again a theater of military confrontation.

Due to time constraints, I would refrain from making lengthy comments and focus on couple of points that I believe are of primary importance.

History teaches us that if we wish to live in peace we need to recognize the right of others to live in a secure and peaceful environment. In today's world it has become an imperative. Technological advances have given us such means that their use will bring the world to the brink of extinction. And we have seen it in the last days of the Second World War when the world witnessed the horrific consequences of the use nuclear weapons.

As early as the beginning of 1970's, that is some 50 years ago the two most powerful nations of the world, the United States and the Soviet Union have come to realize that there can never be a winner in a nuclear war.

Since then this realization has found its specific expression in international legal documents. A good number of important agreements aimed at preventing the nuclear war, limiting and reducing the existing stockpiles of nuclear weapons, preventing the spread of such weapons, prohibiting nuclear-weapon tests, prohibiting chemical and bacteriological weapons were signed and ratified. To our great dismay some of the extremely important disarmament agreements have, in the past few years, been unilaterally abandoned by the US.

The results of decades-long and painstaking efforts have been erased. In today's political environment it would probably be naive even to hypothesize about the possibility for major Powers to sit down and start talking to each other on issues of world-wide concern.

My pessimistic remark was prompted by the ongoing highly charged rhetoric that effectively invalidates the possibility of countries concerned to sit and talk.

Having said that, I wish to refer to an issue which has everything to do with the international situation at hand. I am talking about the principle of equal security. This is a basic prerequisite for a stable world order. All the countries seem to support this principle.

Let's refer to one of the latest documents adopted by the European countries themselves. I have in mind The Charter for European Security adopted at the highest level in Istanbul in November 1999 which unequivocally says that "each participating State has an equal right to security that they will respect the rights of all others in these regards, that they will not strengthen their security at the expense of the security of other States. They also reaffirmed their resolve to build their relations in conformity with the concept of common and comprehensive security. We also know that this fundamental principle has been reaffirmed in other international documents.

When one looks at the grave situation in Europe and in Ukraine in particular, and the underlying reasons that led to the military confrontation in that country shouldn't we remind ourselves about the ready-made promises by the United States to Russia. American scholars and military experts contend, and rightly so, about a possible reaction by the US if it finds at its doorsteps Russian missiles. Does it not remind us about the Cuban missile crisis back in 1962 which nearly brought the world to the brink of nuclear war. Everyone knows what happened then, what John Kennedy, the then President of the United States did in order to prevent the presence of Soviet mid-range missiles 90 miles away from its borders. Why don't we try to draw a parallel between those two events and see what comes out of it. I personally don't see any difference.

From the statements being made by NATO officials it is clear that the West is still unwilling to abandon its idea of bringing Ukraine into the confines of this military alliance. Another point that I wanted to make concerns agreements signed in Minsk, Belarus. The entire world has been closely following the events there. 4 countries Russia, Ukraine, France and Germany at the highest level worked out the text of those agreements. It took some painstaking effort as I recall. And the international community breathed with a sense of relief that the situation in Ukraine will change for the better.

To our great dismay, this was not going to happen. Ukraine's President later said that he was not going to implement Minsk agreements. I am pretty sure that many people and countries around the world were taken aback by such a statement.

But then things were cleared up by the recent statement by the former Chancellor of Germany Mme Angela Merkel. She said in her interview to German weekly Die Zeit in Dec. 2022 that " The 2014 Minsk Agreement was an attempt to give Ukraine time ", that " It also used this time to become stronger, as you can see today ". It further goes on to say that Merkel confirms that NATO wanted war from the start but needed time to prepare militarily.

I hope it would not be out place if I refer to what was said by the Foreign Minister of South Africa Mme Naledi Pandor about international rules and international law in her talk at the Council on Foreign Relations in the United States. She said, and rightly so, that "It is very comfortable for some people to use international rules when it suits them. But they don't believe in them when they don't suit them... They don't apply the rules equally in all circumstances". She went on to say that "You can't say that when Ukraine was invaded, sovereignty is important. But it was never important for Palestine ".

To add to the above -- what was done with the Minsk agreements is, in fact, in my considered view, dealt a deadly blow to the entire system of international relations the negative ramifications of which will, probably, be felt in the years to come.

As is well known, the relations between and among nations are based on trust. Trust is a core component of any international agreement. Without trust it would be difficult if not impossible to talk about the sustainability of any relations between nations. And this core issue of trust is now being put to test.

I hope that common sense will in the end prevail and parties to the conflict will sit down at the negotiating table. It would be in the interests of all the European countries, as well as the world at large.

I understand that Russia is ready to do so. It is now the turn of the other party to make its move.

Thank you for your kind attention.

Спасибо за внимание.

Анхаарал тавьсанд баярлалаа.

The speech during the Global Conference on Multipolarity (29.04.2023). Alexander Wolfheze is a Traditionalist philosopher and writer from Netherlands, who lives in Hungary.

‘Operation Belisarius: Eurasianist Strategy for the West’

Het is een eer hier vandaag te kunnen spreken voor het Nederlandse volk, het volk van de Lage Landen dat al sinds duizend jaar woont aan de grijze Noordzee die de west-einder is van het grote Eurazië – en te spreken voor de grote zaak die alle volkeren van Eurazië samenbindt in hun strijd voor een post-globalistische toekomst, een toekomst waarin ook Nederland een plaats toekomt in de zon.

‘It is an honour to speak here to you today for the people of the Netherlands, who have lived over a thousand years on the shores of the gray North Sea, at the very sea-boundary of great Eurasia – and to speak for a great cause that binds together all the peoples of Eurasia as they struggle for a post-globalist future, a future in which also the Netherlands deserve a place in the sun.’

If one world-historical and geo-political reality has become clear over the last few years – a reality unfortunately too long known to too few, but fortunately to all of us gathered here today – it is that a great evil has become incarnated in the West. Almost a quarter century ago now, in 1979, the Iranian Revolution already named this evil: it called West’s most powerful state, the USA, the ‘Great Satan’. The UK was just one step lower on that geopolitical ladder of demonic hierarchy: it was the ‘Little Satan’. Of course, if we follow that line of describing the globalist-atlanticist world, then my own country, the Netherlands, may be described as ‘Mini-Satan’ - a pirate republic haven for a small but old and vicious force of high finance usury and ‘rules-based order’ institutions. Most of us, here gathered in our Europe Section of today’s multipolar conference, are from countries that are - still - part of the unipolar West: all of us dissidents know how it is to have to live and work in the lair of the beast.

We Western dissidents also know that our part of Europe is every way as Satan-possessed as America. In certain ways, Western Europe is even more of a totalitarian-Orwellian dystopia, with less freedom and more repression. Whereas America itself still has some constitutional rights, such as those of free speech, free assembly and self-defence, here in Europe we had all-out lockdowns, full-blown vaccination mandates, brutal police repression and open censorship. In fact, most of Europe is nothing but an American colony, as amply proven by the lock-step servility of its ‘leaders’ during the Ukraine Crisis and the NordStream affair, and over the last decades it has not been able to oppose the imperialist-globalist agenda in any meaningful way. Europe is under the heel with what is factually globalist neo-colonial rule: globalist-engineered ethnic replacement (‘refugee crisis’) settles Third World colonists in our lands, globalist-sponsored social

degeneracy (‘sexual revolution’) dissolves our indigenous cultures and globalist-imposed bankster usury (‘neo-liberalism’) plunders our human and natural resources. ‘EU governance’ and ‘NATO security’ are shams: they are nothing but globalist control mechanisms to keep Europe in under the merciless colonial rule of a globalist-nihilist elite that may have its home-base in the Anglosphere but is now thinking and planning trans-nationally. For that elite, the ‘world is not enough’: it is now waging an all-out multi-dimensional war to conquer the ultimate geopolitical prize: the Eurasian landmass and the great land powers Russia and China. But a globalist victory in that war – and we may say that Aleksandr Dugin’s ‘Last War of the World Island’ has started on 22-02-2022 – is all but certain. In fact, as I argued in my ‘Rite of Spring’ essay on our shared space Geopolitica.ru, it appears that the globalist elite has overplayed its hand and is now caught up in an unstoppable down-ward spiral. The globalist ‘Empire of Lies’ is being shaken to its foundations by the military miscalculation, reputational disaster and economic ruin following its overreaching attack on the Eurasian coalition of Russia and China. What does that mean for us Western dissidents? What risk and opportunities does the present crisis and possible future collapse of the ‘Empire of Lies’ pose for us dissidents?

We should remember that after the fall of the First Rome and the West-Roman Empire, the East-Roman Empire survived for a thousand years – and that the Second Rome, Byzantium, was not only instrumental in re-civilizing the West during the Renaissance but also in reconquering the First Rome only decades after it had fallen. A great general, Belisarius, set off to the West to destroy and drive back the barbarian kingdoms founded by the Vandals, the Ostro-Goths and the Visi-Goths. His army was a mixture of mercenaries, barbarians and auxiliaries from the reconquered Western lands. Is it possible that the Third Rome, which is the restored Orthodox-Christian Russia that is the centre of our Eurasianist movement, will again re-conquer the First Rome? It might: as we speak, the barbarian rule over Western Europe is slowly weakening. As the terrorized people of the West slowly descend into a new dark age of tyranny, lawlessness and poverty, its power structures are increasingly strained and likely to dissolve by loss of public trust, sectarianism and infighting. In such a climate, a Eurasianist ‘Operation Belisarius’ – a Reconquista of the West – may become an option. Many dispossessed and disaffected Westerners would welcome a Eurasianist liberation of their ruined lands: the restoration of liberty, the return of the rule of law, the rediscovery of tradition and the renaissance of culture. What can we Western dissidents do to facilitate this ambitious but necessary ‘Operation Belisarius’? We may hope that next year the Wagner Group will hold its victory parade in Berlin or that Chinese peace keeping troops will patrol the streets of Rome, but I estimate that the Götterdämmerung of the West will take more time. It may even take a decade and a life-time. So what can we Western dissidents do now?

We can prepare the way, we can lay the groundwork for the Reconquista. Some of us may do this in exile, working as publicists and supporters of the Eurasianist movement, some of us may do this at home, working as activists and politicians to plant the seeds of alternative forms of governance, law and media. As no others, we Western dissidents know the globalist enemy: its strengths and weaknesses. We can analyze the obstacles and opportunities – the reality on the ground. We know that only a minority of the Western peoples are complicit in the globalist evil. My country, the Netherlands, used to famous for fair trade, honest dealing and solid accounting – things that can be put to use for either good or evil. So let me give you my best guess ‘account’ of political calculus. I would venture that of the core Western population, perhaps only 10% is really politically lost – irretrievably caught up in corruption, mired in sin and maddened by Woke. Perhaps another 20% are simply apolitical collaborators – working for money without inner allegiance to globalism. Against them stand another 10% and 20% - those that openly or secretly oppose the globalist New World Order. That leaves 40% in the middle – people who just want to live their lives with their families and who are too dependent on and scared of the totalitarian system. So the percentages do not look too bad – the demographic balance is stacked against the globalist occupation regime, not unlike the situation in the Global South, such as British India, when it started its independence struggle. In fact, one big push may bring the whole globalist house of cards down. We as dissidents should be working towards that – which being prepared.

We should encourage our Eurasianist friends in the East to do everything they can to foster a new generation of Western Eurasianists – a generation that can take over the reigns of power once the whole globalist house of cards comes tumbling down. To add a ‘soft power’ strategy to a ‘hard power’ strategy. Young Westerners may be invited East to do experience things that are now scarce in the West: a good education, a religious life, a military career, a year of work on a farm or in a factory, a proper political schooling. The hearts and minds of masses of young Westerners have already long ago turned away from the filthy decadence, the obsolete illusions and the empty materialism of the ‘modern way’ of globalist-nihilism. They long for a different future, a new start and a real life. All of this the rising Eurasianist East and the new Eurasianist movement can offer them. That way, we can turn the tables on the globalist-atlanticist enemy: as the globalist attack on Eurasia bogs down and falters, and as the ‘Empire of Lies’ cracks and splinters, it will simply implode from within.

Finally, I have a word of warning to our friends from the East. As somebody who was born and raised in the West, and who lived and worked in the West, I would like to say this: do not believe that you can negotiate with the globalist elite that rules the West, do not have the illusion that there can be compromise. What is needed is steady pressure, steady patience, steady work - and an iron will to see the struggle right through the end. There is no half-way peace to be had with the globalist-atlanticist enemy – this evil must be brought down once and for all. This struggle will have to be seen through to the very bitter end – to the ‘Triumph of the Will’. Our to fight for our freedom - and yours.

The unconquerable will
This, too, can bear
I still Am Belisarius

- Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

 Opération Bélisaire : une stratégie eurasienne pour l'Occident

 Operación Belisario: estrategia euroasiática para Occidente

 "ΕΠΙΧΕIΡΗΣΗ ΒΕΛΙΣAΡΙΟΣ: ΕΥΡΑΣΙΑΤΙΚH ΣΤΡΑΤΗΓΙΚH ΓΙΑ ΤΗ ΔYΣΗ”

 Operação Belisário: estratégia eurasiana para o Ocidente

Pierre-Antoine Plaquevent (France) – author, journalist speaks for Global Conference on Multipolarity (29.04.2023)

https://t.me/pierreantoineplaquevent

The Spiritual Orientation of the West and the Geosophical Multipolarity 

At a time when the international order is undergoing unprecedented disruptions in contemporary history, it is essential to deepen the study of international relations through a metapolitical approach. That is to say, an approach that integrates what Count Joseph de Maistre (1753-1821) referred to as a "metaphysics of political ideas".

In order to wage the ongoing spiritual war, or "Noomachie" as defined by Professor Alexandre Douguine, we must therefore examine how the actors of the contemporary geopolitical conflict conceive the nature of the Spirit.

This dimension seems fundamental to us because if we seek to understand the ontology of a culture or civilization, we are naturally led to search for the spiritual core that underlies it. For there are no peoples, nations, cultures, or states that are not structured by a spiritual core, even if secularized.

Rationalistic atheism itself, which has now become the common cultural norm of the West, is rooted in a set of non-rational ideas and conceptions, which are made "para-religious". These ideas emerged underground since the Renaissance and began to emerge as the diffuse ideology of Western elites from the Enlightenment. The term "Enlightenment" itself refers to illuminism and Masonic esotericism.

In the West, after a long historical process, the idea finally emerged that matter would prevail over spirit, and that ultimately, spirit would be a subtle and particularly elaborate stage of matter. According to this idea, matter would evolve continuously by itself and without any external intervention, until it became complex enough to spontaneously generate consciousness and the Spirit. In this evolutionist vision of an existence without a real first spiritual cause - without an arkhè (ἀρχή) - life, consciousness, and the Spirit would be nothing more than successive stages of the same self-created and self-organized matter.

A form of permanent noetic autopoiesis of matter and the whole of reality, perceived as a reversed pantheistic continuum. Reversed, because here it is matter that precedes the Spirit, and not matter that derives from the Spirit, as in the emanationist hypothesis of Plotinian or Brahmanic type, nor is it the Spirit that creates matter ex nihilo, as in the creationist hypothesis of the Abrahamic revealed religions.

This inverted monist spiritual concept, which establishes Spirit as an "evolved" stage of matter, underlies most contemporary Western intellectual, techno-scientific, political, and social orientations. Founding personalities of the current global governance system that now governs the West are or have been imbued with this philosophical orientation. Among many examples, we can cite the influential and eminent British biologist Julian Sorell Huxley (1887-1975), the first Director-General of UNESCO, eugenicist and Darwinian militant who was the father of the term transhumanism. His grandfather, Thomas Henry Huxley, a friend and close associate of Darwin, had already coined the term "agnosticism" in the 19th century in the context of the intellectual confrontation between emerging Darwinian evolutionism and the established spiritual order of the time.

This spiritual orientation constitutes the philosophical background of most of the major societal orientations currently pursued by the West: ecological planning and forced decarbonization of the economy, global biopolitical planning, planned reduction of the world's population, etc. These orientations are not necessarily all bad (for example, those related to environmental sanitation), but they are imposed without alternative or possible discussion, and above all by the same forces that are generally responsible for planetary ecological disturbances. The Rockefeller family, whose fortune was built in the 20th century on oil and the imperialist geopolitics associated with it, is one such example. The Rockefeller Foundation now leads much of the post-oil energy transformation of Western industry. It is also at the forefront of the global demographic reduction agenda within global governance since 1945 It is important to keep in mind that the spiritual orientation of Western elites is now constituted by this monist spiritual materialism. Externally, the West may continue to be perceived as a "Christian club," but this is now inaccurate because its elites are essentially transhumanist and self-messianic.

Thus, Western politics and strategy are now post-Christian and transhumanist. This paradigm shift within the West - which is not always well evaluated in civilizational spheres outside the West - generates instability issues that have repercussions on the entire contemporary international security system.

Because this spiritual shift in the West is accompanied - as always in history - by a change in strategic and political orientation that seeks to impose this integral materialistic worldview both outside the political West but also inside, on populations living in the West. Populations that are still - for some of them - attached to the secularized Christian values that until recently still structured the European collective being. This generates unprecedented internal political and social disruptions in contemporary Western history. But outside the political West, this worldview also has repercussions, as it seeks to impose itself on all geostrategic actors. When this materialistic-transhumanist worldview does not use the direct path of open war, it uses for this purpose the entire techno- political-administrative apparatus of what is presented - euphemistically - as "global governance," but which constitutes in fact a planetary management system for contemporary humanity by non- elected supra- and para-state entities.

Thus, the remains of classical European Christian humanism are collapsing internally under the push of transhumanism carried by Western techno-scientific elites. Elites who, while continuing to make the West a fortress of transhumanism, also seek to transform the entire international order by using the power of political West. We believe that the only way to re-establish a form of inter-civilizational dialogue between the poles of power of a potential multipolar international system passes through two possible options:

1/ First option: that of a shift in orientation of Western elites, which appears unlikely at this stage. On the contrary, it is to be feared that globalist elites will become increasingly entrenched in the face of the joint rise of a global geostrategic challenge and a domestic political challenge driven by the still spiritually and politically alive portion of the Western population. This is what I refer to as the "crisis arc" of globalism, namely the systemic risk for globalists of a "collision" of internal and external challenges to the Western political order.

2/ Second option: that of a replacement of these elites through a process of "crisis-revolution- transformation" of the current Western political form. This will be an extremely painful and impactful crisis process for the entire international order and especially for Western populations themselves. However, as shown by the situation in France with Macron's relentless hostility towards his own population, the usurpers of political power in Europe are not going to give up their positions easily.

It is to such a process of "circulation of Western elites" that all forces working towards a truly multipolar and post-globalist world order must jointly push. If Western elites change, then a dialogue - even a spiritual one - will once again be possible on a global scale. At present, the Western side is in fact engaged in an uninterrupted monologue that perpetually chants the same materialistic, atheistic, and imperialistic slogans.

Pierre-Antoine Plaquevent

 L’orientation spirituelle de l’Occident et la multipolarité géosophique

Pepe Escobar (Brazil), international journalist, geopolitical analyst 

Hello, everyone, it's a great pleasure to be here. And specially as part of the Eurasia block, which is basically my home. I speak to you as tф Latin American, as a European, as an Asian, as an Eurasian, and why not as a Scythian nomad from 2500 years ago. So, it's wonderful to be speaking after my colleagues from West Asia, from Central Asia. You know, these are my areas, you know, I am a nomad there, I'm always loving my I, across Eurasia. And I've been doing this for almost for the past 30 years.

So this is a brief introduction, I'll be I'll be very brief as a whole. We all know why we are here. from different parts of the world, we are all working towards the same goals, the same targets. We know who are we fighting against, which is an extremely toxic and vicious Atlanticist, a hegemonic-factioned elite. They seem to know what they want, which is basically to crush any dissent anywhere in the world and impose cancel culture on virtually any part of the world to the benefit of a very hazy project, which we can more or less describe as the Davos project a great reset or whatever narrative they try to impose on all of us.

So now, against this hegemonic narrative in block that doesn't admit any deviation from anywhere? what we should try to do now is to go on the offense. That's it, you know, the global South, specially 85 87% of the global population has had enough of this hegemonic power, with their vassals across the west. So, this implies, basically, on a personal level, what we're doing now, which we have to do, constantly, non stop, what our Chinese friends would define as people to people's exchanges, which is exactly what we're doing.

And we have to be systematic, in every language in a basket of languages, nonstop. And we need to coordinate our efforts on a regional, continental and global level. So maybe this is the first stepping stone is today with this with this conference. The second vector is as important as the people to people's exchanges, which is the infrastructure that is being set up to coordinate the move towards a multipolar world. And that includes, of course, BRICS+, starting this year, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Eurasian Economic Union, what I called the New Silk Roads for 10 years, since it was established 10 years ago, when Astana to Jakarta by the Chinese, the Belt and Road Initiative, and many the BRICS NDB, the BRICS Bank. So, we have the framework has already been set in place. And the discussions are getting deeper and deeper. So, the number one issue, which we'll have to concentrate our attention from now on is de-dollarization. This is being discussed inside Eurasian Economic Union in detail by Mr. Glaziev and his team. It will be discussed in detail hopefully in the next few months inside the BRICS, when they I guess expand as BRICS+, but this has to, to go all through the international organizations simultaneously and sooner or later, let's say 2024 is not far-fetched, they should get on, they should sit on the same table and start discussing what is going to be the alternative currency, the basket of currencies based on commodities, gold or both, and how to start implementing it through businesses across Eurasia. And then governments will automatically step in and join. So let's say that this is our foundation, that our Rosetta Stone today, with this conference grow really global. And don't forget everyone now it's our tie and we have to go for the kill.

Thank you very much

Bobana Andjelkovic (Serbia) – independent researcher – speaks for Global Conference on Multipolarity (29.04.2023).

Struggle against neocolonialism in a multipolar world: How to annihilate neocolonial networks within state structures?

The first step is to locate and recognize them and then destroy them.

The President of Republika Srpska, Mr Milorad Dodik has said recently that the happiest country in the world is the USA, because it does not have US ambassador. It was on the occasion of the millionth statement by US ambassador to Bosnia and Herzegovina, who openly supports BH Federation entity and openly attacks and discredits Serbian entity. The same goes for unofficial and non-elected and nonapproved by the UN, High Representative Christian Schmidt, who comes from the country whose Minister of Foreign Affairs is illiterate and dumb Annalena Berbock, green painted Nazi actually. Or British Ambassador, or Dutch Ambassador or French Ambassador. All those people are instructed to behave and act as if they were entitled to the entire world’s affairs and destiny.

The same happens in the occupied Serbian South province of Kosovo and Metohija – which can be compared to the situation and behaviour of Western so-called officials in Bosnia. In these two spots, the arrogant and neocolonial style behaviour of Western officials is the most visible. Although it is also visible in other parts of Balkans which are still not sucked into NATO or into its political wing called European Union.

There can be a long list of international agreements, contracts, accords, which were mediated by collective West or collective West was the patron of them, under the disguise of so-called “international community” – which actually consists of EU, UK, USA and their minions – Japan, South Korea, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, wahabbis in Sarajevo and false Muslims among Shqiptars in Kosovo and Metohija. It is very interesting to note that, after all the masks have fallen, it became obvious that only quote-unquote Muslims, who support collective West against Russian SMO, are in Sarajevo and in occupied Kosovo and Metohija. Not to count Daesh and other salafists and taqfiries in Western Asia or Africa.

To mention just a few international agreements and accords, signed and mediated by so-called int’l community:

Oslo Accords which were supposed to regulate relations between State of Palestine and the Zionist entity.

Dayton Agreement – which was signed also in the US military base to regulate peace and relations between two entities after the war in Bosnia in the +90s of 20th century.

Brussels agreement between Serbian state and temporarily administration run by terrorists who declared unofficial independence from the state of Serbia and their patrons from the West in occupied Serbian province of Kosovo and Metohija.

Minsk Accords – to regulate situation in Donbass region after several coloured revolutions organized by the West in Ukraine and after the coup in 2014.

I would like to outline several unofficial, illegal and illegitimate power sources which collective West creates in neocolonial style and use them to prolong its hegemony. If we can agree about the existence of three pillars of state power and administration in the terms of imposed, but also accepted Western European notion of the democracy, we also have three illegal, illegitimate or simply to say criminal pillars which keep Western hegemony not to fall apart.

The forth, unofficial pillar of state administration is gathered in so-called “independent” agencies and bodies which are embedded into official system of administration, covered by laws and bills and led by Western minions or the traitors of own state and people. Those independent bodies are entitled to judge, to norm and to regulate social relations and to create state of affairs which goes in line with Western occupiers and their egocentric policy of exclusivity and exceptionalism. Exceptionalism is sometimes connected only to George Soros, Jewish by origin and Nazi by choice, but it is not only him – he is just a poor puppet and stock speculator who works on behalf of neocolonialism. But, there is lots of them of that or similar kind – Bilderberg group which disguise – in example, in Serbia they disguise as East-West Bridge, Transparency International, Medicines without Borders, etc...

The fifth unofficial pillar is NGO sector. Which claims to be non-governmental, which is partly true. It is not the governmental part of the state where it operates in, but is governmental by the state which sends it – for example, in Serbia, the most active countries who install their governmental envoys to act like non-governmental are USA, UK, Holland, Sweden, Norway, France, Austria, Switzerland, Canada.

The sixth pillar is made of so-called international organizations which actually misuse the notion of “international” because they represent a small portion of international – actually, again the same countries and their structures.

There are attempts world-wide to try to abolish the colonial powers with the argument of some delusional “deep state” which operates within those countries and that the rest of those countries is normal. But, this is not the case. This is an attempt to whitewash the colonial power of their responsibility for the carnage which occurs all around the world, thanks to their destructive and inhuman methods to try to preserve their colonial power and criminal way of administration, both in their own countries and abroad in the countries they occupied, colonized and ripped off. There is no any “deep state” – there is collective West which acts like a supreme world power – but who are they actually? The progeny of incestuous, criminal and retarded humans – in case we speak about Western Europe and UK. In case we speak of UK colonies, like USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, the world has to deal with the progeny of criminals, assassins, prostitutes, delusional Christian sectarians who were sent off from Western European cities and prisons to Northern America and Australia. And we have to deal with their sick progeny now.

The sick progeny can not realize what the state administration is. They are indoctrinated and directed to do what they are told in order to achieve or preserve Western hegemony by all means. They studied state structures and created the ways how to overtake them from within.

The three illegal, illegitimate and criminal pillars of state administrations mentioned above have to be annihilated in every country – depending of their shapes and forms.

The 4PT can be a good starting point for every country to regain its sovereignty and power in order to expel the crooks, pirates and sodomites from the society and state affairs.

Que la paix soit sur vous tous,

Commençons par le commencement, j’adresse mes profondes salutations à mon camarade de lutte Alexandre Douguine, et à sa fille. Que la paix soit sur elle, là où elle est. Je sais qu’elle nous observe profondément dans le combat quotidien que nous menons. Ma petite sœur de lutte Daria Douguina qui a dédié sa vie, afin de faire avancer la cause de la multipolarité et de la souveraineté des peuples dans leur globalité.

Nous menons un combat vous le savez, sur le continent africain, dans la diaspora africaine, visant à permettre aux populations africaines de trouver leur autodétermination, de trouver leur ultime souveraineté. Nos aïeuls ont lutté contre le colonialisme, puis contre le néocolonialisme, et nous rencontrons aujourd’hui en ce début de XXIème siècle, l’ultime forme du colonialisme. La forme la plus prédatrice, la forme la plus criminel, la forme la plus génocidaire, parce que c’est une forme génocidaire culturellement, spirituellement, politiquement, économiquement. Cette ultime forme du colonialisme, c’est le globalisme néolibéral sur le terrain économique et sur le terrain sociétal. Et c’est ce qui fait que nous nous retrouvons aujourd’hui à marcher aux côtés de tous ceux qui luttent contre ce globalisme qui est une pieuvre, un cancer qui veut tous nous asphyxier. Quelles que soient nos couleurs de peau, quels que soient nos origines, quels que soient nos peuples, nous sommes tous confronter aux diverses tentacules de cette pieuvre qui veut nous uniformiser dans le cadre du gouvernement mondial qu’ils veulent essayer d’instaurer.

Le combat que nous menons sur le continent africain est un combat, au commencement qui été contre le néocolonialisme français, mais nous nous sommes rendu compte que le néocolonialisme français faisait partie d’un système oligarchique bien plus grand, bien plus profond, qui est installé du côté des Etats-Unis. Un système qui veut uniformiser l’humanité, qui veut lui imposer une façon de vivre, une façon de penser, un Way of Life profondément occidentalisé. L’occident dans sa dimension physique, que nous connaissons, mais surtout dans sa dimension métaphysique c’est-à-dire éloigné, déconnecté de la connaissance de la tradition. Ce qui nous permettra de nous lever, ce qui nous permettra de nous libérer, ça sera l’unité des divers peuples enraciné, inséré profondément dans leur identité.

L’oligarchie occidentale pense que son Way of Life doit être accepté, adapté par tous les peuples. Mais il y a un certain nombre de gens, en Chine avec Zhang Weiwei que je salue, Alexandre Dougine en Russie, et nous autres sur le continent africain, et tant d’autres aussi, qui ont décidé d’imposer une autre façon de faire, une façon de faire adaptée sur la corrélation entre la tradition primordiale, la compréhension de la tradition primordiale liée à nos identités respectives, alliée plus que jamais avec une compréhension de la géostratégie. Car on ne peut pas comprendre la réalité des tensions dans le monde matériel si on ne comprend pas la dimension immatérielle. Notre peuple, sur le continent africain est confronté à un monstre à plusieurs têtes, mais à un seul cœur. Ce cœur c’est l’oligarchie qui se trouve basé du côté des Etats-Unis. Et cette pieuvre-là, tant que nous n’aurons pas fini avec cette dernière, elle n’asphyxiera pas que nous, elle asphyxiera tous les peuples de l’humanité, dans leur ensemble. Soyons organisé, soyons connecté, comprenons les enjeux. Comprenons que ce qui se passe matériellement est lié à ce qui se passe sur le terrain de l’immatériel. Comprenons que ce n’est pas une bataille simplement de l’Est contre l’Ouest, ou du Nord contre le Sud. C’est une bataille du Bien contre le Mal. C’est une bataille du déracinement contre les peuples enracinés, c’est une bataille de la foi en l’immatériel contre la foi au matérialisme, c’est une bataille de l’équilibre contre le déséquilibre, c’est une bataille de la justice contre l’injustice. L’Afrique sera le centre de gravité de ce combat. C’est le centre déjà de cette guerre des mondes. Il y a l’Ukraine dont on parle beaucoup, mais l’ultime centre de ce combat global, c’est le continent africain, matrice de l’humanité, et qui sera le tombeau de l’hégémonie mondialiste. En l’honneur de nos ancêtres, et par foi au créateur qui n’engendre pas et qui n’a pas été engendré. Que la paix soit sur vous tous.

 Il globalismo neoliberale: l’ultima forma di colonialismo

Calistrat Marvin Atudorei (Romania) – President of Non-Aligned Countries Forum, PhD in Philosophy, writer, journalist – speaks for the Global Conference on Multipolarity.
 

My name is Calistrat Atudorei, I am the president of the Non-Aligned Countries Forum in Romania, PhD in political philosophy and journalist.

The message I wish to convey at this moment of great shifting on the international stage is oriented towards the awareness that in the last hundred years, and especially in the last three years, we have witnessed numerous coordinated worldwide efforts of coercion and aggression against states and peoples. These concerted actions that have taken place around the world necessarily involve a network far too vast and effective to be attributed solely to American power and to the means at its disposal.

To briefly list some of these high-impact assaults that I have documented in my work, I mention that:

The Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 was executed at the command and with the massive support of some organizations outside Russia (not only from America); The two world wars were instrumented through the participation of the same trans-national entities that aimed at restructuring the International System according to the interests of some shadow organizations; During the Cold War, NATO and other organizations used paramilitary structures like Gladio, which secretly manipulated through terror and false flag attacks the social orientations of most Western governments.

The international financial-banking system was, especially after the Second World War, aggressively controlled by globalist institutions such as the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the Federal Reserve Bank or the SWIFT network. All these institutions acted in a coordinated manner and subjugated the states through forced indebtedness and by imposing in every country the authority of the so-called "National Banks", which in fact were (and still are in many countries) just vassals of the Globalist Financial-Banking Cartel.

In the last decades, we have seen the same particularly effective supra-state collaboration in the export of so-called "democracy", in countless countries of the world. This has proven to be a means of infiltrating most states with agents in order to execute regime changes and take over the reins of power in most of the countries. The related infrastructure used, which involved systematic training for "protesters" and funding for opposition groups, was coordinated not only by the US State Departments, but also by vast European organizations linked to the European Union, by trusts such as Open Society (patronized by George Soros), operative structures such as OTPOR, CANVAS, REZIST, but also dozens of other councils, committees, foundations, think-tanks, plus hundreds of various more or less discreet organizations.

Researches that have been undertaken, including by myself, has shown that the most important terrorist organizations were founded, trained and financed precisely by the Western powers under the form of some mercenary armies.

There have also been staged huge terrorist attacks, intensively covered in a coordinated manner by a political and media infrastructure throughout the all Western space. The most proeminent example is the attack from September 11, 2001 (that was in fact a controlled  demolition executed by multiple secret servicies), which constituted a pretext for the orchestration of the "war on terror" inflicted on the Middle East.

In the last three years we have all noticed the terrible acceleration of this Globalist Agenda through the instrumentalization of the so-called "Covid-19 pandemic" (whereof there are now abundant evidence that it was artificially generated), and afterwards through the coordinated positioning of the liberal states against the Russian Federation, under the pretext of helping „democracy” in Ukraine.

As a conclusion to these observations: in my opinion it has become obvious that we confront with a hidden, underground, subversive System of a trans-national nature, which controls much more than America and which seeks to create the so-called "New World Order". Organizations such as the World Economic Forum, the Bilderberg Group or the Trilateral Commission have been acting in a coordinated manner for a long time, as a kind of Shadow Government, and seek (still covertly) to impose their Agenda. Global power, world hegemony is no longer just the objective of a superpower (apparently the United States), but the precise desire of this Shadow World Government. In all this globalist apparatus, the American state is, through its administrations, only the main interface for the exercise of the globalist influence.

Based on this kind of evidences, an important conclusion that we could formulate is that after the breakup of the Soviet Union, in 1991, the international relations passed from the phase of bipolarity (in which two superpowers faced each other) to a phase of unipolarity, but in which the interests, the aspirations for world hegemony were no longer associated to a single state (seemingly the United States), but to a worlwide structure with a supranational character, configured in the form of a Globalist System. This System brings together trans-national organizations, often secret, that do not relate to the interests of any nation, but to the interest of a "globalist elite" that seeks to establish, without the knowledge of the world's population, a form of control and governance at the worldwide level. These globalists are the ones who deliberately engineer crises, who own the media, who control the major international organizations in sight and who hold the levers of financial-banking power.

It is now becoming increasingly clear that the Western Liberal System, as basis of the Globalist System, is rapidly collapsing. Russia, China, and also many other states, have been preparing their exit from this form of domination and control for years and have now created an alternative financial, banking, economic (and military) system, which cancels any chance of recovery of the American-style unipolar world.

The number of states dependent on the Globalist System has visibly decreased in recent years and more and more countries are choosing the path of nationalism and sovereignty. The globalist system with aspirations for unipolarity led (apparently) by the US only controls at most 20% of the world's population. The remaining 80% belong to states that no longer want to hear about America's/Globalist hegemony and are tired of its abusive sanctions. Nearly seven out of eight billion of the world's population now join – or are about to join – very powerful organizations that have broken out of the sphere of globalist domination. These organizations include BRICS, ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations), the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) or the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS).

Although we cannot yet say that we have truly entered into the multipolar international order, its establishment is, in my view, inevitable and very close, and will restore to mankind the chance of a particularly fruitful cooperation between sovereign and independent states.

 DISCURSO DE CALISTRAT ATUDOREI EN LA CONFERENCIA MUNDIAL SOBRE LA MULTIPOLARIDAD, 29 DE ABRIL DE 2023

 Discours de Calistrat Atudorei à la conférence mondiale sur la multipolarité, 29 avril 2023

 Toespraak van Calistrat Atudorei op de wereldconferentie over multipolariteit, 29 april 2023

 Rede von Calistrat Atudorei auf der Weltkonferenz über Multipolarität, 29. April 2023

Geopolitical analyst Markku Siira (Finland) speech for the Global Conference on Multipolarity (29.04.2023)

Tervehdys Suomesta! Minä olen Markku Siira ja kerron teille suomalaisesta politiikasta ja siitä, miten se liittyy ajatukseen moninapaisesta maailmasta.

Greetings from Finland! I am Markku Siira and I am here to tell you about Finnish politics and how they relate to the idea of the multipolar world.

As everyone already knows, on 4th of April, my native Finland became a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO. Although our political elites like to speak of democracy, people were betrayed in the process and no referendum was held to decide about the matter.

This historic transition was justified because of Russia’s special military operation that is going on in Ukraine. But even before that, Finnish public were constantly bombarded by the mainstream media’s lies about Putin’s Russia, so that they would accept only the Western narrative of events.

As I have often argued, because of hybrid influencing, Finland has achieved a foreign policy consensus in which political parties and groups from right, left and centre, have been brought together to promote Atlanticist engagement. Dissenters and critics are not given space in public forums, but are more or less ’cancelled’.

In my opinion, typical political commentators in Finland, have an outdated world view. They still think that the Euro- and Anglophone countries led by the United States, so-called ”collective West”, remains the principal actor and leader of the world. They don’t believe the unipolar moment is already over. This observation led me, over five years ago, to embark on a writing project, aimed at presenting an alternative views on world politics and opening up issues from a ’Eurasian perspective’. So I began my career as a dissident geopolitical commentator.

A recurring theme in my writings is, that the Western-centric liberal order built after the Second World War is at an end, and will be replaced by a new, different one. It is in this unstable, liminal state that we now live. It is this ”state of the world” that I comment on, noting the actions of various geopolitical rivals.

Of course, official Finland still tries to rely on Western institutions, as the latest NATO turn shows. It seems that Finnish authorities can’t accept that we are witnessing a tectonic shift in global power relations.

China and Russia, with their strategic partners, already represent strong poles in this emerging new international order. As in the past during such fundamental changes, the transition will be marked by various crises. The economic system is also undergoing a transformation. I have no doubt that the transnational financial circles are prepared for this scenario, too. The crisis of capitalism has  been talked about for a long time, but in the face of rising inflation, economists’ estimates or technocrats’ talk of digitalization are not necessarily just inspiring.

Will the multipolar world order be more fair, and lead us into a better future? What will happen to the central banks and the big investment companies, owned by the Western globalists? I don’t know, but we have been living in an exploitative, American-led system for decades, so I would at least want to give an Eurasian future a try.

Unfortunately many Finns, because of historical memory, or media’s influencing, prefer to swear allegiance to American hegemony, the bureaucracy of Brussels, or whatever, as long as they can identify themselves as ”Western”, or ”European”.

In 1995, Finns needed the ’eurocentrism’ brought by the membership in the European Union. This was still not enough for some, who also wanted to join the US-led military alliance to confirm their ’Westernisation’. For those living in the NATO bubble, membership in this Atlanticist club represents ’a giant leap into the civilised West’. So have we been primitive Ugrics until now, or how should such a view be understood?

The United States wanted our country into NATO to further its own geopolitical interests; Finland’s national security played no part in this plot. Finnish politicians and others did the necessary foot work, but the plans were drawn up in the Western centres of power already years ago. Once the worst NATO fever dissipates, will the foolish Finns realize they have been deceived?

Things may look dark and difficult now, but it has been interesting to notice, how in this tense situation, where we are still living between the old and the new order, the ideas expressed by Alexandr Dugin, among others, continue to disseminate into the mainstream.

Until recently, concepts such as ”multipolarity” were mentioned only by dissidents and obscure academics, but now, because of co-operation between Russia and China, they are mentioned in the mainstream news.

Here in Finland, it often feels like I am treading on enemy territory, when I speak and write about these things. While the local Atlanticists now celebrate the dire political change brought by the NATO membership, they do not realise that, beyond the small circle of self- satisfied West, the rest of the world is laughing at them, for becoming pawns in the great power game against Finland’s own national interests.

Because of NATO’s enlargement, Russia have to strengthen its military presence on the common border. We shall see whether the military spectacle will continue in Finland after Ukraine? In 1944, Finns survived the end of the world war and the collapse of Nazi Germany with relatively little damage. Will a similar operation succeed a second time in modern times?

Luckily, it is not up to our current political elite to decide which way the future will likely unfold. As the president of China has said, ”we will see changes not seen in a century”. A major shift that is underway, will affect tiny Finland as well, and one day we may again move away from the Western sphere of influence.

In the meantime, regional powers will once again emerge on the scene of international politics. I look forward to meeting you in a multipolar world – if it is not engulfed by the flames of war.

Thank you for your time.

 DISCURSO DE MARKKU SIIRA EN LA CONFERENCIA MUNDIAL SOBRE LA MULTIPOLARIDAD, 29 DE ABRIL DE 2023

 Toespraak van Markku Siira op de Wereldconferentie over multipolariteit, 29 april 2023

 Rede von Markku Siira auf der Welkonferenz über Multipolarität, 29. April 2023

Alberto Buela (Argentina) — philosopher, geopolitician

The Hispanic: Its Meaning and the Ecumenical

In February 2022, the second edition of my book Hispanoamérica contra Occidente, which was first published in Spain back in 1996, appeared in Buenos Aires. So, most of my friends did not know it. I added a single final chapter "Notes on the Original Argentina."

The book came about because of two facts: a) A conference in 1984 at the Versailles Congress Palace together with Julien Freund, Alain de Benoist, Guillaume Faye and Pierre Vial, which gave title to this book, and b) An epistolary exchange with Don Gonzalo Fernández de la Mora about Hispano-ness.

In France, I argued that Hispano-America, unlike Anglo-America, is the continuation of what is most genuine to the West, based on the notion of "that which non-Western traditions never foresaw or even imagined" (Pierre Aubenque, Le probleme d´etre chez Aristote, p.13), as well as linguistic, artistic and cultural expression.

And before the eminent Spaniard, I affirmed that Hispanicity in America is not limited to the monarchy and the Catholic religion, as determined by thinkers such as de Maeztu or García Morente, but opens us to all the culture of the Mediterranean that comes through the Hispanic. The Hispanic in us is both vehicle and matrix.

The term “Latin American,” universally accepted, became a politically correct expression used by the Church, Freemasonry, Marxists, liberals and progressives. A term that is strange to us, of us with a false name. The semantic struggle is the first thing that is lost in war—for the denominations of the enemy are adopted.

I say all this so that you will see that my meditation on America and Hispanidad is not born in this conference but comes from far away, from forty years ago.

I read a few months ago (27/3/22) a report by the Spanish professor Carlos X. Blanco in which he affirmed that: "There could have existed a different universal Order, which generalized the values of Greek philosophy, Roman law and the German-Christian concept of the person. But this Hispanic Empire had enemies everywhere. Hispanidad, more than a nostalgia and an "imperial dream" should be reactivated in a geopolitical key. A ‘Hispanist’ pole in the southern hemisphere of the Americas, extending to the entire Portuguese-Spanish speaking continent and the Iberian Peninsula, (to Asia in the Philippines and Africa with Guinea) could play a great role as a counterweight to the poles that rule the world today: the declining Anglo-Saxon, the emerging Chinese, the Eurasian Russian, the Arab, etc."

I would only correct the verb and instead of saying "generalized" I would have said "populairized" because we are the heirs of those values. Besides, the concept of person is not a German-Christian creation but comes from long ago, at least since Boethius (480-524).

We can have two approaches to the Hispanic: as a vehicle or channel through which the Mediterranean peoples (Spain, Portugal, France, Italy, Syria, Lebanon, Greece, Romania, etc.) that reached America express themselves, and as an ecumene, that is, as a great space of land inhabited by men who have and who feel, think and believe in common values. The Hispanic is neither the German Kultur nor the French civilisation, but contains a worldview about man, the world and its problems that is different from both.

In the first aspect (as a vehicle), the eagerness of the millions of immigrants who came to America in search of progress stands out above all—understood in a broad sense as the passage from the worst to the best, as taught by the Greek philosophers. It was also a vehicle for the Indians who incorporated hundreds of Spanish words into their multiple languages, e.g., cow, horse, sheep, etc.

Today, especially from England, the theory of "original peoples" is used to refer to the Indians. However, we Creoles are also native peoples. The difference with the Indians is that they have the "originality" while we have the "originality, because we are neither so Spanish nor so Indian,” as Bolivar said.

One of the traits of the Hispanic American man is the idea of progress, which is not the same as that of the Anglo-American. The latter, after the amazing increase of inventions produced by the interweaving of science and technology, whose product is technology, bought, adopted and assumed the myth of ineluctable Progress, not realizing that progress is good as an ideal but bad as an idea. If progress means to go from the worst to the best, to go forward, it is good; or does anyone not want to progress? But progress is meaningless if we do not know where we are going, and it is dangerous if we go the wrong way. Thus, if we emphasize comfort, which Hegel argued is infinite, progress will always be unsatisfactory. This technological progress ended with two atomic bombings in Japan, causing thousands and thousands of innocent deaths. We know that evil in the innocent is philosophically inexplicable, and that it is produced by a perversion of the cause that commits it.

On the contrary, for the Hispanic man, progress was always an aspiration and not an inspiration. It was an ideal and not an idea, and thus it traveled to America.

All the great progresses of mankind have not been for the sake of progress or for the benefit of the future, but for the sake of a current image, be it glory, the homeland, the welfare of the family, and so many others.

This aspiration to progress is what defines progress for Hispanic man, but his action is not inspired by the myth of progress.

This leads us to a deeper and more essential aspect of progress. "From the point of view of the spirit, progress is only valid when it develops in intensity or depth, never linearly or horizontally. The depth of progress indicates to us the degree of existential interiorization of the subject. And this is the profound meaning of progress, the increasingly intense interiorization of the truths that we know or, better, that we sense. The process of interiorization has successive degrees that contain one another in a hierarchy similar to the celestial one." That is why we can affirm that in the spiritual life, whether mystical or intellectual, he who does not advance goes backwards (Alberto Buela, Epítome de Metapolítica, p. 117).

Manuel García Morente, that great Spanish master of philosophy, posited the Christian gentleman as the archetype of the Hispanic man ((Manuel García Morente, La idea de Hispanidad). And he was not wrong. But "this theory of archetypes has two flaws. One, it lacks scientific rigor—we can load it with the greatest virtues as García Morente does with the Christian gentleman, or with the greatest vices as the Argentine liberals do with the gaucho. And, two, it is always ascribed and determined to a temporal moment and to a precise place in the history of a people" ((Alberto Buela, Hispanoamérica contra Occidente, p.52). Its validity disappears. It is then necessary to look for its specific features on the other hand.

Hispanicity as "being Hispanic" has been given in history under multiple and varied forms and will be given under many others which we cannot ascertain. It has always stood for the hierarchical sense of life, beings and functions. This hierarchy as a necessity of the inferior with respect to the superior: "What a good vassal he would be if he had a good lord,” affirmed Don Quixote, and not the other way around as the liberal bourgeois world postulates it. Hierarchy that is projected in a total vision, and not that of the specialists of the minimum who lose sight of the vision of the whole. Hierarchy that is based on objective values beyond discussion and not, conversely, on subjective values, arising from the primacy of conscience, the axial axis of the modern world. Thus, the necessity of the inferior, the vision of the whole and the objectivity of values are the expression of the hierarchical sense of being Hispanic.

The second trait is found in the preference of the self and the consequent lack of fear for the loss of identity.

Self-preference is not selfishness but an existential disposition that makes one not afraid of mixing with others. This is what the Spanish and Portuguese had when they arrived in America and what the millions of immigrants who came later had.

I have studied it as the first step of the dissident hermeneutics that I propose as the method of dissent:

"Every method is just that, a way to get somewhere. Dissent as a method starts, no longer from the description of phenomena like phenomenology, but from the ‘preference of ourselves.’ It starts from a valuative act as a resounding lie to methodological neutrality, which is the first great falsehood of scientific objectivism, whether that proposed by dialectical materialism or that of technocratic scientism ((Cf. Paul Feyerabend, Against Method). It breaks with the progressivism of Marxism for which every negation carries in itself a progressive and constant overcoming. On the contrary, dissent is not omniscient; it can say "I do not know," and thus, being the method of popular thought, it can deny the validity of something without having to deny its existence.

The preference is made on the basis of a given situation, a historical, political, economic, cultural locus. In our case, South America or the Patria Grande. This requires or demands dissent, a situated thought, as rightly spoke the popular philosophy of liberation with Kusch, Casalla et alii, and not the Marxist philosophy of liberation with Dussel, Cerutti and others, which is a European branch transplanted in America. It has as a principle demand the hic Rhodus, hic salta (This is Rhodes, now jump—a Latin idiom meaning, “Show us what you say you can do”) of Hegel at the beginning of his Philosophy of Right. Only from a determined place can dissent be genuinely raised, because to raise it from an ‘abstract universality,’ for example, humanity, human rights, equality, etc., etc., etc., is worthy of the distrustful criticism of the left in general, which sees in dissent a dangerous reactionary-populist deviation” ((Alberto Buela, Teoría del Disenso, p. 32).

The third and last of the features we will deal with here is the existence of a common enemy, the Anglo-Saxon. This is a Spanish heritage that Hispanic Americans, including all those of Mediterranean culture who arrived in these lands, have experienced and suffered since the civil wars of Independence. That great Mexican sociologist Pablo Gonzalez Casanova counted 700 military invasions and more than 4000 Anglo-Saxon interventions in Our America, from the battle of San Juan de Ulua in 1567/68 in Mexico to Grenada in 1983, Panama in 1989 and Haiti in 2004.

These successive and continuous struggles have shaped a certain awareness of the public enemy, the hostis. The one who harasses and opposes me. The one who prevents me from developing according to my own standards and values. In a word, the one who does not let me be by me and for me.

These struggles and experiences tend decades after decades and centuries after centuries towards the search of a Great Homeland, of a Great Space, of an Ecumene as we envision it.

The term ecumene, oikoumenh, is the present participle of the verb oikew, meaning “to inhabit in one's own house” and encloses the idea of "a large portion of inhabited land." For the Romans, the Empire was their ecumene, just as for the Greeks it was Hellada, and for the Christians until the end of the Middle Ages, Christianity. These ecumenes, each in its own time, coincided with the limits of what was considered the world. (Ecumene is also used in human geography, designating the appropriate environment for collective life. And since it means environment, in Spanish, the gender has even been changed and we speak of "the ecumene" in the masculine).

The idea of ecumene is certainly linked to that of humanism, but understood as "a living form that develops in the soil of a people and persists through historical changes" (W.Jaeger, Paideia, p.11). Classical Greco-Roman humanism seeks the realization of man's being through his formation. The reference to the soil of a people, according to the quotation, shows us the incarnation of ancient humanism, which the greatest of the Latin poets, Virgil, reinforces when he advises to think from the genius loci. A concept that encompasses the ideas of climate, soil and landscape.

This deep-rootedness, which was maintained in Hispanic humanism, is lost in enlightened humanism, which is, with minor variations, the one currently used by liberal and social democratic regimes and the United Nations around the world.

Other ecumenical summaries cover a multitude of countries, even some scattered ones, as is the case of the Arabian one. The opposite is true of the Indian ecumene, which is limited to a single country.

Ecumenes spatially determine not only an appropriate environment for collective life but also a world of values shared by the people who inhabit it. And in this sense the Hispanic or Ibero-American ecumene is an example of homogeneity, because of the common religion, language, law and customs.

The Enlightenment theory that is fully valid today consists in sustaining that pluralism should be considered not only within the cultural ecumenes but also within the national States that compose them. Since we do not share this theory, we ask ourselves: How should the question be posed?

We maintain, on the contrary, that pluralism should not occur within nation-states, as Dalmacio Negro Pavón likes to say, but that pluralism should occur between cultural ecumenicals. The risk of ecumenical pluralism within the nation-state is noted by the famous liberal political scientist Giovanni Sartori when he states: "Gathering many cultures on the same territory is dangerous. Thus, those who are not ready to integrate should not enter a country. For, immigration not followed by integration leads to the death of pluralism and democracy" ((Giovanni Sartori, "Pluralismo, multiculturalismo e inmigración," in Il Giorno, September 15, 2001).

It is the ecumenical cultures that produce the true and authentic plurality of the world, as they are constituted on the basis of shared values, language, beliefs, experiences and institutions.

Thus, cultural pluralism must be understood as an interculturalism where each identity is considered among others, but on the basis of its difference. In this lies the coexistence, or better, concord of communities.

To understand cultural pluralism as multiculturalism; that is, a cultural relativism that simultaneously leads to the exclusion of other cultures to avoid their denaturalization, or what is worse, to value the other for the mere fact of belonging to a minority and not for its merits or value in itself, is the serious mistake made today by cultural anthropologists and multiculturalists or progressives of thought.

(Multiculturalism is based on two stages in the development of cultural anthropology: a) on the cultural relativism of Franz Boas (1858-1942), the precursor of North American anthropology, who maintains that it is not possible to speak of superior or inferior cultures; and b) on the stage of decolonization in the 1960s and 1970s, when the former "objects" of study of the conquest of America and imperialism in Africa and Asia were transformed into "subjects" who studied their own realities).

When in the name of this multiculturalism, which as we have seen is a sectarian and exclusionary relativism, one ecumenical group invades the others, this produces the denaturalization of those groups. Thus the "Americanization" of the European, the "imbecilization" of the Ibero-American, the "terrorization" of the Arab ecumenical, etc., is encouraged. Erroneously, from the invading ecumene it can be thought that a transfer of meaning is produced, even though not all Europeans are North Americanized, nor are all Ibero-Americans imbeciles, nor are all Arabs terrorists.

This transfer of meaning and interference of one ecumenical group in another, as is happening today with the Anglo-American ecumenical group, is of maximum risk, because it indicates the emergence of an ecumenical totalitarianism, by which one imposes itself on the rest. The world would thus lose its richness of varied aspects, its character of beauty, for what it is—a cosmos—to become a single, uniform and homogeneous "orb."

Alberto Buela

Arkegueta, constant learner

Gabriela Cultelly (Uruguay)  – historian, economist and member of Intelectuals and Artists in Defense of Humanity Network.

Conferencia Global sobre multipolaridad

MSc. Gabriela Cultelli 1

Saludamos en primer lugar a todas y todos y agradecemos la invitación a participar en tan importante evento. Soy Gabriela Cultelli desde Uruguay, coordinadora de ese capítulo de la Red de Intelectuales y Artistas en Defensa de la Humanidad y directora del periódico Mate Amargo.

El tema que nos trae hoy, nos hizo repensar varios nudos de la coyuntura actual y en retrospectiva histórica, para intentar proyectarnos hacia el futuro próximo. Este mundo unipolar empezó y de hecho se gestó conjuntamente con la fase imperialista del Sistema capitalista. Fue así como desde los diferentes imperios y sus áreas de influencia, con 5 o 6 ejes mundiales de dominio y acumulación fuimos pasando a este formato único: EEUU como juez y gendarme mundial.

Aquel proceso para la América Latina comenzó con la misma conformación de los Estados Nacionales luego de la ruptura con el imperio Español, y posterior declive del imperio inglés y culminó por la década del 30 del siglo pasado. Después en el mundo, fecha clave fue 1971 y la declaración de inconvertibilidad del dólar una vez invadida Europa y el mundo con tal moneda. Más adelante para nosotros la década perdida y para el mundo, la caída del campo socialista y la URSS ya para 1992 Son estos procesos largos, no lineales, que fácilmente pueden abarcar medio siglo o más. Así el mundo pasó por multiplicidad de guerras, dos de ellas mundiales. Destrucción y construcción.

Aparentemente o tal vez esté comenzando la gestación de una nueva etapa o fase, pero lo que sí es seguro que esta sucediendo es una crisis global de hegemonía o del mundo unipolar en que hemos vivido hasta ahora, con la decadencia del imperio estadounidense. El resultado inmediato… aún es temprano para vaticinarlo.

El segundo elemento que queríamos traer a la reflexión son las características de los ciclos económicos o ciclo de las crisis. Recordemos en términos de crisis, que en los albores del siglo XX se dio una aguda crisis que acompañó los cambios de fase mencionados, y pensemos también en la más aguda del siglo XX, la crisis del 29 al 33 que fuera preámbulo de un nuevo reparto del mundo a partir de la Segunda Guerra Mundial.

Las crisis hoy tienen ciclos agudos y cada vez más breves. Por ejemplo las que transcurrieron en el 2008, 2014, 2019 A esta última le dicen crisis “de la pandemia” y en realidad la crisis a nivel de los principales países capitalistas, ya se había desatado en el 2019 y la crisis sanitaria de la pandemia la agudizó.

Hoy a inicios del 2023 ya se comienza a anunciar otro ciclo, unos dicen que se continúa el anterior, que no se pudo salir de la crisis “de la pandemia”. De hecho, la economía mundial se recuperó y creció aunque más levemente de lo anunciado. No hubo el “rebote en V” anunciado por los neoliberales.

Son Ciclos de crisis económicas multifacética que transversalizan efectos climáticos, alimentarios, energéticos, poblacionales, sociales en general. En definitiva, son crisis sistémicas.

Esta rapidez y agudeza de los ciclos puede que sea también elemento que nos hace ver los primeros agujeros que aparecen en esta forma mundial de organización unipolar.

Mencionamos antes, otro elemento que queríamos también traer como punto a la reflexión, o sea todo el proceso que se dio de sustitución del patrón oro por el patrón dólar. Pero el Patrón dólar hoy parece manifestar los primeros estertores y no es menor, cuando de crisis de una forma de dominio unipolar estamos hablando.

En Argentina, para ejemplificar con hechos recientes desde la región, se está impulsando el pago a China en la moneda de ese país. Las importaciones de Argentina desde China son más de la quinta parte del total, y si a ello le sumamos las entradas de su primer socio comercial, Brasil, con el cual continúa avanzando en la utilización de sus monedas locales a través de tipos de cambio compensados, se totaliza casi la mitad del valor de sus bienes y servicios importados que tenderían a comercializarse en monedas diferentes al dólar. Otro tanto estamos observando, en relaciones con Rusia, el MIR, etc.

Parecería conformarse al menos los primeros pasos que, de reforzarse, podrían empezar a hacerle mella al patrón dólar. Aún es temprano para un mundo Multilateral con regionalismos sólidos, pero comienza a vislumbrarse.

Los avances comerciales, y la consecutiva transformación en la esfera de la circulación aún no limitan la unipolaridad del mundo. La potencia global, Estados Unidos, sigue siendo multifacética. No solo desde la localización geopolítica del mando de las transnacionales, sino que mantiene también el dominio militar y, unido a todo ello, los aspectos culturales de dominio, retroalimentándose en tiempos en que las formas de capital digital y específicamente comunicacional, cobran un dinamismo único, pudiéndose observar una tendencia al cambio de eje de acumulación en las formas de capital. La hegemonía de que hablara Gramsci parece fortalecida con los entrelazamientos de poderes políticos, económicos, comunicacionales, nunca antes vistos.

Pero sin dudas y al mismo tiempo, se están disputando espacios. No cabe duda y al menos podríamos hablar ya de tres cosas y a manera de conclusión:

• La primera relativa al comienzo de la crisis del mundo unipolar y la caída del imperialismo Yanqui.
• La segunda, unida dialécticamente a la primera, el traslado de ejes de poder hacia otros espacios como los BRICS, que hoy ya suman más de 10 países.
• Por otra parte, y en esta región, la segunda Ola progresista pudiera apuntar, aunque aparentemente con mayor debilidad incluso que la primera, a ir rompiendo lazos de dependencia, pues como decíamos, “la necesidad obliga” y los procesos decoloniales podrán apuntar a ello al tiempo que las elites capitalistas carecen de respuestas.

Termino entonces con una frase de Vijay Prashad en entrevista reciente concedida a MateAmargo:

“Estos dos conceptos de regionalismo y multilateralismo prevalecen en las discusiones en el Sur Global, y no cuestiones de nueva hegemonía o de multipolaridad. Ni China ni Rusia han manifestado ningún interés en un nuevo Consenso de Pekín o de Moscú y tampoco están dando forma al orden mundial de tal manera que se necesite ‘un solo maestro’”2 (esta última expresión, la utiliza parafraseando al propio Putin)

Nuevamente, muchas Gracias.

1.  Licenciada en Economía Política en la Universidad de La Habana (1986), Magister en Historia Económica de la Universidad de la República Oriental del Uruguay (1998-1999). Actualmente es Coordinadora de la Red de Intelectuales y Artistas en Defensa de la Humanidad – Capitulo Uruguay. Directora del periódico Mate Amargo, investigadora principal del Programa EconomiaPolitica.uy

2. Mate Amargo 19/04/2023 “Marxismo y anticolonialismo. Conversando con Vijay Prashad” por José Ernesto Novaez

Dr. Dalbir Singh (India) - National Secretary, Indian National Congress

The Future of Multipolar world

By Dr. Dalbir Singh

It is impossible to engage in a conversation about the geopolitical paradigm without stumbling upon the idea of multipolarity. The socio-global political, and economic scenario has ushered in a renewed appetite for discussions on the international configuration of power. The geopolitical landscape is in transition, and it appears that we are entering the multipolar era. We must analyze as to what insights can we draw from the international relation theory, what are the relevant lessons from history and what are the specifics of our situation, and how can we all work together to ensure that multipolarity becomes a vehicle for sustainable development and durable peace on this planet.

Multipolarity has come to figure prominently in the everyday vocabulary of diplomats and world leaders. The BRICS Summit in 2009 expressed support for a more democratic and a just multipolar world order. Successive BRICS communiques have continued to strike this chord. In 2010, former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton remarked during the official visit to New Zealand that “we are witnessing a shift of power to a more multipolar world, as opposed to the cold war model of a bipolar world”. In 2013, former UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon stated that we have begun to see increasing and irreversible momentum towards a multipolar world. In 2016, Russian Foreign Minister Mr. Lavrov declared that international relations have entered into a conceptually new historical stage, that consists of emergent multipolar world order that reflected the strengthening of new economic development paradigm and power centers. These manifestations reveal a general acceptance that multipolarity has become an inescapable concept within contemporary international dynamics.

It is largely recognized that the unipolar world is not tenable anymore in the context of ground realities. The unipolar world that emerged after the end of the Cold War has been characterized by the dominance of one power in international affairs The Global South, comprising of countries from Latin America, Africa, and Asia, has historically been marginalized in the international system. However, with the rise of multipolarity, the Global South has an opportunity to play a more significant role in shaping the international order. For instance, in the UN General Assembly, the Global South has a majority, with 135 out of 193 countries belonging to the G77, a coalition of developing countries.

Moreover, the fight against neo-colonialism in a multipolar world is crucial. The legacy of colonialism continues to shape the international system, with many modern nation-states being a tragic heritage of the colonial era or a tool for promoting the interests of the major world powers. The effects of colonialism can be seen in the unequal distribution of wealth, influence and power in the world, with the Global South bearing the brunt of the negative consequences. For instance, the GDP per capita of the top 10 wealthiest countries in the world is $100,000 or more, while that of the bottom 10 countries is less than $1,000. China and Russia, as permanent members of the UN Security Council, enjoy the great power status. India, the most populous country, has the fifth-largest economy. Brazil and South Africa are also emerging as countries with more global outreach, influence, and new diplomatic capabilities. The role of BRICS countries cannot be underestimated in shaping the international agendas through multilateral frameworks, as recent negotiations on sustainable development and climate change have indicated.

The world is confronting critical challenges like poverty, deprivation, unemployment, hunger, and disease, as well as climate change. 30,000 people die every day due to hunger, and 700 million people live in abject poverty with less than two dollars a day.

We need a multipolar global order based on equity, cooperation, and trust, with respect for diversity and rule of law besides recognition of the dignity and sovereignty of nations. Violent extremism conducive to terrorism is increasingly perceived as a global threat, requiring comprehensive, coordinated international efforts. The future of the so-called war on terror has created heightened awareness of the need for harmonized, multilaterally agreed approaches.

The Ebola outbreak of 2014 and the COVID-19 pandemic, which led to thousands of preventable deaths, have demonstrated the renewed need for multi-sectoral coordination and cooperation. Even the world drug problem is now considered a common and shared responsibility, as nations at different points in the production and consumption chain acknowledge the unsatisfactory results of the outcomes and seek more effective solutions through multilaterally concerted efforts.

We must also recognize that a myriad of civil society organizations promoting causes ranging from gender equality to disarmament and non-proliferation represent historical evolution that cannot be ignored.

Multipolar world cannot be based solely on a balance of power; it must also be built on a foundation of cultural diversity and mutual understanding. The dialogue of civilizations is crucial in this regard, with the need to foster greater understanding between different cultures, ethnicities and civilizations.

Multipolarity offers an opportunity for a more diversified and balanced economic system, as opposed to the economic order currently dominated by a few Western powers. We need reforms of international economic institutions, promotion of fair trade and investment, and strengthening of regional economic integration.

The United Nations and other Bretton wood institutions need critical reforms to meet the growing challenges of the world. We also need new institutions of collective security and governance. Governance mechanisms must become more inclusive and democratic.

We need strong collective endeavours to deconstruct unipolarity by exploring ideological alternatives, expanding humanitarian cooperation, promoting dialogue, respecting plurality, and resisting hegemonic tendencies of entrenched powers.

Nations of all sizes will need to derive benefits from the sovereign equality of states that is at the core of a successful multipolar order through improved and more inclusive multilateral framework for decision-making and cooperation. Civil society and robust multilateralism need to be strengthened with enlightened leadership, diplomatic resourcefulness, and social mobilization. The citizens of our interconnected societies, who aspire to realize their potential and live a life of peace and happiness, will certainly be ready to make this world a better place for posterity with shared values.

Alexander Kornilov (Estonia), Head of Baltija.eu web-site addresses the Global Conference on Multipolarity (29.04.2023)

Hello, dear friends!

I'm Aleksandr Kornilov, editor for Baltija (Estonia) portal.

The collapse of the Soviet Union changed the international balance of power. The bipolar world was replaced with a unipolar world, which affected the mass media, with liberalism coming afore and letting the liberal media dominate in the global news agenda.

But several years ago, the situation began to change. The world has become multipolar, many countries have chosen their own way to develop the media. A new Cold War has broken out, whereas the old confrontation between capitalism and socialism has been replaced by debates or, in some places, real battles between champions of the liberal economic course and supporters of people-centered state domestic policy.

And now our main task is to force out the deceitful mainstream liberal media and find a way to share truthful information with the countries of the so-called golden billion, telling them about the diversity of the world and the dynamic development of other centers of gravity.

An ideological split has happened to Europe, which has also impacted the media. Most Russian media have been blocked in many countries, not only unfriendly ones.

The Russian mega-projects worth many billions failed to rearrange themselves in  time in spite of numerous warnings. Unfortunately, they do not play any significant role as foreign news outlets in Europe. They simply no longer exist. In order to find supporters of a multipolar world in Europe, we have to set up new media outlets, to join internal European groups in social media and other resources.

We may start with the support of media, launched by Russian compatriots. We have to learn working together with those who sympathize with Russia, thus supporting a multipolar world. With those who are not our compatriots but who love Russia and ready to tell the truth about it in the other countries’ social media and public pages.

There really are a lot of people who are ready to hear the truth, you just have to find the way to them. Walk and ye shall reach.

Thank you for your attention!

Amal Wadan, civil rights activist from Palestine, addresses the Global Conference on Multipolarity (29.04.2023).

Keith Bennett (Great Britain) – Co-Editor of Friends of Socialist China and also the Editor of the International Manifesto Group

First, I would like to thank Nova Resistencia of Brazil, the New International Order Initiative of Turkiye, the International Eurasian Movement of Russia, the Thinker’s Forum of China, and the International Russophile Movement for organizing today’s Global Multipolarity Conference and for inviting me to share some thoughts on the sub-theme of the Struggle Against Neo-Colonialism in a Multipolar World.

The themes you have chosen for today’s deliberations are the central questions of contemporary global politics. Indeed, I would argue, they are among the most vital issues facing humanity for centuries.

What is most significant about the present conjuncture is that the conditions are maturing for the final resolution of this historical problem, through the creation of a truly multipolar, or pluripolar, world, with independence as its foundation and at its core.

At the dawn of the twentieth century, the great African-American scholar and revolutionary, Dr. WEB DuBois said that the defining issue of that coming century would be what he termed the ‘colour line’. He spoke just a few short years after the European colonial powers had met in Berlin to  carve the continent of Africa between themselves like so many slices of cake.

What DuBois was referring to was the struggle of the oppressed nations and peoples for their liberation – a struggle that characterized the twentieth century. The 1917 revolution that led to the creation of the Soviet Union was the first great turning point in the anti-colonial struggle. For the first time, a great world power emerged that was unequivocally committed to the struggle and the freedom of the colonial peoples.

When the imperialist powers again plunged the world into a war for the redivision of the colonies, it was the Soviet Union and its Red Army that played the decisive role in what became an anti-fascist battle for democracy.

Arising from the historic defeat of fascism was the victory of the Chinese revolution, which had a profound impact on the global balance of forces. The founding of the People’s Republic of China, the independence of India, the revolutions in Korea and Vietnam, and the 1955 Afro-Asian Conference in the Indonesian city of Bandung, were among the most important factors in creating a new reality, in which the persistence of the old colonial empires, in the form they had taken hitherto, became increasingly untenable.

Even amidst its tragic and bitter divisions, the existence of the socialist camp was the greatest mainstay and support for the wave of anti- colonialism that swept through Africa and Asia, the Caribbean and the South Pacific, and even in Europe, as the struggle of the Irish people, among others, demonstrates. Whilst formal decolonization remains to be completed, hundreds of millions of people won their national independence and embarked on the struggle to build a new society.

However, that struggle has proven to be no less arduous than that to win formal independence. As far back as 1897, the greatest Irish socialist James Connolly had warned:

“If you remove the English Army tomorrow and hoist the green flag over Dublin Castle, unless you set about the organization of the Socialist Republic your efforts will be in vain. England will still rule you. She would rule you through her capitalists, through her landlords, through her financiers, through the whole array of commercial and individualist institutions she has planted in this country.”

Just as Lenin had defined imperialism as the highest stage of capitalism, so it fell to Ghana’s first president Osagyefo Dr. Kwame Nkrumah to define neo-colonialism as the highest stage of imperialism.

And just as it was the existence of the socialist camp that provided the greatest support to the cause of national independence and the building of a  new society, so it was the collapse of the Soviet Union, in particular, that constituted the greatest setback, temporarily giving colonialism and imperialism a new lease of life.

Far from the ‘peace dividend’ we were promised, the ‘new world order’ and then the supposed ‘rules based international order’, ushered in a new period of colonial wars, in Afghanistan and Yugoslavia, Iraq and Libya, Syria and Somalia, among others, wreaking havoc, destruction and misery in those countries and much farther afield.

Three factors, in particular, have, however, served to make the moment of imperialist triumphalism a fleeting one:

• The People’s Republic of China, far from changing its class character, has deepened its socialist orientation and has continued its steady rise, remaining on course to overtake the United States as the world’s single largest economy, a change unseen in well over a century. As President Xi Jinping first said in 2017, socialism with Chinese characteristics, “offers a new option for other countries and nations who want to speed up their development while preserving their independence.”

• Under the leadership of President Putin, Russia has regained its dignity and self-respect and is once more a powerful and dependable ally of the Global South.

• Starting with the Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela, and with the great example of socialist Cuba to follow, Latin America, considered by the United States to be its hereditary backyard for centuries, has advanced to the forefront of the global struggle for independence and social progress. The return of President Lula in Brazil has also served to greatly expedite that process.

One might say that today, on a state level, the anti-colonial forces have never been stronger and more cohesive. And it is precisely for this reason that imperialism has responded with a ‘new cold war’ targeted on Russia and China in particular. Indeed, imperialism no longer makes any pretense with regard to the fact that it is openly at war with Russia.

Viewed in this light, it becomes clear that Russia’s current Special Military Operation represents a historic counterattack against the global colonial forces represented, in particular, by the US-led NATO alliance. And this, in turn, explains, for example, the outpouring of support for Russia in such long downtrodden countries as Mali, Burkina Faso and the Central African Republic, even if it leaves most of the western left in a state of impotence and incoherence.

Today, once again, the multinational people of Russia stand on the frontlines of the struggle for civilization and against barbarism. I have no doubt that, as in 1945, they will prevail.

And I conclude with this observation of VI Lenin, from his 1923 article, ‘Better Fewer But Better’: “In the last analysis, the outcome of the struggle will be determined by the fact that Russia, India, China, etc., account for the overwhelming majority of the population of the globe. And during the past few years it is this majority that has been drawn into the struggle for emancipation with extraordinary rapidity, so that in this respect there cannot be the slightest doubt what the final outcome of the world struggle will be. In this sense, the complete victory of socialism is fully and absolutely assured.”

Thank you for your attention.

Luís Ribeiro (Portugal) – Journalist and Geopolitical Analyst – speaks for the Global Conference on Multipolarity (29.04.2023).

Good afternoon everyone, my name is Luís Ribeiro, I am an administrator and founder of the social networks “Geopolitics in Portuguese”, I am speaking to you from Portugal and first of all I want to thank you for the invitation to participate in this conference on Global Multipolarity, it is a It is an honor to be able to participate in this event and I would also like to say that it is exciting to observe firsthand the changes that are taking place in the world and that will bring us a world of new opportunities, even facing some challenges that cannot be ignored.

I think I should start my speech by reminding everyone that our house is one, it's called Earth and we have a duty to take care of it, to live in peace, with friendship and balance between our peoples and nations.

The objective of the Multipolar World must be mutual respect, where peoples must follow their aspirations, their paths, their projects, their political systems and always with the awareness that they must be based on their culture and values.

I am not saying with this that other systems cannot serve as inspiration, but I am saying they can do it through leadership with good examples like success in combat to poverty, because that make us worthy of being followed.

On a planet with 8 billion human beings, almost 30% still suffer from food insecurity, a phenomenon that is unacceptable at a time in our development where we produce enough food for everyone and waste food that would be enough for no one to go hungry.

Hunger, misery, and underdevelopment no longer have excuses to continue to exist and the new Multipolar World could be a cornerstone, to reverse the situation that persists mainly in the global south, where the shadow of Colonialism remains strong and limits its development. Even so, we are experiencing several moments of tension in the world that led us to be cautious and pragmatic.

It has become increasingly difficult to engage in reasonable discussions about the state of the world amid rising international tensions. The present environment of global instability and conflict has emerged over the past fifteen years driven by the growing weakness of the the West, and by the economic growth of developing countries like BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa). These states, along with several others, have built the material conditions for their own development projects, including for the next generation of technology, a sector that had previously been the monopoly of Western states and firms through the World Trade Organization’s intellectual property rights regime. Alongside the BRICS, the construction of regional trade and development projects in Africa, Asia, and Latin America that are not controlled by the Western states or Western-dominated institutions – including the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (2001) the Belt and Road Initiative (2013), the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (2011), and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (2022) – heralds the emergence of a new international economic order that we now call Global Multipolarity.

Since the world financial crisis of 2008, nothing kept the same, the United States and its NATO partners have become aware that their hegemonic status in the world has deteriorated. This decline is the consequence of three key forms of overreach: first, military overreach through both enormous military expenditure and warfare; second, financial overreach caused by the rampant waste of social wealth into the unproductive financial sector along with the widespread imposition of sanctions, dollar hegemony, and control of international financial mechanisms (such as SWIFT); and, third, economic overreach, due to the investment and tax strike of a small part of the world’s population, who are solely fixated on filling their already immense private  bank accounts. This overreach has led to the fragility of the Western states, which are less able to exercise their authority around the world and cannot abuse of their power. In reaction to their own weakness and the new developments in the Global South, the United States has led its allies in launching a comprehensive pressure campaign against what it considers to be its ‘near peer rivals’, namely China and Russia. This hostile foreign policy, which includes a trade war, unilateral sanctions, aggressive diplomacy, and military operations, is now commonly known as the New Cold War.

Good for us, the new world order that we call Global Multipolarity, have created new Development Banks, new forms of trade without the dollar and without the SWIFT, is securing great part of energy production, have risen in terms of military technology and telecommunication, become more and more independent in the semiconductor development, have dominated the rare earth market, and is in good position in artificial intelligence and internet of things, and even in the space technologies we already have GPS equivalent systems with GLONASS from Russia and BeiDou from China.

Let’s use our Multipolar Power to lift our Global South friends and put an end in the exploratory way of do international relations and put an end in unipolar hegemony.

Regards from Portugal,

No pasarán!

Luís Filipe Ribeiro

Branislav Tapuskovic (Serbia) – Lawyer, former defender of Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic

Branislav Tapušković, Serbian Lawyer for more than 60 years (known also as Amicus Curiae in the case against Slobodan Milošević in the Hague Tribunal for Ex-Yu and Rwanda – expected to be against Slobodan Milošević, but as a justful person, he was not, he deconstructed their case and he was asked to leave the “Tribunal”.

I am deeply convinced that there is no justice without universal justice. Twenty years ago, I have been Amicus Curiae for three years in the Hague Tribunal for ex/Yu and Rwanda, in their case against President Slobodan Milošević.

He was convinced for war crimes in May 1999, while NATO bombing of Yugoslavia was still going on. This was for the first time in history that the chief of the sovereign state was convinced and brought to trial. At the same time, no NATO countries chiefs of states were called for responsibility for 75 days of bombing of civilians and civilian infrastructure with the ammunition with depleted uranium / although they acted in total opposition with UN and international law principles.

There is something I would like to outline in order to make things more clear. In the introductory notes in the case against President Slobodan Milošević, on February 13th, 2002, Karla Del Ponte noted that it had benn the first case in history that the chief of sovereign country was brought to trial. Then, she had invited her deputy, the prosecutor Rheinfeld to speak and to better explain her words, in details. Then, he said: “Honourable Court, more than half a century ago, Judge Jackson, the main prosecutor of International Military Court in Nurnberg said as follows: ‘The wrongdoings which we now attempt to prosecute were so deliberate, so evil and so destructive, that civilization could not survive their repeating.’ “ This is a sentence of judge Jackson which Rheinfeld quoted and then he added: “Jackson had spoken about the heavy responsibility which came from the first trial held on the occasion of crimes against peace. In that time, the Court hoped that the ruling will serve as deterrent factor for world leaders. The hope was that this kind of trials, like Nurnberg would not be necessary, again. It seems that hope was in vain, it looks like history is repeating and that lessons are not learnt, if they ever were. Or they were ignored and forgotten. This trial represents the start and the first world prosecution of the ex chief of state for the crimes committed while he was the chief of state.

And this is the problem which I mentioned at the very beginning – about universal justice. Two months ahead Karla del Ponte’s speech, I was talking at that Court exactly about universal justice and that it was not possible to talk about justice of only two spots in the Globe – Rwanda and former Yugoslavia, but that talk should be universal.

One year after those events, International Permanent Criminal Court in The Hague was established in order to prosecute every chief of any state if they started a war and committed crimes against peace. And you all know what is the fact and what has been happening since 2002 – what kind of wars were started.

Now there is that clash in Ukraine – and now there is only one question: who is in charge to select the crime to be prosecuted? How and why, the Prosecutor of the Permanent Criminal Court in the Hague decided to start a criminal case and procedure against Russian head of state - ok, maybe he has to do that – but in the case he has to do that, universal justice demands that everyone, every chief of state ahead of him, who has committed crime against peace, since 2002 – I do not even want to mention their names or to mention their war crimes, which has not expired, since Hiroshima to the present day. There has not been a day without war since the end of WW2. There must be responsibility for the crimes against peace and it has to be a universal rule for justice and it has to have universal dimension and everyone, who committed a crime has to be prosecute. Everyone.

 Una regola per la giustizia

Vladimir Kršljanin, Ambassador, Vice President of the International Slavic Academy of Sciences, Education, Arts and Culture

Добро дошли у Нови свет!

Добро пожаловать в Новый мир!

Welcome to the New World!

Undefeated during the NATO’s aggression in 1999, the First European War, in February 2000 we organized in Belgrade a big international conference of political parties from all over the world under the title "International Relations in the New Century - For a World of Equals". We then founded an organization that is still active today - the Belgrade Forum for the World of Equals. Towards the end of that same year, in October, the Western oligarchy (neo-)colonized our country through a color revolution and sent President Miloševic to stand before the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in the Hague.

We founded the Freedom organization then, and after Miloševic was murdered in the Hague we created the Movement For Serbia, seeking to liberate and unify the Serbs, which we partially achieved in 2012 With deep understanding and feel for our spiritual and moral values and our history and tradition, as well as welcoming the arising World of Equals, or the multipolar world, in short - the New World, last year we created the Serbian-Russian Brotherhood. Using the synergy of these four organizations, we are trying to gather forces to get rid of the Western colonial influence and to play a decent role in the New World, led by our friends and brothers - Russia and China.

The Western oligarchy has dominated in the world for several centuries at the cost of killing many millions of people. It is anti-human in its essence, and uses human ideals and creativity only when it needs them to maintain its anti-democratic power and appetites. It has created and improved its might and its weapons (murder, robbery, deceit), becoming perfect in deviating from the New Testament and the basic Christian value of love for God and neighbor. The entire history of its domination is a long list of horrible wars and destruction - crusades, colonial wars, world wars, European wars (the first in the 90s was waged against the Serbs and the second now is against the Russians), hybrid and network wars.

Why it has chosen Russians and Serbs, and more recently the Chinese, as its main target over the centuries? Because they represent true human civilizations, and their success rules out not only success but also the very existence of a predatory oligarchy with its claims to global domination. Serbia is one of the heirs to Byzantium, whose brief Balkan reign, in the 14th century, marked the last rise of the Second Rome, before it passed the baton over to the Third, Russia. And later on, Serbs and Russians stood together in all the dramatic moments of European history, until today.

Russia and China are opening the doors to the New World for everyone. The same is done by the BRICS, which is now followed by most of the world. In just a few decades, without any wars or colonization, they have overtaken the West, ruled by criminal oligarchy, outperforming it both militarily and politically, economically and morally. Why? For the simple reason that human creativity is a collective act, it flourishes with love and equal cooperation, and fades away with all kinds of war and violence. Now that most of humanity is thriving and networking, the Western oligarchy, on the contrary, is ruining itself and its peoples. The new, free world has accumulated the positive experiences of all mankind. There is a place for everyone in it! We invite the Western nations to join this New World, as they are increasingly falling victim to their oligarchy, and we wish them a speedy liberation!

Antifascism is fundamental for the modern civilization. Throughout its history the mankind probably only once reached a great and global consensus when it condemned Fascism. The defeat of Fascism shaped a universally recognized system of international law and international relations. The Western oligarchy resorted to Fascism, terrorism, historical revisionism and flouting of international law in its wars against Serbs and Russians. For this it should be judged following the criteria of Nuremberg trial.

The New World is a strong and organized rule of good over evil!

Thank you for your attention!

Dereck Meriton (Seychelles) – Youth empowerment Seychelles (YES) activist – addresses the Global Conference on Multipolarity (29.04.2023).

Bonzour tou dimoun, fotespere zot tou zot byen. I vreman en plezir e en loner pou et la avek zot ozordi pou sa lesanz e Mon souete ki travay ki nou fer ozordi j annan en lenpak pozitiv, pou byenet limanite e lemonn an antye.

Which translates to, good morning everyone, I hope that you all find yourself in good health this morning. It is a pleasure and an honor to be here amongst you today for this exchange and I hope that the work we do here today has a positive impact on humanity and the world as a whole.

My name is Dereck Meriton and I am from the Seychelles. You may have heard of her. Often referred to as paradise, or the garden of eden, but to us, the people of Seychelles, the Seychellois, it is home. A home that is no stranger to the negative impacts of global woes. The environmental disasters, the wars, recessions, the rise of mental health issues. All interconnected in one way or another to unsustainable economic system that sees us depleting global resources at an alarming rate.

But, in this finite world we inhabit, it is evident if not painfully obvious that any system that relies on an infinite exponential growth for its survival, is a by definition not sustainable and must be changed.

However, that is not what is happening. The world is fast becoming a playground for the rich and powerful peoples and nations, and here in the Seychelles we are no stranger to that, especially with more and more emphasis being put on catering to high end tourism, and more and more places are becoming inaccessible to our own people.

Or The current state of the tuna fishing industry in the Seychelles as another example, where wealthy European companies backed and often subsidised by their respective countries and Governments where they pay comparatively small licensing fees to fish in our waters but make so much more on their own returns. The last numbers that I had in that field was that we receive USD70million over 6 years, yet they make 3-4 billion euro a year after value added. Not only is this inequitable, but it is also without conscience as they employ unsustainable methods, that lack the care for the health and sustainability of the local ecosystem, generating huge amounts of by-catch, including protected species.

As a result, our fish stock are being depleted and affected, and in turn tighter restrictions are put on the local small scale artisanal fishermen which then have a direct impact, a direct effect on our local food security.

Or The elite coming in, buying off big hotels to languish in their private holiday home villas while big five-star hotel franchises run the surrounding establishment, supporting a hierarchal work environment that pushes locals to just be a part of the background. This also often leads to gentrification, increasing societal ills in the poorer areas of society whilst everyone is just left pointing fingers, trying to assign blame, instead of trying to find out why people are turning more and more towards substance abuse and crime.

So, why you may ask, do we put up with such seemingly unfair and inequitable practices then? And the answer is simple. What choice do we have. As a small developing island state, collaboration with the international community helps our growth. That’s how it’s always been through history. That’s how every country has grown economically through partnership and collaboration with other countries. And now it is the very same situation that we find ourselves in and many other developing countries find themselves in. However, nowadays if we want to qualify for assistance in such ways, we find constant regulations being pushed on us, often without understanding the cultures and practices of the locals.

At some point we need to call into question the validity if not morality of such systems and such practices. It is time for a new way. A way where we all support each other, where we promote each other, where we work together for the benefit of the people, not just a few. Where the systems in place are not based on rampant greed, exploitation and this “dog eat dog” mentality where smaller dogs are automatically at a disadvantage.

I do hope that by sharing some examples of my countries shortcomings in response to all these global activities have shed some light on just how far reaching this obsessive western ideologies steeped in neo-colonialism can be. And that together we can formulate ideas on a more equitable way of living together beyond this simple matter of might make right. I hope it’s been insightful. Thank you for your time.

Zmago Jelinčič Plemeniti (Slovenia) – Chairman of the Slovenian National Party (Vodja stanka SNS)

Moje ime je Zmago Jelinčič Plemeniti in sem predsednik Slovenske nacionalne stranke iz Slovenije. Moram povedati, da tukaj predstavljam mnenje velikega števila slovenskih državljanov, ki se ne strinjajo s tem kar se dogaja v svetu. (My name is Zmago Jelinčič Plemeniti and I am the president of the Slovenian National Party from Slovenia. I must say that here I represent the opinion of a large number of Slovenian citizens who do not agree with what is happening in the world.)

I must tell you that I'm very very happy and I'm proud that I can be a part of Global Conference on Multipolarity. It is important thing, otherwise we will disappear, our people who wants freedom, they are pushed aside because of the hegemonism, and the so-called liberalism from the western part of the world, mostly from the United States of America and the states of European Union. Not everybody, but most states of European Union, they are trying to make a pressure on the people, not allowing them to think with their own head and feel with their own hearts.

So I must say that I'm greeting all the people with the brains and with the hearts who wants to change this idiotic way of western part of the world. It reminds me on the, in the history, on the time when the Roman Empire disabled.

They were totally destructive and the western part of Roman Empire collapsed in about 100 years. But the eastern part of Roman Empire they were still living almost 1000 years. So it is our duty to do the same, to give the nations who wants to live, who wants to live freely, who wants to make a contact with the other people.

Of all over the world to remain, not to distress them. Not to kill them like America is doing all the time. We cannot forget what United States since the Second World War they produced. I don't know, 20 or even more wars all over the world only to make money for the Americans, for the Westerners and for degenerating people who are living in that parts of the world, and who are leading the this world. So let's look European Union, what are they doing?

They are not allowing to have a contact with Russian Federation, with China. They are now stopping to make a contact with Brazil, with Saudi Arabia, Southern Africa, with a lot of states in Africa. They are pushing them out of connection. I think that they will try to put us out of the United Nation Organization. So, but asking what is United Nations Organization? It is in the hand of hegemonists of from the world, mostly from United States of America. So now it is our duty to help the people all over the world to live freely, to let them be prosper, because the prosperity of each nation is important for the our Multipolarity world. It is not like the western side are thinking, that only one polarity is allowed, American polarity, European, Western European polarity. No! No, it is our duty to fight against it.

And our Organization starting on the this Conference, we must be together as much as possible. We can, we can do, we can be together, we can fight together and we must show them that we are better than they are, and we are better so I must say what our Slovenian national anthem is saying! In one part they're saying Long live to the nations, who are longing for a day, that wherever the sun is shining, there will be no quarrel on the world, that all the compatriots will be free, and the neighbor will be for friend not an enemy.

So, thank you, and to the final, final fight, and what? To the freedom of all nations and the success! And don't forget in Slovenia we have a lot of people thinking like me!

Javier de Lara, independent researcher from Spain addresses the Global Conference on Multipolarity (29.04.2023)

Hello everyone! First of all, let me introduce myself.

My name is Francisco Javier De Lara. I'm from Spain. I work in Madrid as an engineer in the field of industrial electronics and automation.

First of all, I would like to apologize for the image and sound quality. I have no experience in recording videos in this format and I am a bit unaccustomed to it, but I will to make the best of it.

A priest once told me that long sermons put the people to sleep, but short ones awaken the heart. So, I will try to be brief and make the most of my time.

Let's go directly to what is at the heart of any question, to the origins of everything: the philosophy of the multipolar model and what is at the heart of human nature itself. So, what does it take to understand the essence of human nature? So, the first thing we need to do is to delve into the concept of Dasein.

It was introduced by Heidegger and is defined as the capacity of being for destruction, development and manifestation in people and their communities. What does it mean? It means that each nation is endowed with unique features that derive from its natural cultural environment – this is how a society is shaped.

However, in recent years, we have all witnessed the formation of a unipolar neoliberal model of the world. This model is anti-humane, there is no other way to put it, and it has contributed to fading away of the culture of all peoples, imposing an idea of social homogeneity that does not recognize natural cultural differences. Wherever you go, you always end up in the same clothing stores, following the same trends, eating the same food.

Everything around us is commodified. For example, war used to be a noble cause, a place for all kinds of exploits. For certain types of communities, it even took on a quasi-religious character. Now the war is reduced to numbers, money: the human aspect has been forgotten.

Nevertheless, the unipolar model will soon fall, and the reasons for this lie in the very essence of man. As was said earlier, the hegemony of capital has led to a decline in the culture of nations. But society itself cannot be destroyed. The essence of each people continues to live, even when they try to suppress it.

The essence of these communities cannot be destroyed. Hundreds of years of history are imprinted on our character and consciousness.

And what is the result? Imagine a riverbed. After thousands of years, the river returns to its original course, despite the many rocks that try to prevent it: so, too, will human society return to its origins. No matter how much they try to impose on us a homogeneous model of the world, the essence of each people will always find a way to come to the surface.

It is important to remember that there is no human being detached from society. Otherwise, the very idea of society as a voluntary association of individuals becomes doubtful. Above all, one lives in a community, not by oneself. This is why it is important to realize the importance of society and to work to protect and promote the natural cultural diversity of each people. In multipolarity theory, this would be achieved by the existence of poles.

This is why we must see the multipolar model as a force of nature, prompting us to fight the unipolar model and the hegemony of capital imposed on us, which go against our humanity.

I would like to thank you for listening to my short presentation. There are many things I couldn’t cover, but let it be. Thank you, and I hope you enjoyed it.

I wish you all the best.

[00:00]

Good afternoon! Thank you very much for the opportunity to be here with you, with the experts in geopolitics, with those who are interested in geopolitics, with those who understand geopolitics. After all, we need people to be interested in what is going on in this world. In theory, the unipolar world, led by the United States, will soon cease to exist. Their economic system rests on capitalism, financial capitalism, which has nothing to do with the original idea of economic liberalism that emerged in the 19th century. This philosophy, which originated in the 19th century, was justified because it implied individual freedom, a free market. Perhaps people were out of touch with the old monarchy because of the dire consequences of the mercantilist policies pursued by the authorities and poor relations with the aristocracy. Economic liberalism then had a very clear, pragmatic meaning for social dynamics. Today the capitalist system cannot be justified by anything; rather, it has turned into something that they are seeking to combat. It has turned into a system of oppression, a system of indebting, a system of plundering the natural resources of peoples who have not yet developed an economic system powerful enough resist capitalism.

[01:30]

However, it has long been said that capitalism is in decline, that it is becoming outdated and is about to cease to exist - this I would like to emphasize. I have always said that man can grow up guided by an idea or being in danger. In that sense, we are moving forward driven by the idea of a different model of the world - a model of a multipolar world in which there are different spheres of influence, different systems of government, different visions of what humanity can become. We are now subject to a brutal system of financial capitalism that wants to keep all of humanity indebted to it, to deprive humanity of everything. We have to keep in mind that the fall of capitalism has been predicted since the 19th century, but it hasn't happened. We have to understand why. The fact is that the financial market or the goods and services market is more dynamic than the one of ideas. The market is quicker to rebalance and come to equilibrium than the system of ideologies. Always the representatives of communism, socialism, anarchism, protectionism talked about the fall of capitalism that is inherent in the system of liberal economics, but all these systems have disappeared and the only thing left is

[02:59]

is capitalism. We have to treat the dynamics of the market with caution. Even though it rebuilds much faster than ideas, we should be aware of the dangers this implies. Capitalism is evolving faster than the system of ideas to which we aspire. Time is playing against us. I would like to show you some slides so that you can have a realistic picture of the world in which you and I live. I don't like arrogance, rather I like to know exactly what I am going to do and what dangers I am going to face.

[03:41]

It is a system of underwater cables. When we talk about a unipolar world, we must understand that in fact only the Anglo-Saxons worked to create the ideology, the institutions of power, the world architecture, the world order. Sailing on wooden boats, we Spaniards mapped the world, while the Anglo-Saxons unified it in space and time. Every fraction of a second, endless streams of information sweep before us, entangling the planet. It is a unipolar world. It is a world in which all information systems, all banking transactions come to one center. All these streams flow into the United States, which gamifies information en masse and runs its cables to Asia, to Europe, with offshoots to other parts of the world.

[04:45]

This is a map of trade flows, this is the financial transactions that take place every day. The same thing is happening here. We have an epicenter, a hegemon. There is a certain amount of financial flows that come out of Africa and Europe and other parts of the world and go to one point. This is the unipolar world.

[05:06]

And this is the system of distribution of daily revenues among different countries. In other words, we can see how the world's wealth is distributed. Some goes to the United States, some to Europe, some to Asia, etc. It is clear to see that most of the countries of the world do not contribure to working out philosophies which are generating ideas to promote political systems, they do not participate in the creation of the world architecture and the institutions of power. Their populations are forced to extract raw materials to feed factories and markets located in other countries. These people are supposed to be needed in a unipolar world. We will have to find out from these people if they can offer any new philosophy, what ideas they have, suggestions about institutional development. Living in a multipolar world, we will have to keep an eye on all this. We have a theory, or let me rephrase: thanks to the great philosopher Alexander Dugin, we have an idea that should guide our and help feel the danger. We have to know this world by touch. That is, we must know what is going on in order to quickly promote the Idea

[06:35]

To confront the danger, we need to constantly engage working groups - working groups in the real world - as well as public relations. Through politics, finance, and the media we must ram our ideas home to the people, we must make suggestions about the structure of the financial system, and, furthermore, we must influence political systems. To do this we need permanent working groups in Russia. The double-headed eagle does an excellent, wonderful job of promoting culture, traditions, influencing policy, and protecting the country. Certainly, the world needs groups like the double-headed eagle, because if we want to create a multipolar world, we need different groups that would introduce us to different traditions, different worldviews. That would help us see the world and life from different angles. We need working groups. The double-headed eagle could be an example, or it could be the basis for other different national working groups. We should not forget that there are quite a few who would be against it. But if we want to move from the world of theory to the world of practice, we need people to form an operational system and a tactical system. Thank you very much for your attention. I hope that my words will

[08:05]

practically resonate in some of those who listen to me, and we will be able to create national working groups that will put theory into practice. Thank you very much.

 El complicado camino hacia la Multipolaridad

Выступление блоггера из Таджикистана Олима Ширинова на Глобальнйо конференции по многополярности (29.04.2023).

Олим Ширинов, Республики Таджикистан (блогер, публицист).

В своей жизни я пережил две глобальные трансформации, сейчас, вот — вторая. Первая была в 1991 году, когда распался Советский Союз и мир в одночасье стал однополярным. Как мне кажется, США не ожидали, что так быстро получится расправиться с Советским Союзом и, соответственно, у них даже не было никакой концепции, как выстраивать этот однополярный мир. И всё, что они делали дальше, они просто дальше, как получается. И мы увидели довольно страшные вещи. На наших глазах разрушались государства. На наших глазах лидеров независимых государств, кого, по ложным обвинениям, сажали в тюрьму, а потом там доводили до смерти, кого просто зверски убивали.

И, конечно же, мы все помним Югославию, мы все помним Ирак, мы все помним Ливию, дальнейшем Афганистан… И США, они действуют по принципу — раз они выше всех, раз они самые крутые, соответственно, они могут делать то, что хотят. Но дело в том, что, начиная с нулевых годов мир стал глобальным меняться. Стали появляться новые большие игроки. Они стали появляться в Латинской Америке, конечно же это Китай. Ну, и Россия, под руководством Владимира Владимировича Путина, это не Россия девяностых. И терпеть беспредельные, прямо так скажем, выходки Соединенных Штатов уже становилось просто невыносимо.

Далее Соединенные Штаты решили перейти на мироустройство, основанное на правилах, когда они сами определяли правила и говорили, что вот так нужно жить. А кто живёт не так — это, значит, не по демократический это значит неправильно. Но, когда мы пытались следовать их же правилам, правил почему-то менялись. То есть получается мир, основанный на правилах США — это правила, которое всегда на стороне Соединённых Штатов Америки.

Но, как уже сказал — Мир изменился. Появилось очень много больших центров силы на планете. И в этом ключе нельзя не сказать, что те события, которые произошли в прошлом году, но начались они, конечно же, ещё в декабре 2021 года, когда Россия направила НАТО и западу конкретный документ, в котором четко определила, как стоит выстраивать новый миропорядок. Но Запад не услышал, соответственно мы имеем сегодня то что имеем.

Конечно же, Соединённые Штаты и те страны, которые являются их сателлитами… а, если мы вспомним ситуацию с подрывом Северных Потоков и, если верить расследованиям Сеймура Херша, то получается, что и канцлер ФРГ Шольц был в курсе того, что планируется сделать. И он никак этому не помешал. А это говорит уже о том, что марионеточные правительства, подконтрольные Соединенных Штатов, теперь не только в каких-то там странах третьего, но в центре Европы. И конечно же, когда происходит подобного рода глобальные преступления, этого нельзя оставлять без ответа.

Я не буду углубляться в этот момент, но хочу сказать только одно, Соединенные Штаты идут, ва-банк! И, когда мы видим заявления Китая о том, что Тайвань — это неотъемлемая территория КНР и Китай неоднократно об этом заявлял. И в тоже время мы видим, как на Тайвань приезжают миссионеры из Соединённых Штатов.

США всегда действовали одинаково. Их принцип — разделяй и властвуй. Их принцип находить повод, чтобы поссорить народ внутри страны, внутри региона, а дальше собирать барыши. Как я уже упоминал, они разрушили Югославию, они уничтожили, можно сказать, Ирак и Ливию. А дальше банально грабили эти страны.

В современной ситуации, когда дела доходят до того, что Соединенные Штаты начинают пренебрегать такими вещами, как обязательное право любой страны, тем более, которая входит в Совбез ООН, на посещение этого здания. Понятно, что находится на территории Соединённых  Штатов, но мы помню, как долго США одобрили визу министр иностранных дел Российской Федерации Сергею Лаврову.

Нас ждут сложные события впереди, потому что это не та ситуация, из которой запад сможет выйти, сохранив лицо. Они перешли точку невозврата и Мир стоит у порога Нового мироустройства. Будущий мир — это, конечно же, многополярный мир. Это мир, где будет уважаться суверенитет государств. Где и ни одна из стран не будет пытаться продвигать «цветные революции» только для того, чтобы потешить свои амбиции.

И это время, конечно же, тяжёлое. Это время перемен. Но это то, что мы имеем. И я рад, что Китай и Российской Федерации идут рука об руку. Мы знаем, что сейчас огромное количество стран подали заявки и хотят вступить в БРИКС. Есть наши региональные объединения, это ШОС, ОДКБ, ЕАЭС. Мир встаёт и заявляет западу, что то, что вы предлагаете и то, как вы предлагали нам жить, это неправильно, это себя не оправдало. Это игра в одни ворота. Так не пойдёт! В мире, живёт множество народов и каждый народ достоин уважения. И, конечно же, у каждого народа есть свои интересы, и они должны быть защищены. А не так, что кто-то решил и соответственно, как он хочет, так и будет.

Я ещё раз хочу сказать большое спасибо, что дали возможность высказаться. Нам, конечно же, нужно объединяться, нам нужно объединить наши усилия. И я считаю, что вопрос уже решён, это неизбежно — мир будет многополярным! И это не то, что мы будем об этом думать — когда он станет таким, хорошо это или плохо, — другого пути у мира просто нет. Иначе и быть не может!

Maxim Kramarenko (Kazakhstan) – Deputy Chairman of the World Coordination Council of Russian Compatriots – speaks for the Global Conference on Multipolarity (29.04.2023).

Good afternoon, dear friends!

Thank you very much for inviting me to attend this up-to-date and necessary discussion on the changes taking place in our world order. The unipolar world that the U.S. has been building for a long time has turned out to be a wishful thinking.

It is back in 1989 that the American thinker Francis Fukuyama, perhaps unknowingly became the first to predict the demise of the "unipolar world”. In his essay "The End of History?" he triumphantly said that the spread of American-style liberal democracy throughout the world would bring about the common good, and would signal that the mankind has achieved the end point in its sociocultural evolution.

His model of a "unipolar world" was supposed to lead to an age with no ideological confrontations and, accordingly, no social upheavals, such as wars and revolutions.

Now, analyzing his essay, one can only smile bitterly, as we may note that it reflects not so much the author's vision of the future development of mankind, but rather the sentiments U.S. political elite, which was celebrating an upcoming disintegration of the Soviet Union and the Socialist camp. Watching how the Socialist pole, led by Moscow was about to collapse in the late 1980s, Washington assumed that it could set up a perpetual U.S.-led unipolar world, imposing its liberal values across the globe. It seemed to them then that the fall of the socialist camp may pave their way to establishing world hegemony.

This perception of developments has created a false sense of exceptionalism in the American elite, that empowered them to determine the fate of all mankind. This could be attested by a new U.S. foreign policy, proclaimed in 2006, which then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice called "transformational diplomacy”. According to this new model, Washington assumed the right not only to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, but also to establish democracy in them according to the American template.

Rice put that a very sophisticated way: “America needs an equally bold diplomacy, a diplomacy that not only reports on the world that it is but seeks to change the world itself. We've called this mission transformational diplomacy”. That is, the U.S. has empowered itself to transform the world according to its own script-book, bringing closer the very "end of history," which in fact would establish liberal-democratic totalitarianism in world politics with a harsh suppression of dissent. Yugoslavia, Libya, and Iraq are brilliant examples of such totalitarianism, which attempted to transform the world without being invited by legitimate governments. We also know the results of such a transformation - the collapse of nation-states, the large-scale flow of refugees into Europe and the emergence of the Islamic State, which seeks to build a world caliphate by armed force.

Certainly, in its pursuit of global hegemony, the U.S. needs to follow a policy that would contain the social, political and economic development of other nations, creating hotbeds of tension both within the territories of its opponents and the neighboring countries, also imposing its culture on the people of its potential adversaries.

Francis Fukuyama intuitively guessed it right that the unipolar world is "the end of history," though he meant the positive side of it. In his world of the future, with liberal democracy being a victor, there was no need for philosophy to stay on the table. What Fukuyama did not see was that giving up philosophy as a form of social thinking would lead to the degradation of society itself. The Western world now serves as a good example of it, replacing traditional values, which underlie European cultures, with LGBT values, which could eventually dismantle the whole of human society. After all, LGBT values are aimed at destroying the institution of the family, the institution that distinguishes human beings from the animal world. As we know, the process of building family and kinship relations in its time brought about the so-called primary norms, which later triggered ethics, morality, and law. When the traditional institution of the family is replaced with by LGBT values, it will eventually lead to giving up all social and legal regulators, turning human society into a flock of consumers. And this development would really be the end of human history.

And the fact that there were forces, such as Russia, China and Iran and other states that challenged the unipolar world has become a salvation for humanity, there's no other way to put it. Resolute in their stance, they have triggered a change in inter-state relations. Thanks to this, more and more countries are moving to the right side of history, rejecting dictates, blackmail, sanctions, military pressure and proliferation of color revolutions, as well as weaponizing the dollar. Now they are facing an important task: to form a fair and successful model of a polycentric world order, that has to rest on such basic principles as the prohibition to set up any totalitarianism in international relations; protection of the traditional values of all peoples living on planet Earth; non-interference in the affairs of other states, except at the request of a legitimate political regime.

In the new world, economic cooperation and the well-being of all nations should be an ultimate goal per se, instead of a desire to transform everyone according to one's own liberal-democratic template.

Thank you for your attention.

Nikolay Malinov – Chairman of the International Rusophile Movement and Chairman of the National Rusophile Movement in Bulgaria

Dear Participants of the Online Conference, Dedicated to the Multipolarity Theme

Dear Scientists and Public Representatives,

Dear Russophiles,

Thank you for the initiative of the Latin American intellectuals from Brazil, Peru, Nicaragua, Colombia and Argentina, who invited us to be co-organizers of this Conference!

Thanks to everyone who agreed to participate in this Discussion!

Thanks to everyone who made serious organizational efforts to make this event take place!

I am happy that we all will take part in a conversation dedicated to one of the main values of the International Russophile Movement, proclaimed and argued in our founding Manifesto, the "Multipolarity" value.

Each historical process has its own logic. We are sure that we understand this logic correctly! We want to be the subjects of the affirmation and the victory of this logic, and from this point of view we see ourselves as part of the forces of human progress!

What struggle are we participating?

We do not want the world to be divided into lords and slaves. We do not want one country or one center of civilization to dictate the rules of world coexistence, we are against the fact that the identity of the peoples of the world is attacked, crushed and destroyed, so that peoples are fused into a kind of conglomerate, that serves the interests and dreams of the global elite. After all, we object to one civilizational center defining the meaning of words, deciding who is "progressive" and who is "reactionary", who is an "aggressor" and who is a "victim", who is "civilized" and who is not, " who represents the interests of the people” and who does not, who is “democratic” and who is not.

When we say that Multipolarity is our value, what we really want is to recognize the equal right of all peoples and cultures to go their own way, to build their own socio-political, economic and cultural systems...

In fact, from a geopolitical point of view, politicians can be divided into two groups.

The first one, which for decades has been dominating and imposing its own vision of the world and its own rules, are those who want to solve political and economic problems by force. Coercion is their weapon, sanctions their language, the weakness of this or that people is their goal. This mentality is what they call today's "world order". The other group includes the politicians of peace who want mutual respect among nations, mutual tolerance, common security, respect for diversity, recognition of the right of everyone to determine their own path, their values, their dreams.

This is our conversation today. It takes the creative effort of multipolarists to imagine this coming, new and better world order, to propose its contours and formulate ideological principles - beyond the obsessive dominant and imposed by the force ideologies.

The conference that we are conducting today is devoted to these efforts, this dream, this determination!

And we are convinced, dear participants in this multinational Meeting that historical justice is on our side and that in the end the world, if it survives, will be the way we see it - diverse and based on cooperation!

Best wishes for a successful Conference!

Guillermo Rocafort (Spain) – PhD in economics, specially in predatory funds - speaks for Global Conference on Multipolarity (29.04.2023).

Eftim Kletnikov (North Macedonia) – poet, translator – speaks for the Global Conference on Multipolarity (29.04.2023).

Of course, it was Macedonian, my native language, the language of my homeland, my country of Macedonia. Now, already in French, I begin to talk about the complex, multifaceted subject of multiculturalism and multipolarity. Do they exist in our world? This is an overly complex subject, and I will quote the great German philosophers Leibniz and Schopenhauer, who tried to give a definition to the world in which we live.

The first definition is optimistic, but the second is a pessimistic one. Leibniz says that our world is the best, most beautiful world, while Schopenhauer, on the contrary, believes that the world in which we live is horrible. I am more pessimistic, and I am closer to Schopenhauer's definition than Leibniz's, because the world in which we and our civilization are today, as one would say, look very pessimistic. There is no diversity, only division. The world, and above all Western civilization, is divided into strong and weak, into large nations and small, petty ones.

I would like to give an example that refers to my homeland, Macedonia, a small country that has been crushed by Brussels and Washington, this civilization of hatred and genocide of Macedonian identity, which was to change the original name of our country, which would mean abandoning our roots, our past and so on. And it is very, how shall I put it... What I am trying to say is that this civilization is not humane. This is the first time in Europe, after the genocides committed by this civilization all over the world, that it commits genocide on European soil, and Macedonia was its target. I want to emphasize this because it is especially important to characterize this civilization, which calls itself a civilization of democracy, but it is not.

There is a great Russian writer, Zinoviev, who lived in Germany for a long time, but returned to Russia, where he later died. He was a slave to the Stalinist era. Zinoviev said he had studied this civilization well because he had lived there in Europe for a long time. He said it was a totalitarian democracy, and that is true. This is true because it is an arrogant civilization. Montesquieu, the great French thinker, and writer who was leaning towards cosmopolitan views, said: “I happened to be born French, but above all I am a man, a follower of humanism," something that no longer exists today. There is another French phrase that is no longer relevant in the West today: “Equality, Liberty, Fraternity." It was this motto that gave birth to democracy in Europe, but it did not last long, and now it no longer exists.

Even if we talk about the war in Ukraine, between Russia and Ukraine. If we can, and actually we should, do some research on this conflict more closely, we will see that this is a war not only between Russia and Ukraine, but between Russia and the West of Brussels and Washington, between Russia and NATO. In this terrible war the West has sacrificed Ukraine. That is why I think our world is very depressing. It can be divided into two poles: one pole is the West, America, and Europe — the rich, great countries like Germany, England, France, etc., the colonizing countries, which today also colonize the world, but in other forms: through banks, capital, etc. This is the civilization of capital. A German philosopher said that the man of the West is a man of one dimension only, a man who is only a consumer of material goods and that is all.

So, in the world and, in general, on our planet the Western civilization dominates, and Russia, unfortunately, does not belong to it. After all, this is land, this is civilization, which is quite suiting Europe. We see a division between Western civilization and the rest of the world: Russia, China, India, Africa, etc.

Thus, I adhere to a more pessimistic definition of the world, because, as Zinoviev said, and I have already quoted him, our world is but a civilization of totalitarian democracy. The world needs a change and a rebirth, we must return to the motto of the French revolution "Equality, Freedom, Fraternity", which related to the ancient Macedonians, including Alexander the Great, who founded a global state on the principles of love, equality, freedom, fraternity, etc. Today we are dealing with the Western civilization, a civilization of corporate powers, a globalization of corporatism, of capital, and not of humanity and love between peoples. And that is sad. That is it from my side.

Raymond Abellio et la Multipolarité

L’écrivain et penseur français Raymond Abellio a publié un livre essentiel en 1953, titré Assomption de l’Europe. Il s’agit d’une analyse structurelle complète de la morphologie historique de l’Europe, et des raisons de sa transformation en Occident.

Je pense que la dialectique entre Europe et Occident est plus que jamais d’une actualité brûlante, et que c’est la compréhension du rapport entre Europe et Occident qui pousse chaque personne aujourd’hui à soutenir, ou l’Ukraine ou bien la Russie dans ce conflit. Pour le dire autrement, un Occidental proclamera son soutien à Zelensky, alors que quelqu’un qui se sent profondément européen ne peut que se sentir solidaire de la civilisation russe. Et ceci n’apparaîtra comme un paradoxe que pour les observateurs superficiels. Raymond Abellio explicite sa vision de l’ontogenèse des civilisations, précisant qu’elle est similaire à celle des individus. Il assigne cinq instants clefs à la vie d’une civilisation, à savoir : la conception, la naissance, le baptême, la communion et la mort, fondant ainsi une véritable symbolique historique des sacrements.

Ainsi, pour Abellio, la conception de l’Europe chrétienne se fait-elle par Jésus : le germe est déposé au sein de la matrice. Par la naissance, le nourrisson quitte la matrice pour entrer dans le monde, tout en restant tributaire de sa mère ; pour Abellio, il s’agit de la scolastique de Saint Thomas d’Aquin, qui met toute sa raison dans la foi. Le baptême consacre l’instant où la personne ne se contente plus de voir le monde : elle se voit elle-même. Elle renait de par l’acquisition de la conscience de sa propre conscience, se voyant pour la première fois comme sujet dans un monde d’objets. À la Renaissance, Galilée et Descartes mettent toute leur foi dans la raison.

Quant à la communion, il s’agit d’un moment où la civilisation change son rapport avec le monde, qui n’est plus un monde d’objets, mais un monde de sujets. Et un sujet, ça s’assujettit. En 1789, l’Europe ne se voit plus comme cause-de-soi, mais cause-de-l’univers. Elle s’appelle désormais Occident, et se confondra de plus en plus avec le monde jusqu’à ce que ce soit le monde qui devienne pleinement occidental. L’épuisement consécutif à cet épanchement indéfini mène en tout logique à la mort. Et c’est bien ce qui se passe aujourd’hui. Cependant, la loi des cycles décrite par la Structure Absolue, établie par Raymond Abellio, montre la qualité de l’inachèvement indéfini de ce processus, chaque étape historique d’une civilisation ayant des répercussions dans toutes les autres. Le prétendu statisme de la civilisation chinoise, par exemple, dénigré par Guillaume Faye pour mettre en exergue une supposée supériorité de la civilisation occidentale, n’est que le signe d’une durée plus longue de ses trois premiers sacrements. Et il est fort probable que la Chine ne franchisse en ce moment les arcanes de sa propre communion avec le monde, ce qui ne pourra qu’aboutir au remplacement de l’Occident par la sinisation complète du monde – à quoi on finira bien par trouver un nom.

Le concept de la multipolarité consiste, pour l’Europe effacée et transmutée en Occident par Descartes, à se réapproprier sa transcendance originelle en accomplissant un véritable acte nuptial avec la civilisation russe, afin de faire émerger ce Saint-Empire Paraclétique des Temps de la Fin, auquel tant de véritables écrivains européens ont rêvé, de Dante à Jean Parvulesco.

Laurent James

 Раймон Абеллио и многополярность

 Raymond Abellio and the Multipolarity

 Tutti gli europei non possono che sentirsi solidali con la civiltà russa

Дмитрий Василец (Украина), лидер партии "Держава" выступает на Глобадбной конференции по многополярности (29.04. 2023).

Mikis Filaniotis (Cyprus) – Member of the International Russophile Movement

Hello! I am Mikis Philaniotis from the Republic of Cyprus. I am a member of the Coordinating Council of the International Movement of Russophiles. And I begin my speech with one phrase in Greek:

Αγαπητοί φίλοι που συμμετέχετε στη διάσκεψη, σας χαιρετώ!

This means:

Hello, dear friends, participants in this conference!

Hello fighters for justice, for equality, for freedom and for a multipolar world!

It may sound like revolutionary slogans! But I assure you, and you understand that they are really revolutionary, because this is the turning point in global geopolitics and economics that gives us the impetus to act. Our civilization demands it. If we do not act now, if we do not stand up and fight to change the system of world governance, to bring a new world order, to dismantle unjust hegemony of unipolar world, the policy of economic globalization, neocolonialism, double standards, then without all the above, we will continue to roll downhill and continue to live like slaves, like second-rated people as a huge colony of the US elite.

We must not miss this chance or we will go down miserably in the history and next generations will reproach or even curse us for the failure to act, for missing this chance, for lacking courage to embark on this cause and bring it to a happy end. And that goal cannot be other than changing a unipolar world into a multipolar world.

Dear those who inspired and organized this global conference! I sincerely congratulate and thank you for this idea! You are now writing the history of the new world! This is the first step!

It is the first spark that will turn into a big fire that will burn away today's enslaving unipolar world. It is a small wave that will turn into a great tsunami that will sweep away in its path, all the current injustices that make us feel humiliated. We are people with no national pride and no rights to determine our national interests and our peoples. Of course, both fire and tsunami are a metaphor and do not mean any violence or illegal actions. All of that is missing from our vocabulary. We are a peaceful people.

I am especially glad to see next to the Latin American intelligentsia our International Movement of Russophiles, which acts as a co-organizer and is taking its first confident steps, in the right direction. We, Russophiles, support your initiative because, as our President, Nikolai Malinov, pointed out, one of the values , enshrined in our manifesto, is to strengthen "people's diplomacy" in defense of a multipolar, peaceful and harmonious world.

After the collective West, led by the U.S., has ignored all Russia’s proposals on the peaceful settlement and global security, it became clear what danger the ultimate global hegemon is posing to the world and how much pressure it exercises on it. The U.S. is trying to maximize profits by destroying the economies of other countries, even the European Union. As a citizen of the EU, I am ashamed of today's unworthy leaders of Europe and the European Union, who, instead of protecting the interests of their peoples, obediently follow the instructions of the USA and the Anglo-Saxons, destroying the economy and advantageous energy policy of their countries in favor of the USA.

Now look how timely the UK divorced the EU! Thousands of sanctions announced, embargoes, seizures of property, assets and deposits, legal actions, bans and everything that is easily described as piratical behavior of a state. The main goal of the West now, is to strangle and destroy the economy and the social and public system of Russia. Thank God, the BRICS countries and other Asian, Arab and African countries have understood that Russia is the first out- post in this battle. Just as the Soviet Union took the most powerful blow from the Wehrmacht in '41, so now Russia is taking a very strong military and economic blow from the collective West and NATO countries. All countries should now unite around Russia and support it as they know they will be the next victims.

Now we have to unilaterally halt that destructive policy of the unipolar world. Western hegemony, like a new fascism and Nazism in its modern form, must be stopped. It is only through alliance, friendship, cooperation, mutual respect for the sovereignty and interests of each country in a multipolar world format that humanity and the peoples of the world can escape from modern slavery.

Peoples will regain their national pride and identity, which they lost in globalization. If we love our children and grandchildren, we have only one path -the one to a multipolar world and we must reach it and win.

Full ahead, dear comrades-in-arms, intellectuals and fighters for a brighter future, for a just multipolar world.

We, the members of the International Movement of Russophiles, are ready to fight along with you, for the common good. For the good of mankind! Let's toil hard, brothers! Together  we are Power! God is with us and Victory will be ours! Long live the multipolar world!

Thank you for your attention!

 I popoli ritroveranno il loro orgoglio nazionale e la loro identità

 Volkeren zullen hun nationale trots en identiteit terugkrijgen

 Los pueblos recuperarán su orgullo e identidad nacionales

 Die Völker werden ihren Nationalstolz und ihre Identität wiedererlangen

 Les peuples retrouveront leur fierté et leur identité nationales

Выступлений профессора Николы Аврейски на Глобальной конференции по многополярности 29.04.2023ю

Multipolarity as a natural state of international relations

The world seen through the prism of the theory of international relations is originally multipolar. This principle was laid down in the first system of international relations, the Westphalian system, and then reproduced in subsequent systems - the Vienna, Versailles-Washington and Yalta systems. The principle of national sovereignty also underlies the modern international law.

The world is also multipolar according to the theory of civilizations. British professor Arnold Toynbee identified 34 different civilizations that once existed, and claimed that only five of them survived. Samuel Huntington from Harvard believed that eight civilizations existed at the end of the twentieth century, and a ninth, the African civilization, was about to emerge. Unlike Toynbee, Huntington was convinced that the surviving civilizations were not bound for universalization, but that each of them had a potential to unite around one core state, reproduce itself and assert its right to independent development. Huntington even warned that the attempt by Western civilization with the United States in its core to absorb other civilizations would inevitably lead to clashes with all other civilizations. He said that they would align against the West, risking a total clash, in which the West would face the problem of surviving.

But, blinded by the unexpected end of the Cold War, the U.S. ignored the traditions of international communication and political realism and launched the concept of a "new world order", which boils down to setting up a new international system dominated by Washington and based on American national interests. Thus, the U.S. revived the illusion of "American omnipotence", assumed the position of the "Great Winner" in the Cold War, proclaimed being the main guarantor of world security, the only protagonist of the new world, the conductor of stability, the main architect of the world economy, the guardian of the international financial system and the advocate of democratic change everywhere in the world.

But the idea of a unipolar world did not materialize, as the dream was taken for possible and the desirable for the real. The world never became unipolar. The Gulf War (1991), recognized as a war for resources, scared the Arab world away from the United States. In August 1994, Chinese President Deng Xiaoping stated that the primary foreign policy objective of his country was "to oppose hegemony and power politics and to defend world peace”. When Yeltsin paid an official visit to Beijing (early 1996), both leaders made a joint statement that hegemony in international life was unacceptable. Even in the middle of his first presidential term, Vladimir Putin openly opposed hegemony not just speaking but also acting against U.S. intentions and encroachments in Iraq, Georgia, Libya, Syria, and Iran. Equally important was that President Putin was able to put an end to chaotic reforms imposed from outside, take economic power away from, defeat separatist tendencies and bring the republics under central control, overcome the comprehensive crisis and stabilize the Federation

The political elite united around Putin, hastily looking for a consensus on a vision of Russia's specific way for development, on real sovereignty and on the sovereign democracy. Russia thus regained its confidence as a true Great Power, rediscovered its unique opportunities as an independent Eurasian geopolitical player, and assumed the role of leader among countries interested and determined to stop American hegemony. This firm course has been confirmed by the way Crimea reunified with Russia and how Russia extended unconditional support for the Donbass People's Republics.

In 2010s geopolitical experts assumed that there were three global superpowers, dominating the world - the United States, Russia and China, with the latter two acting concertedly against the first.

With serious advances in strategic arms, Russia decided to use this "strategic window of opportunity" to enter into an open confrontation with the postcolonial West, which has extended its predatory hands to Ukraine. This straightforward confrontation will be fateful not only for Ukraine, for the future of Russia and the one of Europe, but it will also inform ultimate defeat of American ambitions to impose a unipolar world.

The United States made a bet on the post-colonial practice of waging proxy wars - at the present stage "to the last Ukrainian," soon - "to the last Eastern European," if necessary - "to the last Western European". It claimed that Russia fully isolated internationally. But they have managed to rally only 50 countries (out of 193 UN members) for their proxy war in Ukraine against Russia. As the French Le Monde recently admitted, it was not Russia, but the West that is left lonely.

The vast majority of sovereign nations, peoples on all continents, including Bulgaria, which is proven to be the most Russophile in the world, want Russia to succeed in this proxy war. Because they understand that this is a battle to strengthen a multipolar world, that their own fate will depend on its outcome. They are convinced that a multipolar world is just as it respects the sovereignty of all major geopolitical stakeholders, regional powers and each individual state. They realize that a multipolar world is balanced as it properly takes into account all the most significant factors of international life. They believe that a multipolar world is stable and provides security for all.

A multipolar world is the natural state of the system of international relations. And it must be finally established!

Prof. Dr. Nikolas Avreysky

Marcelo Ramirez (Argentina) –  journalist and director of AsiaTV think-tank - speaks for Global Conference on Multipolarity (29.04.2023).

Вице-президент международного движения русофилов Сулейман Анта Ндьяй (Сенегал) говорит о важности многополярности.

Я очень рад снова вступать перед вами и хотел бы кое-что добавить. На французском и на русском. К сожалению, у нас появились технические проблемы во время этой конференции. Но вы все видите, что африканский взгляд на тему конференции одинаковый. Значит, многополярность нужна именно сейчас, многополярность это путь к будущему, многополярность - это путь дружбы, это путь сотрудничества на равных уровнях.

Африка после рабства, после колонизации, и неоколонизации, которая сейчас происходит, Африка освободится окончательно.

И я считаю, что дружба с Россией даёт нам возможность быть независимыми. Африканцы, практически все африканцы, так думают. Мы больше не можем жить как жили раньше. Когда мы были колониями стран, которые нас просто эксплуатируют, используют наши природные ресурсы. Этого хватит. Большинство, особенно новое поколение, не хочет верить слепо колонизаторам.

Россия, Советский Союз, во время деколонизации Советский Союз помогал африканским странам освободиться. Советский Союз помогал ЮАР, Анголе. Эта традиция, это советское качество сохраняется Россией. Так что африканцы сознательно осознают, что лучший выбор для Африки - это Россия.

Хорошо, многополярность. Да! Чтобы были разные направления, чтобы никто никому не диктовал свою роль. Африканцы в этом убеждены.

(Дальше говорит по-французски)

Я просто хотел сказать, что Африка после многих лет колониализма, неоколониализма теперь наконец освободится и сможет снова выбирать себе партнёров.

Африка больше не будет обязана жить по указке своих прежних колонизаторов.

Россия - это превосходный партнёр для Африки. Советский Союз помогал Африке в годы борьбы за независимость.

Советский Союз помогал ЮАР, Советский Союз помогал Анголе и другим африканским странам сбросить с себя иго колониального бремени.

И теперь эта традиция продолжается в современной России.

Мое выступление прерывалось из-за технических проблем во время этой конференции, но слово Африки - это многополярность. Африка выступает за сотрудничество с Россией.

Большое спасибо!

Juan Antonio Aguilar (Spain) – Director of Spanish Institute of Geopolitics – speaks for Global Conference on Multipolarity (29.04.2023).

0.  Introducción

La intención de esta comunicación es establecer un marco desde el que desarrollar propuestas políticas desde una potencia media, como España, en un mundo en el que se están produciendo movimientos tectónicos y “cambios que no se veían desde hace 100 años” (Xi Jimping).

1. El tema de nuestro tiempo: Del mundo unipolar al mundo multipolar

El año 2020 será, posiblemente, uno de los más recordados en la historia reciente. La humanidad padeció un terremoto sanitario y, sobre todo, psicológico, para el que no estábamos preparados. Unos tristes acontecimientos que causaron profundas transformaciones en la escena internacional, y cuyos síntomas se detectan hoy en varios puntos del planeta, con especial atención en Ucrania. Allí se está librando una dura batalla, que supone el inicio de una larga serie que trazará el futuro de la política mundial.

Algo que se iba fraguando poco a poco (había importantes indicios: guerra en Siria, surgimiento de los BRICS, Pacto de Samarkanda, …), se va haciendo realidad: el fin del viejo orden unipolar vigente. Un sistema que, en sí mismo, nació ya muerto, por el afán de dominio norteamericano. Su funcionamiento era muy simple. Por un lado, aprovechaba el vacío global causado por el desmoronamiento del bloque soviético. Y por el otro, los niveles de fuerza y desarrollo se concentraron en una sola una nación, considerada ella misma como mundialmente indispensable. Por este motivo, desde el primer momento intentó imponer su hegemonía global, enfrentada a la civilización humana y dando la espalda a sus propias leyes y acuerdos.

Las aventuras bélicas, como en Irak y en Afganistán, desvelaron el límite de las fuerzas económicas y militares norteamericanas, así como el estancamiento de sus planes geoestratégicos. A partir de esas políticas tan agresivas se generó un caos general, cuyas consecuencias seguimos padeciendo hasta hoy. El mundo se asemeja cada vez más a un peligroso volcán de ambiciones, en riesgo evidente de erupción, que pone en tela de juicio la estabilidad global. Lo preocupante es que el peligro aumenta un día tras otro, y resulta difícil pronosticar sus consecuencias. Ningún país del mundo permanece a salvo de sus efectos, y la grave inflación mundial que sufrimos no es más que un ligero síntoma de lo que se nos avecina. Una crisis económica de la que ni los mismos Estados Unidos se libra.

Si lo analizamos desde una perspectiva histórica, comprobamos que los grandes imperios de la antigüedad (romano, español, británico, musulmán, otomano,…), comenzaron a desmoronarse desde su interior. Por tanto, no debería sorprendernos contemplar, a medio o largo plazo, cómo el gigante norteamericano se disgrega en un enorme mosaico de reinos de taifas, enfrentados entre sí. Un complicado futuro que también avistamos en la vieja Europa. El “jardín” se ha convertido en melancolía y se ponen en duda todas aquellas ilusiones y expectativas que permitieron a Europa vivir una de sus experiencias más exitosas durante la Edad Moderna.

A ello se añaden los intentos de las nuevas potencias, caso de China, India, Rusia, Irán o Turquía, cada vez más firmes en su empeño por rebelarse contra la hegemonía occidental. Por primera vez,  desde la derrota otomana frente al imperio ruso en la Guerra de Crimea (1766 y 1772), parece que el domino occidental está llegando a su fin.

Los innumerables conflictos diarios, las luchas por los recursos energéticos, la inoperancia de unas instituciones supranacionales repletas de burocracia y al servicio de las grandes potencias, el aumento sin freno de la pobreza, la carencia de unas reglas comunes que organicen la estructura global y, sobre todo, el miedo que atenaza a los seres humanos, indican que nos encontramos en los inicios de una nueva era por el dominio mundial. Expresiones como la del pensador italiano Antonio Gramsci de que el viejo mundo se muere y el nuevo todavía no ha nacido, ya avecinaban este doloroso parto.

Y esta es una realidad que solo podemos comprender de una forma completa desde una perspectiva geopolítica, posiblemente la más apta, o al menos, la que mejor nos puede ayudar a entender situaciones tan complejas como las que vemos desarrollarse a nuestro alrededor. Lo cierto es que los sucesos que vivimos no son más que el comienzo de otros aún por aparecer, en especial, el arco geográfico que se extiende desde el Atlántico hasta la Muralla China por el este, y desde el Ártico hasta el Cuerno y El Sahel africano por el sur. Una inmensa área territorial que presenciará el mayor número de conflictos, guerras y actos terroristas.

Hemos resaltado la complicada situación que vive hoy el mundo a nivel global. Un planeta, el único que tenemos, naufragando en una crisis económica sin precedentes y con unos niveles de deuda que alcanzan cifras históricas, pues rondan los 300 billones de dólares.

El mundo no se limita sólo a Occidente, que dominó la escena internacional durante los últimos dos siglos. Existen otros países, y otras culturas, empujadas por los vientos de la historia. Y, sobre todo, que caminan con firmeza y dignidad, en su desafío por aportar una alternativa. Con este objetivo, se crean nuevas instituciones, trazando otras corrientes de valores que respeten la idiosincrasia de cada pueblo. En definitiva, hay que alumbrar una nueva era: la de las civilizaciones o diversidad de culturas basada en el diálogo y el respeto, en una búsqueda, común y constante, por mejorar la vida humana.

Sin duda, caminamos hacia un mundo nuevo, multipolar, un sistema internacional que debe basarse en el respeto, en la cooperación y en el dialogo entre las culturas y las civilizaciones.

2. Geopolítica y Realismo en las Relaciones Internacionales

Lo que se ha llamado a finales del siglo XX el “regreso de la geopolítica” ha sido provocado por dos factores incuestionables: En primero lugar, el fracaso del “momento unipolar” surgido tras el colapso de la Unión Soviética, que se escenificó dramáticamente con los sucesos del 11 de septiembre de 2001 y sus consecuencias. Y, en segundo lugar, la insuficiencia de los enfoques, metodologías y paradigmas de las ciencias sociales, incapaces de ofrecer un marco teórico que pudiera explicar lo que estaba ocurriendo y que nos ha llevado a la situación actual de conflicto y de fracaso de la globalización tal como se había diseñado en los años del “momento unipolar”.

Si la globalización y la gobernanza mundial empezaba a resquebrajarse es porque había “espacios” (territorios) que se escapaban al control de las potencias dominantes, es decir, el espacio volvía a colocarse en el centro del análisis… Y la ciencia que estudia la influencia del espacio en la vida de las sociedades se llama Geopolítica.

A ello hay que sumar la necesidad de adoptar el enfoque de la Teoría Realista de las Relaciones Internacionales. Es la Teoría que percibe al Estado como una entidad suprema y de valiosa relevancia y que entiende que la sociedad y la política se encuentran gobernadas por leyes objetivas,  basadas en la propia naturaleza humana usando dos elementos: los hechos y la razón. En el sentido del realismo, esto consiste en cotejar los hechos y buscarles el sentido usando la razón. La reafirmación de esta tesis en palabras prácticas, es el situarnos en la posición de un estadista que enfrenta un problema de política exterior, buscar las posibles alternativas y suponer, de manera racional, cual va a ser la elección correcta. El elemento necesario conductor entre la razón y los hechos, es el interés definido en función del poder. Es este el principal indicador de la política internacional.

El realismo clásico parte de la evidencia de que el mundo esta políticamente organizado por Naciones, y por esto el interés nacional es el elemento clave, y para esto surge el Estado nacional. El mundo está lleno de Naciones que compiten entre sí y se enfrentan por el poder, y todas las políticas exteriores de todas las naciones referencian la supervivencia, y entonces ahí surge el patrón del Estado, para proteger la identidad física, política, y cultural, frente a la amenaza constante de todos las demás naciones.

En el mismo sentido, se asume que el sistema internacional es anárquico, en el sentido que no existe ninguna autoridad por encima de los Estados que sea capaz de regular sus interacciones; los Estados deben de relacionarse entre ellos y por sí solos, más que guiarse por las directrices de una entidad de control supranacional (pues no existe de hecho un gobierno mundial con AUTORIDAD). Asimismo el realismo parte de la convicción de que los Estados soberanos, y no las instituciones internacionales, las ONG o las corporaciones multinacionales, son los principales actores en las relaciones internacionales.

Según el realismo, cada Estado es un actor racional que actúa siempre según sus intereses, y el objetivo principal de cada Estado es el de garantizar su propia seguridad. Por tanto, las relaciones interestatales están condicionadas por el nivel relativo de poder del Estado. Ese nivel de poder viene determinado por las capacidades estatales, tanto económicas, sociales, mediáticas, científicas, demográficas como militares.

3. La Contradicción Principal de nuestra época

En todo proceso siempre hay muchas contradicciones y, de ellas, una es necesariamente la principal (Mao Tse Tung), cuya existencia y desarrollo determina o influye en la existencia y desarrollo de las demás contradicciones.

Cuando la angloesfera desata todo un proceso para conservar su hegemonía a nivel mundial, entonces, la contradicción entre el unipolarismo y aquellos países que quieren mantener su soberanía pasa a ser la contradicción principal, mientras todas las demás contradicciones (clases, ideológicas, sociales, culturales,…) quedan relegadas temporalmente a una posición secundaria y subordinada.

En cada etapa de desarrollo de un proceso sólo hay una contradicción principal, que desempeña el papel determinante. De este modo, si en un proceso hay varias contradicciones, necesariamente una de ellas es la principal, la que desempeña el papel determinante y decisivo, mientras las demás ocupan una posición secundaria y subordinada. Por lo tanto, al estudiar cualquier proceso complejo en el que existan dos o más contradicciones, debernos esforzarnos al máximo por descubrir la contradicción principal. Una vez aprehendida la contradicción principal, todos los demás problemas pueden acometerse con relativa facilidad. En este momento histórico, la contradicción principal es la que existe entre el mundo unipolar o globalista y el mundo multipolar, el mundo de los patriotas.

Hablamos corrientemente del "reemplazo de lo viejo por lo nuevo". Dentro de todo proceso existe la contradicción entre lo nuevo y lo viejo, la cual da origen a una serie de luchas llenas de vicisitudes. Como resultado de estas luchas, lo nuevo pasa de pequeño a grande y llega a ser predominante; en cambio, lo viejo pasa de grande a pequeño y se aproxima gradualmente a su desaparición. Esta es la encrucijada histórica en la que nos encontramos actualmente.

Y es una contradicción antagónica puesto que hay una imposibilidad de compromiso entre las dos concepciones geopolíticas, debido a que los grupos involucrados tienen visiones del mundodiametralmente opuestas, sus objetivos son tan disímiles y contradictorios que no se puede encontrar una resolución mutuamente aceptable para las dos partes. Las contradicciones no antagónicas pueden resolverse a través del mero debate, pero las contradicciones antagónicas sólo pueden resolverse a través de la lucha.

De todo lo anterior podemos ir extrayendo algunas conclusiones:

El sujeto histórico en las Relaciones Internacionales es el Estado-Nación. Los Estados-Nación se enfrentan a un poder hegemónico UNIPOLAR surgido del fin del mundo bipolar de la Guerra Fría. Lo que llamaríamos la ANGLOSFERA (y sus Estados vasallos) o el OCCIDENTE realmente existente.

Este hegemón es el instrumento de unas élites globalistas que tienen como programa máximo imponer su modelo liberal-capitalista a todo el planeta. Es decir, una única ideología, de esencia totalitaria, a la que denominamos GLOBALISMO, que para alcanzar sus metas, busca la desaparición de los Estados-Nación.

Frente a ellos se alzan los pueblos que no quieren someterse al Globalismo. Estos serían los pueblos PATRIOTAS, que buscarían la conformación de un mundo MULTIPOLAR, donde distintos Espacios de Civilización puedan converger en relacionas mutuamente beneficiosas (ganar-ganar) y respetando las distintas identidades de todas las culturas, de sus valores y su historia.

El choque entre estas dos cosmovisiones ANTAGÓNICAS conforman la contradicción principal del momento histórico presente de la humanidad en su conjunto.

Ante una contradicción antagónica no hay posibilidad de encontrar una “posición intermedia, “centrada” o “equidistante”. Solo es posible tomar partido, es decir, tomar la DECISIÓN política que nos determinará automáticamente quien es el AMIGO o aliado, y quien el ENEMIGO.

4. La categoría política fundamental en las RRII: La SOBERANÍA

Tomar partido para acometer la contradicción principal, como hemos señalado, implica una DECISIÓN política. Para que el sujeto geopolítico, el Estado-Nación, pueda tomar una decisión es necesaria una condición: que sea soberano. Sin SOBERANÍA no es posible la decisión libre, ni se pueden garantizar los intereses nacionales.

Tomar partido para acometer la contradicción principal, como hemos señalado, implica una DECISIÓN política. Para que el sujeto geopolítico, el Estado-Nación, pueda tomar una decisión es necesaria una condición: que sea soberano. Sin SOBERANÍA no es posible la decisión libre, ni se pueden garantizar los intereses nacionales.

En conclusión, toda la política internacional del Estado y la defensa de los intereses nacionales están supeditadas al ejercicio de la soberanía y, en consecuencia, es el factor primario y fundamental que debemos garantizar todos en el concierto internacional.

Un corolario directo de la soberanía es la doctrina Estrada de las RRII. La doctrina Estrada se fundamenta en el principio de no injerencia en los asuntos internos de otros Estados y afirma que los gobiernos extranjeros no deberían juzgar, para bien o para mal, gobiernos o cambios en gobiernos de otras naciones, ya que implicaría una violación de su soberanía.

Si queremos que respeten nuestra soberanía, debemos ser consecuentes y respetar la soberanía de los demás Estados.

Somos conscientes de que lo expuesto es tremendamente ambicioso, que es un proceso que necesita tiempo, decisión y medios, que las dificultades son inmensas, pero las recompensas también. De igual forma, sabemos que cada paso que demos necesita un desarrollo argumental para darle solidez y rigor. Pero lo importante es dar el primer paso: el de decir con firmeza y rigor: “esto es lo que queremos”.

Porque lo que queremos es un mundo multipolar, justo, libre y soberano.

 Speech by Juan Antonio Aguilar at the Global Conference on Multipolarity, 29 April 2023

 Toespraak van Juan Antonio Aguilar op de Wereldconferentie over Multipolariteit

 Rede von Juan Antonio Aguilar auf der Weltkonferenz zur Multipolarität

Выступление телеведущего Григория Азаренка (Беларусь) на Глобальной конференции по многополярности (29.04.2023).

Belarus and multipolarity

Good day, dear attendees. I would like to greet you from Minsk, the capital of the Republic of Belarus. Thank you for the opportunity to present at such a respectable and meaningful conference. I apologize for not being able to participate in it in person and having to present my report through this recording.

Belarus is in the center of Europe. It is at the crossroads of the Western and Eastern civilizations. For centuries our land has experienced the advantages of its position: being the junction, the center of the famous trade route "from the Varangians to the Greeks", which was beneficial for the development of commerce and the dialogue of cultures. However, these advantages were seriously offset by our land becoming the focus of historical, cultural, and geopolitical confrontations.

The Belarusian land started off as one of the centers of the East Slavic, Orthodox civilization. Three Saint Sophia Cathedrals - in Kiev, Novgorod, and Polotsk - were the centers of our first empire. Bishop Cyril of Turov gave sermons that are rightfully considered masterpieces of elocution, philosophy, and theology to this day: they have become the foundation of our worldview.

Yet over the centuries we have always been the first ones to face Western cultural, economic and, often, military expansion. Powerful Catholic Poland served as the fire and sword of the West and the conduit of its ideas to the East for many centuries. The first blow of such expansions was always taken by the Orthodox population of the Belarusian lands. This led to our people deliberately identifying themselves as "the locals". When the elite betrayed their ancestral faith in favor of the szlachta nobility's liberties, these very people preserved their identity in the Orthodox brotherhoods and folk customs and rituals.

This peculiar national temperament helped us make the right choice in changing times. Let me remind you that when globalism triumphed, when the forces of darkness were at the peak of their power, we were the first to choose the path of true independence and opposition to globalism, of an alliance with Russia, when only the lazy were not mocking it. That happened when we elected President of the Republic of Belarus Alexander Grigoryevich Lukashenko. We were then the first in Europe, we drove out Soros and all his structures, completely destroyed the net of American-British influence and raised the banner of anti-globalism in our region.

In May 2021, our President defined our geopolitical position as the New Eurasia's outpost. The first fortress standing in the way of the enemy. We have been playing the role of a breakwater under the most difficult circumstances under a barrage of repeated color revolution attempts involving the full range of Western psychological, informational, and technological capabilities for three decades. That is why I am convinced that the Belarusian experience of nation building is not only useful but essential for our increasingly multipolar world.

I would like to remind you of the way the Belarusian model proved itself during the pseudo-pandemic orchestrated by the globalists. Under the colossal pressure we did not stop a single factory, we did not lock a single person up in their apartment, we did not engage in forced vaccination, we did not impose a “muzzle regime”, our Church did not board up church doors, which was perceived as a challenge by the globalist elite who tried to destroy us.

We have been consistent in our support for the Russian Federation's special military operation on informational, diplomatic, and other levels.

The President of Belarus says - Do as I do. We can see the immense strength of the Belarusian state in preserving our people's traditions, prioritizing the state planned economy and the unconditional will of our leader. He said: "The world is tired of the American noose". We shall remove this noose from humanity's neck, the ideas of evil, death of man and humanity, fascism and its cult of murder and cruelty cannot flourish in God's world, and the Republic of Belarus will remain an indestructible Brest Fortress standing in the way of these dark forces.

May the memory of the murdered Daria Dugina, Maxim Fomin, and other present-day martyrs and heroes of God's army live on forever. Thank you, dear participants.

Gonzalo Collado (Italy-Argentina) – Analyst, specialist in Geopolitics, International Security and Global Affairs

Buenos días, buenas tardes o buenas noches, dependiendo del momento en el que estén mirando este video.

Mi nombre es Gonzalo Collado de Giovannini, y quiero agradecer a todo el comité organizador de esta Conferencia Mundial sobre Multipolaridad por haberme invitado a participar.

Voy a dar una pequeña pincelada por el tiempo reducido que tenemos, para comentar mi visión respecto a lo que es la multipolaridad y por qué es importante que tengamos en cuenta todos qué es la multipolaridad, qué es lo que hay en juego y qué es lo que se viene. Eso es para entender justamente donde estamos posicionados en este momento, de dónde venimos y a dónde vamos.

Para entender la multipolaridad hay que comprender previamente lo que es la unipolaridad. La unipolaridad es ese momento donde un polo, es decir, un hegemón, impone sobre el resto del mundo. Es una característica que se dio hace no muchos años, tras la caída de la Unión Soviética, en donde un solo modelo quedaba tras el fracaso del comunismo. En este sentido, el modelo que quedaba era el modelo liberal occidental en donde, Estado Unidos como hegemón imponía su voluntad al resto del mundo.

¿Y esto en qué consistía? Consistía en, por ejemplo, transmitir al resto del planeta un solo polo, una sola idea; es decir, un solo modelo económico, un modelo social y, por supuesto, un modelo cultural. Esto fue secundado, por supuesto, por los países que hoy llamamos los miembros del G7, es decir, todos los de la esfera y área de influencia de Estados Unidos que componen, incluso hasta día de hoy, la mayor parte de sus aliados.

Aprovechando las debilidades del comunismo, del fracaso de esta ideología política y económica, aprovechando también la poca resistencia que había de lo que fue en algún momento esa tercera posición de países no alineados, que no se encontraban ni con un bloque ni con el otro, favoreció el contexto para que Estados Unidos se introdujera como el hegemón del mundo. Muchos autores hablaban de que era el Gendarme o la policía del mundo, donde podía ir a diferentes partes del planeta para poder imponer su voluntad, que era, aunque no lo decían de esa manera, sostenían que era la voluntad internacional; pero en realidad era la voluntad de ellos.

Nosotros encontramos que esto lo vendían de una manera más fácil para llegar a las personas, esto era el multilateralismo, es decir, con Estados Unidos a la cabeza era multilateral, participaban muchos países y todos participaban en una idea común, pero  lo cierto es que esto servía para transmitir las propias ideas de Estados Unidos y asegurar su statu quo.

Este momento unipolar no podía vivir el resto del tiempo y el propio Estados Unidos conocía sus desventajas y tarde o tempranos saldrían oposiciones, como sucede siempre naturalmente a todas las potencias. Por ejemplo, en palabras de Brzezinski se vendía como que Estados Unidos era una hegemonía democrática, flexible y plural, pero en realidad estamos hablando de una hegemonía política y liberal que se debe solamente a sus intereses, de flexibilidad poco y nada, solamente cuando le convenía o cuando le era rentable.

Entonces ¿qué sucedía con esto? que había muchos países que no se sentían cómodos con esta forma de pensar, esta forma económica, esta forma de llevar la política a otros países. Los distintos organismos internacionales donde estaban, por ejemplo, muchos países en decadencia, pero que antaño habían sido grandes potencias, como el Reino Unido y Francia, y que habían impuesto, tras la Segunda Guerra Mundial, su voluntad política y habían tenido posiciones muy importantes como por ejemplo, ser miembros permanentes en el Consejo de Seguridad de Naciones Unidas, ya no representaban esa potencialidad global, ya no eran lo que habían sido. En el siglo XXI no tenían ni el PIB, ni la población, ni mucho menos la potencialidad económica que tienen otros países emergentes. Un caso clarísimo de esto son los BRICS que, por supuesto ya sabéis, seguramente todos, compuesto por Brasil, Rusia, India, China y Sudáfrica.

Estos países, a día de hoy, ya componen el 40% de la población mundial, el 20% de las inversiones globales, componen más del 20% del PIB mundial y, por ejemplo, Brasil, que es un país que tiene un PIB superior al Reino Unido, no tiene la misma presencia internacional que éste.

Lo que presentan los BRICS son una alternativa económica, también una alternativa política. Ellos quieren un multipolarismo donde haya un respeto a las tradiciones locales, una coexistencia pacífica con el resto del mundo, donde no haya una imposición ideológica sobre el resto de la sociedad, porque justamente el multipolarismo entiende que son múltiples culturas, múltiples valores y múltiples formas de pensar son las que conforman el mundo, y no una sola. Una sola idea, unipolar, aunque la llamen multilateral, es una idea globalista. Esto es importantísimo que lo tengamos en cuenta todos porque, según estimaciones para el año 2050, dentro de 20 o 30 años, dependiendo de cómo vaya cambiando el escenario internacional, la mayoría economía mundial, que ya está en Asia, va a marcarse el mayor centro neurálgico del mundo, es decir, ese eje económico mundial que se encontraba en Occidente se va a desplazar aún más hacía Asia.

En este sentido, es importante que nosotros sepamos que el escenario mundial va a cambiar, por tanto, cuando cambie el escenario mundial, también van a cambiar los  valores que se estén promoviendo desde diferentes ángulos. En este sentido, no se trata de cambiar un collar por otro, no se trata de cambiar la voluntad hegemónica de Estados Unidos de imposición al resto del mundo por la de China, por ejemplo.

Muchos países no van a compartir el modelo cultural, el modelo social o el modelo económico de China. Es por ello que es importante tener una visión multilateral en este aspecto.

Que dentro de los BRICS estén países tan opuestos y cercanos como China e India, demuestra que puede ser un objetivo que se puede alcanzar siempre y cuando se sienten unas bases y que las partes respeten de manera concienciada y mutua todo lo que se ha hablado antes, es decir, el respeto a la integridad territorial, el respeto a las tradiciones y culturas locales, el respeto a la naturaleza, el respeto a la soberanía, y numerosos aspectos más, pero no quisiera extenderme demasiado en este tema.

Por lo tanto, frente a este nuevo orden internacional que viene desde el Occidente liberal, esa idea liberal en lo político y, sobre todo, en los cultural, se cree que en un orden multipolar va a haber caos, porque van a haber diferentes actores y cada uno va a luchar para sus propios intereses lo cual, en cierto sentido, es cierto. Sin embargo, como seres civilizados que supuestamente somos tenemos que tratar de alcanzar acuerdos respetables y serios, y no que esto sea un trampolín de una potencia para ocupar el espacio que estaba ocupando previamente Estados Unidos en el escenario internacional.

Por mi parte, esto sería todo. Fue un muy rápido repaso de cómo el momento unipolar pasó al multipolarismo. Lo estamos viviendo y estamos viendo estos cambios tecnológicos, estos cambios económicos a nivel internacional, esta presencia que está cambiando en el mundo y, por supuesto, esto puede traer conflictos bélicos. Siempre que una potencia ha ascendido, la potencia que estaba anteriormente ha intentado frenar esto para mantener su statu quo. Lo ideal es que no alcancemos un conflicto de tal envergadura pero que tengamos los pies puestos de que ya no estamos en 1990, ni a comienzos del 2000.

Muchas gracias a todos.

Sergey Glazyev (Russia) – current member of the board for integration and macroeconomics of the Eurasian Economic Commission. Adviser to the President of the Russian Federation.

Poles Formation and Disappearance Patterns in the Global Economy

According to the dictionary of foreign words in the Russian language, the term "pole" originates from the Greek word "polos," meaning the extremity of an imaginary axis around which a wheel rotate [1]. Geometrically, there can only be two poles, as reflected in geography: the North and South poles. However, this does not apply to contemporary geopolitics, where the concept of a multipolar world is gaining popularity. With this terminological clarification, we will cautiously employ the notion of a multipolar world, considering its diverse interpretations by various thinkers.

1. Change of Global Economic Poles during the Transition of World Economic Systems.

In the context of the author's theory on long cycles of global social and economic development [2], a pole can be understood as a country whose ruling elite exerts decisive influence over the development of the global economy. Viewing this process as a shift of world economic systems (WES), it is possible to establish the periodicity of change of the global economic poles. During the transition period between WESs, there cannot be fewer than two poles (the old and new WESs). Upon completion of this transitional period global dominance shifts to the country that forms the core of the new WES.

This is precisely how Giovanni Arrighi [3] conceptualized the development of the global capitalist economy, dividing it into five systemic, centurial cycles of capital accumulation: the Spanish-Genoese, Dutch, English, American, and presently transitioning to the Asian cycle. Throughout the five-century era of capitalism, the ruling elites of the Spanish-Genoese, Dutch, English, and American powers successively replaced each other as the decisive driving force in the development of the global economy. Apart from the first cycle, in which Genoese capital provided the financial foundation for the rapid expansion of the Spanish Empire, each subsequent cycle was characterized by the dominance of a single country whose production relations and institutions served as an example for others. Over time, the effectiveness of these dominant powers' production relations and institutions diminished, while a new leader emerged on the periphery with qualitatively more efficient production relations and institutions. Global dominance shifted to this new leader as a result of a world war, which the declining power initiated against its main competitors in order to maintain global hegemony, oblivious to the emergence of a new social and economic paradigm with its own geoeconomic pole.

The systemic centurial cycles of capital accumulation, as revealed by Arrighi, represent corresponding epochs in the evolution of the global capitalist system. These epochs differed not only in the leading countries but also in the systems for managing the reproduction and development of the economy. To study these cycles, the author introduced the concept of a World Economy Systems (WES), which is defined as a system of interconnected international and national institutions that facilitate expanded economic reproduction and determine the mechanism of global economic relations [4]. The institutions of the leading country play a crucial role, exerting dominant influence over international institutions regulating the world market, international trade, and economic and financial relations. They also serve as a model for peripheral countries that aspire to catch up with the leader by importing the institutions imposed by it. Therefore, the institutional framework of the social and economic paradigm permeates the reproduction of the entire global economy, encompassing its national, regional, and international components.

The systemic cycle of capital accumulation is a form of the life cycle of the WES. The Spanish-Genoese, Dutch, English, American, and the currently replacing Asian centurial cycles of capital accumulation described by Arrighi are manifestations of the life cycles of the corresponding trade, trade-manufacturing, colonial, imperial, and integral WES, respectively. They differ so significantly in their systems for managing reproduction and economic development that the transition from one to another has historically occurred through world wars and social revolutions. During these tumultuous events, the outdated management system was crushed, and the victorious country formed a new one.

World economic structures differ not only in the type of international trade organization but also in the system of production relations and institutions that allow leading countries to achieve global superiority and shape the regime of international trade-economic relations. The classification of world economic structures is determined by the institutional systems of advanced countries that dominate international economic relations and form the core of the global economic system. At the same time, other, less efficient and even archaic institutional systems of organizing national and regional economies can be reproduced on its periphery. Relations between the core and periphery of the global economic system are characterized by non-equivalent foreign economic exchange favoring the core. The countries of the core extract a surplus profit due to technological, economic, and organizational superiority in the form of intellectual and monopoly rents, entrepreneurial and emission incomes. Therefore, the core countries constitute the center of the global economy, dominating in international economic relations and determining global social and economic development.

The logic of geopolitical competition in the capitalist world-system necessitated the dominance of one country within the life cycle of any given world economic system. This is linked to the role of national legislation and sovereignty in ensuring the expanded reproduction of capital. National sovereignty provides the ruling elite with opportunities for unlimited capital accumulation by relying on the national credit and banking system, the issuance of national currency, various tools to protect the domestic market, and judicial protection of property rights. Although international treaties may provide norms for the protection of property rights and foreign investors, in practice, the guarantees of their compliance heavily depend on the balance of geopolitical influence between countries. National armed forces often became the decisive argument in resolving geopolitical contradictions.

From the Westphalian system, which paved the way for states to acquire national sovereignty, to the present time no supranational or interstate structures have been created at the international level that are close in their effectiveness to the national systems of economic reproduction and capital accumulation of the most powerful countries. Even if the countries are civilizationally close, the various coalitions and alliances between them are incomparably less strong than the institutions that bind together the economic relations of economic entities within sovereign states. The stronger they are, the more opportunities the respective national elite have to realize their interests in international relations, including enrichment through non-equivalent foreign economic exchange, exploitation of natural resources, and human capital of relatively weak states, the elites of which are unable to ensure national sovereignty.

The direct dependency between the power of national states and the opportunities for capital accumulation through non-equivalent foreign economic exchange generates an upward wave of strengthening the power of a country leading in the formation of a new WES. Its ruling elite consistently increases its capabilities, using the superiority of its state to maximize profits in international economic relations. This is how the capitalist world-system evolves, with its center sequentially moving from Northern Italy to Spain, the Netherlands, Great Britain, and the USA. Meanwhile, the states that lost their leadership were relegated to the periphery and vice versa, new leaders rose from it.

The life cycle of a world economic system (WES) consists of phases of material and financial expansion. In the first phase, due to the super-efficient management system, the country, forming the core of the new WES, makes a breakthrough on a long wave of growth of the new technological mode, modernizing the economy on its basis At this time the countries of the core of the old WES are plunged into a structural crisis and depression, caused by super-concentration of capital in outdated productions of the previous technological mode. They are trying to maintain hegemony by any means, including inciting a world war between competitors. heir mutual weakening creates additional opportunities for the economic breakthrough of the country, forming the core of the new WES. As a result, it seizes global leadership, which it consistently builds up to a dominant position. Therefore, Holland gained global dominance after the Spanish-British War, Great Britain - after the Napoleonic Wars, the United States - after World Wars I and II. At present, the global hybrid war unleashed by the U.S. objectively contributes to the economic breakthrough of China, which forms the core of the new WES.

Having seized global dominance, in the second phase of the WES life cycle, the country of its core gets an opportunity to impose its conditions of international financial and economic exchange, up to the use of its currency, financial institutions, foreign trade and transport infrastructure on others. In this phase of financial expansion, the dominance of the country's core of the already mature WES turns into global hegemony, which is maintained by super-profits from the exploitation of peripheral resources through non-equivalent trade exchange, manipulation of world prices, capital squeezing and brain drain. The flip side of this hegemony is a growing national debt and a shrinking productivity of an economy in which financial speculation becomes preferable to productive investment. WES is entering the final phase of its life cycle, which coincides with the phase of birth of a new WES on the periphery of the world-system with a more efficient system of reproduction and economic development management.

It follows from this analysis that the capitalist world-system is unipolar in the period of maturity of WES and multipolar in the period of change of WES. During the formation of a new WES, one or more of its core countries emerges, competing both with the outgoing hegemonic country and with each other. As a result of this competition a global leader emerges, consistently increasing its dominance. Apart from them, there is also Russia, which preserves its global influence in various political forms throughout the whole period under consideration, the historical role of which Arrighi completely ignored.

2. Russia as an independent pole of world influence.

Throughout the entire era of capitalism, starting with the Genoese-Spanish systemic century cycle of capital accumulation according to Arrighi, Russia has acted as an independent pole of global influence. The outgoing imperial WES was bipolar, with the USA and the USSR controlling a third of the world economy each, with the remaining third being a field of their rivalry. In the preceding colonial WES, the Russian Empire successfully opposed the British Empire, controlling a large part of Eurasia, Alaska, and the northern part of the Pacific Ocean. In the trade-manufacturing WES, Russia underwent the modernization of Peter the Great, effectively catching up with the then world leader - the Netherlands - in terms of technological development and surpassing it in terms of production scales. The Moscow Empire of Ivan the Terrible, which had inherited the traditions of the Byzantine Empire and part of the territory of the Horde Empire, was hardly inferior in its power to the Spanish Empire, with which it had no contradictions.

Therefore, since at least the 17th century Russia constituted an independent pole of world influence that existed in parallel with the competing and successive countries of the WES core in the West. Here we do not consider the previous period, covered by the gloom of historical falsifications that obscure the world influence of Russia (Rus') in the Horde and Byzantine periods. Our analysis concerns only the well-documented period from the seventeenth century to the present, in which the rhythm of the change of world economic and technological ways can be traced. The regularities revealed on the basis of this analysis allow us to make a reliable forecast of the change of global economic development poles until the end of this century. The role of Russia remains uncertain, which has remained an independent pole of global development all this time parallel to the shifting poles of the Western world-system with the change of WES.

After the Great Troubles and the accession of the Romanovs Russia was drawn into a complex and contradictory relations with European states, which at different times are at times allies and adversaries. Russia they regarded as a reactionary force that hinders the processes of liberalization of social and productive relations and democratization of state and political systems. Russia is seen by them as a reactionary force obstructing the processes of liberalization of social and economic relations and democratization of state-political systems. The ruling elites of European countries fear Russia and periodically unite against it, striving to crush and dismember it. Starting with the establishment of the colonial WES and British global hegemony, Russia is invariably seen as a pole of global influence opposing the West.

For their part, the leaders of the Russian state treated the shifting poles of the Western world-system as an ally and partner, an adversary and enemy, a teacher and a learner. Centuries of systemic cycles of capital accumulation affected Russia as the periphery rather than the center, until the USSR stopped participating in this process altogether. And now the West is trying to take everything it has accumulated from Russia. It has to be said that the Russian ruling elite has not developed any definite attitude toward the West. The discussion between Westerners and Slavophiles continues to this day. The former link Russia's special position to its backwardness and advocate its overcoming through integration with the West, while the latter see Russia's special mission in saving humanity from the threats posed by liberalism, capitalism and post-humanism rooted in the West. This argument has lost its relevance today due to the anti-Russian aggression of the collective West, which, in fact, ends the half-century era of its global dominance and, with it, the capitalist era. The center of the world economy is shifting to Southeast Asia, where the poles of global influence are emerging.

3. Poles of a new world economic order.

The ongoing change of the WES takes place in full accordance with the previously identified patterns of this process [5]. It began with the collapse of the USSR, and today it ends with the collapse of Pax Americana. In full accordance with the theory to maintain its global hegemony, the ruling elite of the U.S. unleashed a world war, seeking to crush or chaotize the countries that have become beyond its control: China, Russia, Iran. However, it will not be able to win it due to the qualitatively higher efficiency of the management system created in China. he U.S. has already lost a trade and economic war to China, by the end of the current five-year plan China will achieve technological sovereignty and become the first in the world in terms of scientific and technological potential. By seizing Russia's foreign exchange reserves, Washington has undermined confidence in the dollar and is rapidly losing its hegemony in the monetary sphere. At the same time, China is becoming the world's largest investor. China's investment in the One Belt, One Road (OBOR) countries exceeds by an order of magnitude the financing of the much-publicized "American Indo-Pacific Future Image" initiative. The scale of this project pales in comparison to the OBOR, which plans to spend, according to various estimates, from $4 trillion to $8 trillion. The OBOR investment portfolio also dwarfs the Marshall Plan to finance the post-war reconstruction of Western Europe, which, at today's dollar value, could be valued at $180 billion. ($12 billion 70 years ago) [6].

After the collapse of the USSR, the American ruling elite rushed to declare its final victory and "the end of history”[7] However, this euphoria ended with the global financial crisis of 2008, which marked the limits of the American century cycle of capital accumulation. The era of U.S. global dominance lasted a little longer than Great Britain's after the end of World War I, which ended with the financial crisis of 1929. The Great Depression and World War II that followed buried the British Empire, which could not compete with the more efficient systems of government in the USSR and the United States, forming the two poles of imperial WES, which had replaced the colonial one.

In all macroeconomic indicators, China has already surpassed the United States. Almost unaffected by the global recession of the last decade, China supplanted Japan as the world's second-largest economy in August 2010. In 2012, with imports and exports of $3.87 trillion, China surpassed the United States. The PRC overtook the U.S. with a total foreign trade turnover of $3.82 trillion, displacing it from the position it had held for 60 years as the global leader in cross-border trade. By the end of 2014, China's gross domestic product, measured at purchasing power parity, was $17.6 trillion, surpassing that of the United States ($17.4 trillion), the world's largest economy since 1872 - the largest economy in the world since 1872. [8]

China is becoming the world's engineering and technology center. The share of Chinese engineers and scientists in the global workforce reached 20% in 2007. The proportion of Chinese engineers and scientists in the world reached 20% in 2007, and doubled since 2000 (1,420,000 and 690,000 respectively). Significantly, many of them have returned to the PRC from American Silicon Valley, playing a major role in the rise of innovative entrepreneurship in China. By 2030 China will be in first place in the world in terms of expenditure on scientific and technological development, and its share in the world expenditure will be 25%. (30%) will be scientists, engineers and technicians from China [9]. By 2030, China will take the first place in the world in terms of spending on scientific and technical development, and its share in the volume of global spending will be 25% [10].

Between 2000 and 2016, China's share of global publications in the physical sciences, engineering, and mathematics quadrupled, surpassing that of the United States. In 2019, the PRC surpassed the U.S. in patent activity (58,990 vs. 57,840). Not only on the macro level, but also on the micro level, Chinese companies are outperforming U.S. leaders in innovation activity. For example, for the third year in a row, China's Huawei Technologies Company, with 4,144 patents, is significantly ahead of Qualcomm (2,127 patents).

China is the world leader in mobile payments, with the U.S. in sixth place. In 2019, the volume of such transactions in China was $80.5 trillion. The projected total volume of mobile payments in the PRC is $111 trillion, while in the U.S. it is $130 billion. This seems to indicate that the bulk of U.S. money issuance is tied up in financial market speculative circuits, not reaching end consumers.

The share of the dollar in international settlements is rapidly falling, while the share of the yuan is steadily growing. At the same time the continued growth of the U.S. sovereign debt pyramid and financial bubbles of trillions of derivatives (doubled since the financial crisis of 2008 and leaves no doubt about the impending collapse of the U.S. financial system on a shrinking income basis.

Figure 2. he largest (TOP-5 and TOP-25) U.S. financial holdings - holders of derivatives: volume of derivatives, assets (trillion dollars) and their ratio (times)

Source: M. Ershov according to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.

Figure 3. Dynamics of U.S. national debt over the past 230 years, in % of GDP

Source: BofA Global Investment Strategy.

Figure 4: Federal Reserve Balance Sheet since 1914

Source: BofA Global Investment Strategy, Haver, Federal Reserve Board.

The more than fourfold growth in the monetary base after 2008 did not translate into an upturn in the U.S. economy, as most of the money supply went into blowing financial bubbles. China, on the other hand, has achieved a much greater monetization of the economy while increasing investment in the development of its real sector, creating a much more efficient reproductive circuit of capital accumulation.

The reasons for China's advanced development lie in the institutional structure of the new WES, which ensures a qualitatively more effective management of economic development. By combining the institutions of centralized planning and market competition, the new world economic order demonstrates a qualitative leap in the efficiency of management of social and economic development compared to its predecessor systems of the world order: the Soviet one with directive planning and total statehood; and the American one dominated by the financial oligarchy and transnational corporations. This is evidenced not only by the record growth rate of the Chinese economy over the past three decades but also by China's rise to the forefront of scientific and technological progress. And also the breakthroughs in the development of other countries that use the institutions of an integrated world order: Japan before the artificial suspension of its rise by the Americans by sharply revaluing the yen; South Korea before the American financial oligarchy provoked the Asian economic crisis in 1998, modern Vietnam, which in many ways adopts China's experience; India, implementing a democratic model of the new world order; Ethiopia, showing a record growth rate with the active participation of Chinese investors.

Regardless of the dominant form of ownership - state, as in China or Vietnam, or private, as in Japan or Korea - the integrated world economic order is characterized by a combination of institutions of state planning and market self-organization, state control over the main parameters of economic reproduction and free enterprise, the ideology of the common good and private initiative. At the same time, the forms of political structure may differ fundamentally - from the world's largest Indian democracy to the world's largest communist party in China. What remains constant is the priority of national interests over private ones, expressed in strict mechanisms of personal responsibility for conscientious behavior, clear performance of one's duties, compliance with laws, service to national goals. he social and economic development management system is built on the mechanisms of personal responsibility for improving the well-being of society.

Therefore, assuming the most likely outcome of the global hybrid war unleashed by the US ruling elite not in its favor, the new world economic order will be formed in competition between communist and democratic varieties, the results of which will be determined by their comparative effectiveness in exploiting the opportunities and neutralizing the threats of the new technological order. It is likely that the main competition between the communist and democratic varieties of the new world economic system will unfold between China and India, which are leading today in terms of economic development rates and are claiming, together with their satellites, a good half of the world economy. This competition will be peaceful in nature and regulated by the norms of international law. All aspects of this regulation, starting from control over global security and ending with the issuance of world currencies, will be based on international treaties. Countries refusing to accept obligations and international control over their observance will be isolated in the corresponding areas of international cooperation. The world economy will become more complex, the restoration of the importance of national sovereignty and the diversity of national economic regulation systems will be combined with the fundamental importance of international organizations with supranational powers.

The competition between communist and democratic varieties of an integrated world economy will not be antagonistic. For example, the Chinese initiative "One Belt, One Road" with the ideology of "one destiny of mankind" involves many countries with different political systems. Democratic EU countries are creating free trade zones with communist Vietnam. The competitive landscape will be determined by the comparative effectiveness of national governance systems.

The further unfolding of the global financial crisis will objectively be accompanied by the strengthening of China and weakening of the United States. As Dr. Wang Wen rightly points out, "the global community sees China growing and the U.S. shrinking on the parameters of international investment, mergers and acquisitions, logistics and currency. Globalization is becoming less Americanized and more Chineseized [11]".

In the course of this transformation, countries on the periphery of the U.S.-centric financial system, including the EU and Russia, will be significantly affected. The only question is the scale of these changes. Under favorable circumstances the Great stagnation of the Western economies, which has been going on for more than a decade, will last for several more years until the remaining capital after the collapse of the financial bubbles will be invested in new technological mode of production, and they will be able to "ride" the new long wave of Kondratiev. In an unfavorable course of events, the monetary pumping of the financial system will lead to galloping inflation, which will entail disorganization of economic reproduction, falling living standards and political crisis. The US ruling elite will be left with two options. The first is to accept the loss of global dominance and instead of forming a world government, as in the century before last, to negotiate with nation-states on the conditions of investment. This will give it the opportunity to participate in the formation of a new world economy as a leading player. And the second - to escalate the global hybrid war, which they are already waging. And, although objectively they can not win this war, the damage to humanity can be catastrophic, up to fatal.

The processes of destroying the reproduction system of the American capital accumulation cycle will accelerate as the countries exploited by the US ruling elite come out from under their control.

If we resort again to historical analogies of the previous period of changing world economic systems, its final phase (analogue - World War II) can take up to seven years. So far, these analogies are surprisingly confirmed. The first phase of the transition period, which coincides with the last phase of the life cycle of the current world economy, begins with Perestroika in the USSR in 1985 and ends with its collapse in 1991. In the previous cycle, it began with the First World War in 1914 and ended in 1918 with the collapse of four European monarchies that hindered the global expansion of English capital.

The second phase of the transition period follows, during which the world-dominating country reaches the peak of its power. After the end of World War I, British hegemony was established for two decades, lasting until the Munich Agreement, which marked the beginning of World War II. In this phase of the transition period, the outgoing world economic system reaches the limits of its evolution, while on its periphery the core of the formation of a new world economic system arises. In the antecedent cycle, this nucleus was manifested in three distinct political paradigms: socialism as seen in the USSR, capitalism embodied by the US, and a national-corporate model in Japan, Italy, and Germany. Presently, it is similarly manifested in three unique political frameworks: socialism with Chinese idiosyncrasies; Indian democratic nationalism, and the transnational dictatorship of globalists, who are seen to have instigated the escalation of the global hybrid war with the introduction of the coronavirus. As with the previous instance, this phase spans two decades, commencing with the disintegration of the USSR and the provisional establishment of Pax Americana in 1991.

Lastly, the third and terminal phase of the transition period is characterized by the disintegration of the core of the erstwhile dominant global economic structure and the consequent emergence of a new order, with its nucleus shaping the novel epicenter of global economic development. Lastly, the third and terminal phase of the transition period is characterized by the disintegration of the core of the erstwhile dominant WES and the consequent emergence of a new order, with its nucleus shaping the novel epicenter of WES. In the previous cycle, this phase began with the Munich Agreement in 1938 and concluded with the disintegration of the British Empire in 1948. Assuming the inception of the global hybrid war instigated by the US to be the Nazi coup in Kiev, their subsequent occupation of Ukraine, and the implementation of financial sanctions against Russia, the concluding phase of the current transition period commences in 2014, with its culmination projected for 2024. As prognosticated by Pantin, who accurately foretold the global financial crisis of 2008, the apex of American aggression against Russia is anticipated in 2024. It is noteworthy that this year also coincides with a shift in the Russian political cycle in alignment with the presidential elections.

Let us delve deeper into the historical analogy of the previous change in global economic orders, which commenced with the engagement of leading nations in World War I. Post the socialist revolution in Russia, a prototype of a new global economic order was established, characterized by communist ideology and comprehensive state planning. Approximately a decade and a half later, in an effort to surmount the Great Depression, the United States implemented the New Deal, which forged another variant of the new global economic order, marked by the ideology of a universal welfare state and state-monopolistic regulation of the economy. Simultaneously, in Japan, Italy, and subsequently in Germany, a third variant was being molded - characterized by Nazi ideology and a public-private corporate economy.

All these transitions occurred during the concluding period of the British capital accumulation cycle and the underlying colonial global economic order. As the fulcrum of the world economic system, the ruling elite of Britain endeavored to resist changes that threatened its global dominion. Economic blockades were imposed on the USSR, and imports were limited to grain only, with the intention of inciting mass famine. Trade embargoes were enforced against the United States. In Germany, the anti-communist Nazi coup was encouraged, and in an attempt to counter the influence of the USSR, British intelligence agencies safeguarded and propelled Hitler to power. With similar intentions and in anticipation of substantial dividends, American corporations invested heavily in the modernization of German industry [12].

The British adhered to their traditional geopolitics of "divide and rule", provoking a war between Germany and the USSR. They hoped to replicate their success in instigating World War I, which was precipitated by the London-provoked Japanese attack on Russia. As a result of World War I, all of Britain's major Eurasian competitors self-destructed: the Russian, German, Austro-Hungarian, Ottoman, and finally, the Chinese Empires. However, immediately after the onset of World War II, the Third Reich's qualitative superiority over all European nations, including Britain, in terms of economic management efficiency and the mobilization of all available resources for war purposes became evident. The British troops suffered humiliating defeats not only from Germany but also, in conjunction with the Americans, from Japan, which demonstrably surpassed the Anglo-American alliance in terms of organizational and technological capabilities for conducting large-scale military operations in the vast territory of Southeast Asia. Although Britain, owing to its allied relationship with the US and USSR, emerged as one of the victors, post World War II, it lost its entire colonial empire - over 90% of its territory and population.

The Soviet system of managing the national economy proved to be the most effective at the time, accomplishing three economic miracles: the evacuation of industrial enterprises from the European part to the Ural and Siberia, rebuilding new industrial areas within half a year; achieving work productivity and capital return rates in wartime that surpassed those of Fascist-allied Europe by an order of magnitude; and the rapid restoration of cities and production capacities completely destroyed by the occupiers after the war.

Roosevelt's New Deal significantly boosted the mobilization capabilities of the American economy, which allowed the US to defeat Japan in the Pacific Basin. In post-war Western Europe, the US had no competitors: having insulated itself from the USSR with the NATO block, the American ruling elite effectively privatized Western European countries, including the remnants of their gold reserves. In Third World countries, the former colonies of European states became a zone of rivalry between American corporations and Soviet ministries. The further global development took place in the format of a cold war between two world empires - Soviet and American - each possessing similar technocratic and diametrically opposite political models for managing social and economic development. Each had its advantages and disadvantages, but both significantly outperformed the colonial system of family capitalism with its ruthless exploitation of wage workers and slaves in terms of the efficiency of mass production organization and resource mobilization capabilities.

A similar picture is currently emerging. The forming new global economic order also has three possible variations. The first has already formed in China under the leadership of the Communist Party of China. It is characterized by a combination of state planning institutions and market self-organization, state control over the main parameters of economic reproduction and free entrepreneurship, the ideology of common good and private initiative, and demonstrates astounding efficiency in managing economic development, far exceeding the American system. This has been vividly demonstrated by the much higher growth rates of advanced industrial sectors over the past three decades and was again confirmed by the performance indicators in the fight against the pandemic.

The second variant of the integral world economic order is forming in India, the largest real functioning democracy in the world. The foundations of the Indian version of the integral structure were laid by Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru on the foundation of Indian culture. The Constitution of India, adopted after independence, defines its economy as socialist. This norm is practically realized in the system of strategic planning, norms of social policy, financial regulation. The benchmarks for monetary emission are set by a special commission, which, based on the planned priorities of social and economic policy, determines the parameters of refinancing development institutions and banks in the directions of lending to small businesses, agriculture, industry, etc.

The nationalization of the banking system, carried out by Indira Gandhi's government, allowed the management of financial flows to be brought in line with indicative plans for economic development. Correctly chosen priorities gave impetus to the development of key areas of forming a new technological order, and shortly before the coronavirus pandemic, India came first in the world in terms of economic growth rates. As in China, the state in India regulates market processes to increase public welfare, stimulating investment in production development and the adoption of new technologies. At the same time, currency and financial restrictions keep capital within the country, and state planning directs entrepreneurial activity to the production of material goods.

The third variant of the new world economic order exists so far as an image of the future in the eyes of the Americentric financial oligarchy, striving for world domination. The US deep state is initiating calls for a new world order. On the wave of an artificially organized pandemic, attempts were made to create institutions claiming to manage humanity. The Bill Gates Foundation establishes control over the activities of the WHO in terms of population vaccination. At the same time, vaccination is used to promote a long-developed technology of biological programming to reduce fertility and total control over the behavior of vaccinated people. This technology combines the achievements of bioengineering and computer science: vaccination is accompanied by chipping, allowing any restrictions on human activities [13].

In other words, the third variant of the new world economic order essentially envisages the formation of a world government under the leadership of the American ruling elite in the interests of the financial oligarchy, controlling the emission of world currency, transnational banks and corporations, and the global financial market. This is a continuation of the trend of liberal globalization, supplemented by authoritarian technologies of population control in countries deprived of national sovereignty. It is described in many dystopias, starting with the famous "1984" by Orwell and ending with modern religious images of the coming of the Antichrist - an "electronic concentration camp", heralding the end of the world. This scenario of world capital domination was presented in the first chapter of this monograph.

Each of the variants of the new world economic order characterized above implies the use of advanced information technologies, which are the key factor of the new technological order. All of them rely on big data processing methods and artificial intelligence systems necessary for managing not only unmanned production processes, but also people in systems of economic regulation and social behavior. The goals of this regulation are set by the ruling elite, the way of forming which predetermines the essential characteristics of each of the above-mentioned variants of the new world economic order.

In China, power belongs to the leadership of the Communist Party, which organizes economic regulation to increase public welfare and directs social behavior towards achieving political goals of building socialism with Chinese specificity. Market mechanisms are regulated in such a way that the most efficient production-technological structures win in competition, and the profit is proportional to their contribution to the growth of public welfare. In medium and large corporations, including non-state ones, party organizations operate, controlling the compliance of the behavior of the management with the moral values of communist ideology. The system encourages increased labor productivity and production efficiency, modesty and productivity of managers and owners on the one hand, and punishes market dominance abuses and speculative market manipulation, wastefulness and parasitic consumption, on the other hand. A social credit system is being developed to regulate the social behavior of individuals. According to its design, the social opportunities of each citizen will depend on their rating, which is constantly adjusted based on the balance of good and bad deeds. The higher the rating, the more trust in the person when getting a job, promotion, obtaining credit, delegating authority. This unique modernization of the personal file system familiar to Soviet people, which accompanied a person throughout their working life, has its positive and negative sides, the assessment of which is beyond the scope of this article. Its main problem area is the dependence of the mechanism for forming a productive elite of society on artificial intelligence that manages the social credit system.

The second type of the new world economic order is determined by the democratic political system, which can significantly differ in different countries. The pinnacle of this type can be observed in Switzerland, where pivotal political verdicts are primarily determined via public referendums. The most consequential embodiment of this approach, from a global economic standpoint, is India, alongside the traditional countries of European social democracy. However, in numerous nations, this democratic framework is severely compromised by corruption and is susceptible to manipulation from large-scale businesses, which can either harbor patriotic or comprador tendencies. The incorporation of the widely recognized distributed ledger technology (blockchain) into electoral systems can potentially enhance the efficacy of this democratic model by eradicating vote-rigging and ensuring equitable media access for all candidates. The burgeoning popularity of independent media outlets in the blogosphere has engendered a competitive environment for information sources, thereby facilitating candidate access to potential voters. Assuming appropriate legal provisions are established for the application of modern information technology within the electoral process, an automatic mechanism for holding government bodies accountable for the societal consequences of their actions can be developed. The efficacy of this democratic paradigm is directly proportional to the level of education and civic engagement of the populace. The main challenge facing this paradigm is the dependency of the ruling elite's formation on clan-corporate structures, which are generally disinterested in promoting transparency and electoral integrity.

Finally, the third type of the proposed global economic structure is contingent on the aspirations of the financial oligarchy, aiming for global hegemony. This is accomplished via liberal globalization, which entails the erosion of national economic regulatory institutions and the subordination of economic reproduction to the prerogatives of international capital. Dominance within this structure is held by a few dozen intertwined American-European familial clans who control major financial conglomerates, law enforcement agencies, intelligence services, mass media, political parties, and the executive branch [14]. This core of the U.S. ruling elite engages in hybrid warfare against any nation beyond its sphere of control, employing a wide array of financial, informational, cognitive, and increasingly, biological technologies to destabilize and engender chaos. The ultimate objective of this warfare is the creation of a global institutional system under its jurisdiction, which regulates not only the global economy, but the entirety of humanity via contemporary informational, financial, and bioengineering technologies. he primary issue with such a political system is its absolute lack of accountability and ethical principles, with its hereditary ruling elite adhering to Malthusian, racist, and to some extent, misanthropic ideologies.

The formation of a new world order will transpire in competition among these three variants of the novel global economic arrangement. Notably, the latter variant excludes the first two, although the initial two can coexist peacefully. This scenario parallels the hypothetical outcome if Fascist Germany and Japan had prevailed in their war against the USSR and the USA, which would have negated both the Soviet and American models of the novel global economic structure of that era. This scenario parallels the hypothetical outcome if Fascist Germany and Japan had prevailed in their war against the USSR and the USA, which would have negated both the Soviet and American models of the novel global economic structure of that era.

Hence, three prospective scenarios are proposed for the formation of the new world economic structure. They all share a common material basis in the form of a novel technological structure, the core of which comprises an amalgamation of digital, informational, bioengineering, cognitive, additive, and nanotechnologies. Leveraging these technologies, fully automated unmanned productions are currently being developed, alongside artificial intelligence systems managing infinite databases, transgenic microorganisms, plants, and animals, as well as the cloning of living creatures and regeneration of human tissues. Upon this technological foundation, the institutions of an integrated global economic structure are being built to consciously regulate social and economic development of sovereign states and potentially humanity as a whole. This is achieved through a combination of state strategic planning and market competition based on public-private partnerships. Depending on the interests that regulate the activities of autonomous economic entities, one of the aforementioned variants of the new global economic structure is formed. The first two – the communist and democratic variants – can coexist peacefully, competing and collaborating based on international law norms. The third – the oligarchic variant – is antagonistic towards the first two as it assumes the establishment of hereditary global dominance by a few dozen American-European familial clans, incompatible with either democratic or communist values.

The trajectory of humanity's evolution, according to one of the three forecasted scenarios, hinges on the outcome of the hybrid warfare initiated by the American ruling elite against sovereign states.

Among the three scenarios previously characterized for the formation of the new global economic order, the domination of the global capitalist oligarchy appears least probable. Albeit this is the current direction of the unfolding global hybrid warfare, the ruling elite of the USA is destined to fail due to the qualitatively superior mobilization capabilities of the People's Republic of China and the global disinterest in this war.

Regardless of the scenario for the further unfolding of the global economic crisis, the mechanisms for the reproduction of the American capital accumulation cycle are eroding, leading to the weakening of the USA's economic power. There is no doubt that the American ruling elite will utilize any means to maintain their global dominance. They will aspire to steer events towards the formation of a global government, as recently suggested by the former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Gordon Brown [15]. The pandemic of fear over the coronavirus, global warming, and environmental catastrophe, inflamed by the media under their control, is preparing public opinion for this scenario. However, the financial interest of the US financial oligarchy to consolidate their hegemony in the global financial system, and to maintain it, thus precluding the independent development of other countries, is hidden beneath this narrative. To maintain these countries in a dependent position, the Anglo-Saxon geopolitical tradition employs tools such as pitting competitor countries against each other, provoking social and political conflicts, orchestrating coups, and encouraging separatists to instigate chaos in non-compliant countries and regions. To minimize the ensuing risks for Russia, the Eurasian Economic Union, Eurasia, and humanity as a whole, the immediate formation of an anti-war coalition capable of inflicting unacceptable damage on the aggressor is imperative.

Potential participants in the anti-war coalition could include all countries not interested in a new global war and the overwhelming majority of the population residing within them. Foremost, these include countries against which the brunt of American blow is directed - Russia and China. These are the countries of the new global economic system, growing successfully on the wave of the new technological order: China, India, and the countries of Indochina, constituting a new center of global economic development. Others include Japan, Korea, and all post-Soviet states that have maintained their sovereignty, the precursors in forming its constituent institutions. And, of course, the beneficiary countries cooperating with the Asian center of economic development, receiving positive impulses from its growth through participation in the One Belt, One Road initiative, and other processes of Eurasian integration.

Contrary to the countries of the "core" of the existing global economic order, which have imposed a universal financial-economic relationship system as the basis of liberal globalization, the forming "core" of the new global economic system is characterized by greater diversity. This peculiarity is reflected in the principles of international relations shared by the countries that constitute it: freedom of development path choice, denial of hegemonism, and sovereignty of historical and cultural traditions. The formation of a new global economic order is undertaken on an equal, mutually beneficial, and consensus-based foundation. These principles form the basis for new regional economic associations - SCO, EAEU, MERCOSUR, ASEAN-China - and international financial institutions: (the BRICS Development Bank and currency reserve pool, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, and the Eurasian Development Bank.

The unification of countries into such large international organizations as the SCO and BRICS represents a qualitatively new model of cooperation, paying tribute to diversity in contrast to the universal forms of liberal globalization. The unification of countries into such large international organizations as the SCO and BRICS represents a qualitatively new model of cooperation, paying tribute to diversity in contrast to the universal forms of liberal globalization. The principles of international structure shared by the countries of the forming "core" of the new global economic order differ significantly from those typical of previous global economic systems, which, according to S. Huntington, were formed by Western civilization "not due to the superiority of its ideas, moral values, or religion (to which only the population of a few other civilizations were converted) but rather as a result of superiority in the use of organized violence" [16].

The restructuring of the global monetary and financial system is of key significance for the transition to a new world economic order. The new architecture of international monetary and financial relations should be formed on a treaty-legal basis. Countries issuing global reserve currencies will have to guarantee their stability by adhering to certain constraints on the size of public debt and deficits of payment and trade balances. In addition, they will have to comply with the requirements set on the basis of international law for transparency of the mechanisms they use to secure the issuance of their currencies, providing unhindered exchange possibilities for all tradable assets on their territory.

4. The configuration of poles in the new world economic order

Based on the above, the configuration of multipolarity of the world economy by the end of the current century is likely to appear as follows.

1. A bipolar core of the new (integral) WES with communist (China) and democratic (India) poles, between whose competition half of the GDP growth will be produced.

2. Its near periphery (ASEAN, Pakistan, Iran).

3. The significantly influential core of the capitalist part of the crumbling old (imperial) world economic system (USA and Britain) with their satellites.

4. Entities wavering between the cores of the old and new world economic systems, such as the European Union, Turkey, and the Arab world, whose global influence opportunities will depend on their ability to break free from the dictates of the USA.

5. Fragments of the old world economic system aligning with the core of the integral system, likely to integrate into it once they free themselves from dependency on Washington (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan).

6. The raw material periphery of the integral world economic system (Africa, Central Asia, Latin America).

7. Russia and the EAEU, which, depending on the economic policies currently being pursued, may either enter the core of the new (integral) world economic system or remain on its raw material periphery, where they are currently situated in effect.

8. International organizations facilitating the consolidation of the new (integral) world economic system (BRICS, SCO, EAEU, ASEAN), the influence of which will be growing.

9. International organizations used by the USA to maintain their hegemony (NATO and others), the influence of which will be rapidly diminishing with the end of the global hybrid war.

The integral world economic system differs from the imperial one by restoring the significance of national sovereignty and international law based on it. This presupposes a much greater diversity of the geopolitical landscape, on which national states and their integration associations can create various configurations of international relations, striving to occupy the most advantageous niches in global economic connections. In this context, the importance of non-economic factors of integration, such as spiritual culture, civilizational proximity, spiritual values, and common historical destiny, significantly increases. Consequently, the influence of spiritual-historical poles of influence will intensify, integrating into the configuration of the integral world economic system. Its multipolarity will have a civilizational connotation, affirming the concept of a multipolar world of civilizations [17].

Russia's position in the multipolar world forming as a result of the change in the world economic system remains uncertain. A radical change in economic policy is necessary to escape the current peripheral position between the cores of the old and new world economic systems. This involves implementing a strategy of advanced development based on a new technological order, relying on the institutions and management methods of the integral world economic system [18].

1. Krysin L.P. Modern dictionary of foreign words / L.P. Krysin; In-t rus. lang. them. V. V. Vinogradov RAS. – Moscow: AST-PRESS, 2014. – 410.

2. Glazyev S. Management of economic development: a course of lectures. M.: Moscow University Press, 2019. 759 p.

3. Arrighi G. The long twentieth century: money, power and the origins of our times. London: Verse, 1994.

4. Glazyev S. World economic structures in global economic development // Economics and Mathematical Methods. 2016. Vol. 52 No. 2; Glazyev S. Applied results of the theory of world economic structures // Economics and Mathematical Methods. 2016. Vol. 52 No. 3; the author of this material has registered the scientific hypothesis "Hypothesis of periodic change of world economic patterns" (certificate No. 41-H for registration by the International Academy of Authors of Scientific Discoveries and Inventions under the scientific and methodological guidance of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences was issued in 2016).

5. Glazyev S. The Last World War. The US starts and loses. M.: Book World, 2016.

6. Steinbock D. U.S. – China Trade War and Its Global Impacts. – World Century Publishing Corporation and Shanghai Institutes for International Studies China Quarterly of International Strategic Studies. 2018. Vol. 4. No. 4. P. 515–542.

7. Fukuyama F. The end of history and the last man. M.: AST, 2010.

8.  Why China is taking over the ‘American century’ (by Dilip Hiro) // The Asia Times. URL: https://asiatimes.com/2020/08/why-china-is-taking-over-the-american-century/. August 19, 2020.

9. 2030 Zhongguo: manxiang gongtong fuyu (China - 2030: forward to universal prosperity) / Tsinghua University National Research Center / Ed. Hu Angang, Yan Yilong, Wei Xing. Beijing: Publishing house of Renmin University of China, 2011. P. 30

10. Prospects and strategic priorities for the ascent of the BRICS / ed. V. Sadovnichy, Yu. Yakovets, A. Akaev. M.: Moscow State University - Pitirim Sorokin-Nikolai Kondratiev International Institute - INES - National Committee for BRICS Research - Institute of Latin America RAS, 2014.

11. Wang Wen. China won’t watch Globalisation Die // The Belt and Road News. June 16. 2020.

12. Charles Higham. Trading With The Enemy: An Expose of The Nazi-American Money Plot 1933–1949. New York, 1983.

13. Bill Gates talks about “vaccines to reduce population” // URL: https://www.warandpeace.ru/en/exclusive/view/44942/ 4 марта 2010 г.

14. Coleman D. Committee of 300. Secrets of the world government. M.: Vityaz, 2005.

15. The savior of Great Britain proposes a world interim government // RIA Novosti. URL: https://ria.ru/20200328/1569257083.html, March 28, 2020

16.  Huntington S. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order (1996) is one of the most popular geopolitical works of the 1990s. Originating from an article in the journal Foreign Affairs, it describes in a new way the political reality and the forecast of the global development of the entire earthly civilization. The publication contains the famous article by F. Fukuyama's The End of History.

17. A.Dugin, “Theory of a multipolar world”, Moscow: Eurasian Movement, 2013. - 532 с.

18. S. Glaziev. Leap into the future. Russia in the new technological and world economic structures. - M.: Book World, 2018. - 768 p.

Закономерността на образуването и изчезването на полюсите на световната икономика

 I modelli di formazione e scomparsa dei poli economici globali

Alexander Markovics (Austria) – Editor-in-chief of Agora Europa, historian, Secretary General of the Suvorov Institute.

Dear Prof. Dugin! Dear Mr. Savin! Dear Mr. Bovdunov! Dear Mr. Pacini! Thank you very much for the invitation to this important conference.

We're living in interesting times. For more than 30 years, Europeans felt like living at the “End of History” as proclaimed by Francis Fukuyama. No alternative seemed possible to our Liberal-Capitalist system, no other form than Liberalist Democracy. But with the start of the Russian special military operation, it became obvious, that history is moving again. The end of history has ended.

Since Europe was living in the believe, that no alternative is possible, nobody dared to think about geopolitical alternatives to the European Union, which served as an obedient vassal to the United States for most of the time. The COVID measures have been a first wake up call for most Europeans, the Western escalation in the Ukraine conflict turned out to be the final straw in terms of a geopolitical awakening. Finally people started to protest against Globalism on the streets, but an European spring can only start, if we also realize the need for a mental and spiritual awakening of Europe.

As a consequence of the Russian Special Military Operation, Russia finally started it's Eurasian mission on an international scale. Before our very eyes the unipolar moment is collapsing and the multipolar moment just started. Russia, China, Iran, Latin America are already playing an important part in creating the nucleus of a multipolar order, something we can only envy you for as Europeans.  But what place can Europe have in this process, especially since it's still part of the political Wesr?

I think that Europeans first and foremost have to leave behind the chimeras of modernity, not only including the true genocidal Neofascism in Ukraine and other countries, but especially the ideology of Liberalism 2.0 with it's Great Reset, wokeism, Human rights imperialism, destruction of identity and individualism. This of course also includes the Neomalthusian ideas of climate change and population reduction. Democracy has shown it's true face and behind the mask we can recognize a Globalist oligarchy which wants to get rid of the peoples it governs. Europe becoming multipolar would mean that it leaves it's postmodern civilization behind and returns to it's traditional identity.

Europe can only become a souvereign part of a multipolar world, if it manages to reaffirm it's traditional identity, based on Christianity and the idea of empire, which is the anti-thesis to the current Atheist-Satanic and centralist regime imposed by the European Union. By adopting the ideas of the New Right, Europe can become it's own pole as a part of multipolarity, in the process of realizing it's authetic identity. For many Europeans this will constitute a painful process, since they'll forced to realize, that Europe is not world, but just a part of the world.

Of course this future isolation in the sense of Europe focusing on itself would also be benefical for the rest of the world: Europe stopping it's support for open society on a global scale would mean peace for world. An end of European support for the Zionist regime in Israel means peace for Palestine. Europeans stopping to impose neocolonialism in Africa will finally mean a more peaceful life for Africans and put an end to mass migration. And the end of European lectures on Democracy and Human rights for China will make normal realtions between Europe and Asia possible. Finally, an end of the Transatlantic partnership will result in the United States no longer being able to abuse European ressources for their dreadful wars all around the world.

Last not least, in order to create a long lasting peace order in Eurasia, Europe needs to respect Russians, Chinese and Turkish people as they are. The Europeans have to remember the start of their relations with Russia in the 16th century, where the Austrian nobleman Sigmund von Herberstein started diplomacy between Russia and the Holy Roman Empire as a relation between equals. We need to finally respect the other as the other and should no longer strive to assimilate everyone to European values. This will mean the beginning of a true pax euroasiatica and peaceful cooperation between europe and the other civilizations of mankind.

 L’inizio di una pax eurasiatica

 DISCURSO DE ALEXANDER MARKOVICS EN LA CONFERENCIA MUNDIAL SOBRE LA MULTIPOLARIDAD, 29 DE ABRIL DE 2023

 Discurso de Alexander Markovics para a Conferência Global Multipolar

 ΟΜΙΛΙΑ ΤΟΥ ALEXANDER MARKOVICS ΣΤΟ ΠΑΓΚΟΣΜΙΟ ΣΥΝΕΔΡΙΟ ΓΙΑ ΤΗΝ ΠΟΛΥΠΟΛΙΚΟΤΗΤΑ, 29 ΑΠΡΙΛΊΟΥ 2023

Challenge of multipolar world

‘There are both challenges and opportunities for my country Australia in the current global movement away from the old Western-dominated ‘Rules Based Order’, and  towards a genuine multipolar world order,  of strong civilisational states  and regions sharing the world’s resources and governance more equitably and peacefully.  

Australia by virtue of its geography and history as a European-settled British colony in the Asia-Pacific region is particularly torn between negative and positive cultural forces on our complex national identity and foreign policy.

First , the negatives .  Dominant is the inbred white Australian fear of Anglo-American abandonment. The early European settlers in Australia , mainly from England Scotland and Ireland , took the continent from its indigenous peoples with relative ease. They imported the British hierarchical imperial model of society and adopted it as their own.  

Australians unconsciously absorbed racist attitudes of cultural superiority to our indigenous First Australian peoples , and to our Asia-Pacific neighbours.  These attitudes have held our nation back. 

As Japan grew in military and economic strength , and began her own imperial adventurism in the Russian Far East,  Korea, Manchuria, China and further south, most Australians instinctively sought our security in the old Anglo-American rules- based order: protection first by our colonial motherland, Britain, and then increasingly by our adopted step-parent , the imperial United  States.

Australia’s evident weakness and vulnerability to Japanese invasion in WW2 indoctrinated Australians to a perceived need to be, and to be seen as, an indispensable and super-loyal forward military ally of United States and Britain in the Asia -Pacific region. 

The two parent countries continue, even now , to take advantage of these deeply ingrained Australian insecurities to consolidate their positions as key influencers of, and beneficiaries from, Australian strategic policy.  It has become a deeply unequal relationship. 

Against these powerful negative forces are important positive forces which I believe are strengthening and will prevail. 

First is geography. As a secure continental state rich in natural mineral and agricultural resources, Australia is a natural economic partner to the dynamic Asia-Pacific region  to our north. 

Second is the asset of our increasingly multicultural society. Especially in our major cities, our civilisation is now being profoundly influenced by immigrants from our Asia-Pacific region  and their cultural inheritance,  now going back many generations in Australia. 

It is becoming anachronistic to describe Australia as a predominantly European country in Asia . Our civilisation is increasingly multicultural in character, and this is beginning at last to influence our political culture.

Australia stands to benefit greatly from the coming multipolar world order , now being championed by Russia and China. It will be easy for Australians culturally to ‘plug into’ our Asia-Pacific region’s main socio-economic poles - China, India, Japan, ASEAN , even extending to West Asia, Eurasia and even Russia -  but only if we can mentally move forward from the backward-looking psychological insecurities that still tie us to the waning Anglo-American Rules Based Order: an order which most of the world increasingly sees through as an hollow shadow of its former hegemonic self.

It is difficult to predict how soon this might happen in Australia.

At the moment, Australia seems to be moving backwards : retreating into the military posturing and risk-taking of AUKUS, and the empty promise of a meaningless Quad grouping; and enlisting ourselves as a forward United States military base for its futile attempted encirclement and provocation of China. And,  in the worst case , risking national disaster as an expendable American pawn.

Our southeast Asian neighbours shake their heads sorrowfully at how Australia, after our progress towards real sovereignty in the 1970s  and 1980s,  is now apparently retreating into an anachronistic Anglo-American camp.  

They see the opportunities Australia is missing to re-direct its energies as a vibrant young multicultural nation in an increasingly multipolar Asia-Pacific region . 

All the economic and social assets are here to achieve this : the only thing stopping us is our political elites’  immature fears of Anglo-American abandonment.

Fortunately , influential Australian voices are calling for a change in policy direction : people like former Prime Ministers the late Malcolm Fraser and a still influential Paul Keating, former foreign ministers Gareth Evans and Bob  Carr , and many distinguished former academics and senior public servants such as John Menadue and Hugh White . 

The critical mass in Australian elites for real policy change is not there yet, but I am sure that Australia’s present competent leadership trio  - Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, Defence Minister Richard Marles, and Foreign Minister Penny Wong - are beginning to think about how Australia over the next few years might jump into the multipolar world pool. They will find it a refreshing and welcoming place when they do. “ 

ENDS.

Tony Kevin

Vivek Valapoil (India) — independent researcher,  co-founder of "Smart Haiti" project

Namaste, Vande Mataram Respected speakers, participants, the organizers and the audience it is a great privilege to me to be here in this conference. I thank for this opportunity and the efforts that you put on to organize such a important endeavour.

We are living in a era which can be called as western liberal totalitarian timeline, where the differences between humans are signified and amplified using various methods. The contrast between colour, creed, race and gender are being amplified or saturated by various indirect nefarious activities yet making the people to believe they are doing something significant.

We are living in a era which can be called as western liberal totalitarian timeline, where the differences between humans are signified and amplified using various methods. The contrast between colour, creed, race and gender are being amplified or saturated by various indirect nefarious activities yet making the people to believe they are doing something significant.

Yes the modern world has provided us with many facilities which made our life easy, but we just didn’t do it in the right way. We didn’t consider our history and culture as an important aspect rather we took the text book manual dictated by the western powers. By doing so we are in situation where all major aspect of our life being controlled by nations which many of us have never seen or been to. Is it really the logical way to live, what if one day they plan to pull the plug, as we have seen in the years 2022 in name of economic sanctions the SWIFT transfer facility to Russia was suspended at least that is what we heard from the western media. The normal people suffered due to it, the people were scared, all sorts of anxiety enwrapped them. But there was another side for this sanction which were not actively spoken western media that is everyday Europe was purchasing billions of dollar worth of gas from Russia and to enable this trade the swift facility was permitted to operate for gas transfer but the normal people of Russia should not able to access the SWIFT. Is it fair ? is it fair when they want something they can just take it but others should pay the price with their pain?

I ask you this one question, isn’t it example of hypocrisy at its peak?, isn’t it the greatest example of double standards?, isn’t it the example for sadism?, isn’t it the example for terrorism?

I say that it is enough, it is time take our control back of our life and our future. It is time to deconstruct the western dictated modernity through which they maintain the totalitarian control.

It is time to reassure our people that we don’t need ideologies from the west rather we could look with in and around us. The west have created an intelligent trap that easily puts anyone in to the category or brackets of a socialist, communist, nationalist, or a fascist, if we reject the western dictated liberalism. Therefore, it is critical have new revolution, ideology and values which comes from premodern era which was forcefully erased by the western powers.

The time from March 2022 to till now have showed us that there is still hope. Especially we were able to see the double standards from the west. Also we saw a new unity growing to it zeniths of power. As an Indian, since childhood Russia was the nation protected us not once but dozens of times. For most people who are depended on todays social media and mass media dictated by the west they don’t know a time when India was being encircled and attacked by everyone. We were restricted in developing our weapons when enemy states at our border were creating and testing nuclear weapons.

They never wanted India to help our friendly neighbouring country when millions people were being massacred in weeks and India was facing a one of the biggest refugee crisis which the world have seen, over 10 million refugees at India borders within weeks, I am refereeing to 1971 Bangladesh partition.

Now we see that INR is inching to replace the US dollar in international trades. The BRICS is becoming a significant collaboration and power. And inside you can see multipolarity and independence, which means every member nation is free to preserve their own culture and still they have the ability to work together and develop as nations. Most probably this is reason there are more interested nations who wants to join BRICS. These events points towards to the creation of multipolar world.

I am not saying to completely abandon the western ideology rather to put it as an optional choice.

The services that we use on our daily life are from the west or secretly controlled by west from the inside.

In this current situation if anyone who goes against the set of control check points of these totalitarian western check points, they will be deplatformed, branded as enemy of modern world.

So it is critical we understand the crisis at hand and work towards independence together by forgeting our differences, by embracing the past cultures and knowledge of our nation. We don’t need to look to global west to get development rather we just have embrace what we are as nations of new world order.

I would like to conclude my words by reminding this “ We as people outside western world have the biggest market, largest amount of human resources, natural resources and great history, why we need us dollars and western ideologies, it is them who needs us to survive”

Thank you for your time and attention. Jai Hind!!

Zeinab Mehanna (Lebanon) – PhD in Contemporary Islamic Thought, specialty - Women and Gender Studies, writer and a human rights activist

Dear Professor Dugin and esteemed guests,

It is quite symbolic (to me at least) that the Multipolarity Global Conference is held on today the 29/5/2023 which marks the 1st anniversary of the martyrdom of my late husband Nader Talebzadeh, Professor Dugin’s close friend and comrade in the resistance movement against the Anglo-American hegemony and deviated cavillations that is being imposed on the world. I would like to also express my deepest condolences for the martyrdom of my friend Daria Dugina.

The first time multipolarity was mentioned in Iran by Professor Dugin was in 2014 when he was invited by Nader the Head of New Horizon Conference. It followed in 2015 at the Arbaeen walk in the holy city of Najaf and in Iraq and then again in 2018 in the holy city of Mashhad, Iran and finally in 2019 in Beirut Lebanon. In all these events, Professor Dugin presented a multipolar world as a concept which is an inevitable response to the US’s total abuse of power and its hegemony around the world.

How do I as Lebanese national see “Multipolarity” as a necessity as a natural world order to follow to end the catastrophic economic crisis that Lebanon has been going through since 2019 as a result of the direct interference of the American and the Western forces in our internal politics and decision making?!

I would like to also bring the attention of the esteemed audience that the fact that the US Embassy is currently constructing its second- largest embassy in the world (after Baghdad) over 43- acres of land costing its taxpayers an amount of ONE BILLION DOLLARS, is concerning, given the dire economic situation in the country. …. Are we looking at a Baghdad scenario on the Mediterranean cost?

So why do we need multipolarity now?

• Greater stability: where no single power can dominate global and local affairs which may lead the risk of conflict
• Greater diversity of ideas and perspectives in a country that has 18 religious dominations
• Greater distribution of wealth among its citizens without sectarian influences
• Greater opportunities for corporations and an increased competition among the diverse political fractions in Lebanon

In my opinion, the current situation in Lebanon reflects the urgent need to follow the multipolar model especially with the defiance of certain forces to the voices herald by the Islamic Resistance (Hezbollah) and its allies in Lebanon where the Secretary of the Part Sayyed Hassan Nasrullah called for the corporation with Russia and China. The discourse in Lebanon is either “US” (meaning the allies of the United Sates and the West) or “Them” (meaning the EAST) …In other words, not an inclusive international system that respects the sovereignty of all nations and an equitable global governance and finally based on balance of power and respect of diversity of cultures and civilizations.

It is heartening to see the commencement of talks between Iran and Saudi Arabia, orchestrated by China, which gives hope to many in the region and around the world that the multipolarity concept is on its way to being applied and established globally.

In conclusion, I wish for peace in a multipolar world, where no single power can dominate global and local affairs, leading to greater stability, diversity of ideas and perspectives, and distribution of wealth among its citizens without sectarian influences.

Thank you,

Zeinab Mehanna

 Perché abbiamo bisogno del multipolarismo ora

 ΟΜΙΛΙΑ ΤΗΣ ZEINAB MEHANNA ΣΤΟ ΠΑΓΚΟΣΜΙΟ ΣΥΝΕΔΡΙΟ ΓΙΑ ΤΗΝ ΠΟΛΥΠΟΛΙΚΟΤΗΤΑ, 29 ΑΠΡΙΛΙΟΥ 2023

 DISCURSO DE ZEINAB MEHANNA EN LA CONFERENCIA MUNDIAL SOBRE LA MULTIPOLARIDAD, 29 DE ABRIL DE 2023

Shahzada Rahim (Pakistan)  –  journalist and commentator, political scientist

Distinguished speakers, scholars and professionals, I am honored to be part of today’s Global Conference on the Multipolarity (GCM-1). I would like congratulate both participants and listeners of GCM-I to become part of this sacred cause, which once was merely a theoretical manifestation but today we are really experiencing the crumbling of the old Western-centric world order.

The dawn of the 21st century marked a significant transformation at the geopolitical and geoeconomics spheres due to the emergence of new economic, political and civilizational poles in key regions of the world such as China and India in Asia, Russia in Eurasia, South Africa in African continent, and Brazil in Latin America. The emergence of these new power centers outside the western sphere literally propelled the major transition at both regional and global levels. Today, the multipolarity can be witnessed at the regional level both in terms of economic cooperation between regional countries and institutional building. For instance, BRICS, SCO Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) and AIIB are the key components and foundations of the multipolar process which has gained a significant pace in the last one decade. Today, BRICS has overtaken G7 in terms of GDP and Economic growth that clearly signals the decline of unipolar moment and so-called old order mainly led by the collective West. Hence, when it comes to multipolarity, the realization of the global politics goes beyond the understanding of the evolving trends across the global spectrum.

Ladies and gentlemen, the time has arrived when multipolarity has become a geopolitical reality transcending from a mere theoretical manifestation decades ago. Since its inception my country Pakistan has become the victim of the vicious geopolitical game waged by the West by joining the western camp during the Cold War. As a signatory to the CENTO and SEATO, Pakistan acted as a pawn of the West in its vicious geopolitical fight against the Soviet Union. The gross Foreign Policy failures on the part of our leaders brought Pakistan on the brink disaster and incessant chaos which is still hindering its progress and development despite being a Nuclear State. Though, in the last decade Pakistan for the first time attempted to abandon the Western bloc by joining the China’s Belt and Road initiative. As a result of China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), China vowed to invest 68 billion dollars in Pakistan developing key economic zones, infrastructure marvels and providing developmental loans. However, due to incessant pressure from the West especially the U.S. and the political elites of Pakistan repeated the mistake of their predecessors with vile attempts to dump the China-led mega economic corridor initiative.

Since the inauguration of CPEC project, China has only invested 17 billion dollars in developing the North-South route and the rest of the investment was blocked due to west sponsored political instability and security reasons in Pakistan. It is time the leaders of Pakistan should wake before it is too late to reclaim their share in the emerging multipolar world just like India and other regional countries in Asia. The emerging nations in Eurasia such as China, India and Russia are providing mammoth opportunities for the regional connectivity and development. It is time Pakistan should abandon Western Euphoria and join the emerging multipolar process led by China, India, South Africa, Russia and Brazil.

Without wasting time, once again I want to say thank you to all the organizers who successfully organized this conference and encouraged us to share our views on multipolarity.

 LA MULTIPOLARIDAD ES UNA REALIDAD EMERGENTE

 Il multipolarismo è una realtà emergente

 ÇOK KUTUPLULUK GELİŞMEKTE OLAN BİR GERÇEKLİKTİR

 Η ΠΟΛΥΠΟΛΙΚΟΤΗΤΑ ΕΙΝΑΙ ΜΙΑ ΑΝΑΔΥΟΜΕΝΗ ΠΡΑΓΜΑΤΙΚΟΤΗΤΑ

 Multipolaritas adalah realitas yang muncul

Youssef Hindi (France) – Political analyst, journalist, philosopher

Western civil war in the multipolar world

In the eyes of the geopolitician, the West appears to be one. This is only the apparent surface of reality. There is an alignment of European leaders with US foreign policy, but the West does not exist as one civilisation.

The integration of Europe into the « great space » (grossraum) of the United States is the ultimate consequence of profound transformations that took place from the 16th century onwards : the Protestant reformation, the weakening of the Roman Catholic Church, secularisation, the transformation of Calvinist England into a planetary hêgemôn, and the two world wars that put Western Europe under Washington’s tutelage.

However, the Anglo-sphere has always maintained the separation from continental Europe. The United States, not being an empire in the traditional sense, does not see the Old Continent as an extension of its nation. Nor are European countries vassals in the classical sense. America is an unequal hêgemôn, in contrast to the Roman Empire, which considered people as equals. The United States does not behave like an empire towards its vassals, in a mutually beneficial relationship. It devours its European slaves like Kronos eats his children for fear that one of them will supplant him, or at least become emancipated. Washington prefers to sacrifice the countries of Europe, to burn its own ships, rather than see them move closer to Russia, even if it means weakening itself.

The West is therefore not ‘collective’. Apart from anthropological and cultural differences, it has been riven by a serious fracture for several decades, which has turned into a civil war. Anglo-American and Judeo-Protestant ultra-liberalism has destroyed the industrial fabric of Western societies and fractured them geographically, culturally, economically and sociologically. The bourgeoisie of the big cities, on which the ruling classes rely, have seceded from the working classes of the periphery.

But the struggle goes far beyond that of classes. It pits high finance against the real economy, speculation against production, the fictional against the real. It’s an existential war which, as it intensifies, brings together with the hard core of the working class the middle classes threatened with extinction.

Productivist capitalism is no longer, it has changed its nature. It is now sacrificial, it consumes Western societies and peoples. It is a veritable war of extermination that the proponents of this neo-capitalism are waging in a West that is seriously affected by atheism, the breeding ground of nihilism. However, the suicide is not collective. The growing number of revolt movements are proof that the survival and self-preservation instinct of the Western peoples has not disappeared.

Thus, the Western oligarchy and ruling caste are waging a double war : against their own revolting peoples and against Russia. It is more than a global civil war, it is a pan-polemos. It is an interstate, intrastate, socio-economic, biological, religious, existential war. It is a war against life, a war against creation, a war against natural law.

Global civil war and pan-polemos have been spread by the United States, which has established a permanent state of exception in the West and systematically violates international law.

In this anomic context, the violation of natural law has become the rule. The authorisation of homosexual marriage, incest, sex change of adults and children, makes the West the home of antinomianism, to speak in theological-legal terms. It is an entropic movement, the epicentre of which is the Judeo-Protestant Anglo-sphere, which destroys all societies where its hegemony is imposed.

The popular revolts in the West, and the Russian counter-attack in Ukraine against NATO, must thus be interpreted as negentropic reactions to entropic forces. Nomos (law) against antinomianism, order against nihilistic chaos.

Russia is fighting, like the Western peoples, for its existence, to push back evil and expel it from its own body. It is waging an external war, with weapons, and an internal, spiritual struggle. The more the external war intensifies, the more Russia becomes radicalised, in the Latin sense ; it tries to extirpate the tenacious viruses of progressivism.

In this global civil war, in this pan-polemos, the European peoples and Russia are objective allies against those who have designated themselves as their common enemy.

The advent of multipolarity cannot be reduced to a new division of the world and the end of US global hegemony. The Russia/NATO war in Ukraine is not exclusively material, and the popular revolts in the West are not confined to a socio-economic struggle.

The historical coincidence of these different phenomena is not accidental. The identification of the enemy to which the peoples of Europe, Russia, the countries of Africa and China are resisting should make us reflect on the nature of this global struggle. The totalitarian political project of the enemy, its methods and its nihilistic feature, place the pan-polemos imposed on us on eschatological ground.

American leaders, whether believers or atheists, see the United States as a messianic nation whose policies are always justified in a religious sense, even if they lead the world to Armageddon. The danger, in the not too distant future, is the direct confrontation of nuclear powers on European territory, against the will of the people locked into US supranational structures. At this stage, Europeans have not yet found their champions, their true representatives capable of taking over the reins of states that have lost their political sovereignty.

Hope lies in the rapid delegitimisation of European leaders as history accelerates. In this context, Russia plays an important role. The war of attrition it is winning against NATO may ultimately precipitate the fall of several European governments. Thus precipitating the Western civil war to its conclusion.

It is therefore necessary for Russia not to cut itself off from Europe completely and to build bridges with civil society, where the real elites are to be found and from which future leaders will emerge. Multipolarity must be built with the people, and beyond the political powers if necessary.

 LA GUERRA CIVIL OCCIDENTAL EN EL MUNDO MULTIPOLAR

 La guerra civile occidentale nel mondo multipolare

 La guerre civile occidentale dans le monde multipolaire

 ΔΥΤΙΚΟΣ ΕΜΦΥΛΙΟΣ ΠΟΛΕΜΟΣ ΣΤΟΝ ΠΟΛΥΠΟΛΙΚΟ ΚΟΣΜΟ

Ross Alexander Cameron  (Australia) – political scientist and commentator. A research fellow at the University of Canberra's National Security

Thanks very much.

I just want to say Wen Qing, I think you're doing a terrific job on behalf of the Asia Pacific delegation. And, you know, not always perfect circumstances. But look, I am a pretty ordinary Australian citizen. But I have I still have a functioning brain. And when I was first invited to join the multipolar conference, so I went and did a bit of research. And that took me to the Guardian newspaper, John Ross, in Moscow, March 16, who described this collection of speakers as a group of fringe dwelling conspiracy theorists and Russian propagandists. So, I thought, well, I definitely want to attend that conference. Because that's me.

Yeah, that's my trouble. Because I just think if you have not been smeared and insulted by The Guardian newspaper, you're obviously not trying hard enough.

I am a Western god, okay, I'm your classic Westerner, in the sense that, you know, I believe in Homer, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Abraham, Moses, Jesus of Nazareth. I like the philosopher Boethius who was executed in prison for his convictions. I venerate Rene Decart and, you know, somebody like Francis Bacon on the evolution of the scientific method, I like John Stuart Mill, on liberty. I go to Adam Smith and David Ricardo on the Wealth of Nations and the value of free trade, but I just have to admit that my own tribe has abandoned their foundation principles.

And what we described as the West today does not reflect those great historical antecedes. And so, like Socrates, I have a concern for definition. When we use the word multipolar, you know, I got into its origins, which we find really in biochemistry. And then we find that the original simple primitive forms of life, the amoeba, the algae, you know, the worms and the flies, they built around unipolar neurons. And they only have one axon and dendrites, they don't communicate backwards and forwards there, they don't really have to heavily engage with all of the other cells around them. But if you want to go to complex law, if you want to go to a vertebrate, we find that the biochemistry does this amazing shift, either by, by God or evolution, whichever you prefer, to the multipolar neuron, and that multipolar neuron, has the ability to communicate with all the other neurons.

And its axon is sort of sending information out and its dendrites, bringing information back and this cell has the capacity for an enormous amount of information processing. And indeed, we find that you and I, Wen Qing, as vertebrates, we have not a single unipolar neuron in our whole bodies, as 70% of the central nervous system of a human being is made up of multi polar neurons. And we have no unipolar neurons. And so I take this as a sort of a suggestion from nature that if you want to live harmoniously in more complex systems, you must have multipolarity and this was a kind of insight that took place in Europe in the early 1600s, after 30 years of the most brutal war, when about 450 likes came together to figure out how they could untangle the fishing line that was drawing them into constant brutal conflict and war with each other and they came up with the Treaty of Westphalia and the first expressions of the idea of national sovereignty, you know. I will respect your autonomy and you will respect mine.

And the historians of violence say that in the course of five centuries that have followed the world has become a less and less violent place. Yet we find it as the Western world loses touch with its ancient wisdom, that the world is becoming more violent and more threatening. And we see this instinct to try and superimpose a unipolar view, on what by nature is multipolar. And so the only way that can be achieved is with the use of books. And if I choose just three simple examples, you know, we find that in the area of economics, if you want a unipolar world, you must introduce sanctions on a multiplicity of nations to hold their head under water.

So, they cannot emerge as a competitor or rival to the unipolar hegemony. But the problem with sanctions is they injure the sanctioning country as much as they do the victim of the sanction. So, you take a little bit of fertilizer out of the market, and the price of fertilizer in the United States, in many places increase 200 to 300%. So, it's a very stupid policy, but it is the logic of unipolarity, isn't it? Yeah, so I just say what, whether you look at the media, which then runs on the basis of canceling alternative views, and censoring alternative opinions, and locking up one guy in Sydney, expresses the Russian view, he is now confined in the Russian Consulate, because he will be arrested if he walks out. And then, of course, finally, to the actual use of force, you know, permanent campaign of warfare, going from Afghanistan, to Iraq, to Libya. And now, you know, to the Ukraine, which is all species of the same organisms of the permanent war, which is required by unipolarity to superimpose itself on the naturally multipolar human race. So, I just say it's my honor, to be joined by a group of others I regard whose main characteristic is sanity. And I just hope that the message of live and let live, can break through before we destroy the whole civilization.

Mukadda Bruce Shillingsworth (Australia) – Native Australian activist, participant in numerous protests for indigenous rights in Australia, human rights defender.

Khin Maung Zaw (Myanmar) – Joint Secretary of the Myanmar Institute of Strategic and International Studies ( MISIS)

The necessary steps to Multipolar World

1 Addressing and re-addressing Global Dynamics of Geoplolitics and Geoeconomics.

Global Development Programs Like BRI being addressed as geoeconomics threats towards the West.

Momentum of moving towards Multipolar World against hegemonic and dominancy struggles generate the acts of sanctions, containments and proxy wars making international community threatened and unstable.

How can we get out of such actions and how nations can have the right of to develop harmless and protected from multi-dimensional threats of hegemonic and dominancy ambitions has been serious questions of the day?

2 Configuration of Multipolar World.

How can we get out of present unipolar setting of the World?

Multipolarity of global finance and monetary systems.

Strategic de-dollarization is essential for multi-polarity of gobal monetary.

Independency from dollar economy is a broader need for independency of dollar currency and resilience to created cconomic crises.

Collective and strategic frameworks to de-dollarize must be established to speed up and realize the process. Global financial system need to be diverted from unitilateral controlled institutions of IMF and World Bank.

Multipolarity of Economic Regions ensuring un-disrupted global supply chains and value chains need to be established.

Multipolar strategic security balance at un-threatened and free navigation and aviation shall be guarnteed, especially at strategic choke points.

Multipolarity of Civilizations have to be preserved and promoted.

Mutual respect and admiring of different cultures and values shall be core of international relations.

Expancion strategy of BRICS and SCO should be cope with future multi-polar setting of the world. All areas of strategic balance such as monetary, military, media and technology needed to be evenly develop among the strategic poles to have stability.

3 Rewriting Global Order

Rewriting international rules and reforming institutions at multi-polar vision and dimensions including UN and other major international institutions.

Promoting linguistic, cultural and social connectivities are key areas of New Multilateralism.

De-colonization, counter state-crafting, counter proxy wars and counter Westernization are the measures to collectively react during the process of moving towards multi-polar international order.

Freedom from unitilateral order may not be free.

Collective Resilience against multi-dimensional threats of allied suppressions, such as containments, sanctions, blockades always needed as long as alliance means to destruct targeted nations.

New International Order at all global Commons: Sea, Air Space, Space and Cyber Space ensuring freedom from Choke Point Threats and unitilateral control of any Domain must be reestablished.

Rules must be made multilaterally at equal participation.

Thanks you All.

dr. Doğu Perinçek (Türkiye) – chairman of the Patriotic Party (Vatan)

The decisive importance of the alliance between Russia, Türkiye, Iran and China at the edge of entering the Eurasian Era

Honorable President,

Dear friends who have joined our conference from the seven continents,

I am greeting you with the spirit of the great desires of humanity.

We have come to the end of the Atlantic Era. A new civilization emerges

from Asia.

THE FRONTLINE

The states of West Asia are the frontline of humanity.

Russia’s war in Ukraine against US imperialism is the fight of all of us. On this front, we join Russian heroism. We join the resistance of the Alexander Nevskys, Kutuzovs, Stalins and Putins.

Right now, in the Eastern Mediterranean, US guns are pointed from military bases on Greek shores towards Türkiye. Türkiye keeps here the watch for humanity.

Syria, Iraq, Türkiye and Iran are fighting with arms together against the US project of a Second Israel labeled “Kurdistan”.

The emerging unity between Iran, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf Emirates and Yemen is historic importance. Especially the beginning of the process of Iran joining the Organization of Turkic States is of extraordinary value for the unification of Asia.

China provides bravery and hope to all humanity with its insistence on constructing socialism and its awareness in the Strait of Taiwan.

THE KEY PART OF THE FRONTLINE: SYRIA’S NORTH

Dear friends,

Today, the north of Syria is the key part of this frontline. Here, we have forces and a strategic position that is superior to that of US imperialism.

Due to given circumstances, Russia, Türkiye, Syria and Iran are not able to pursue joint operations and maneuvers in the Ukraine front. But in the north of Syria, all four of these states are present with their military forces. The frontline of Black Sea – Mediterranean – Arabian Sea can be united via the north of Syria. And such a practice will be start of a process to expel the United States from our region and from Ukraine too.

Joint operations in Syria with the goal to eliminate US-led separatist and religious extremist terror organizations will not only ensure Syria’s territorial integrity. They will also constitute a decisive offensive for the security of West Asia and the world’s peace.

This joint military operation will:

1. Liberate the Turkish state from pursuing hesitating and contradictory practices and ensure its positioning in the joint front;
2. Confront the United States with the problem of fighting at several fronts simultaneously;
3. Strengthen Russia’s position on the Ukraine front;
4. Strengthen China’s position in the Taiwan Strait.

THE MODEL OF SECURITY AND PEACE

Honorable friends,

In 2017, Türkiye, Iraq, Syria, Iran and Russia acted together and foiled the US and Israeli attempt to establish a so-called ‘Kurdistan’ in the north of Iraq.

Azerbaijan, Türkiye and Russia have displayed a joint approach and practice in the Karabakh War. As a result, the United States could not set even one foot in the Caucasus.

These practices show that the unity of West Asian countries within the

Turkish-Russian axis provide a model of peace and security.

ONE SINGLE FRONT FROM THE BLACK SEA AND THE MEDITERRANEAN TO THE ARABIAN SEA

Now is the time to broaden this model to all regions of confrontation. In that context:

1. A joint position needs to be taken against NATO enlargement to the East. NATO must be stopped.
2. A united front must be established with the goal of closing down all US and NATO military bases.
3. Crimea is territory of the Russian Federation. The Donetsk and Luhansk regions as well as Zaporizhzhia and Kherson are part of the Russian Federation. These facts must be recognized officially and openly.
4. The independence of the Republic of Abkhazia must be recognized.
5. Azerbaijan’s struggle to liberate its territories under occupation must be supported.
6. In the Eastern Mediterranean, the struggle of the region’s states to defend their Blue Homeland against the axis of US-Israel-Greece must be supported.
7. The Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus must be recognized. The reason: If the United States gains control over entire Cyprus, they will dominate all routes from the Suez Canal to the Strait of Hormuz.
8. All efforts should be pursued with determination to end Israel’s occupation of Arab lands. Moreover, all measures must be applied to ensure the establishment of a unified, independent Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital city.
9. The United States’ sanctions to various countries of the world should not be recognized nor applied. These sanctions should be turned into “golden opportunities” to further develop cooperation between regional countries.
10. Institutions like the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the BRICS, Asian Union, Arab League, and the Organization of Turkic States unite the region’s countries against hegemonism. Unity, solidarity and integration among these organizations must be developed further.
11. The People’s Republic of China’s Belt and Road Initiative for a shared development must be advanced further.
12. Works to pursue international trade in national currencies and to establish joint regional currencies must be intensified.

Dear friends,

May the words of our great poet Yunus Emre enlighten the path ahead: “How high the mountain ever may be, the road passes over its summit.”

Our common hopes and desires provide us with extraordinary power. Asia’s heritage of grand empires and revolutions has taught us to live in pride and brotherly.

As the Turkish nation, we promise to fight with our heads up on the frontline for the construction of the Asian Civilization.

I greet respectfully and wholeheartedly all the fighters gathered here. Together, we will fight for the new civilization that is not individualist  and profit-driven but is sharing, public-oriented, statist, freedom loving, peaceful and that strengthens the independence of national states.

Hanieh Tarkian  (Iran) – Geopolitical analyst&Islamic Lecturer

Bismillahi ar-Rahmani ar-Rahim

Salamun alaykum

Thank you for inviting me. I would like to start by remembering the martyrs of the multipolar world, those who have fought against the military and ideological terrorism of the West and globalist groups, and in particular general Soleimani and Daria Dugina.

The first thing I would like to point out is that the new multipolar order is already here, we are no longer in transition. I think there are some important events which made this transition more tangible: in summer 2015 General Soleimani went to Moscow, a few months later, Russia intervened in the fight against terrorism in Syria alongside the legitimate government of Bashar Assad and Resistance forces including Iran and Hezbollah. So I believe that 2014 with the coup d'etat in Ukraine and 2015 with the intervention of Russia in Syria were the years in which the transition from the unipolar order to the multipolar order became more tangible, with Russia and other countries becoming fully aware of the West being unreliable and its policies dangerous. In particular, the twelve and more years of the fight against terrorism, which is supported by Western countries, and on the other side Syria, Iran, Iraq, Russia and Lebanon fighting against it, have marked a division in the world, on one side the globalist and warmongering countries and on the other side states that want to safeguard their interests, identity and culture.

So there is an opportunity now to strengthen the multipolar order in which collaboration and dialogue coexist and there is no need to destroy cultural, religious and national identities, as it happened in the unipolar order. If we manage to achieve this real collaboration, not the globalist one, it will be precisely this type of collaboration that will allow us to rediscover our identity, as well as to preserve and strengthen it without feeling the need to destroy the identity of others, and we saw this kind of collaboration in the Middle East with the Resistance forces fighting against terrorism. The globalist and warmongering groups wanted a perpetual state of instability as to allow them to exploit and steal the rich resources of the free peoples of the Middle East. However they have failed in their plan of total conquest of this strategic region, as well as in the total imposition of their interests on the rest of the world.

To complete the realization of the multipolar order it is necessary to unite forces and to do this we can follow the model of the fight against terrorism in the Middle East: in fact, by creating unity and collaboration among the different resistance forces, General Soleimani had managed to change what was the plan for a new Middle East, we remember former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice defining the bombing of Lebanon by Israel in 2006 "the birth pangs of the New Middle East", a Middle East that would have been at the service of the globalist and warmongering groups. But Soleimani with the resistance forces in Syria, Iraq and Yemen managed to stop this plan, and not only that: he also encouraged Russia to get involved, whose role was decisive in the defeat of ISIS in Syria.

The school and example of General Soleimani can be a model for all peoples: the ideological school of Soleimani has managed to unite individuals from different religious traditions and nationalities to fight terrorism and oppose the hegemony of globalist and warmongering groups.

We are no longer in a transition phase, the time has come to completely replace the false pax americana with the real pax multipolaris. However, let us remember that to do this it is necessary not only to join forces, but to rediscover and consolidate our identity traditions, just like in the Middle East, where Muslims and Christians and other groups have united in the fight against terrorism, which is not only military but also ideological. Thank you

Zeinab al Safar (Iraq) – Iraqi-Lebanese TV Host, Chief Editor, Executive Producer & Academic Researcher.

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

السلام عليكم و الله بالخير

My Dear Professor Alexandre Dugin

Esteemed Speakers & participants

Respected Initiator, organizers and listeners

Thank you very much for the invitation and for arranging this multipolar gathering at this pivotal time.

We may argue that one will not be able to grasp the size of the accelerating repercussions of the end of the US unipolarhegemony over our region, nor can one explain the forms of accelerating positioning among the active players in the region, if we remain at borders drawn by politics, direct interests and wars, all of which were a reflection of deeper transformations that made the emergence of these repercussions inevitable. Like Saudi Arabia’s position in the energy sector and what thisdictates of vital interests with both Russia and China, the American failure in Afghanistan leading to the recognition of this failure and the decision to withdraw, the wars of the Resistance and the steadfastness of its forces and governments in Syria and Iran and elsewhere and the rise of Russia and the rise of China are all real and correct elements that played a pivotal role in the political manifestation of the transformationssince the collapse and disintegration of the Soviet Union and the advancement of America as the sole dominant global power, waging wars without an opponent facing it, and imposing sanctions without international law preventing it , until the American graphic curve began to decline and retreat and steeplyfall and move from crisis to crisis. Yet one might ask what are the profound transformations that we are talking about here and which led to the ebb of unipolarity?

Washington waged and fought the battle to control the world under the rubric of transforming globalization, as it is an expression of a technological revolution that weakened the importance of the separating distances in geography into a source of abolishing geography, with what it holds of the characteristics and capabilities that distinguish peoples, nations, and states, and Globalism was the political version of globalization, meaning the Global government, which does not recognize geography, and the globalized individual whose cultural, religious, historical and national peculiarities are abolished to become a follower of the global government and who participates in the race for well-being, instead of sticking to the roots, but globalization as a technological revolution granted platforms, capabilities and opportunities for the race between the concepts of the individual belonging to cultural peculiarity and religious roots and the Globalist government. Thus the Technological globalization, which shortened & lessened the distances of geography, was a major cause of the transformation that rehabilitated geography as the bearer of cultural, religious and national peculiarities. The Americans ignored the simple rule that says that the door you enter through, cannot prevent others from entering through too. And here we are today wherethe whole West in the war on Ukraine, waging war against Russia under the same headings it had previously announced its death, when it said that the time for sovereignty and patriotism had ended in light of globalization and what resulted from globalism.

In the same way that the individual has become the unit on which the globalization of technology is based, where communication with technology is individual and does not pass through the gateway of a state, nationality or religion, theimportance of the individual in confronting the machine has regained its importance, as the individual has become the backbone of wars, so geography has returned to fighting the end of history, as history is an industry of geography- the multi-cooperating and warring belligerent geography, and emerged from the womb of cultural, religious and national specificity, the fighter individual in Spirit versus the globalized individual belonging to the shadows of the global government based on the supremacy of the machine, and thus the theory of zero-cost  war fell apart, and likewise the theory of no wars on land anymore and the war is to be decisive from the air, which DonaldRumsfeld spoke about during the Iraq war, and the July 2006 Israeli aggression against Lebanon war came as a clearexpression of the first complete confrontation between the two models, and the victory of the resistance in this war was an utterand complete declaration of the failure of the armies of globalized individuals in confronting the armies of individuals of cultural, religious and national specificity, and the matter was repeated in Gaza yet Afghanistan was the decisive issue here.

What completed the new scene was the emergence of the national state capable of steadfastness and resistance in the face of the extremely fierce American wars, which culminated in the war on Syria, where the Syrian national state stood with its National background, and the Iranian national state with its Islamic background, expressing the two great characteristics in the region, Arabism and Islam, and Hezbollah (Hashed other resistance movements) as a double expression of these two characteristics, was the added value in resolving the direction of the war, which reaffirmed the status of the national state in the face of the global government, and converged with this equation and the Russian national state with its tsarist and Orthodox background. Then the change continued in the war in Yemen, where the new war technology that invested in globalization appeared as a technological revolution, capable of overthrowing the old law of war, and the drones and small and accurate guided missiles were able to defeat the giant aircraft carriers. And here is the Ukraine war saying the final word in terms of the superiority of this technology and its placement in the place of the technology of tank and aircraft wars that ruled the First and Second World Wars. Among the most prominent changes also is the change introduced by the economy to the concept of the economically important country, so that the sanctions against Russia show that the countries that cannot be dispensed with are those that have an irreplaceable position in providing energy resources, and this is true in the case of Russia and is also true in the case of Saudi Arabia.

The world is changing rapidly under the influence of irrevocable laws, until the impact of rising countries grows to the limits of saturation determined by their sources and resources of population, economic and military strength, and consequently the influence of the hegemon countries ebbs.

Yes we welcome you all to this multipolar world that consists not only of powerful states or geography but also of powerful resistance movements that have tipped the balance in many confrontations in the last 3 decades and which have become a winning focal chip and an integral element and a quintessential prop and support that delivers in shaping this new vibrant multipolar world. Resistance movements from Lebanon Palestine Iraq Yemen and elsewhere paving the way for this New World.

Thank you and Salam.

Zeinab Al Saffar

Foad Izadi (Iran) –  Associate Professor of Faculty of World Studies (Tehran University)

Moving towards a multipolar world, where power is distributed among

multiple major global players, can be accompanied by various obstacles. Here are some common challenges that will arise:

1. Dominance of Existing Powers: Established global powers, such as the United States, will resist relinquishing their dominant positions and influence in the international system. They will view a multipolar world as a threat to their interests and work to maintain their hegemonic status.

2. Competition and Conflict: As power is distributed among multiple poles, competition and conflicts of interest can intensify. Rivalries between emerging and existing powers may escalate, leading to geopolitical tensions, proxy wars, or even direct confrontations.

3. Lack of Global Governance: Transitioning to a multipolar world requires effective global governance mechanisms. However, there might be a lack of consensus on global governance structures, decision-making processes, and rules. This can hinder cooperation and coordination among nations, making it challenging to address global issues collectively.

4. Unresolved Regional Conflicts: Numerous ongoing regional conflicts can complicate the move towards a multipolar world. Disputes and unresolved conflicts between nations can hinder the establishment of stable and cooperative relationships necessary for a multipolar system to thrive.

5. Economic Interdependence: Existing economic interdependencies, such as trade relationships and supply chains, may be disrupted during the transition to a multipolar world. Economic competition and protectionism between major powers can create instability and hinder progress towards multipolarity.

6. Differing Ideologies and Values: Countries in a multipolar world are likely to have different ideologies, values, and political systems. These divergences can lead to conflicting interests and hinder collaboration on global issues, making it harder to establish common ground.

7. Security Dilemmas: In a multipolar world, nations may face security dilemmas where actions taken by one state to enhance its security might be perceived as threats by other states. This can lead to arms races, mistrust, and instability.

8. Lack of Trust and Cooperation: Trust-building and cooperative relationships among nations are crucial for the success of a multipolar world. However, historical rivalries, deep-rooted suspicions, and differing national interests can impede the development of trust and hinder cooperation efforts.

9. Power Asymmetries: Transitioning to a multipolar world can be challenging when significant power asymmetries exist among nations. Weaker states may feel marginalized or threatened by the dominant powers, leading to resistance or attempts to form alliances against them.

Overcoming these obstacles requires diplomatic efforts, dialogue, multilateral institutions, and a shared vision for global governance. It demands a commitment to mutual respect, cooperation, and compromise among nations to ensure a smooth and peaceful transition towards a multipolar world.

As it was said earlier, United States will violently resist relinquishing its dominant position in a multipolar world based on historical patterns and geopolitical considerations. Here are some strategies the United States might employ to maintain its position:

1. Economic Strength: The United States has traditionally relied on its robust economy and technological innovation to maintain its global influence. It could continue to prioritize economic growth, invest in research and development, and promote innovation to stay competitive.

2. Diplomatic Alliances: The United States may seek to strengthen its alliances and partnerships with like-minded countries to maintain a collective influence in international affairs. Strengthening alliances with NATO, the European Union, and other democratic nations could provide a united front against challenges to American dominance.

3. Military Capabilities: The United States has historically maintained a strong military presence worldwide. It could continue to invest in advanced military technologies, maintain a global military footprint, and ensure military readiness to project power and deter potential adversaries.

4. Technological Dominance: Emphasizing technological advancements, such as artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, space exploration, and biotechnology, can help the United States maintain a competitive edge and bolster its global influence in a rapidly evolving world.

5. Soft Power and Cultural Influence: The United States has long relied on its soft power, including its cultural exports to exert influence globally. Continued emphasis on propaganda and public diplomacy, and fostering positive international perceptions can contribute to maintaining its dominant position.

6. Adaptability and Multilateral Engagement: Recognizing the changing global dynamics, the United States may need to adapt its approach and engage with emerging powers and rising regions. This could involve active participation in international institutions, negotiations, and multilateral frameworks to shape global norms and regulations.

7. Economic and Trade Policies: The United States could pursue strategic economic and trade policies to protect domestic industries and address concerns related to intellectual property rights and technology transfer. These policies may aim to maintain economic advantages and prevent the erosion of American dominance.

It's important to note that the global landscape is complex, and the United States will likely employ a combination of these strategies while adapting to evolving circumstances.

In order to resist U.S. hegemony in the path towards a multipolar world, NGOs and intellectuals can play a significant role. Here are some ways they can confront and influence the global power dynamics:

1. Research and Advocacy: NGOs and intellectuals can conduct research and provide evidence-based analysis to expose the consequences and limitations of American hegemony. They can highlight issues such as inequality, human rights abuses, environmental degradation, and economic exploitation resulting from dominant power structures. By raising awareness and advocating for change, they can foster a critical discourse on the need for a more equitable and inclusive global order.

2. Mobilizing Civil Society: NGOs have the capacity to mobilize civil society and grassroots movements to push for alternative visions of global governance. By organizing campaigns, protests, and advocacy initiatives, they can amplify the voices of marginalized communities, challenge dominant narratives, and demand greater accountability from powerful actors, including the United States.

3. Building Networks and Coalitions: NGOs and intellectuals can collaborate across borders to build networks and coalitions that promote alternative perspectives and challenge American-let hegemonic power structures. By fostering cooperation between organizations and intellectuals from different regions, they can amplify their impact and present a united front against dominance.

4. Promoting Dialogue and Exchange: Intellectuals can foster dialogue and exchange between different cultures, societies, and knowledge systems. By facilitating discussions and creating platforms for diverse voices, they can challenge Western-centric narratives and promote a more inclusive understanding of global affairs. This can contribute to a more balanced and multipolar discourse.

5. Policy Advocacy: NGOs and intellectuals can engage with policymakers, international institutions, and multilateral forums to influence policies and promote alternative approaches. By providing expertise, proposing policy recommendations, and participating in decision-making processes, they can help shape a more equitable and multipolar global order.

6. Engaging with Emerging Powers: NGOs and intellectuals can actively engage with emerging powers and rising regions to foster dialogue and cooperation. By promoting collaboration between these actors and sharing knowledge and best practices, they can contribute to the diversification of power and challenge the dominance of western powers.

7. Promoting Global Solidarity: NGOs and intellectuals can advocate for global solidarity and cooperation, emphasizing the interconnectedness of global challenges such as climate change, poverty, and conflict. By highlighting the shared interests and interdependence of nations, they can foster a collective effort to address these challenges, thereby reducing the influence of any single hegemonic power.

It's important to note that confronting United States hegemony and promoting multipolarity requires sustained efforts, collaboration, and a long-term perspective. NGOs and intellectuals can contribute significantly by providing critical analysis, mobilizing civil society, and advocating for alternative visions of global governance. And most importantly, provide the principles of an ideology that seeks to confront United States hegemony. Here are some principles that can be associated with challenging U.S hegemony:

1. Multipolarity: The ideology should promote the idea of a multipolar world order, where power is more evenly distributed among multiple actors. It emphasizes the need to challenge the dominance of the United States, and seeks to create a more balanced and inclusive global system.

2. Sovereignty and Self-Determination: The ideology recognizes the importance of national sovereignty and the right of nations to determine their own political, economic, and social systems without external interference. It opposes interventions, military occupations, and impositions of dominant powers that undermine the sovereignty and self-determination of nations.

3. Equality and Justice: The ideology emphasizes the importance of equality and justice in international relations. It challenges the unequal power dynamics that perpetuate global injustices, such as economic exploitation, social inequalities, and human rights abuses. It promotes fair and just systems that prioritize the well-being and dignity of all people.

4. Solidarity and Cooperation: The ideology encourages solidarity and cooperation among nations and peoples. It seeks to build alliances and partnerships based on shared interests and mutual respect, fostering collaboration to address global challenges collectively. It emphasizes the importance of dialogue, diplomacy, and multilateralism in resolving conflicts and promoting common goals.

5. Cultural Diversity and Respect: The ideology recognizes and values cultural diversity, promoting respect for different cultures, traditions, and perspectives. It opposes cultural homogenization. Instead, it supports the preservation of cultural heritage and the promotion of intercultural understanding and dialogue.

6. Sustainable Development and Environmental Stewardship: The ideology prioritizes sustainable development and environmental stewardship. It acknowledges the need for responsible resource management, climate action, and ecological sustainability. It challenges dominant economic models that prioritize profit over the well-being of the planet and future generations.

7. Anti-Imperialism and Anti-Colonialism: The ideology opposes imperialism and colonialism in all forms. It seeks to address the historical legacies of colonialism, including economic exploitation, cultural subjugation, and territorial occupation. It supports the right to self-determination of colonized and oppressed peoples.

These principles are not exhaustive, and different ideologies and movements may emphasize different aspects. It's also important to note that confronting hegemony is a complex endeavor, and the specific principles and strategies adopted may vary based on the specific context and goals of those challenging the dominant power structures.

Rishabh Sethi (India) – Master scholar of International relations, Tver state university, Expert analyst of International relations

Future prospects & role of BRICS plus for Multipolar World

By:- Rishabh Sethi

(Expert analyst of International relations)

The concept of a multipolar world has gained significant traction in recent years, as countries seek to assert their influence in an increasingly complex and interconnected global order. The 21st century has seen a significant shift towards a multipolar world, where power would be getting more evenly distributed among multiple nations, rather than being concentrated in a single superpower.

The rise of new economic powers, such as India, Russia, China and the relative decline of traditional Western powers, has led to a fundamental shift in the balance of power in the world. Against this backdrop, the idea of a multipolar world has emerged as an alternative to the traditional bipolar or unipolar models of global governance in today’s 21^st century.

This shift has significant implications for the future prospects of the global political, economic, and security landscape. One of the most significant implications of a multipolar world would be the potential for increased competition among great powers. As the balance of power shifts, countries may seek to assert their influence and challenge the existing order. This could lead to increased tensions and conflicts, as countries seek to secure their interests and defend their values. However, competition can also drive innovation and progress, as countries seek to outcompete each other in areas such as technology, infrastructure, and human development.

Another potential outcome of a multipolar world is increased collaboration among great powers. As countries become more interdependent, they may seek to cooperate in areas such as trade, security, and climate change. This could lead to the emergence of new alliances and partnerships, as countries seek to pool their resources and work together to address common challenges. For example, the SCO (Shanghai cooperation organization), G20, BRICS+ groups have emerged as important forums for dialogue and cooperation among major economies.

The BRICS+ initiative has been gaining importance in the current international scenario, which is characterized by the emergence of multiple centres of power and the decline of the unipolar world order. In this regard, the BRICS+ initiative would play an important role in the development of a multipolar world order. The BRICS+ initiative is significant for the creation of a multipolar world as it seeks to increase the representation of emerging economies in the global governance architecture. The inclusion of other emerging economies in the BRICS group would allow for a more diverse and representative group of countries to engage with the international community on issues of global importance. This can lead to a more equitable distribution of power and decision-making in international institutions, such as the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, and the International Monetary Fund.

The BRICS+ initiative is also essential for promoting the development of a new economic order that is less dependent on the traditional western powers. The inclusion of other emerging economies in the BRICS group would provide greater opportunities for economic cooperation and development between the member countries. This would help to strengthen economic ties between the BRICS countries and other emerging economies, which could potentially lead to the creation of new economic blocs that are less dependent on the United States and Europe. Also it will contribute to the establishment of a new security architecture that is more inclusive and representative of emerging economies. As the global security challenges become more complex, there is a growing need for a more inclusive and collaborative approach to address these challenges. The inclusion of other emerging economies in the BRICS group would provide an opportunity for greater cooperation and coordination on issues such as counterterrorism, cybersecurity, and regional security.

The BRICS+ initiative is also very much essential for promoting cultural exchanges and people-to-people contacts between the member countries. The BRICS+ initiative can facilitate greater understanding and cooperation between different cultures and civilizations with the friendly countries. This can lead to the promotion of cultural diversity and tolerance, which is essential for building a more inclusive and harmonious global society. Also this initiative would help in promoting a more effective multilateral system. The existing multilateral system, including the United Nations, has been criticized for being outdated and ineffective in addressing the complex challenges of the 21st century. The BRICS+ initiative can help in promoting reforms in the existing multilateral system, which can make it more inclusive, transparent, and effective. By working together, the BRICS+ countries can promote greater cooperation and coordination among different multilateral forums, which can lead to the development of more effective solutions to global challenges. The introduction of BRICS currency would be great initiative for a stronger multipolar world trade development. As recently the BRICS group economies also surpassed the G7 group economies which were indirectly controlled from west.

A multipolar world also has significant implications for global governance. With the decline of Western dominance, non-Western countries are likely to demand greater representation and influence in global institutions such as the United Nations, World Bank, and International Monetary Fund. The economic implications of a multipolar world are also significant. As power shifts towards emerging economies, they are likely to play a more significant role in shaping the global economic landscape. This could lead to greater diversification of trade and investment flows, as countries seek to reduce their dependence on any single economy or single trading currency such as US dollar or Euros. However, it could also lead to increased protectionism and economic nationalism, as countries seek to protect their domestic industries and workers and also to promote businesses in local currencies so as to promote their own currencies and also to stop the hegemony of the USD & Euros for global trade.

At last I would like to add that the strong historical India Russia relationship also plays very important role for supporting & developing the multipolar world. Unprecedented sanctions on Russia from past 2 years is one of the biggest examples for the whole world to understand that the Western groups wants to do the things according for their own interest and selfishness, and this is one great reason that now many developing nations and friendly countries want to promote trade relations in their local currencies. India & Russia are strongly supporting each other in this difficult period of time and are also proving that Russia India are like brother for each other and also brings our nations closer to support for the development of country economies by providing all the manufacturing products in different spheres such as technologies, metals, fertilizers, oil & gas, coal, IT products etc.

In conclusion, the BRICS+ initiative is of great significance for the development of a multipolar world order. The inclusion of other emerging economies in the BRICS group and other friendly countries can help to create a more diverse and representative global governance architecture. This can lead to the development of a new economic order that is less dependent on traditional western powers and also would help to stop the dominance of west & US currency monopoly, a more inclusive security architecture, and greater cultural exchanges and people-to-people contacts between the member countries. the future prospects of a multipolar world are complex and multifaceted. While a multipolar world could lead to increased competition and it also presents significant opportunities for collaboration, innovation, and progress. To realize the potential of a multipolar world, friendly countries must work together to manage tensions, build trust, and develop new models of governance and cooperation that reflect the interests and values of diverse nations and cultures to promote greater equity, justice, and harmony in the global community.

Mammadov Elshad  (Azerbaijan) – Professor, Odlar Yurdu University.

SPEECH BY THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH OSSETIA, ASSISTANT TO THE RECTOR OF A.TIBILOV SOUTH OSSETIA STATE UNIVERSITY IRINA TADTAEVA FOR THE GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON MULTIPOLARITY, HELD UNDER THE AUSPICES OF THE INTERNATIONAL MOVEMENT OF RUSSOPHILES

Зынаргъ æмбæлттæ!

Æхсызгон мын у Республикæ Хуссар Ирыстоны æппæт адæмы ахсджиаг æмæ нысаниуæгджын æхсæнадæмон конференцийы хайадисджытæн зæгъын «Уæ бон хорз!» Бузныджы ныхæстæ мæ фæнды зæгъын Конференци чи бацæттæ кодта æмæ нын фадат чи радта нæ хъуыды зæгъын, уыцы адæмæн!

Дорогие друзья!

От имени народа Республики Южная Осетия, руководства, сотрудников и студентов Юго-Осетинского государственного университета имени А.А.Тибилова приветствую участников марафона под эгидой Международного движения русофилов, учрежденного в марте этого года с целью объединения тех, кто солидарен с Россией в ее борьбе за справедливое многополярное мироустройство. Выражаю благодарность организаторам этого возможность продемонстрировать принципиальную позицию в поддержку движения и его идеалов, а также внешнеполитических усилий России.

Dear friends!

On behalf of the people of the Republic of South Ossetia, the rector, the staff and the students of Alexandre Tibilov South Ossetia State University I have the honour to greet the participants of the marathon under the auspices of the International Russophile Movement, which was established in March, 2023, and the aim of which is to unite all those who stand in solidarity with Russia in its struggle for a just multipolar world order. We sincerely thank the organizers of the Conference for the opportunity to demonstrate our compelling stand in support of the Movement of Russophiles and its ideals, and our readiness, along with Russia and its allies, to defend the principles of justice and the supremacy of law in international affairs.

The Republic of South Ossetia defended its independence at the price of its people’s blood. We will never forget the great assistance of brotherly Russia, the logical result of which was the recognition and final establishment of the statehood of the RSO on August 26, 2008 Later the Republic was recognized by major Latin American countries – Venezuela and Nicaragua, the Syrian Arab Republic and the Republic of Nauru.

A.Tibilov South Ossetia State University is doing a great deal of work to popularize the Russian language and literature, Russian history and Russian culture. There are many centres in the university in this regard, e.g. Russian Centre of the Foundation “Russkiy Mir”, several literature centers of famous Russian writers, Association of Teachers of Russian Language and Literature of South Ossetia etc. A science magazine “Русское слово в Южной Осетии” (“The Russian word in South Ossetia”) is published in our university.

I would like to emphasize once again that the goals and objectives of the new movement are congenial to us. We share the same views on universal traditional values that Western countries are trying so hard to overthrow, imposing alien neoliberal ideals and standards. In reality, under the banner of promoting democracy, the original culture of other countries is being erased, the institution of the family is being destroyed, the most important aspects of the unique political culture of each state, national idea, etc. are completely ignored. Peoples with their own rich culture and centuries-old traditions are turning into "cannon fodder" serving the interests of Western countries and corporations. The most telling illustration of this is what happened in Georgia during the presidency of Mikhail Saakashvili and in a number of other states that underwent accelerated "democratization" according to Western patterns.

Having created in his day an aggressive nationalist regime, Saakashvili, at the instigation of Western "hawks", attempted to accelerate Georgia's entry into NATO. The main obstacle on this path were South Ossetia and Abkhazia, the former autonomies who did not want to break ties with Russia and resign their independence, won at a heavy price. After unsuccessful attempts to squeeze the Russian Federation out of the negotiation formats and to achieve the withdrawal of Russian peacekeepers, the Tbilisi regime decided on a military solution to the conflict, which became the most barbaric episode of its irrational policy.

In August 2008, Georgian troops, trained by Western instructors, unleashed multiple rocket launchers and heavy-gun armament on peaceful neighborhoods of the city of Tskhinval. And only the timely intervention of the Russian Federation, which forced Georgia to peace, saved the people of South Ossetia from a new genocide.

These crimes against my country committed with the tacit consent of the West went unpunished, and so did the actions of the Kiev regime against Donbass. Moreover, in June, 30th, 2022, the International Criminal Court initiated a criminal case for committing war crimes against the three representatives of South Ossetia (the injured party). At the same time, the International Criminal Court had no questions about any of the Georgian military or politician responsible for the mass death of civilians and the brutal murder of Russian peacekeepers. And this is another ugly manifestation of the unipolar world order, its policy of double standards. In fact, we are dealing with a new form of totalitarianism that justifies any atrocities committed in the interests of the collective West.

The same approach and the same methods on an even larger scale can be observed on the example of Ukraine. After the failure of Saakashvili's adventure, the next step of the West was to turn Ukraine into its main military and political foothold in the post-Soviet space. Unleashing with the help of the Kiev regime a war against all Russian, the United States and its allies are thereby trying to maintain their  hegemony in international relations and monopoly on the truth. The prospect of losing the exclusive right to turn a whole group of countries into pariahs and invade the territory of sovereign states with impunity causes their undisguised aggression and a desire to suppress all those who stand up for just multipolar world order.

In order to impose its ideological trends and narratives on the rest of the world they organize the so-called "Summits for Democracy". However, their attempts to consolidate the Western community and its supporters in other regions of the world on a common ideological platform brings more and more doubtful results.

It is obvious, that the ideology of neoliberalism, opposed to national sovereignty and the distinctive culture of other countries, causes increasing rejection on the part of the progressive humanity. Numerous tragic examples of the export of American democracy, which led to the deaths of millions of people in the Balkans, Iraq, Libya, Syria and Afghanistan, excluding the victims of conflicts in the Caucasus, Ukraine and other regions creates not very optimistic background for "summits" of this kind.

South Ossetia fully supports Russia's actions in Ukraine. Today, South Ossetian servicemen and volunteers take an active part in the special military operation. South Ossetia regularly sends humanitarian aid to the war zone. The Ukrainian nationalists brought Donbass into a situation which South Ossetia experienced for many years resisting the aggression of Georgian nationalists. South Ossetia was the first state to recognize the independence of the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics in 2014 South Ossetian volunteers were among the first to help the residents of Donbass. A logical continuation of this principled line was to support the decisions on recognizing the independence of the DPR, LPR, Zaporozhskaya and Kherson regions and their further entry into Russia.

For South Ossetia the collapse of the unipolar world order opens up broad prospects for the development of cooperation with other countries. Our efforts in this direction have been blocked under pressure  of the United States and its satellites, including Georgia. South Ossetia has been deprived of access to the platforms of existing international organizations, including United Nations.

The next step in contributing to the policy of isolation of South Ossetia and Abkhazia was the decision of the European Union, adopted last year, not to recognize Russian passports issued to the residents of these two republics. European officials were not deterred by the fact that their discriminatory decision is a serious violation of international norms, which they themselves had earlier broadcast from different platforms.

Taking this into account we attach particular importance to the participation of our republic in the International Geneva Discussions on Security and Stability in Transcaucasia. With the support of the United States and its satellites, Georgia has been refusing to provide legal security guarantees to the republic for almost 15 years, increasing its military arsenal and cooperation with NATO. Revanchist moods in Georgian society, newly exposed during the recent riots in Tbilisi, as well as unceasing calls for the opening of a "second front" against Russia, pose a serious security threat to South Ossetia and the region as a whole.

We think the problem is that Tbilisi and Western capitals still do not want to admit the truth about the events of 2008 and the current realities. We are being denied the right to determine our own destiny and to be a full member of the international community. They must realize that there is no other alternative for us but to be near Russia. We are bound by strong ties of brotherhood, friendship and alliance. The special character of relations between our countries was noted during the recent Russian-South Ossetian summit.

With the support of Russia and other allies, South Ossetia will continue its efforts to break out of international isolation and develop equal relations with other countries. We cooperate effectively with the states that have recognized the independence of the RSO – Abkhazia, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Syria and Nauru. The efforts of authorized  representatives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of South Ossetia in Italy, Turkey and the Benelux states make it possible to establish ties with the parliamentary and public circles of these countries, including cultural projects. Ordinary people in the West show a lively, genuine interest in my people, their culture and customs. They are open to dialogue with us without the superficial politicization imposed by Western officials.

The problem is that Tbilisi and its Western patrons are deliberately conveying distorted information about my country to Western society. That is why we will continue delivering the truth about South Ossetia to the world community, its successes on the way to building a democratic state, and believe me, they are very convincing. No doubt, our participation in such representative international conferences will contribute to solving this problem.

Thank you for your attention.

 Многополярность: взгляд из Южной Осетии

Cynthia McKinney (USA-Bangladesh) – an American politician and activist, former member of the US House of Representatives and the Green Party's nominee for President in 2008.

Making Our Multipolarism Our Own

Remarks On the Occasion of the First Global Conference On Multipolarity

Thank you very much for allowing me to participate in this very necessary Virtual

Conference.

I have spent the entire day teaching and am only just now arriving at home and have been asked to make my presentation and I have not had very much time to prepare. So, with that having been said, I’d like to beg your pardon in advance for not having slides or prepared remarks.

I guess I should start where I just left off with my students. I teach them that we live in a neocolonized world. And I introduce the works of Frantz Fanon, Paulo Freire, Jose Maria Sison, and Edward Said to them. I want them to know that there is a vast struggle that has been going on for hundreds of years and that struggle is for freedom, for liberation from oppression, for sovereignty. And that very few states in this world of today can truly say that they are sovereign and free—despite what their Constitutions might say. I allow them to see for themselves the placement of U.S. military bases around the world; how the United States stepped in to rescue the colonial powers—which was a multipolar world—from the united cries against repression and theft and all that colonialism represented. I teach them that engaging in this struggle is like having a conversation around the dinner table and that without understanding fully the content of the conversation that preceded their entry, they are likely to select the wrong leaders, the wrong values, the wrong actions to model. Therefore, it is incumbent upon them to understand the history of the people who sat at the table before them; what they accomplished; what they left unfinished; and to understand themselves and their values, so that they know fully well what they are doing when they engage in the conversation around the dinner table of life that is the struggle for sovereignty freedom and dignity. I share with them what my values are and I encourage them to set out now to contemplate what values are important to them and what kind of leaders they want to be. And so, while it is an Introduction To Political Science 101 course, I ask them to dig deeply inside themselves and to think about such matters because they are being groomed for leadership. The question is what kind of good leader will they be: Transformational or Transactional and what values will motivate them as they assume their seat at the table.

They are young, but they seem to enjoy such discussions. So, I ask them to examine their own cultures and societies and communities and see where the vestiges of colonialism are alive and well and who actually is keeping the structural and cultural violence of colonialism’s violent conquest period still alive. And, they admit that, in many respects, it is  they who are doing so, including their parents and grandparents who cling to attitudes formed as mechanisms of survival during the periods of direct violence associated with colonialism. They come to understand that what they experience in a neocolonized world is only a limited kind of freedom. Limited sovereignty, as Kwame Nkrumah learned, is still no sovereignty at all. And so, I ask my students to engage with me, not in the textbook world, but in the real world of réalpolitique. Thus, after introducing them to these great freedom thinkers, I ask my students to re-engage in their own communities, but with opened eyes to look at the structural and cultural phenomena that tend to create what we call, “The Great Culling Machine,” that culls the best of the best of young brains that could- be freedom fighters and channels them into the “best” jobs that are always considered to be the local satellites of European and U.S. corporations and never seemingly their own! Then, I say to them:

“Let The Games Begin!”

I created a game that I call “Sovereignty Or Suzerainty?” In which they literally become representatives of the U.S., China, India, Russia, Pakistan, Myanmar, Bangladesh, Israel, and this semester—for the first time, at the suggestion of the students—Palestine.

I give them ample background information about each state/country and let them get busy, replicating the kinds of leaders that they see in the real world, warts and all. But, in the exercise, they learn statecraft and diplomacy and the real pressures that constrict freedom of policy choice including in their own country. Most importantly, they get to see that their old way of thinking, of leaving their home country and basically fleeing to the metropole, is really the backbone of the exploitative system that we currently have. And that we will never have the kind of change that lifts all equitably and respects the dignity of all, including Mother Earth, by feeding a system that perpetuates and exacerbates global wealth inequality. By the end of this exercise, they are actually hopeful about change in their own country, although they understand its difficulty.

In their final exercise, they are tasked with evaluating the effectiveness of organizations like Our Bolivarian America (ALBA), the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa (BRICS), the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), and more. By the end of the semester, I send them into the real world to join the real political conversation that takes place at dinner tables all over the world. I hope that I have achieved my goal with them of having a fuller understanding of the exigencies of leadership, power, and politics. My hope is that I have inspired them to discover a real foundation for themselves that will prompt them, when called upon, to make decisions that are not only better for themselves, but that also contribute to the changed world that they would like to see.

This all leads me, however, to ask a question that I suppose I should not ask in this setting. But, of course, the reason you’ve invited me to participate is because someone knew that I could be counted on to ask the inconvenient questions. So, here it is from me:

Suppose the not-so-invisible hand of “The Globalists,”—I don’t know what else to call them in this setting—the very people whom we struggle against for their totalitarianism, are also directing our movement of multipolarism? Suppose we are doing all of this heavy lifting only to be furthering the same cause against which we struggle?

So, I think I have just suggested a research topic for myself to see if I can have an answer to my own question by the time we reconvene in our Second Global Conference On Multipolarity. Thank you so much for inviting me to speak and share my thoughts with you: May OUR Multipolarism Truly Be Our Own!

Iurie Rosca (Moldova) – journalist, former Deputy Prime Minister of the Republic of Moldova.

THE GREAT RESET AND THE END OF CLASSIC GEOPOLITICS

Notes for the International Conference on Multipolarity

Iurie Roșca, Republic of Moldova

Dear friends,

In the last few years, more precisely from February-March 2020, I began to wonder if we were not too quick to state that the "unipolar moment" has remained in the past and that the triumph of multipolarity is taking place.

The first alarm call that put me on guard was the Covid-19 pLandemic. The fact that all countries reacted absolutely uniformly, taking on the mandatory narrative dictated through the WHO, is the proof of a generalized obedience. The real target of this operation is depopulation. At the same time, the controlled demolition of the world economy by lockdowns produced the largest transfer of wealth from the middle class to the world oligarchy.

The alternative media reported only five cases when high-ranking dignitaries opposed the fake pandemic, four African leaders and the president of Haiti. And all five died suddenly. Here are these cases:

• Pierre Nkurunziza, President of the Republic of Burundi, June 8, 2020, heart attack;
• Ambrose Mandvulo Dlamini, Prime Minister of Eswatini (Swaziland), December 13, 2020, diabetes, Covid-19;
• Hamed Bakayoko, Prime Minister of Ivory Coast, March 11, 2021, cancer;
• John Magufuli, President of Tanzania, March 17, 2021, heart failure;
• Jovenel Moïse, President of Haiti, assassinated on July 7, 2021 by a group of mercenaries.

The leaders of all other countries were somewhat more reasonable than the five leaders above. They preferred to save their lives in exchange for the slaughter of their own peoples. And the WHO has shown its full decision-making capacity, appearing as an instrument of the World Government.

In the summer of 2020, President of the WEF, Klaus Schwab published the book Covid-19: The Great Reset. This book provides the key to understanding the role of historical accelerator played by the Covid-19 pLandemic, that carries the task of hastening the establishment of the New World Order.

The second major factor that has expanded on a global scale in the last few years is 5G technology. We are dealing here with yet another weapon of mass destruction, but also of total control, including full mental and behavioural control. And again, all countries are equally aligned to the same world project. Dystopias present themselves today as self-fulfilling prophecies or predictive programming.

The third factor that defines the common agenda of all countries is the imposition of the cashless society model. CBDC is about to be introduced everywhere. So, the end of human freedom is our common very near future.

The fourth factor is the imposition of electronic documents. All this will initially be installed on special applications on mobile phones, and in the nearest future - on chips implanted in the human body.

The fifth factor: Smart Cities, Smart Things, Smart Bodies. Technolatry has become the obsession of the whole world. So, today we are the helpless witnesses of the total digitization of the world. The end of privacy and the establishment of a worldwide digital GULAG are just a step away.

The sixth factor imposed through the UN is the myth of climate change or the scam of "global warming".  It is another common element that reshapes the world according to the same matrix.

Today notions like "augmented man" and "augmented reality" no longer seem something nightmarish. Here again, any conceptual differences disappear, countries competing only for the fastest possible inclusion in the "new normal".

And since all the countries of the world are implementing the same common agenda, I have called the new international reality THE END OF CLASSICAL GEOPOLITICS. In other words, it is obvious that there is only one world center of power, which imposes a single model of the future on all countries.

Beyond the horizontal conflicts between various countries, a single vertical of power is clearly visible. It seems that these conflicts are actually being stimulated by the craftsmen of the New World Order with regard to create the illusion of fundamental contradictions.

The phenomena that encompassed the whole world have two complementary names: TECHNOCRACY and TRANSHUMANISM. It is a world of Luciferian dictatorship that seeks the end of man as a divine creation. The agenda of the globalist octopus boils down to just two priorities: DEPOPULATION and CONTROL.

And the general plan imposed everywhere, which is being implemented with tremendous speed, has a well-known name: UN AGENDA 21 or AGENDA 2030 for SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT. And since there is ONE COMMON AGENDA for all the countries of the world, multipolarity remains for the moment only a desirable perspective.

 LE GRAND RESET ET LA FIN DE LA GÉOPOLITIQUE CLASSIQUE

 De Grote Reset en het einde van de klassieke geopolitiek

 Das Grosse Reset und das Ende der klassischen Geopolitik

 O Grande Reset e o fim da Geopolítica Clássica

Atul Aneja (India) –  journalist and writer. The Strategic Affairs Editor at The Hindu newspaper.

Well, thank you so much for the organizers.

Okay, first of all, thank you so much for giving me the opportunity to speak on this topic, which is of exceptional importance to entire humanity. We are aware that the multipolar world has arrived. And that's the reality. And this multipolar world is essentially made of what has been stated by Professor Dugin, in fact, by Samuel Huntington earlier that this is a multipolar world comprising essentially of what can be called civilizational states. That would include India, that will include China that will include Russia, including United States, Iraq, Iran, I mean, these are civilized, not ordinary states, but with a very deep and profound history, and which have developed along with their own genius, and with their own understanding of the world.

And, therefore the thoughts and ideas extremely deep rooted, much before the Westphalian world order emerged. And this is a time when these civilization states along with others, are coming into their own. We find that the unipolar world which emerged with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, has completely given way to a number of poles which have developed economically, you can see the emerging economies among them, which have acquired military capacity, which have much more global influence now than it was the case around the time of the collapse of the Berlin Wall, followed by the collapse of the Soviet Union.

So, while the multipolar world is with us right now, the problem really is, really is what are the rules? What will be a rules-based order which will go on in a multipolar world? I think that's where the real challenge arises. And among the poles, for example, there is a need for extensive dialogue. You can see in the case of let's say, the Indian civilization and the Chinese. Each of these two civilization states have their own geo cultural space. If you take in the case of China, one can see that from China eastwards right up to the Korean peninsula, it is essentially a Confucian world. But if you go south and come towards Southeast Asia, you see a very strong imprint, cultural imprint of the Indian civilization of influence of Hinduism, influence of Buddhism, which is strong and palpable, even Islam, the Sufism, that Islam is developed in South Asia, one can see it in Malaysia and can see it in Indonesia.

So, the point is that if you want to have a rules-based multipolar system, the poles have to accept each other's geo cultural space. And there's a need for a dialogue between them, that the new multipolar world if it has to be a non-hegemonized world, that has to accept the geo cultural space of each of the poles. And frankly, when once you accept the geo cultural space, as an example, I illustrate with China and India, then there is a need also to accept a geostrategic space which sort of concurs and rides with the geo cultural space.

And, therefore, there needs to be a very strong dialogue between the major strong poles which have arrived. To arrive at the rules and an understanding with each other so that the multipolar world also doesn't collide with each other and ends up tragically the way the unipolar world ended. So, these are the some of the challenges before us, I think, one of the arenas where the dialogue will finally have to get translated is in the United Nations composition. You cannot have the World War II architecture after 1945 to define the multipolar world order.

So, I think we need, we would require a much bigger debate, and frankly, a collapse in the resuscitation of a new global institutional architecture. So, the challenges are there, the objective reality of a multipolar reality is there but to make it a better world, a more beautiful world and a more representative world, I think there's a lot of heavy lifting, which is required, and the time for intense dialogue among the poles would be the need of that. I'll stop here and thank you so much for your attention.

Elshad Mirbashiroglu (Azerbaijan) Member of Parliament (Milli Majlis) of the Republic of Azerbaijan, Member of Board of the New Azerbaijan Party

Lanfranco Cirillo (Russia-Italy) – architect, businessman.

It’s a big pleasure to be here. Everything that I am listening is naturally something that I understand and many people in Europe are starting to understand.

So, what I would like to say to all of my Russian friends and friends from all over the World is that many people are exiting this kind of clouds where they don't have a clear idea. Many people are starting to open their eyes and understand that the world is a big mass, and only 1 billion people is western. And they consider themselves the "golden billion". They consider themselves the people blessed from God, the only place where there is democracy, the only place where there are rights.

But the world is changing. I've been travelling all my life and I still travel a lot in Africa, Middle East. And when I travel, I am shocked that many different countries are tired that European are trying to say what the have to do. They are tired that today they are not considered at the same level as the others, that they are just people to be used.

The same story is happening now, because now we see what makes western countries. I prefer to share them in two pieces: Anglo-Saxon countries and the rest. But the main ideology, in my opinion, is Anglo-Saxon and how they are using poor Ukrainian people — that's pretty amazing, because they are victims.

The civil war we are living in now, we are looking at something unbelievable: sisters and brothers are fighting each other. I am Christian and I think that any kind of war is a tragedy for everybody. The Russians have losses, the Ukrainians have losses, everybody has losses. Anyway, we understand that any war is a sacrifice, and Russia sacrifices young lives for the different prospects for future generations.

For this reason, I think what we living, what we are looking at today, is really a sign of a new world. The last years of unipolar world are finishing. I think this is the last year. The new world will start the next year. I suppose what is happening is a big human revolution. That is something that will change the future generation. The western people understand that Russians want to be Russians, Chinese want to be Chinese, they want to have choice, they want to be free. Russians want to have choice to read Dostoevsky or to read any American literature.

We want freedom. We are fighting for freedom, for intellectual freedom. I see that in American sanctions spread on people that have nothing to do with politics: philosophers, artists, sportsmen. Russia and western countries, especially Italy, are very close. Italians love Russians and Russians love Italian people, they are very close. Don't look at politics. A lot of Italians are starting to open their eyes, to understand what is true. They understand that the information in Italy is absolutely not free. Many time it goes in Italy when I make some interviews and I always tell to everybody probably thanks to God that the Russian leader is moderate, that he is not an extremist, because if not Vladimir Putin the world now would degenerate in such worse situation.

I think it is time when western people are starting to understand (I don't mean politicians, I mean average people) that there is no possibility that the only country can control everything all over the world. The Americans failed to control the world by economy, the failed. Now they want to control the world by army. Again, they are failing because it is not possible to be the one against everybody. And seven billion people want to see the new world, where all the countries will see their own interest, respect their traditions and history and work for future generations.

Srđan Mazalica (Bosnia and Herzegovina) – A member of the National Assembly of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina

We live in a world with many different races, religions, ideologies, cultures and heritage. In order to establish order and international law with the institutions that maintain it, the fact that there are different religions, economic systems and political arrangements in the world must be recognized, and that there are no universal truths or universal models. In his book The Clash of Civilizations, Huntington says:

Every civilization sees itself as the center of the world and writes its history as the central drama of human history. This has been perhaps even more true of the West than of other cultures. Such monocivilizational viewpoints, however, have decreasing relevance and usefulness in a multicivilizational world. Scholars of civilizations have long recognized this truism. In 1918 Spengler denounced the myopic view of history prevailing in the West with its neat division into ancient, medieval, and modern phases relevant only to the West. It is necessary, he said, to replace this "Ptolemaic approach to history" with a Copernican one and to substitute for the "empty figment of one linear history, the drama of a number of mighty cultures." A few decades later Toynbee castigated the "parochialism and impertinence" of the West manifested in the "egocentric illusions" that the world revolved around it, that there was an "unchanging East," and that "progress" was inevitable.

The UN system is the result of joint struggle of democratic forces during the Second World War against the fascist forces and principles that have emerged as a result of this ideology.

However, the exclusivity and self-confidence of the Nazis regarding the system they created and which they tried to spread to other parts of Europe and the world by force, did not disappear with the collapse of Germany in World War II. We have forgotten that most genocides in the world were committed by countries and peoples of Western civilization, who spread their influence with physical force and weapons. As Huntington says:

The key to the Westerners' success in creating the first truly global empires between 1500 and 1750 depended upon precisely those improvements in the ability to wage war which have been termed 'the military revolution." The expansion of the West was also facilitated by the superiority in organization, discipline, and training of its troops and subsequently by the superior weapons, transport, logistics, and medical services resulting from its leadership in the Industrial Revolution. The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion (to which few members of other civilizations were converted) but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.

The war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, like the breakup of Yugoslavia, was partly caused by the pressures and interests of some Western powers, but it was stopped with the mediation of the USA. The Dayton Accords have been highly successful at bringing a durable peace to BiH, largely because the democratic constitutional system they established respects the rights of BiH’s two Entities and three constituent peoples.

The BiH Constitution’s mechanisms protecting the interests of the Constituent Peoples and the Entities mean that legislation on a contentious issue must be the product of negotiations and  consensus building rather than the dictate of a bare majority.

Unfortunately, some elements of the international community fail to appreciate the importance of the Dayton principles for BiH’s future stability and success, and so they continue to undermine the Dayton system and build more centralized structure. The Office of the High Representative (OHR) is an ad hoc international institution responsible for overseeing implementation of civilian aspects of the Peace Agreement, but High Representatives claimed dictatorial authority over BiH that conflicts with their strictly limited responsibilities laid out in Annex 10 of the Dayton Accords.

The Peace Implementation Council, established by the Peace Implementation Conference held in London on December 8-9, 1995, to mobilise international support for the Agreement, in 1997 extended powers of the OHR, to act as they judge necessary to implement the Dayton Accords. But High Representatives have interpreted these powers to mean imposing substantial legislation and even annulling constitutional court decisions. The so-called Bonn Powers further empowered the High Representative to adopt binding decisions and remove public officials from office. Neither the Peace Implementation Council -an ad hoc group of countries with no legal authority over BiH- nor the UN Security Council have ever bestowed on the High Representative legal authority beyond its mandate under the Dayton Accords. Over the years, successive High Representatives have acted illegally as colonial viceroys and worked aggressively to replace the highly decentralized BiH mandated by the BiH Constitution with the unitary state that was the Bosniak Muslim army’s wartime goal.

On 27 May 2021, a western majority of the ambassadors representing members of the PIC Steering Board purported to appoint German politician Christian Schmidt to succeed Valentine Inzko as High Representative. This represents another serious violation of article 41 of Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and the principle of non-interference in internal affairs of a host state. Mr. Schmidt’s purported appointment is entirely illegitimate, because there is no legal basis for the PIC Steering Board or a majority thereof to appoint a new High Representative. Neither the Dayton Accords nor the UN Security Council granted the PIC or its steering board any such authority.

Neither China nor Russia supported the appointment of Christian Schmidt. No high representative in the history of Bosnia and Herzegovina was from either China or Russia. They were from Austria, Germany, the United Kingdom, Sweden and Slovakia.

The Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina have nine members: six members from Bosnia and Hercegovina and three foreign members selected by the President of the European Court of Human Rights. Never selected any Russian. In many important decisions, two Bosniak Muslim together with 3 foreign members, outvoted two Serbs and two Croats, thus violating the Dayton principles and the adopting the decisions which undermine constitutional provisions of BiH. Three foreign members were supposed to be removed more than five years after the initial appointment of judges, but still remained 28 years after the end of the war.

In this and other cases, there was a unilateral, voluntaristic and violent approach in the implementation of the Dayton Agreement by the Western countries, but it is still a treaty of international law, and its implementation should involve equally great powers, with the participation of the United Nations.

The consequence of this is that the countries that had the most interference in internal affairs in BiH: USA, UK and Germany, with their biased acts and decisions, undermined the trust between peoples, reduced the possibilities for reaching an agreement and brought BiH to a state of permanent political crisis. The political viewpoint and modus operandi in Sarajevo, among Bosniak-Muslim politicians, is that for any failure to reach an agreement, the way out is sought in the imposition of a solution by the High Representative.

We see such examples all over the world. Because of all this, and we can learn from the example of Bosnia and Herzegovina, we need to work on the affirmation of international law, the restoration of the authority of international institutions, the restoration of the balance between the great powers and other countries and trust in mutual agreement and compromise. 

Guy Mettan (Switzerland) – politician, political scientist and journalist, the founder of the Swiss Press Club in Geneva.

February 24, 2022 will go down in history. Because, beyond the special military operation in Ukraine, this day marks the moment when Russia, and with it the whole of the global South, said a clear and irreversible no to Western hegemony under American influence. This day therefore marks the beginning of the end of the unipolar world order and the beginning of the multipolar international order that has been in the making since the creation of the BRICs in 2001, the BRICS in 2011 and the expansion of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization in 2021 The application of many more countries to join these organizations since 2022 confirms and accelerates this trend.

Until last year, it was the political West that dictated its will to the rest of the world.

Since then, the world's center of gravity has shifted both to the East, the Middle East and Asia, and to the South, Africa and Latin America. Everywhere voices are being raised to demand a world order that is more just, more sustainable and more in keeping with the weight of the peoples, continents and civilizations that make up the human universe.

Having said this, it is now important to prepare for the future, and therefore to strengthen and accelerate the process underway, knowing that we are only at the beginning and that there is still a long way to go to achieve a world order that is more balanced, more peaceful, and more respectful of the civilizational poles that make it up.

The West has not said its last word and will not easily accept to share its power.

The fight for a multipolar world will take place in all fields, economic, monetary, financial, security and military, but also on the ideological, scientific, intellectual, and cultural terrain.

It is this field that interests us today. It is on this ground that we should concentrate our efforts in the framework of our activities.

Indeed, it happens that the West, thanks to the advantages accumulated during decades, still has a quasi-monopoly of the thought and the action with the world public opinions and politics. It masters both the technical means, the main mass media and social networks, the financial means, the human resources - networks of NGOs, private and public international organizations such as the G7, the WEF and the OECD, think tanks, academic experts, and large multinational companies - as well as a common language, English, to impose its narrative and its "values" almost everywhere in the world. The mastery of the tools of global soft power allows it, precisely, to monopolize and instrumentalize the values of which it claims to be the sole inventor and defender - democracy, freedom, human rights, civil society, the rule of law, the international community - to its sole benefit.

I believe that it is now time to criticize this fraudulent and misleading appropriation of these values and to develop concepts, ideas, philosophical, political, and moral principles that are just as universal, but which have not yet been able to flourish as a result of the hegemony of Western conceptions of the world and of life in society.

It is not a question here of imposing anything, nor of speaking on behalf of others. But I note that the "reservoir of values" and the field of reflection is immense. But on a personal level, I would be interested in knowing more about the potential of the word peace, for example, which is expressed in Russian by two words, and therefore two different concepts. A few years ago in Beijing, a traditional painter explained to me that the Chinese know five meanings of freedom, whereas the West reduces it to one, the individual right to vote. The Japanese notion of wa, of social harmony, is unknown in the West, as are the Chinese concepts of tianxia and government at the service of the people's well-being. And who knows that one of the first charters of human rights was promulgated in Mali in 1235 (the Kuruganfuga Charter)?

There is therefore a need to develop the major principles on which the multipolar world should be based and articulated, knowing that these principles cannot be reduced to a simple copy and paste of Western concepts.

A second field of reflection that we should tackle concerns the organization, the form, the contours of this multipolar order that we are calling for. This is a much more political and concrete aspect. Faced with the collective West, which forms a political group that occupies the field in international organizations and defines the norms of international public and private law to its sole advantage, it is a matter of building an organized "global South", with its network of think tanks, NGOs, diplomats, embassies, journalists and media, which can make the voice of the multipolar world heard not only at the UN and in traditional international forums, but also on the stages and through the intermediary of new and independent organizations.

In short, I believe that it is now time for the proponents of the multipolar world to develop their own soft power and build their own organizations in order to gain strength in all possible arenas. The time for affirmative thinking and action has come.

 Un processus irréversible à renforcer

 Un processo irreversibile da rafforzare

 Un proceso irreversible que hay que reforzar

 Een onomkeerbaar proces dat moet worden versterkt

 Ein unumkehrbarer Prozess, der verstärkt werden muss

Mateusz Piskorski (Poland) – Polish politician, lecturer, political scientist and journalist, member of the Fifth Sejm

Jan Carnogursky (Slovakia) – Prime Minister of the Slovak Republic within Czechoslovakia in 1991-1992

Многополярность

Ян Чарногурский

Milí priatelia vo svete. Pozdravujem vás z Bratislavy na Slovensku, pri rieke Dunaj.

Председатель КНР Си Цзиньпин посетил Москву в прошлом месяце и, уходя, сказал президенту Путину: «Мы обсудили вопросы, которые изменят мир, каким он был в течение последних ста лет. Китайский президент был слишком скромен. Россия и Китай проводят согласованную политику, которая изменит мир каким был более чем сто лет. Для такого изменения мира необходимо выполнение двух предпосылок: необходимо иметь видение лучшего устройства мира, чем оно есть до сих пор, и необходимо иметь силу лишить существующий полюс мира своей гегемонии.

Наиболее точно это видение было названо в США, точнее отрицательная форма видения. На всем Западе глубинное государство имеет непропорциональную власть, компании и отдельных лиц, которые никем не избирались и не все известны, но определяют политику государства и влияют на работу СМИ. В Словакии никогда не было рабства, они никогда не ввозили контролируемую рабочую силу из-за границы, но словацкой футбольной команде пришлось встать на колени перед межгосударственным матчем в знак раскаяния в совершенных американцами преступлениях против рабов. Только после возмущения словацкой общественности они перестали это делать. Ни в одной центральноевропейской стране избирателей не спрашивали, согласны ли они с вовлечением своей страны в войну на Востоке, но правительства так называемой «бухарестской девятки» во главе с США в феврале одобрили размещение иностранных войск НАТО на своей территории якобы для усиления их защиты. За возможным исключением Польши, ни одно правительство в Центральной Европе не имеет мандата своих избирателей на политику, которая привела бы к участию страны в войне. Формально демократически избранные правительства, парламенты, главы государств не пользуются доверием большинства граждан. Согласно опросам общественного мнения, почти половина граждан США считают последние президентские выборы в США сфальсифицированными. Установление в мире нескольких полюсов силы сделает невозможным одностороннее влияние на избирателей и восстановит доверие к демократии. Это позволит предотвратить введение односторонних экономических санкций вплоть до предотвращения террористических операций, таких как взрыв газопровода «Северный поток» в Балтийском море. Все улики говорят о том, что к взрыву причастны США, но весь Евросоюз боится допустить независимое расследование и назвать виновного.

Политика Соединенных Штатов позволила России и Китаю действовать скоординировано. Через неделю после визита председателя КНР Си в Москву президент России Путин подписал новую концепцию российской внешней политики, которая является более жесткой по отношению к Западу, чем предыдущая. В то же время замминистра иностранных дел России перечислил российские военные цели в Украине, которые являются более жесткими, чем в начале военной операции. Послевоенная Украина также не сможет вступить в Евросоюз. Война на Украине — катализатор изменения мирового порядка. Государства-члены Шанхайской организации сотрудничества генерируют больший ВВП, чем страны G7. Доллар США теряет свой исключительный статус международной резервной валюты. Украина получает оружие и деньги от всего НАТО (население 900 млн), но Россия, население 150 млн, сохраняет за собой стратегическую инициативу. Сила, необходимая для того, чтобы лишить до сих пор единственный полюс мира его гегемонии, уже существует.

Как изменится порядок мира, зависит еще от одного важного обстоятельства. В России, Европе и Америке духовной основой жизни людей является христианство. В России и Восточной Европе преобладает православие, в Центральной и Западной Европе и в обеих Америках преобладает католицизм. На протяжении веков между двумя религиями царили холодные отношения. За столетия западной гегемонии в глазах людей католическая церковь, похоже, слишком сильно привязалась к западным странам. Сегодня католическая церковь является таким же объектом нападок со стороны прогрессивных либералов, как и православная церковь. Подписание совместного меморандума Папой и Патриархом Московским в аэропорту Гаваны в 2016 году стало хорошим шагом к улучшению отношений. В российско-украинском конфликте Папа Римский использует на публичных мероприятиях как российскую, так и украинскую символику, а украинское государство неоднократно протестует. Целью должно стать братское сосуществование католиков и православных.

Ян Чарногурский

Andreja Lovic (Serbia) – Political scientist, security policy analyst

Помаже Бог драга браћо и сестре из слободног света! Пре свега желим да се захвалим организаторима овог скупа на прилици да говорим на овом значајном панелу. Драго ми је што ћу моћи као Србин да говорим о променама које се дешавају муњевитом брзином пред нашим очима.

First of all I would like to thank you all for giving me the opportunity to say something about, as I understand them, important issues regarding the new understanding of multilateralism, especially in security issues. Let me explain also why I think that the definition of „global South“ is a relict of the post-colonial time and why, we, the participents of this conference should not define nations and people by their geographical location, because the WEST told us so. The new-developping re-established countries, as I would call them, are indeed the newgenerator of economic, cultural and military growth worldwide. That is why the role of these mentioned countries from all continents is extremely important for the future world order and global governance.

These days we see how difficult global governance is, especially in the security sector. Therefore, in the name of the new world order, where multipolarism is sustainable only if it is based on rules and institutions, we must discuss control mechanisms. Such mechanisms can be the basis for the formation of new international formats.

In the past decades we saw thаt the non-aligned movement, for example, was a true driver of multipolarity in the age of a bi-polar world, but respected colleagues, I believe that now is the time to talk about a new era of multipolarity. Оne multipolar format that has proven to be insufficiently effective is for example the G20, and for instance the G20 is a multipolar platform, representing a huge part of the world, but we should be more open-minded. The new multipolar world lacks regulations that will tame the old forces and limit the newly created ones at the start, so that we do not witness the emergence of already seen solutions.

Dear colleagues, I want to direct your attention to aspects of international security, because the current system is dysfunctional and based on simple force, regardless of the United Nations charter. Therefore, we, the representatives of the free world, should be determined to create a new security order. That order will inevitably, as many authors predicted, be based on realism, but not on the colonialism of the USA or the collective West.

Samuel Huntington was right when he stated in his work "The Clash of Civilizations" that Western civilization is not universal, but he could not predict the form of coexistence of other civilizations. Therefore, I believe that the word COEXISTENCE among nations is crucial for the 21st century and that no country or nation can claim to be superior to others. In the past period, we have witnessed further self-isolation of the West, which leads to even more complex security situations in the world. Such processes testify to the wrong perception of reality by the Western elites and their followers.

The key question is how the 193 UN member states will organize themselves in the future due to the impossibility of the real functioning of the United Nations Security Council and the actual absence of effective international peacekeeping missions. We Serbs are witnesses of the unipolar world and the domination of the Western hegemon, which robs sovereign nations of their right to exist and imposes its own solutions. The witnesses of those Western solutions are the Serbs in Kosovo, the southern Serbian province, which many Western countries continue to steal from the Republic of Serbia. The example of Afghanistan and Kosovo best illustrates that responsibility to protect actually means responsibility to destroy. That is why multipolarity in the 21st century for new-developping re-established countries should be the basis for a new security architecture that will primarily respect the will of the people and its legitimate representatives, as well as non-interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states. The coexistence of nations and states should be based not on the right of the stronger, but on reducing instability. Therefore, respected colleagues, I would like to emphasize which three  principles I see as key to strengthening trust between states and strengthening the new multipolar order, primarily in matters of security:

1. Non-interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states in matters of socio-political or economic organization.
2. Reduction of security instability through the reduction of foreign military capacities in sovereign states and in border zones between states and international waters.
3. Creation of a new organization for cooperation in the field of international security, based on the principle of equality of sovereign states.

These three principles would make the world safer and the possibilities for strengthening peaceful cooperation between states would increase.

Due to the objective impossibility of reforming the existing formats of international cooperation (like the UN), the construction of new formats primarily in the field of international security is inevitable in the years ahead. I want to point out that the very fact that we, free-thinking people, brothers and sisters, sons and daughters of our mother planet, are discussing today the new achievements of the international order is for me a signal that we are already one step closer to that goal. Thank you for your attention!

Yannis Rachiotis (Greece) – Lawyer, public figure

Dear Friends,

Multipolarity, as a new international order, where a number of sovereign states in the same region ,with similar civilization , form poles of the international system, could be the common goal, at least of the non western world.

In the Global South the necessity of a Multipolar World is broadly understandable. It should be, and I hope to be, common goal of the people in the Balkans and Eastern Europe . More than 30 years now, the West uses this region as a place for looting. They are looting our resources and force the most qualified of our working force to migrate. Via EU and NATO the West fully controls our political and economical systems and uses our soil to place tens of US military bases .

For the small depended states which the West formed in the Balkans and in Eastern Europe in the 90ies , multipolarity is “conditio sine qua non”, for their transformation from vassal states into independent states. In our region, it is necessary to rebuilt federal structures. Otherwise what could be the future of alleged states with population of some hundred thousand or even 1-2 millions?

Dear Friends

Very important steps to the direction of multipolarization are already in progress: Need to mention the BRI, the common stance of the global south against the western sanctions , the formation of BRICS,SCO and also CELAC & ALBA in Latin America etc ,the formation of the BRICS’ Bank and more important the de- dollarization process of international transactions . All are very optimistic developments

But we have to keep in mind that the road to multipolarity,still confronts serious obstacles: The US still controls, almost entirely, important economic and commercial networks and crucial industries ,such as semiconductor industry.

Even more important, the rhythm of the multipolarity process , in the foreseeable future , will be determined by the outcome of the war in Ukraine, and of the wars that the US promotes in Asia.

Without a decisive defeat of the collective West , in Ukraine and in Chinas Seas, if finally the war erupts there , the future of multipolarity is not guaranteed.

We use to say that the US is declining. By a general perspective it is correct, but nobody can say how long will lasts this process. US decline does not mean that US will be defeated by definition in the current wars. They have serious military capabilities and they do not hesitate to use them. The first year of the SMO proved this .At this point , a reasonable question arises. What could be, in the current conditions, a decisive defeat of the West in Ukraine ? Various answers are proposed till now. The future will show us, which is the correct one

It is clear that the US is preparing a new war against China. They consider that they still have the might and they ought to go to war, in the next few years. Maybe this war is not unavoidable ,if Russia in Ukraine destroys the will of the western powers for war. If China develops a sufficient deterrence capability and if the masses of the world’s lower strata consider the struggle for a multipolar world as their own.

Dear Friends

What a multipolar perspective requires from the peoples , is not the same in every region,

In Eastern Europe it is clear that requires first of all to oust the US military bases . Nobody can be independent and sovereign with US forces on its soil. Second, requires withdrawal from EU and NATO which are the poles of US dominance on European countries. 3^rd requires to reestablish a common space in the region . Possibly, here in the Balkans and Eastern Europe, we have to re-examine old ideas about federalism, in the framework of the formation of the new multipolar international system.

Keith Bennett (Great Britain) – Co-Editor of Friends of Socialist China and also the Editor of the International Manifesto Group

Pierre Tonna (Malta) – Entrepreneur

Merhba u s-Sibt t-tajjeb lil kulhadd!

Good afternoon to all, today marks a very special date on our calendar, we are here to discuss, share opinions and listen to each other. I shall go straight to the point, because time is precious.

We are already living in a multipolar environment. But our current rules and laws, which were created to serve the West, based on western national standards adequate solely to western politics, will in no way let our nations live in peace.

All of us present here today were born in a bipolar world and lived in a unipolar world after Soviet Union was disintegrated. We have seen and experienced wars in every corner of the world: in Vietnam, in the Gulf, in Yugoslavia, in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in Libya, in Syria, in Yemen, in Ukraine and the list continues. These wars took millions of lives, created close to 40 million refugees, injured and wounded both soldiers and civilians, turned many homeless and devastated economies. Today we read about food insecurity, lack of clean water in some countries as well apart from no education and no stable income.

What have we done to our world! Why didn’t we learn lessons from history! I introduced my speech in my native language Maltese - from historical facts I learned, that if Russian patriots, to whom I pay my deepest respect, didn’t sacrifice their lives during WWII, I would probably be speaking German. I also respect my Maltese ancestors who died during the same war together with the other Europeans who did their best supplying my country with its needs. This is the beauty of earning history, respect the past and build a better future.

In 1961 we managed to send the first man in outer space and return home safely. Today, 62 years later, it might not be possible to travel to a city in the Eurasian continent. Every day we loose a part of our freedom, inflation makes us work harder and longer hours, families end up not seeing each other. Holidays have to be well planned and calculated or even unaffordable.

Thinking about multipolar world is not enough now. We are here to start working on it, to make it happen in a truly desirable way that is good for everyone, that is beneficial to all nations and above all, that respects the dignity and peace of all human beings. Once I read - “The best general is the one who wins a war without a fight “. Upon dialogue agreements can be reached, that satisfy both sides, but only if both parties agree to sit down and solve the dispute.

Together we dedicate our energies to create a better world order, based on strict international laws drafted and agreed upon by all poles. Western laws are effecting badly not only the south and the east, but also the west itself. The effect of sanctions made the European life more difficult and expensive whilst salaries remained the same.

The fantasy, that a superpower can take over another, must be never dreamt by any leader. Article number five says “An attack on one is considered as an attack on all”. I have a simple question - and if there is an attack on all, can they be defended by one? And do we need attacks? Why always think negative? Since my childhood, as a catholic, I always enjoyed listening attentively to the Pope bestowing blessing in Maltese once a year on Easter Sunday. As a leader of our church he always projects a message of love and peace and, above all, a message of hope to the faithfull. And because of this we respect him and trust him.

Multipolarity will enhance wealth balance, will bring economic stability, will improve politics and thus we share better political decisions, will benefit science and technology together  with a world agreed Masterplan, that addresses climate change and enrich laboratories to overcome pandemics, will reinvest a strong united team for space exploration and other related scientific programs. Last but not least, it will teach us to respect different cultures and religions.

The phrase “let’s oppose” must change to “let’s work together “; the word “war” must change to “respect “; the word “challenge” must change to “help”.

Our west is not strong enough and not capable of dealing with world order any longer. The “Global South” formerly defined by us as “Third World” cannot be called that way. The richness of this region is needed by all nations. They seek serious economic ties with countries like China and Russia. Resources, that lay underground, belong to the people born on that land. To distribute these resources we have to build a strong multipolar economic and financial system, that suits everyone. Economic and trade laws must be internationally agreed upon and not based on national equivalents. They must satisfy all countries and profits shared in a just and fair way. We can no longer worship a currency , that can create financial turmoil any time it chooses to do so.

Today we are united under one roof, the “Multipolar World Alliance” and to make things work we must have dedication and muscle! Keeping in mind our values, principles and interests our goal must be nothing less than achieving freedom and peace. The process has already started and it can’t be stopped. We see changes every day and these changes will stay. There is no way back! A multipolar future is inevitable and it is us who must start shaping the world into an inclusive one!

We are all aware of problems that lay around us, but with a positive attitude we can overcome obstacles. Today I had a chance to mention a few and together, I’m sure, we can find solutions. Ideologies are important, but getting things done in the closest future will bring world order and greater opportunities to everyone.

WELCOME TO THE MULTIPOLAR WORLD ALLIANCE!

Eliseo Bertolasi (Italy) – Anthropologist, political scientist, independent journalist

Многополярность - это не просто политический тезис: то есть возможность эффективного противодействия несколькими державами (странами или группами стран) торгово-экономической, финансовой и военной гегемонии или влиянию США над всем миром (это и есть однополярность).

Но многополярный мир уже существует. То есть уже существуют страны и группы стран, которые за последние тридцать лет заняли достаточно прочную роль и позицию, чтобы подорвать роль господства США и их международного сообщества.

Мир отреагировал! Ответ многополярного мира ставит под сомнение «идеологические основы, которые однополярная система хотела бы навязать в качестве универсальных норм: индивидуализм и социальная атомизация, объединение мировой финансовой системы, либеральная демократия, западная интерпретация прав человека и заблуждения различных западных лобби.

Однополярному космополитическому универсализму противопоставляется «модель, в которой каждый полюс рассматривается как обладающий собственной идентичностью, как в области культурных ценностей, так и в области политических институтов, которую невозможно свести к универсальным моделям. Эти государства не просто хотят проводить суверенную политику, не подчиняясь диктату наднациональных элит. Но они также хотят противостоять любому «глобалистскому» проекту, который направлен на то, чтобы на всей планете царили одни и те же принципы.

Следует отметить, что «культура всех культур не может существовать».

Можно сказать, что многополярный мир зарождался и развивался по мере постепенного заката западной глобализации.

Напомним, что глобализация была как раз ответом США на общий кризис капитализма, в то время, когда после распада СССР (который разделил мир на два блока, капиталистический Запад с одной стороны и коммунистический Восток с другой), у Соединенных Штатов больше не было никаких препятствий перед собой, у них был свободный путь чтобы осуществить свой гегемонистский план мирового господства.

После распада СССР нам сказали, что наше будущее будет жить в глобализированном мире, всем вместе с энтузиазмом, в однополярной системе  под американской тягой, единственной глобальной гарантией свободы, демократии, мира и благополучия.

Мир должен был бы стать раем, своего рода глобальной деревней, где рано или поздно даже пришлось бы установить универсальное правительство.

Но нет! То, что происходит, реальность на наших глазах, опровергает этот глобалистский проект.

Мирного процесса не было и нет, эра мира и процветания не началась. Действительно, глобализация была фазой, характеризующейся войнами не только на экономическом, торговом, валютном, энергетическом уровне, но и на военном уровне. Достаточно вспомнить количество «региональных» войн последних тридцати лет в Югославии, Афганистане, Ираке, Ливии.. Все мы помним «демократические бомбы» США и НАТО по этим странам. Даже нынешний конфликт на Украине надо рассматривать именно в этом контексте.

Но что будет делать Европа? Это война не только физическая и геополитическая, но война идентичности и духовная. Его эпицентром сегодня является, в частности, старый континент.

Это огненный фронт между однополярным и многополярным мировоззрением В прошлом Европа была полюсом цивилизации, а сегодня уже нет! Это уже не континент греко-римской культуры и не христианское средневековье! Столкнувшись с многополярным миром, который врывается в историю в политической и геополитической реальности мира, кажется, что Европа даже не соизволила поставить перед собой знаменитую гамлетовскую дилемму: «Быть или не быть, вот в чём вопрос». На самом деле вопрос даже не в том, что делать, а, в частности, в том, чтобы быть и хотеть продолжать существовать как политический, геополитический, экономический, субъект идентичности.

Сегодня Европа является колонизированным континентом. Его элиты представляют интересы Соединенных Штатов, и для защиты этих интересов они без колебаний действуют даже против интересов своих собственных народов. Связав свою судьбу с судьбой США, Европа вступила на путь беспредметности, незначительность, где в многополярном мире она будет лишь ответвлением США, будет лишь краиней США.

Это результат недостатка внутренней силы, духовности, это результат морального упадка «Старого континента».

Gojko Raicevic (Montenegro) - editor at IN4S.NET

Poštovani gospodine Dugin, organizatori, cijenjini učesnici i pratioci današnje konferencije. Pozdravljam vas ispred redakcije portala IN4S, Greetings from Montenegro!

As you know, we are talking about the former Yugoslav republic, today a NATO country, which, according to the former prime minister's admission, was against joining that criminal military alliance in the percentage of 85 percent.

And YES, in order to get a clearer picture of the importance of that decision, you should keep two facts in mind.

First, the people of Montenegro are certainly the most Russophile people on the planet.

Second, the country itself has a population of just over half a million inhabitants, an area so small that, today, almost 1300Montenegros can be placed on the soil of the Russian Federation.

The 1990s, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, which had long been a competitor or participated in the construction of a bipolar world, brought to the stage what Fukuyama skillfully formulated as the end of history, and the final triumph of democracy, but actually as the absolute, untouchable, global supremacy of the United States American States in all fields - above all military, economic and cultural.

The 1990s, therefore, brought the establishment of a new paradigm called the New World Order. We are witnessing that the time of the unipolar world is passing, and that the new, multipolar world, and this is well formulated from Russia itself, where, I think President Putin himself said it, said that Russia does not have an ideology to impose on others, smaller and develops unstoppably.

I will deal with the topic of the Serbian national space and a part of the Serbian world, today, I repeat, unfortunately, without questioning the will of the people, a part of the NATO alliance.

Aggressive rewriting of history, which was mentioned as a fact in Russia itself, was assessed as inadmissible and unacceptable for Russia. If one were to look for the very causes of today's conflict in the east of Europe, more precisely in the area of the former USSR, and even more precisely on the periphery of Russian civilization, it is clear that they are right there, in the desire of the West to aggressively rewrite history and try to change the collective consciousness. Entire nations. That is why, today, it is not surprising that on the battlefield in the Ukrainian steppes you can see scenes of the destruction of, for example, German military equipment, more specifically German anti-aircraft systems and German tanks, just as it happened once before, in the historical memory of all mankind.

What is on stage is, therefore, an attempt to change the collective consciousness and collective memory of entire nations.

For illustration, let's return to the example of Ukraine, where, especially in the last ten years, the process of rewriting historical memory has been carried out.

First, the Russian language was suppressed and later practically banned.

Furthermore, various modalities of intimidation of the Russian and Ukrainian population living under the auspices of the Russian civilizational model were implemented.

Then those who opposed this policy of the Ukrainian puppet authorities were killed.

Let us remember the dozens of murders and inhumane war crimes committed continuously, especially cruelly against the population of the Donetsk and Lugansk regions, by the army of the puppet Kiev regime, trained, incited, armed and financed by the member states of the NATO pact.

As we can see, all this has just led to the flare-up of the conflict in the worst possible way, with the constant threat of nuclear war breaking out.

I gave this, possibly somewhat broader, introduction in order to get to the story of Montenegro, in which a process quite similar to the one in Ukraine took place until recently, where the criminal regime of Milo Djukanovic was financed and maintained to a good extent by the West, and which has lasted more than 30 years! Changed in a diametrically opposite way to how the so-called Orange Revolution was carried out around the world, under the direction of the West.

In our country, too, it began with the suppression of the national Serbian language, along with inevitable economic and political pressures on the historically established Serbian people, in order to move, as in the Ukrainian case, to the open persecution of the canonical Serbian Orthodox Church, which operates in the territory of today's Montenegro.

The people, then, through the magnificent lithic movement, in complete unity with their church, in a peaceful and Gandhianway, without a single scene of documented violence, peacefully and almost silently with mass peaceful gatherings, lithicmarches, day after day, until the undemocratic elections , I repeat the non-free elections, from August 30, 2020, peacefully removed the government of Milo Djukanovic's party.

In the recently held presidential elections, in a much freer atmosphere, Milo Djukanovic's almost four-decade-long political career ended with his convincing defeat.

Unfortunately, these days we see that the Ukrainian regime of fear is trying to bring to an end another job, instructed, led and financed from the outside, about the final solution and reckoning with the historically Russian Kiev Metropolitanate and the Church, which finds its origin and centuries-old connection in Russian Orthodoxy.

This certainly raises questions about the future situation in Montenegro. Will our national liberation and the freedom of our Church be threatened again? Or, as the people want, the country will find itself in a society of equals, in a world of multipolarity, where there will be a place for everyone on the basis of free will and cooperation without imposing solutions.

Our Serbian people, just like the Russian people, like many peoples around the world, want and hope for a MULTIPOLAR WORLD in which states and peoples will live and cooperate on the basis of understanding, non-imposition of solutions and true freedom.

Elie Hatem (France) – international lawyer

TOWARDS A NEW FREE MULTIPOLAR WORLD

Following the end of World War II, the world gradually divided into two blocs: the "Free World" in the West and the "Totalitarian World" in the East. The latter was characterized by a lack of freedom and private initiative, with public authorities controlling all private activity. Individuals were monitored and their freedom of expression was controlled by the dictatorship of a single thought, including the media.

As someone who could not support this totalitarian concept, I fought against it as a member of the World Anti-Communist League and supported movements such as Solidarnosc in Poland. I was thrilled to see the fall of the Soviet Union and the disappearance of the Totalitarian World.

However, my excitement was short-lived. The end of bipolarity did not lead to the liberation of society, as a unipolar world emerged with a hidden dictatorship. The former "Free World" betrayed its values, as societies became robotic and disconnected from their identities due to globalization. This phenomenon deprived individuals of their specificities and freedoms, leading to a planetary totalitarianism similar to what was opposed during the bipolar period. States gradually lost their sovereignty to supranational norms imposed without consent. Events such as the 9/11 attacks in the US were used to strengthen control over globalized society.

Today, financial operations, commercial transactions, and economic activities of individuals and small and medium-sized enterprises are carefully tracked, while the large-scale trafficking and laundering of cartels and tax evasion of multinational companies continue without consequences. Globalization and technological developments (such as GAFA) have also affected individual liberties, leading to a sense of fear and submission to a strict control system, particularly in the former "Free World" and its dominant countries.

"GOD CONQUEROR WILL BECOME SATAN, SATAN CONQUEROR WILL BECOME GOD" (Anatole France)

The end of bipolarization has resulted in a global imbalance and the rise of a hegemonic power, which imposes its dictatorship on the entire planet by leveraging its position as the former leader of the "Free World" and victor of the old "Totalitarian World". This power is the United States of America, which has self-proclaimed itself as the "World's Policeman" since the Dayton Accords that ended the war in Yugoslavia. Washington provoked the war in Yugoslavia, as well as the current situation in Ukraine, to prevent its alliance with the Russian Federation and thus prevent Moscow's return to the international scene.

This strategy, which has been reinforced by the successful manipulation of religion for political purposes, particularly in Afghanistan, has also been employed by the US to achieve the same objective in Chechnya, Bosnia, Dagestan, and other regions.

The idea of an "Islamic Emirate" first emerged in Dagestan, and was then adopted and developed by the "Islamic State of Iraq and Syria" (ISIS), under the influence of the Salafist movement and the Muslim Brotherhood. ISIS succeeded Al Qaeda, which was structured and developed under the supervision of US services, as a response to their strategy of using religious factors for political purposes.

The links between the American CIA and Osama Bin Laden are well-documented, as his codename within the agency was "Tim Osman". His mission was to spread a political ideology by leveraging the Muslim religion, particularly the Salafist school, for political purposes. This strategy allowed the Americans to defeat the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.

Following the war in Afghanistan and the fall of the Soviet Union, Osama Bin Laden quickly moved to countries that were previously part of the USSR, where the majority of the population was Muslim (or, to be precise, of Muslim tradition since most of these populations did not practice their religion under the communist regime). It should be noted that the Muslim rite practiced by these populations before their conquest by the Soviet Union was Sufi. The Salafist propaganda, meticulously guided by the American services at the time, provoked their radicalization and their shift towards Hanbalism, which is opposed to Sufi practices.

Furthermore, it should be noted that Afghan "Mujahideen," who were trained in warfare in Afghanistan by "Maktab Al Khadamat," the precursor to Al Qaeda, and supervised by the American CIA, were sent to fight in Bosnia and Kosovo.

Thus, the Americans, who have succeeded the British as the leaders of the "Anglo-Saxon World" since the end of World War II, have experimented with and developed a strategy of leveraging religion or community and ethnic factors for political purposes in various parts of the world.

DIVIDE AND RULE

In 1963 and 1974, the United States provoked a conflict in Cyprus between the Greek and Turkish Cypriot communities, after Mgr Makarios had become one of the emblematic figures of the Non-Aligned Movement, considered at the time as a satellite movement of Moscow. The American secret services, along with the Israeli Mossad, sparked a series of conflicts in Lebanon in 1975, taking advantage of its political and social model, turning it into a testing ground to destabilize all the countries of the Near and Middle East.

They began by fomenting a conflict between Palestinian refugees deported from Israel since 1947 and the Lebanese. The American-British services had whispered false information to King Hussein about a project to overthrow the Hashemite monarchy by the Palestinians, causing a similar conflict between Palestinians deported to Jordan and King Hussein. In Lebanon, similar propaganda was carried out by the American secret services and agents of the Israeli Mossad to provoke fear, generated by the rumor of a project to drive the Lebanese out of their country, which would then become the substitute Palestinian homeland.

This Lebanese-Palestinian military conflict led to the destabilization of Lebanon, weakening the state and its institutions and spreading weapons in the hands of civilians and political parties that became militias. During bipolarization and in the midst of the Cold War, the Palestinians received weapons from the Soviet bloc, while the Lebanese political parties, transformed into militias, received weapons from the American CIA through its agents, including a Lebanese-Armenian then married to the daughter of the commander of the 6th fleet American.

A large propaganda campaign led, on the one hand, by rumors spread among the different communities, and on the other hand, by media infiltrated by "journalists" who were actually agents of the Israeli Mossad, managed to sow discord among the Lebanese communities. When the civil war broke out in Lebanon, many of these leading journalists migrated to France and found identical roles in the French media. They sowed discord in France with the same methods and rhetoric they had used in Lebanon.

The objective of the Americans and Zionists was to weaken the states in this region of the world by creating communal or ethnic conflicts. The emergence of these conflicts could only serve the interests of Israel, the main ally of the Americans, and demonstrate the inability of multi-confessional and multi-ethnic societies to establish themselves as states. The sense of fear generated by this unstable and belligerent situation was exploited by the Zionists to create social cohesion within the entity they imposed in Palestine.

In 1979, the Americans succeeded in instrumentalizing the religious factor both in Afghanistan and Iran, using the same strategy adopted in Lebanon, through propaganda and intrigues of their secret services. The fall of the Shah of Iran, a faithful ally of the West, was supposed to allow, in their eyes, the establishment of an Iranian theocratic regime, subservient to Washington but also capable of sowing tension between Sunni and Shia Muslims to destabilize the entire Middle East. The Iranian monarchy was overthrown, and an "Islamic Republic" was proclaimed, but the final result was not expected, and Khomeiny came into conflict with Washington. The latter had difficulties in creating tensions on a communal and religious basis. Moreover, the Iran-Iraq war prevented the exportation of the Islamic revolution to other countries, notably in the Gulf countries.

PROPAGANDA AND SOFT POWER

After becoming the world's superpower following the fall of the Soviet Union, the United States of America adopted a new method of propaganda known as soft power. This approach utilized extensive financial and technological resources to exert influence on a global scale. Eastern European countries without communal assets, such as the Baltic states, Poland, Ukraine, Moldova, and Macedonia, were particularly targeted with this strategy, along with the manipulation of religious factors for political purposes in order to sow discord. This region has a history of both communal and religious conflicts, especially in the Balkans and countries with different religious or ethnic communities.

In order to dislocate Yugoslavia and prevent it from forming a strong alliance with Russia, the US instrumentalized religious, communal, and ethnic factors. This resulted in conflicts between Serbs of Orthodox faith and Croats of Catholic faith, as well as between Serbs (of Christian religion) and Bosnians (of Muslim religion). The US also used an ideological current based on certain precepts of Salafism to destabilize predominantly Muslim countries like Chechnya, Dagestan, and Kyrgyzstan.

In addition, the US has paid for the manipulation of religious and ethnic-communal factors in conflicts between Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia in the Caucasus region. American services have also used figures to carry out propaganda for internal destabilization and dislocation of societies, including the George Soros Foundations. The financing of this machine has operated through the interlocking of the structures of these foundations, and American secret services have benefited from agreements with Qatar to use legal structures in this country to finance the nebulae of political Islam. This method will be further discussed in subsequent developments.

Washington employed "soft power propaganda" in various countries including Poland, a Catholic country with a history of Soviet occupation and a view of Moscow as the capital of political Orthodoxy, as well as in Finland, the Baltic countries, Romania, Bulgaria, Macedonia, and especially Ukraine, which has been used as a base for soft power in Western Europe with the help of groups such as Femen.

Since the end of World War II, the Americans have wanted to establish a grip on the European continent and launched the Marshall Plan for Europe before overtaking the European Economic Community. The hybrid status of the European Union, which succeeded the EEC, allowed for the dilution of internal power in European countries that ceded their sovereignty to the Union, facilitating the American strategy through lobbying.

The United States has recognized the importance of lobbying in Brussels since the 1970s to protect their interests, establishing their Chamber of Commerce (AmCham EU) and expanding their networks of influence through the ERT (European Round Table), UNICE (Business Europe), ICCF (International Council for Capital Formation), ACCF (American Council for Capital Formation), and others.

At a higher political level, they relied on their Anglo-Saxon partners, primarily Great Britain, Germany, Denmark, and Norway, and exerted pressure on influential members of NATO. Through soft power, they also encouraged projects aimed at weakening societies in member countries of the Union in order to control them, including legislative measures, ideological and social currents, instrumentalization of sexual tendencies for political purposes, advocacy for and encouragement of the opening of borders to a large number of immigrants despite the inability of these states to integrate them into their respective societies. Interestingly, left-wing parties and movements have favored this politico-social propaganda, which is close to American ideals, despite their former proximity to the ex-Soviet Union.

It's worth noting the significant efforts of American propaganda worldwide, particularly targeting Western European societies through various media channels, including mainstream media and cinema, as evidenced by the Blum-Byrnes agreements between the United States and France, and later the GAFAM. As a result, the United States has wielded considerable cultural influence over European societies. Western European countries, members of the European Union (with the exception of the United Kingdom, which left in 2021), have become fully subservient to the United States, as the leader of NATO, which is the Union's only armed wing. Over time, their societies have become increasingly culturally and ideologically Americanized due to a gradual transformation of their respective cultures, internal legal orders, and demographic components. This has been driven, in part, by the migratory phenomenon encouraged by globalization and the post-colonial policies of their governments, which have resulted in the loss of their national sovereignty.

Western societies have become, like the United States of America, a melting pot of communities mostly from third-world countries. Indeed, the often brutal and revolutionary decolonization phenomenon, which occurred during the period of East-West rivalries, led to the seizure of power by despotic personalities or those who became despotic to control the institutions and societies of the new independent states, which also witnessed a phenomenon of corruption in the circles of power. This situation has led to popular misery, and immigration to Western countries was a way out.

This context has facilitated the destabilization of Western European societies. After encouraging their deculturation and the loss of their national identities, a fringe of immigrants, those of Muslim religion, was radicalized. In search of an identity to assert their existence within these societies, whose states were incapable of integrating them, let alone assimilating them, this category of the population became prey to a propaganda, meticulously orchestrated and widely financed, with the aim of radicalizing them. The religious factor was thus instrumentalized in Western countries to sow discord and sow conflict on the European continent.

Indeed, the global phenomenon of the radicalization of a fringe of Muslims served this strategy, both in Europe and in other regions of the world, notably in Arab countries and later in Africa. This phenomenon is the result of the success of the experimentation of the instrumentalization of the religious factor for political purposes, both in Afghanistan and in the countries of Eastern Europe and those that were previously part of the ex-Soviet Union.

POLITICAL ISLAM

In the mid-1990s, a new form of political and military groups that used Islam as a tool emerged during the Bosnian war. This phenomenon was dubbed "political Islam" and was subtly encouraged by well-financed soft power. This period saw the rise of groups like Al-Qaeda and ISIS, as well as the resurgence of the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Muslim Brotherhood was officially founded in 1928 by Hassan Al Banna, an Egyptian official who was inspired by Wahhabism, a school of thought founded in the 13th century by Mohamed Abdel-Wahhab, who was influenced by the ideas of Ibn Taymiya. The British secretly encouraged Al Banna's creation of this society to control King Farouk's power. Al Banna also received financial assistance from the Rothschilds' Suez Canal Company to create the organization, which was structured into cells and sections with a logo of two crossed swords. Its goal was to establish an Islamic state based on Sharia law and bring about an Islamic renaissance.

However, the Brotherhood's ideological foundation predates the 20th century. In the 19th century, several religious-looking brotherhoods, some linked to secret societies like Freemasonry, emerged within Muslim communities. Many of them were of Sufi obedience, and personalities like Emir Abd el Kader and Sayyed Jamal Eddine Al Afghani were part of these brotherhoods. Al Afghani was considered the instigator of the Muslim Brotherhood's organization, and he advocated a reformed Islam before Al Banna's creation of the Brotherhood. Sayyid Qoutb, who joined the Brotherhood in 1953, led a new trend within the organization.

It is noteworthy that the Brotherhood borrows from Freemasonry's initiatory rites and principles. Additionally, membership in the Muslim religion is not a prerequisite for joining the organization, as it counts among its members Christians and Jews. Members must be primarily devoted, available, assiduous, and provide financial support regularly by contributing financially, allowing meetings to be held in their homes, showing courage, obedience, and commitment, following current events, and commenting on them, among other things.

The Brotherhood was fought in several Arab countries in the 1970s, becoming almost non-existent. However, it reappeared in the 1990s with significant financial means and settled mainly in London.

In parallel to this organization and taking advantage of the growth of satellite TV channels, an ideological propaganda emerged, inculcating Muslim societies with a culture and way of life inspired by their religion, but in reality, diverted from Islam with ostentatious practices and an interpretation of religious precepts that pushed them towards extremism and confusion between religion and politics. This propaganda targeted not only Muslim countries but also the European continent, taking advantage of technological developments and communication tools. Salafist preachers roamed Western Europe to preach this "new faith."

This propaganda was successful among immigrant populations whose parents came from Muslim culture countries and settled in the suburbs of large cities in very modest conditions and therefore less educated. In addition, these populations were in search of an identity that Western countries had not been able to provide them since they had lost it themselves. But this propaganda also succeeded in "converting" others in search of spirituality, or those who feel isolated within the robotic Western consumer societies, devoid of the spirit of family and social solidarity. It also succeeded in recruiting a certain number of delinquents, by establishing a phenomenon of fashion and group belonging.

Thus was born the ideology of a "revolutionary Islam," based both on Salafism and on the political ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood, calling for an uprising against regimes in Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia, and against Western societies. This ideology is indeed that of Al Qaeda, which, at the instigation of US intelligence services, preached military "Jihad" and transformed itself into a "jihadist international" to fight against the Soviet infidels.

Two countries were involved in financing this "world Islamic awakening": Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

Under American influence since the Quincy Accords, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia had become involved in financing US operations in Afghanistan to defeat the Soviets and ensure its protection by the United States in the event of an attack by the new Iranian regime, following the revolution of 1979. Later, Wahhabi religious institutions as well as wealthy Saudi individuals continued to finance Salafist groups responsible for spreading this "Islamic awakening" around the world.

In his book "Partners in Time," Charles Cogan, a former CIA officer, recounts a statement from Zbigniew Brzezinski, a former advisor to the US President, who courageously revealed the following: "This secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of luring the Russians into the Afghan trap, and you want me to regret it? On the day the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter, essentially saying, 'We now have the opportunity to give the USSR its Vietnam War.' In fact, Moscow was forced to fight an unbearable war for almost ten years, a conflict that led to demoralization and ultimately the collapse of the Soviet Empire."

Brzezinski did not regret promoting the new ideology of "revolutionary Islamism," providing weapons, ideologically training opinion leaders, and conducting propaganda to achieve this end. He argued that the fall of the Soviet Empire was more important in world history than the rise of the Taliban or the emergence of Islamic extremism. He believed that the West did not need a global policy towards Islamism, as there was no such thing as "global Islamism." Instead, he urged people to look at Islam rationally, without resorting to demagoguery or emotionalism. He pointed out that the Islamic world was diverse and complex, with different countries having different political and social systems.

In summary, Brzezinski's revelations shed light on the complex and often cynical geopolitical games that are played behind the scenes, where religion and ideology are often used as tools to further national interests.

The successful experiment with religious factor in Afghanistan was later instrumentalized worldwide. This engineering was carried out with great finesse and skill by the US intelligence services, involving the actors and even the victims of this Machiavellian enterprise. In other words, the Americans extended shovels to these populations, leading them to dig their own graves.

This propaganda machine, which exploits religious factors for political gains, has received support from another Gulf country that follows the Wahhabi doctrine - Qatar.

With a surface area of 12,000 km², this country has a population of 1.8 million people, including 1.5 million foreigners. Its wealth stems from the exploitation of hydrocarbons since the 1930s, initially by the Standard Oil of New Jersey, owned by the Rockefeller family (later becoming Exxon-Mobil), which held the monopoly on oil exploitation with BP (or BP/Amoco) and Royal Dutch Shell, partly owned by the Rothschilds. Over time, and with the creation of the Qatar Petroleum company by the Qatari government, Exxon-Mobil became the main oil company participating in the capital of Qatar Petroleum. It sits on the Qatari Trade Council as well as the Board of Directors of Qatar Petroleum, along with Northrop-Grumman, a defense company directly linked to the U.S. Pentagon.

During the reign of Emir Khalifa Ben Hamad Al Thani, his son, Hamad, went to study in the United Kingdom before returning to his country, where he overthrew his own father and took power. Gradually, under his rule, Qatar moved closer to the United States, who built their largest military base (outside of the United States) in this tiny state. A flagship television channel was created, inspired by CNN: Al Jazeera. This channel succeeded in attracting the attention of public opinion in the Arab world because it began to emerge as a defender of freedom of expression in the Arabic-speaking world. It broadcast programs and debates that criticized the leaders and governments of Arab countries. Later, it gained international notoriety, both during the Gulf War, covering military offensives on the ground, and especially since the September 11, 2001 attacks, when it broadcast exclusive messages from Osama Bin Laden.

In a second stage, and after successfully becoming the media reference in the Arab-speaking world, it changed its editorial line and proceeded to a radicalization of Arab-Muslim societies. This approach was encouraged by one of its directors, Wadah Khanfar, whose brother is an activist within Hamas, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. Curiously, in 2011, Khanfar resigned from his position following the revelation of his contacts with CIA officials, according to The Guardian.

Despite its good relations with Israel and the United States, Qatar, like Saudi Arabia, has been accused of financing revolutionary groups proclaiming Islam, as well as Islamist propaganda institutions in the West. The Qatari government has always refuted these accusations, attributing certain financing to individuals or even uncontrollable sources.

Indeed, Qatari legislation, notably the Commercial Companies Law (CCL), has allowed for the creation of companies where shares or stocks can be held by nominees, managed by a local director. Individuals or legal entities can thus hold shares, through bearer (nominee), within these companies. They can then open bank accounts and make transfers abroad, benefiting from this system that allows for the concealment of economic beneficiaries.

Complicated and opaque structures can thus benefit from this legal system, despite the 2010 AML (Anti-Money Laundering Law), whose provisions do not conflict with those of the CCL. As a result, these structures can allow companies located in Delaware to participate in their Qatari share capital.

Thanks to this system, and in addition to Qatari oil wealth, these local law structures can participate in financing operations or projects. Officially, these sources of financing are considered Qatari, ruling out any suspicion of involvement by foreign individuals or entities in financing propaganda or terrorism. This also explains why the amounts invested and spent officially by Qatar exceed the revenues of this country.

It is necessary to conduct thorough investigations, with the cooperation of the countries whose nationals (both legal entities and individuals) are involved in this process, in order to determine the origin of these Qatari funds. This task is delicate as it may involve different intelligence services, as evidenced by the legal actions taken in the United States that have provided clues about the involvement of intelligence services in drug trafficking and revealed the Lansky system, which will be discussed in the following developments. Unfortunately, most of these cases have not resulted in any convictions. Some of the individuals mentioned or prosecuted invoked national security reasons to avoid investigation. Therefore, we must wait for the declassification of archives and public documents in order to shed light on the interaction between different intelligence services and determine their role in the machine of terror that aimed to manipulate public opinion to achieve these political projects.

Political Islam, which involves exploiting religion for political purposes, was successfully tested by defeating the Soviets in Afghanistan and supporting the Islamic revolution in Iran against the US-backed Shah. This approach became the United States' weapon of choice for destabilizing societies and state institutions, using it to create internal tensions within states and between religious communities, especially Sunni-Shia conflicts in the Middle East. The US created chaos in Muslim-majority countries that were formerly part of the Soviet Union, before expanding it into an international phenomenon that served as a pretext for hegemonic military operations and population monitoring and control.

In response to the 9/11 attacks, regulations were implemented to control global circulation of goods, people, and capital, and surveillance measures were legitimized. In addition, NASA monitors a significant portion of the world's population, with assistance from the GAFAM companies.

ILLEGAL FINANCING OF AMERICAN POLITICAL PROJECTS

The public funding of intelligence agencies often falls short of what's necessary to carry out large-scale operations. As a result, most agencies resort to parallel financing methods. The former KGB of the Soviet Union, for example, required a budget well beyond what was officially allocated to carry out its operations discreetly, including providing secret subsidies to communist parties, delivering weapons to destabilize political regimes, and infiltrating political leaders' inner circles.

Similarly, the 16 American intelligence agencies, including the CIA, require a much larger budget than their official allocation to carry out extensive international operations. These operations include destabilizing regimes through a variety of networks, subsidizing and compensating both direct and indirect agents, and conducting propaganda campaigns in a covert and insidious manner, with the assistance of parallel organizations.

Intelligence agencies sometimes resort to subversive methods to secure a larger budget than what is authorized by the government or parliament. For example, in the 1990s, the CIA claimed to need more funds from Congress to support organizations involved in destabilizing Iraq and Syria, but only a small portion of these funds were intended for these institutions. Most of the funds were transferred to shell companies owned by the CIA, located primarily in Delaware. These funds were intended to be used more discreetly, both in these countries and others, including Western Europe, to promote the spread of "political Islam".

Parallel to official methods of funding, intelligence services including the CIA resort to other means to obtain funds and maximize their assets. Some of these methods are illegal, but they are covered up to obscure this aspect, such as drug trafficking or money coming from drug trafficking.

In fact, most intelligence services in the world use this market to discreetly obtain funds outside the purview of official state bodies. For instance, during the Vietnam War, the CIA developed networks to ship and distribute massive amounts of heroin manufactured from opium in the "Golden Triangle" in South Asia to the United States and Europe. This was the method of the "Lansky syndicate," named after its instigator, Meyer Lansky, a structure that allowed the CIA to direct and control the harvest and processing of opium into heroin, to transport it, and distribute it in Europe and the United States.

Furthermore, without being directly involved in directing and managing trafficking, the CIA benefited from financing from drugs by facilitating the activity of drug trafficking networks for a percentage fee. This process particularly developed during the Contra war in Latin America.

Through complicated and intertwined structures of screen companies, the CIA provided cargo planes to drug traffickers and also allowed them to launder money from this trafficking. In 1998, the Frederick Hitz report accused the American intelligence agency, revealing the existence of links between American services, including the CIA, and drug traffickers from South America.

It was the bank accounts revealed during the "Iran Gate" (or "Iran-Contras") scandal on which the sale price of arms to Iran was paid, which allowed these operations to be revealed. Iran was then under embargo. Additionally, Afghanistan also allowed American services to obtain the exorbitant sums necessary for their operations.

In fact, the Afghanistan War officially cost over six billion dollars, half of which was supported by the United States and Saudi Arabia. However, alongside this official budget, occult sources contributed to the financing of both this war and the establishment of the Taliban and later Al Qaeda. This was the drug trade that resurfaced in this region called the "Fertile Crescent," which earned between 100 and 200 billion dollars a year.

Indeed, the Central Asia region constitutes a strategic platform for the drug trade, particularly of opium, alongside its oil reserves. Heroin production, which was reduced in Afghanistan before the war, resumed in the 1990s. Territories near the Pakistan-Afghanistan border became the main supplier of heroin on the global market. Under the impetus of the CIA, the Mujahideen ordered peasants to cultivate opium on the plots they controlled. Heroin manufacturing laboratories from opium were established through the intermediation of Afghan businessmen and leaders with the collaboration of secret services in Pakistan.

In 1995, the CIA's Director of Operations in Afghanistan, Charles Cogan, admitted that "the CIA in Afghanistan had sacrificed the war on drugs to focus on the Cold War...(our) main mission was to inflict as much damage as possible on the Soviets. We didn't really have the resources or time to investigate the drug trade."

As a result, opium production had increased by 15 times since the start of the Afghan War in 1979 and continued to rise. The trade benefited from both the Taliban's support (before they banned its cultivation in 2000, one year before the attacks in the United States) and that of Osama bin Laden's fighters in a chaotic, lawless area. Once processed in laboratories, heroin was then transported through networks to Europe and the United States, benefiting from protection ensured by cooperation between certain branches of the intelligence services. Once on the market, the drug was distributed and sold in a very discreet manner, making it impossible to determine the leaders of the networks. This was the Lansky syndicate system, also known as the "clandestine arts" system.

The profits from sales were then laundered in secret bank accounts, with some funds deposited in safes and others placed on the New York Stock Exchange with the complicity of certain US financial institutions. A cascade of CIA-owned shell companies, headquartered in Delaware, benefited from these investments to both launder money and legally and transparently earn even more dividends. The funds generated by these schemes were used to finance the intelligence agencies' "black budgets" outside institutional legal channels and to evade the scrutiny of parliamentarians and politicians, ensuring the utmost secrecy and discretion in their operations, though they sometimes received the complicity of certain politicians and high-ranking individuals to facilitate the transportation, distribution, and collection of profits from drug sales or trade.

These operations were revealed through judicial investigations, such as the aforementioned CIA Inspector General's report in 1998. The report highlighted the contacts between the CIA and certain institutions in the US government apparatus that facilitated these operations, including links with drug manufacturers in South America, as well as humanitarian organizations, to camouflage this trafficking.

These methods, which had already been exposed through judicial investigations, were used in Afghanistan where US agencies provided not only logistical but also financial support to Jamiat-e-Islami and later to the Mujahideen, to counter the Soviets. This dirty drug money also financed the Bosnian Muslim Army since 1990, as well as the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). The secret nerve of the war, this trade was associated with other official and clandestine funding sources, contributing to military operations as well as propaganda efforts and the establishment of operational groups or "movements," such as "Al Qaeda" and "ISIS".

Therefore, American services have colossal funds to finance their political projects around the world, operated through soft power or through organizations and movements they control.

In fact, the armada of George Soros's foundations has funds exceeding his income and fortune, which serves as a front for American services. Through soft power, they do not hesitate to destabilize and control not only their adversaries but also their own allies, like Great Britain or Israel.

Likewise, according to the New York Times of March 14, 2015, the "Islamic international" of Al Qaeda benefited from financial assistance from the CIA. According to the newspaper, this organization was funded by Osama Bin Laden's own funds, but his entire fortune alone could not finance this enterprise and its ramifications.

In this same context, it is interesting to recall Donald Trump's statements during his first election campaign, especially those of August 10, 2016, where he indicated that ISIS was created by the Obama Administration, which sowed chaos in the Middle East: "He is the founder of ISIS. He is the founder of ISIS, OK? He’s the founder. He founded ISIS. And I would say the co-founder would be crooked Hillary Clinton."

Moreover, the latter revealed the instrumentalization of political Islam by the American administration for political purposes in her book "Hard Choices," published in 2014. She textually stated, "it was indeed the American administration that created ISIS (...) with the aim of conducting a new "partition" in the Middle East region," affirming that "coordination took place on this subject between Washington and the Muslim Brotherhood to create this "state" in Sinai. In this work, she stated, "We infiltrated the war in Iraq, Libya, and Syria, and everything was going well, and then suddenly a revolution took place in Egypt and everything changed in 72 hours (...) We agreed with the Brothers in Egypt to announce the Islamic state in Sinai and hand it over to Hamas and a part to Israel to protect it, add Halayeb and Challatine to Sudan, and open the Libyan borders towards Salloum. There was even talk of announcing the birth of the Islamic State on July 5, 2013, and we were waiting for the announcement to recognize, us and Europe, this new state."

CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS, ARAB SPRING AND CHAOS

The United States has employed the strategy of chaos after the bipolarization period to destabilize multiple continents by utilizing religious and/or ethnic factors for political gains. This has been particularly evident in the Middle East, Asia (including Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Dagestan, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Xinjiang), Africa (such as AQMI), and even in Europe.

There have been serious allegations that the United States is instrumentalizing the Uyghurs, a predominantly Muslim ethnic group in China's Xinjiang region, to destabilize China politically and economically and advance its own geopolitical agenda. Some experts argue that the U.S. sees the Uyghurs as a potential ally in countering China's growing influence in Central Asia and the Middle East and is providing financial and logistical support to Uyghur separatist groups. This is not the first time that the U.S. has been accused of supporting separatist and extremist groups in China, including the Uyghur separatist movement seeking an independent state of East Turkestan in Xinjiang. The U.S. has also been accused of using political Islam or Islamism as a means of advancing its interests and destabilizing countries it perceives as adversaries, including China. The mainstream media in the U.S. have been highly critical of China's treatment of the Uyghurs, accusing China of human rights abuses and genocide. In response, the U.S. has imposed sanctions on Chinese officials and companies involved in the Uyghur issue and has called for a boycott of the 2022 Winter Olympics in Beijing.

While it is important to address human rights abuses wherever they occur, it is also essential to question the motives behind the actions of powerful nations such as the United States. The Uyghur issue must be understood within the broader geopolitical context of U.S.-China relations and its use of political Islam as a tool of foreign policy.

In Europe, and as previously discussed, a political effort has been made to lead the countries of Western Europe to surrender their national identities and respective sovereignties by submitting to total subordination to the European Union and its regulations. This has led to a phenomenon of massive immigration from south to north due to economic problems in southern countries, as well as military conflicts that have caused a wave of refugees to flee to the European continent, presented by mainstream media as prosperous and offering these populations a better future.

This situation has been exploited to create tensions within Western countries, encouraged by a wave of attacks attributed to Islamist movements (or political Islam). France has been particularly affected by this wave, both because it is the historical adversary of the "Anglo-Saxon world" and because it offered the necessary ingredients for experimenting with a civil war pitting immigrants against natives, as an extension of the Algerian War. This phenomenon has been fueled by the theory of the "great replacement" and that of the "clash of civilizations", with the aim of creating chaos on the European continent.

The theory of the clash of civilizations was proposed by Samuel P. Huntington in 1993 in an article published in the journal Foreign Affairs. Huntington argued that with the end of the Cold War, global conflicts would no longer be driven by ideological differences between the United States and the Soviet Union, but rather by cultural and religious differences between civilizations.

According to Huntington, the world's major civilizations include Western, Islamic, Confucian, Japanese, Hindu, Slavic-Orthodox, Latin American, and possibly African. He argued that the interaction between these civilizations would be the primary source of conflict in the post-Cold War world. In particular, he believed that the Islamic and Western civilizations were on a collision course, citing historical and contemporary examples of conflicts between the two.

Huntington's theory gained popularity and was widely discussed in academic and political circles. It has been further developed and adapted by other scholars and public figures, including Bernard Lewis, a British-American historian of the Middle East. It continues to provide a useful framework for creating fear in the complex and interconnected world.

Simultaneously, another concept, the one of a "Great Replacement", has been introduced in Western Europe. This is a contentious and largely discredited theory that asserts the existence of a deliberate plan to replace white Europeans with non-European immigrants. This theory is based on the notion that a "demographic war" is being waged against the white population of Europe, which is part of a broader plot to undermine Western civilization.

Despite a lack of supporting evidence, this theory has gained some traction among individuals who fear immigration and feel that their societies are falling apart, resulting in a loss of identity. At the same time, they observe immigrant populations on their soil who are deeply connected to their own cultures and original identities.

Recent reports suggest that certain American intelligence agencies may be using the "Great Replacement" theory to instill fear and provoke conflict in Western Europe. The idea is that by promoting the theory, these agencies can create an environment of fear and mistrust that will ultimately benefit their own geopolitical interests.

While the extent to which this theory is actually being used by American intelligence agencies is unclear, there is little concrete evidence to support the notion. However, it is evident that the "Great Replacement" theory is a harmful and divisive idea. Some politicians use it to fuel socio-cultural conflicts in the West, such as those that erupted in Ukraine and were stoked by Volodymyr Zelinsky. It is coincidental that the adoption of this theory has been done by politicians whose surnames begin with the letter "Z," in Ukraine (Zelinsky) and in France with Eric Zemmour (or Zammour, with the correct translation)...

These two theories, that of the clash of civilizations and the great replacement, have been supported by a political strategy aimed at destabilizing a large part of the Arab countries and causing a wave of migration to the European continent. This strategy sought to undermine the state structures of Arab countries by provoking the fall of their political regimes and the establishment of chaos. At the same time, it led their respective societies towards economic, social, and cultural regression. This regression, in fact, makes it easier for populations to embrace extremist and radical political currents, as it is easy to shape the minds of those who lack culture or individuals who are in poverty. Therefore, instead of carrying out external military operations to overthrow these regimes, it seemed more judicious for US services and their allies to provoke social uprisings against their governments, supporting them through NGOs using soft power. However, in the event of the failure of these uprisings and facing the resistance of state institutions, external coups became the only alternative. This was the case for Iraq, invaded by the US military in 2003, or for Libya attacked by NATO in 2011, causing the fall of the regime and the assassination of President Gaddafi.

In other countries, US soft power was sufficient to overthrow the governments in power and lead to chaos but also to bring about the emergence of Islamic political currents, as Hillary Clinton indicated in her aforementioned book, Hard Choices.

Indeed, the role of George Soros in the Tunisian "Revolution" highlights the important role that American intelligence services played in supporting this movement. While it is clear that the revolution was primarily driven by Tunisians themselves and that various factors

contributed to it, the support provided by these actors cannot be overlooked. They helped the movement amplify their voices and accelerate their momentum. Soros had been funding Tunisian groups for several years leading up to this "revolution". His Open Society Foundations provided grants to civil society organizations, human rights groups, and media outlets in Tunisia, all of which played a key role in mobilizing opposition to the government. Some of the groups supported by Soros included the Tunisian Human Rights League, the Tunisian Association of Democratic Women, and the Tunisian Association of Magistrates.

In addition to Soros, the US government and its intelligence agencies also played a significant role in supporting the opposition to the Tunisian government. WikiLeaks cables revealed that the US had been closely monitoring the situation in the country and had been providing assistance to groups and demonstrators. The US Embassy in Tunis had established contacts with activists and opposition figures, and had been providing them with funding and training. Additionally, the US Agency for International Development (USAID) had been providing grants to civil society groups and independent media outlets in Tunisia.

The US government's support for this "revolution" in Tunisia was part of a broader strategy aimed at promoting "democracy and human rights" and manipulating the population. Protesters were provided with social media and independent media outlets to spread their messages and mobilize more supporters.

Immediately after these events in Tunisia, the same scenario unfolded in Egypt, Libya, Yemen, and other Arab countries. Mainstream media immediately labeled these movements as the "Arab Spring," motivated by the desire of populations to promote democracy and human rights. These slogans were used by American soft power to provoke popular uprisings.

Like Tunisia, George Soros played a significant role in the revolution in Egypt, which ultimately led to the downfall of President Mubarak. Soros, through his Open Society Foundations, had been providing funding to various groups in Egypt for several years leading up to the "revolution". These groups included human rights organizations, media outlets, and civil society groups, in a similar way like in Tunisia. The funding provided by Soros played a critical role in mobilizing an opposition to the Mubarak government. Soros also used his personal influence and connections to rally support for this movement. In addition to Soros' support, the US government and its intelligence agencies also played a crucial role in Egypt. Leaked diplomatic cables revealed it. The US Embassy in Cairo had established contacts with activists and opposition figures, and had been providing them with funding and training. Additionally, the US Agency for International Development (USAID) had been providing grants to civil society groups and independent media outlets.

The revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt, the so-called "Arab Spring", which were initially driven by the desire for freedom and democracy, had unintended consequences that significantly impacted the future of these countries. In the aftermath of these revolutions, Islamist groups rose to power, undermining the original slogans of the revolution and the aspirations of the people.

The rise of Islamist groups in these two countries resulted in significant political and social changes. In Tunisia, the Islamist party Ennahda came to power after the overthrow of President Ben Ali in 2011. In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood won the country's first

democratic elections after the fall of President Hosni Mubarak in 2012. However, the Islamist parties' policies and actions contradicted the slogans of the revolution, and many Tunisians and Egyptians felt that their voices had been silenced once again.

The Islamists' policies and actions, including the imposition of strict Islamic law and restrictions on individual freedoms, caused considerable controversy and unrest, leading to protests and divisions among the populations. These events demonstrated that the revolutions had failed to achieve their original goals of democracy and freedom.

The rise of Islamists in Tunisia and Egypt was not a surprise to everyone. In her book HARD CHOICES, former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton revealed that she had warned of the dangers of Islamist groups coming to power in the wake of the Arab Spring. Clinton argued that the Islamists' arrival to power could undermine the progress made by the revolutions and cause further instability in the region.

The "Arab Spring" that took place in Tunisia and Egypt was supposed to bring positive changes in terms of political and economic reforms, as well as greater freedoms and rights for the populations. However, the arrival to power of Islamist groups, who are under the influence of the Freemason brotherhood of the Muslim Brotherhood, led to a regression in various domains.

Economically, these countries have been affected by the decline of tourism, which is a key source of income. The instability and insecurity created by the Islamist movements have deterred tourists from visiting these countries. This has led to a drop in revenues for hotels, restaurants, and other businesses that depend on tourism, leading to a decline in the overall economy.

Socially, the arrival to power of the Islamist movements has led to the marginalization and discrimination of certain groups, such as women, minorities, and secularists. Women's rights, in particular, have been severely curtailed, with the implementation of strict dress codes and restrictions on their mobility and participation in public life. This has led to a backlash from women's rights groups and civil society organizations, who see these measures as a setback to the gains achieved in terms of gender equality.

Culturally, the Islamist movements have sought to impose their conservative views on society, leading to a restriction of artistic and cultural expression. Many artists and writers have been censored, and certain works have been banned, leading to a decline in the cultural scene and a loss of diversity.

The populations of these countries have been disappointed and disillusioned with the Islamist movements that took power, as they have failed to deliver on their promises of greater freedoms, rights, and prosperity. This was revealed by Hillary Clinton in her book "Hard Choices", where she admits that the US government was mistaken in supporting the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

In Libya, while the U.S. intelligence agencies and NATO initially sought to overthrow Gaddafi through internal revolutionary movements, they ultimately resorted to military action to achieve their goals. The intervention was facilitated by the involvement of the French

president, who was keen to distance himself from his former ally. However, the outcome of the intervention was a protracted conflict that led to the downfall of Gaddafi's regime and the subsequent destabilization of Libya.

Indeed, there is a widely held belief that the U.S. intelligence agencies and NATO had planned to topple Colonel Gaddafi through an internal revolutionary movement as part of the "Arab Spring" uprisings. However, these efforts did not bear fruit, as Gaddafi's regime managed to crush the initial protests in Libya. Therefore, the U.S. and its allies resorted to a military strike via NATO to remove Gaddafi from power.

The NATO-led operation was made possible by the involvement of French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who had been previously compromised by his financial dealings with Gaddafi. The Libyan leader had allegedly provided funds for Sarkozy's presidential campaign, and the French president was eager to distance himself from his former ally.

The NATO-led military intervention began in March 2011, with the goal of enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya to prevent Gaddafi's military from attacking the civilian population. However, the intervention soon escalated into a full-blown military campaign aimed at toppling Gaddafi's regime. NATO forces conducted airstrikes against key military targets and provided assistance to Libyan opposition groups.

Despite the international efforts, Gaddafi's forces managed to hold on to power for several months, leading to a protracted and bloody conflict. Eventually, in October 2011, Gaddafi was captured and killed by rebel fighters in his hometown of Sirte.

The fall of Gaddafi's regime led to a period of instability in Libya, as various factions and militias struggled for power. The country descended into chaos, with a breakdown in law and order and the rise of extremist groups. The people of Libya, who had hoped for a brighter future after the fall of Gaddafi, were left disillusioned by the ensuing turmoil and violence.

The Libyan scenario can be compared to the one adopted in Iraq, where the government and power were able to resist American and Western abuses, including the inhumane embargo which heavily affected the civilian population. Therefore, the Americans and the British had to carry out a military operation to overthrow the regime, introduce chaos, and create inter-communal tensions, particularly between Shiites and Sunnis. This situation allowed the Americans to once again use their experimentation of politicizing and weaponizing political Islam for political and military purposes by creating ISIS, which they also projected into Syria in the context of the "Arab Spring" phenomenon. This had also led to the downfall of the government of President Ali Abdallah Saleh in Yemen before dragging this country and its neighbor, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, into a fratricidal war, under the underlying pretext of a Sunni-Shiite conflict (the Zaydi Yemenis being a branch of Shiism) also involving Iran, whose majority population practices Twelver Shiism.

The revolutionary scenario of the "Arab Spring" was transposed to Syria. As indicated, this strategy aims to destroy the state institutions of Arab and Middle Eastern countries, including Israel at the moment, and to create endless internal and regional tensions, with inter-communal and ethnic clashes (between Sunni, Shiite, Alawite, Zaidi, Orthodox Christian, Catholic, Sephardic, Ashkenazi and Falasha Jews, Kurds, Arabs, Turks, Persians, etc.).

Thus, the conflict that began in Syria in 2011 was not a simple uprising against the government but a complex situation involving many foreign actors. The destabilization of Syria began with popular demonstrations that were incited and funded by foreign actors with the aim of destabilizing the regime and destroying state institutions. Some of the demonstrations were initially peaceful and driven by grievances related to political and economic issues. However, they quickly escalated into violence as armed groups, consisting of foreign mercenaries, emerged and the Syrian government responded with force. The role of foreign mercenaries in Syria cannot be overstated. They were responsible for a significant amount of violence and destruction, exacerbating the already complex political and social situation in the country. Chechen mercenaries and "Mujahidin" (who had previously fought in Afghanistan and Bosnia) were particularly effective in 2011 and 2012. Their skills in guerrilla warfare and ability to carry out surprise attacks made them a formidable force against the Syrian army, and they also instigated violence against peaceful protesters, creating a sense of insecurity among the population.

The foreign involvement in the conflict is well documented, with reports of support from a range of countries including the United States, Turkey, Qatar, and Israel. These countries provided financial and military support to the so - called opposition groups, with the aim of weakening the Syrian government and ultimately toppling the regime.

President Bashar Al Assad was left with no other option but to seek Iran's help during the early stages of the Syrian conflict. The fact that no other Arab nation came to his aid is regrettable, especially given the support that somes arab States, under the American diktats, were providing to the Islamist revolutionaries. Nevertheless, Iran's assistance has played a crucial role in maintaining Syria's stability and preventing the country from descending into total chaos.

However, during the summer of 2014, a new paramilitary group similar to Al-Qaeda emerged in the Middle East. In reality, it was founded in 2006 in Iraq, as a result of the American strategy adopted to foment a Sunni-Shiite conflict in this country, which was long ruled by a Sunni President: Saddam Hussein. By intervening and invading Iraq, the American occupation forces propelled Shiite policies to power and pushed for the marginalization of Sunnis, thus sweeping away the efforts of the Iraqi Ba'ath Party, which, like its Syrian branch, had managed to build a secular state without distinction between religious and ethnic communities. It should be recalled that the former Iraqi Vice President and Foreign Minister under President Saddam Hussein was Tarek Aziz, a Christian. Similarly, during the Iran-Iraq war instigated and encouraged by the West, Saddam Hussein managed to bring together the entire Iraqi population under the same Arab banner. However, since 2003 and under the impetus of American geopolitical experts, a communal and ethnic distinction has been provoked in this country. Sunni Iraqis have been marginalized and mistreated by Shiite leaders installed in power by Americans and receiving orders from them. The Kurds have been pushed to secede and proclaim the autonomy of a Kurdish province. It is in this context that Islamist ideology (or Salafist political Islam) has spread among Sunnis, especially among former army members.

In this context, on June 24, 2014, a Sunni Iraqi, Ibrahim Awwad al-Badri al-Samarraï, appeared on stage, proclaiming himself as Caliph under the name of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and calling for the establishment of an Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

There are many claims and rumors regarding the links between Abou Bakr Al Baghdadi, the self-proclaimed Caliph, and the CIA. While some of these claims are unsubstantiated and lack evidence, there are some facts that suggest a connection between the two.

One of the most significant claims is that Al Baghdadi was a prisoner at Guantanamo Bay detention camp. While this claim has been disputed by some experts, there is evidence to suggest that he was indeed held there. According to leaked documents, Al Baghdadi was arrested by US forces in 2004 and held in detention in Iraq. He was then transferred to Camp Bucca, a US detention center in Iraq, before being released in 2009. It is unclear what happened to him after his release.

There are also claims that Al Baghdadi had links to the CIA during his time in Iraq. Some experts suggest that he may have been recruited by the agency as an informant or asset. While there is no concrete evidence to support this claim, it is possible that he had some kind of relationship with the CIA.

Finally, there are the links between Al Baghdadi and the Salafist movement. Salafism is a fundamentalist interpretation of Islam that seeks to return to the practices and beliefs of the early Muslim community. Al Baghdadi was known to be a Salafist, and it is likely that he had connections with other Salafist groups in the region.

Overall, while there is no definitive proof of a connection between Al Baghdadi and the CIA, there are enough circumstantial links and rumors to suggest that there may have been some kind of relationship between the two. Additionally, Al Baghdadi's links with the Salafist movement highlight the complex web of relationships that exist between extremist groups in the Middle East with American secret agencies, just like the obvious links between the CIA and Al Qaeda.

Since 2014, ISIS has been a significant threat to Syria and the wider Middle East. This group quickly established control over large parts of Syria and Iraq, creating what it called the "Islamic State."

One of the reasons why ISIS was able to grow so quickly in Syria was its ability to attract foreign fighters to its ranks. The group's sophisticated propaganda machine played a key role in this, appealing to disenfranchised individuals and exploiting their grievances. With its slickly produced videos and social media campaigns, ISIS was able to convince many young men from around the world to travel to Syria and fight for its cause. To achieve this, ISIS required significant financial resources and the support of various intelligence agencies. The group generated revenue from a range of sources, including the sale of oil, extortion, and kidnapping for ransom. However, it is widely believed that some intelligence agencies provided financial support to ISIS in the early days of the conflict.

In addition to attracting foreign fighters, ISIS also managed to co-opt local Sunni Arab tribes in Syria. The group promised to establish a Sunni-dominated caliphate and presented itself as the only viable alternative to the Syrian secular republic. This appeal, coupled with the group's brutal tactics, helped it to gain control over large parts of the country and to threaten the stability the wider Middle East.

Interestingly, the absence of hostility between ISIS and Israel was noted. For example, Abu Muslim Al Turkmani, the deputy of Abou Bakr Al Baghdadi, posted a tweet on his organization's official account, in which he stated that "in the Holy Quran, Allah did not command us to fight against Israel or the Jews." Additionally, at a conference held in Tel Aviv in January 2016, the Israeli Minister of Defense, Moshe Yaalon, did not hesitate to affirm that "if I had to choose between Iran and Daesh, I would choose Daesh." This same Israeli official had insinuated in April 2017 that there were links between his government and Daesh, embarrassing the political circles of his country. He had indicated that Israel had received "official apologies from Daesh for having accidentally fired some rockets at Israel."

Furthermore, in 2016, the American newspaper, The Wall Street Journal, revealed Israeli military aid to the paramilitary group of Daesh, going so far as to train a special military unit charged with assisting this organization by providing "weapons and ammunition" and "salaries for its members" in a "good neighborly" objective, according to journalist Ehud Yaari. In the same newspaper, the spokesperson for the armed group called "the Golan fighters" paid a "vibrant tribute" to Israel for "bravely standing by our side: if it were not for Israel's help, we would never have been able to stand up to the Syrian army," said Moatassem Al Gholani, while his companion in combat, Abu Sahil, revealed the amount paid by Israel as a salary: "As a commander, I receive an annual salary of $5,000 paid by Israel. And my group has been working with Tel Aviv since 2013, since a first major offensive by the Syrian army against our positions. We asked the Israelis for help, to welcome our wounded in their hospitals. (...). Tel Aviv sent us money and ammunition not only to our group but also to other groups fighting alongside us in the Golan."

This israeli behavior would confirm the coincidence between the work done by ISIS on the ground and a plan revealed by the Israeli professor, Israel Shahak, according to which Israel would favor the creation of antagonistic mini-states in the Arab world that are too weak and too divided to effectively oppose it: "The fragmentation of Syria and Iraq into regions determined on the basis of ethnic or religious criteria should be a long-term priority for Israel, the first step being the destruction of the military power of these states. [...] Rich in oil and torn by internal struggles, Iraq is in Israel's crosshairs. Its dissolution would be more important for us than that of Syria, as it represents the most serious short-term threat to Israel."

Finally, it is not uninteresting to recall the links between Israel and the Al Nosra Front denounced by the United Nations. Thus, on December 11, 2014, in his quarterly report to the Security Council, the former Secretary-General of the World Organization revealed these links "for more than 18 months, facilitating the medical treatment of wounded combatants." Additionally, in May 2017, another United Nations report documented a series of meetings (16 meetings) between Israeli military representatives and Daesh leaders near the Syrian border, particularly in the Quneitra region and in the central heights of the Golan, between November 18, 2016 and March 1, 2017. It is also worth noting that Israel has never attacked Daesh in Syria, while it has bombed positions of the Syrian army in Damascus, particularly in the vicinity of the international airport of the Syrian capital under the pretext of the presence of Iranian military elements. However, if the presence of such elements was real, it was aimed at helping the Syrian regular army and Russian forces present in Syria at the request of the Syrian government to fight against Islamic military groups.

Facing the complexities of the conflict and the emergence of Daesh, President Bashar Al Assad has officially requested military intervention from Russia to assist in safeguarding the institutions and territorial integrity of Syria. Indeed, the war had been raging for several years and the emergence of the terrorist group, known as ISIS, further complicated the situation. The Syrian government was struggling to maintain control of its territory and institutions in the face of intense opposition from various rebel groups and extremist factions.

Given the complex nature of the conflict and the presence of foreign actors, President Al-Assad had no other option but to seek this military assistance from his ally, Russia. The intervention was meant to help the Syrian army regain control of key areas and protect the country's territorial integrity. This intervention was the last resort to protect the Syrian people and the country's institutions from further harm.

The Russian military intervention in Syria began in September 2015 and included air strikes and ground operations in support of the Syrian government. This intervention helped turn the tide of the war and allowed the Syrian army to regain control of key areas previously held by rebel and extremist groups.

Thanks to the efforts deployed by Russia and Iran, Syria has been able to preserve its institutions despite a terribly bloody war where civilians and innocents paid the price of foreign interference aimed at creating tensions not only in this country but throughout the Middle East region. Today, Syria is on the path to regaining its place within the Arab League, in this new era that is opening up in relations between different countries in the Middle East region (such as the normalization of relations between some Arab countries and Israel, reconciliation between Iran and Saudi Arabia, and the resolution of the fraternal and bloody conflict between the latter and Yemen).

These efforts and the success of Russia's enterprise in Syria, which thwarted American political projects in this region of the world and their extension into the European continent, have upset Washington. Russia is now a powerful player on the international stage and has managed to maintain good relations with other powers in this region, including Iran, Israel, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf countries, and Egypt. Since 2014, it has quickly become a target for the United States, much like China, with the aim of bringing it down.

As the Americans see China and the Asian world as an economic and technological threat, they see Russia as another danger: the challenge to globalization and the defense of cultural and national identities, as well as the defense of state sovereignty and efforts to revive public international law, which has long been marginalized in favor of political opportunism

THE HIBERNATION OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

The present state of international affairs is akin to a chaotic and lawless jungle. This is, in part, the result of the steady decline of public international law, which has been replaced by political opportunism that governs the international society since the end of bipolarization. The previous era, however, had the merit of preserving a delicate balance and allowing for the use of law to restore conflict situations. It is true that the application of public international law was never perfect due to the fragility of the subject, which mainly developed during the 20th century. Nevertheless, there was hope that it would be applied and respected by States, the main actors of international relations. The United Nations Charter provided a glimmer of hope by codifying the fundamental principles that should guide the international society, including the sovereignty and equality of States (Article 2(1) of the Charter), non-interference in their internal affairs (Article 2(7) of the Charter), the non-use of violence in international relations (Article 2(4) of the Charter), and the peaceful settlement of international disputes (Article 2(3) of the Charter).

However, since the end of bipolarization and the rise of the United States as the world's policeman, public international law has been subjected to an increased and continuous violation. Political opportunism has replaced the rule of law, with partial use of certain provisions in an interpretive manner that serves to mask the subjective violation of the law.

The principal body responsible for monitoring and ensuring the execution of international norms by sanctioning any violation of these norms and principles, the United Nations and its subsidiary bodies, has become ineffective due to the structure of these bodies and their mode of operation. For instance, the International Criminal Court only exercises partial jurisdiction due to the non-adherence to its statute by a number of states, including the United States. The US has perfected the process of exempting itself from the jurisdiction of this international judicial body by concluding bilateral treaties with states subject to the Rome Statute that established the Court in 1998. Under these treaties, individuals accused and prosecuted by the International Criminal Court have remained untroubled. States that have adhered to the statute of this Court have committed, in application of these bilateral treaties, not to surrender American citizens to this jurisdiction.

Since 1989, the date of the fall of the former Soviet Union, the United States has multiplied its direct military operations, in violation of the principles of non-use of violence in international relations and non-interference in the internal affairs of states. We can cite some of these interventions: the invasion of Panama in 1989, the intervention in the Arab-Persian Gulf in 1990 and 1991, the military intervention in Somalia in 1992 and 1993, the various interventions in Bosnia and Kosovo in the 1990s, the intervention in Afghanistan following September 11, the operations carried out in Libya under the cover of NATO in 2011, but especially the invasion of Iraq in 2003, as well as the ongoing military interventions in that country and in Syria since 2014...

However, the most spectacular intervention that demonstrates the blatant and arrogant violation of international public law by the United States remains the invasion of Iraq in 2003 with false pretenses. Although these false pretenses were discovered, the American occupying forces maintained their occupation of the country.

It is not uninteresting to compare this situation with that of Ukraine.

The United States and their allies, particularly Great Britain, claimed that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction that posed a threat to international peace and security in order to justify their military intervention.

However, it should be noted that the Iraqi territory is very distant from the United States. Therefore, even if Iraq had these weapons, this situation did not threaten American territory.

Moreover, no illicit act was committed by the Iraqi government that could justify a "preventive intervention" by the United States without obtaining the approval of the United Nations Security Council. In fact, France, although an ally of the United States within NATO, was opposed to this operation, which was nothing more than a pure invasion without justification. It is totally contrary to international law, which provides that in cases of exceptional recourse to force as provided for in the Charter (under the authorization of the Security Council or the General Assembly, or in the case of individual or collective self-defense to deal with an aggression or an imminent threat of such aggression), the intervention must end as soon as the threat of an internationally illicit act, in this case aggression or a threat of aggression, is resolved.

By analogy with the Russian operation in Ukraine, it should be emphasized that this country borders Russia. Since 2012, it has been destabilized by American soft power, like many countries in Eastern Europe, including Poland, the Baltic countries, Macedonia, etc. It has become a satellite link of Washington, as demonstrated by secret notes exchanged between Ukrainian and American authorities, including correspondence between George Soros and President Petro Poroshenko and his Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk in 2013 and 2014. The arrival of comedian Volodymyr Zelensky in power has only reinforced this American position at the gates of Moscow.

Military abuses against the Russian-speaking population in Ukraine increased, in violation of the Minsk Protocol of September 5, 2014. These abuses were committed by ultra-radical and nationalist groups, with Volodymyr Zelinsky positioning himself as the leader of this fringe in Ukraine, similar to Eric Zemmour in France, who has emerged as a leader of a large part of the French nationalist movement. Ukraine was on the brink of joining NATO or its satellite, the European Union, and a real threat weighed not only on Russian-speaking Ukrainians, but also on Russia bordering Ukraine. The latter was considering a military operation to deport its Russian-speaking population to Russia.

These hypothetical fears for some, before the operation launched by the Russian army on February 24, 2022 to thwart this project, turned out to be real. More than a year after this operation, the Russian army has not been able to eliminate this danger due to the sophistication of Ukrainian weapons and the support that Ukraine receives from NATO in this American-Russian conflict on Ukrainian soil. It should be noted that some former leaders of European Union countries, such as the former French President who was totally subservient to Washington, François Hollande, and Angela Merkel, did not hesitate to reveal that the Minsk Agreement I was just a delaying tactic to give Ukraine more time to prepare militarily.

Unlike Iraq in 2003, the threat against Russia and Russian-speaking Ukrainians proved to be real. The blatantly illegal actions of radical Ukrainian military and paramilitary groups have not ceased. Russia's use of Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, based on aggression and/or the threat of aggression by these groups, appears to justify this operation until the threat is eliminated.

Unfortunately, the United Nations Security Council is unable to take measures to end this manifestly illegal disturbance and restore peace and security, due to its structure and functioning, particularly with the use of the veto power of five countries.

Can we qualify Russia's military operation in Ukraine as an occupation? It is necessary to wait for its outcome, particularly the end of the actions that led to its initiation, to see if Russia will maintain its presence in this territory, as the Americans did in Iraq, or if it intends to carry out a purely defensive operation to protect Russian-speaking Ukrainians and put an end to the threat to its security, given its proximity to Ukraine's border.

Unfortunately, this legal argument has eluded Western countries and servile allies of the United States who have participated in this conflict by continuously supplying sophisticated weapons to Ukraine and imposing a series of sanctions.

Since the end of bipolarity, the practice of international individual sanctions, including extraterritorial ones, has become commonplace. Emboldened by their dominant position in finance and commerce, the United States has systematically resorted to this practice to increasingly assert their hegemony. Under Washington's sway, the European Union has followed suit by systematically taking similar measures and echoing the same justifications put forth by the United States. It is worth noting that in terms of anti-money laundering and counterterrorism financing surveillance and control, the European Union has aligned itself with the U.S. Financial Action Task Force's initiatives.

Interestingly, the allies of the United States, even when they commit obvious internationally unlawful acts, have never been concerned about being subjected to sanctions imposed by either the United States or the subservient European Union. This is the case with Turkey, which has occupied northern Cyprus since 1974. This act has been condemned at the international level, particularly through a plethora of resolutions from the United Nations Security Council and General Assembly. Since 2004, the island has joined the European Union, with a portion of its territory under Turkish occupation. Yet, the European Union has not imposed any sanctions against Turkey.

Similarly, there exist over a thousand resolutions adopted by both the United Nations Security Council and General Assembly against Israel, which has occupied Palestine since 1948, following the deportation of the Palestinian population and massacres of 1947. Israel has been committing crimes against humanity, including the gradual extermination of Palestinians and internationally unlawful acts, on a permanent basis. Despite this, Israel has not received any sanctions due to its alliance with the United States.

This unjust situation and the plight of Palestinians, which must be resolved imminently and prioritized over other international situations, are summarized in a recent United Nations General Assembly resolution to which we must refer: resolution 77/247 of December 30, 2022.

Therefore, the resurgence of sanction measures since the fall of the Berlin Wall and their drift, where the practice of global embargo becomes a means of suffocating certain states and does not hide the deliberate intention to destabilize them for purely political reasons, leads us not only to criticize this new regime of international sanctions but to condemn them and question their legal basis.

Indeed, the imposition of sanctions through the United Nations Security Council has become completely outdated. It is subject to political opportunism and the predominance of the United States. The former Secretary-General of the United Nations, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, eager to give more independence to this global organization and to remove it from political hegemony, particularly that of the United States, which had prevented his re-election as Secretary-General, stated in his "Agenda for Peace" that the measures provided for in Article 41 of the Charter should not aim to punish a state but to modify the behavior of a party that threatens international peace and security. He strongly recommended the peaceful settlement of disputes, particularly through the International Court of Justice, which would allow for an objective respect of the principle of proportionality of the sanction to the offense.

Unfortunately, since the end of bipolarization, we have witnessed a drift in the practice of international sanctions: that of extraterritorial sanctions. This practice violates international legal order, questioning the principle of state sovereignty and freedom of trade and international transactions, particularly with regard to the establishment of so-called "secondary" sanctions. These acts infringe upon the diplomatic and economic independence of third-party states and thus on their sovereignty.

The sanctions imposed by the United States against non-American actors who operate outside of US territory apply if they do not comply with the boycott rules set by the US against a third state. This affects companies, large corporations, small and medium-sized enterprises, and financial institutions that are not based in the US and do not have US nationality. These entities are forced by this legislation to abandon markets, suspend others, and incur enormous expenses to develop compliance services to determine their degree of attachment to the United States. Failure to comply may result in financial penalties or retaliation against their assets or activities in the United States, as seen with French companies such as Technip, TOTAL, ALSTOM, BNP Paribas, Crédit Agricole, and Société Générale, who have faced hefty fines and penalties for corruption or violating US sanctions.

Thus, the extraterritorial effect of US national laws designed to sanction a third state or situations contrary to the US internal public order infringes on the independence of third states. These laws place the law at the service of political objectives and economic interests, leading to a power struggle on the international stage with the use of countermeasures and retaliation taken by the victim states of the secondary effects of extraterritorial sanctions. The aim of these measures is to exert pressure on the state responsible for the countermeasures, in this case the United States, to reverse the measures taken by its legislative apparatus.

Having enjoyed unilateral dominance of the international community for three decades, the United States has asphyxiated public international law and international organizations, mainly the United Nations headquartered in New York. The former Secretary-General of this organization, Boutros Boutros-Ghali, hoped that after the bipolarization of the world, this global organization would fulfill its role of safeguarding law and its global implementation. But he was heavily fought against by the United States, who not only wiretapped him in his office at the UN but also at his home in New York, exerting constant pressure on him and especially preventing his reelection as head of the organization, especially since he denounced the massacres in the city of Cana in southern Lebanon by the Israeli army. Madam Madeleine Albright prevented him from condemning this act in writing, to which he replied that he would "condemn it orally or not at all."

As a professor of public international law for several decades at various universities, I found myself in a very difficult situation with the upheaval of the international legal order in a unipolar world dominated by the United States, who hold their allies hostage. I was no longer able to answer my students' questions because the practice of public international law no longer corresponded to its theory. I stopped teaching this subject, but that did not stop me from denouncing the chaotic situation that dominates the world. I did so in an interview with Free West Media on September 25, 2018, by calling on the international community to wake up, revive public international law, and defend universal freedoms by creating a "New Free World" (https://freewestmedia.com/2018/09/26/the-project-of-world-chaos/).

I have observed the reaction of some political leaders, sometimes timid due to this global hegemonic situation, such as the statements of French President Emmanuel Macron, who declared in 2019 that NATO is "brain dead," or by threatening the United States in a veiled manner to withdraw from this organization during the diplomatic crisis that occurred in 2021 over the submarines ordered by Australia, who unilaterally terminated the contract at the request of Washington. However, I only saw my wishes come true during the unfortunate Ukrainian conflict, which I regret for its violence, especially the victims and the material damage.

A NEW FREE WORLD IN TURNOIL

As with the fall of the Soviet Union, which allowed the international community to evolve by causing the end of bipolarity, the regrettable conflict in Ukraine nevertheless has the merit of pulling the unipolar world out of the hegemony of the United States. What some Western countries call the "international community," by invoking the seat of the United Nations and its main subsidiary organs in the United States, is a pure illusion. It is a minority that claims this status, composed of the United States, Great Britain, Australia, Canada, Japan, South Korea, and a number of EU member states.

Faced with this coalition, the majority of countries and nations on the planet oppose it in an ostentatious manner, expressing their desire to end the unipolarity of the international community. These are the states of Latin America, those of the African continent, those of the Asian continent, including countries and major powers such as China, India, Pakistan, Iran, Russia, the countries of the Middle East and the Gulf, a large part of the countries of Eastern and Central Europe, but also certain EU member states such as Hungary or, discreetly, France, Italy, and Portugal. Even France is waiting for the opportune moment to join this "New Free World." This was evidenced by the statement of French President Emmanuel Macron upon his return from an official visit to China, where he spoke of "American hegemony" and announced the emergence of a multipolar world.

As someone close to the late Boutros Boutros-Ghali, the former Secretary-General of the United Nations and my mentor, I observe that this global organization is facing the same fate as the League of Nations. It no longer fulfills its mission of maintaining peace and international security and safeguarding public international law.

The UN needs to be restructured, with its headquarters relocated to a neutral location, as suggested by Boutros Boutros-Ghali, such as an island, far from the dominant powers on the international scene. Likewise, all its subsidiary bodies, particularly the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, which are controlled by Washington and used as a bargaining tool against borrower countries in need, must be reformed.

A mechanism for decision-making and the adoption of equitable international regulation must be established, respecting the sovereignty, equality, and respective cultural and social identities of states, to break free from the globalization to which human societies are enslaved. It is time to restore freedom - freedom of expression, freedom of movement for people, capital, and goods. It is time to break free from the enslaving instruments of the GAFAM, their monopolies, and their systematic control of people's actions and words. The world is undergoing profound change, in search of a new balance, but above all, the return of international law and equity.

The sad and regrettable conflict in Ukraine also has the merit of allowing for the emergence of new, bustling mechanisms of exchange. It is therefore time to establish a parallel system to SWIFT to facilitate commercial and financial exchanges, as well as global financial institutions, particularly those of the BRICS, to enable the development of poor or struggling countries. It is also necessary to establish an effective, genuine, and fair mechanism to combat corruption and money laundering.

We are pleased with the positive developments currently unfolding on the global stage. The dominance of the US dollar in transactions is declining, particularly since Saudi Arabia, the world's second-largest oil producer and the primary supplier of this commodity to China, has agreed to receive payment in yuan. Additionally, Russia, the world's largest gas exporter, has secured agreements for payment in rubles from its partners. The financial power of the United States appears to be in decline, evidenced by the Federal Reserve's move to lend $12 billion to the banking sector following the bankruptcy of Silicon Valley Bank. Meanwhile, the BRICS bloc is continuing to gain momentum, now contributing 31.5% of the world's gross domestic product (GDP) compared to 30.7% from the G7. Experts anticipate this trend will continue to grow in the coming years. Furthermore, the BRICS Development Bank, established in 2014 and headquartered in Shanghai, is becoming a significant player in the global finance arena.

It is also imperative to develop an international judicial system that can impartially and objectively enforce sanctions against any violation of international law, while also imposing appropriate penalties against states, organizations, and individuals who have disregarded international principles and norms or assisted in such internationally prohibited actions.

Thus, hopes are placed on this new multipolar international free society to restore this broken imbalance.

Dr. Franklin Nyamsi (Cameroon) – philosopher, writer

WHAT IS A MULTIPOLAR WORLD IN TERMS OF FREEDOM OF AFRICA?

I would like to seize this opportunity to take a moment here in Moscow at the international conference on building global multipolarity to thank the organizers, because the idea of a world without hegemony inspires great hope in all of us. I am a native African and a citizen of France, have been persecuted in France since 2021 because of my calling for rebellion African and Western people against French neo-colonialism, Western imperialism, Middle Eastern imperialism, and African despotism. Just the other day, the French Ministry of Education expelled me from teaching for three months for criticizing French and Western neo-colonialist policies in Africa outside of my classes. This is a clear demonstration of how dangerous it has become to think and speak out against the government. And yet we live in the heart of a society that was thought to be the birthplace of universal freedoms, which today proves as dangerous for me as Athens once was for Socrates.

With all this in mind, speaking at this international conference gives me the opportunity to call for the unification of all the civil and spiritual forces of our planet to defend our right to education, to freedom of thought, to freedom of expression, and to unite every people, every civilization, every person in their respect for the ancient traditions of the humankind. For the protection of these civil and spiritual human rights, deeply rooted in the consciousness of human civilization, is a prerequisite for the victory of cosmic forces over apocalyptic ones, which still dominate our planet under the sign of what the French philosopher René Guénon rightly called "the dominance of quantity," a true cult of the golden calf, which symbolizes the triumph of greed, violence, meanness and perversion of anything and everything as the highest standards of the world order.

When I hear about multipolarity, this concept breaks down in my mind into two logically opposite parts. “Multi” in terms of “Many" refers to that which is plural, hence scattered, isolated, atomized. Whereas "polarity" implies both separate centres and a binary opposition between these centres, the poles. Indeed, the Greek word polos, in Latin polus, originally meant “axis,” the extremity of an axis or the centre of rotation. Thus, the concept of multipolarity contains a potential tension between a dividing, opposing and dispersing multiplicity on the one hand, and a concentrating, tying up and unifying pole on the other. What would a multipolar world be like then? Will it remain a single, unified world at all if it is multipolar? After all, would it really be multipolar if it did not allow for real, potential, or logical unity of the world? Obviously, the complexity of the "multipolar world" concept lies in its dual hermeneutic interpretation: it simultaneously seeks to unite and separate, to concentrate and to distinguish. Thus, there is not one form of multipolarity, but at least three: atomistic, schismatic, and dialogic or intersubjective multipolarity. In fact, these are the three models of multipolarity that are currently available to us.

Atomistic multipolarity asserts dispersion as the theoretical basis of human social reality. Black African civilizations, Western, Eastern, American, Indian, Russian civilizations, etc. would be unique (lat.sui generis). Humanity would be a set of human races, different in nature, which would be formed by spontaneous appearance in big numbers at a certain point in the world at a certain point in history. In this vision of the world, peoples, civilizations, nations, and states should have as their absolute ideal self-sufficient autarchy, and the pinnacle of human experience should be the principle of "every man for himself.” It is clear, however, that such a vision of humanity, based on the irrationality of polygenism, would easily feed the already tragically familiar racist, colonialist, imperialist and ethnocentric attitudes, and views that could lead to a total indifference to the "Others.” Atomistic multipolarity is therefore not suitable for Africa, nor for any modern civilization in the world, since the model of civilizational development in which they are separate from one another has become untenable because of the already established interconnection of societies, spaces, ideas, enterprises, and people.

Schismatic multipolarity postulates the principle of primordial separation, the rupture of human unity as an irreversible tragedy. A rift between people would be a very historical inevitability. This refers us to Thomas Hobbes, who argued that the rivalry of human desires in theory is irresistible; to Kant, who spoke of the unsociability of man; to the famous African myth of Amon-Ra, who constantly had to force the first gods of Ogdoada to watch over creation, since Amon-Ra himself was not in that city; and to the myth of the ceaseless evils of Set and Apop, representing the relative and the absolute evil. Thus, a schismatic multipolarity will result in a world left to itself, doomed to perpetual decline, to an endless war of all against all, which, especially given the current nuclear, environmental, pandemic, and economic threats and risks, will lead to the collective suicide of humanity. So, rift is no better than atomization. It leads to the triumph of chaos. Even despite the interests of Africa and the Common Good of humankind, this model is doomed to failure,

Dynamic and dialogical multipolarity is the principle of unity in diversity. It is about building a world in which no state has a monopoly on international law, trade routes, monetary units, technical and biological norms, norms of social life, norms of sexuality and identity, political, moral, or spiritual values that are considered universal. When meaning is found as part of a dialogue, when parties listen to each other and respect each other's sovereignty, the world truly becomes a shared creation, rich and strong through its harmonious diversity. Thus, the value of all people becomes equal relations, mutual recognition of sovereignties, and respect for differences that are well thought out, reasoned, justified, and negotiated in a dialogue in which the parties respect the traditions of every people, every civilization, every nation, and every state. Building such a world is no easy task, but it is when Africa has a chance. Clearly, it is a question of the modern African peoples consciously committing themselves to a world in which a four-point program of African liberation will be possible: the complete withdrawal of the troops of the neo-colonial and imperialist powers from African soil; the abolition of foreign monetary and economic domination of the dollar, euro and CFA franc in Africa; the end of illegal regimes resulting from neo-colonial and imperialist hegemony in Africa; the revival of all African institutions on the basis of the centuries-old Maat (Truth-Justice-Solidarity) tradition, which represents the ideal of the search for harmony in its three forms: harmony between humanity and the cosmos, harmony between people and harmony within people themselves, realised as individuals, aware of their spiritual origins and vocation. It is therefore necessary to rethink the perspective of the African Renaissance, rediscovered, discovered and developed through the works of Cheikh Anta Diop, Theophile Obenga, Ebussey Bulaga, Amadou Ampaté Ba, Kaulan Morenga, Kalal Omotunde, Mboga Bassong, Molefi Kete Asante, Jan Assmann, Jean-Marc Ela, Wumby Jock Moudimbe, Gregoire Biyogo and others. Africa's internal security, economics, politics, technical sciences, aesthetics, and spirituality need to be reinterpreted. All this must be renewed through a self-critical approach and a comparative political anthropological study of human civilizations. This can be done in terms of revolutionary, traditional, anti-racist, anti-colonial, anti-imperialist, and anti-depressive politics. This is our path of hope which we came to know.

In conclusion, free Africa is committed to the model of unity in diversity (model 3), because only this will allow it to preserve both its millennia-old cultural identity and the necessary and fruitful relations with all the other cultures of the planet. The dialogical and dynamic model that we promote will enable Africa to join the nations that follow the UN Charter, to join the BRICS, to seek a non-hegemonic world monetary system, and to seek models of international cooperation that are primarily based on dialogue, agreement, negotiation, mutual benefit, compromise, and listening carefully to the diverse expressions of human thought.

It was this beautiful prospect of collective international work and the return of dignity to the indigenous peoples of Africa, so despised for the past six centuries by those committed to "quantity dominance," that inspired me to attend this conference in Moscow.

Thank you for your attention.

Dr. Franklin Nyamsi

Philosopher, writer, participant of international conferences

Head of the Institute for African Liberties

  QU’EST-CE QUE LE MONDE MULTIPOLAIRE DU POINT DE VUE DE L’AFRIQUE DES LIBERTES ?

 Che cos’è il mondo multipolare dal punto di vista dell’Africa libera?

  Wat is een multipolaire wereld voor de vrijheid van Afrika?

  Was bedeutet eine multipolare Welt für die Freiheit Afrikas?

  ¿Qué es un mundo multipolar en términos de libertad para África?

Dr Sidibé Fatoumata (Mali) – Chairman of the Sports Medicine Commission of the National Olympic and Sports Committee of Mali

The backwardness of countries of South is due, among other things, to the unipolarity established by the West.

Since the beginning of transition, Mali has become the absolute role model for Africa, the most successful embodiment of struggle for the liberation and sovereignty of the people. Unchained Mali has chosen three basic principles:

• Respect for its sovereignty.
• Diversification and free choice of partners
• Partnership based on mutually beneficial cooperation

The cooperation between Mali and Russia is an illustrative example. Cooperation that is not based on coercion, but that takes into account national interests and priorities, cultural peculiarities, spiritual, religious and traditional values. Today, the whole of Africa is looking at Mali. To some extent, Africa's destiny is being played out in Mali, which has dared to take its destiny into its own hands.

Dr Sidibé Fatoumata 

Bamako, Mali

 Discours du Dr Sidibé Fatoumata (Mali) à la Conférence mondiale sur la multipolarité

 Discurso de Fatoumata Sidibé na Conferência Mundial sobre a Multipolaridade

Younès Yunuss (Mali) speech at the Global Conference on Multipolarity

Tchitembo, Adviser to the President of the Republic of the Congo. strongly criticises NATO policy and demands, in the context of multipolarity, that troops from NATO countries should immediately leave the territory of all sovereign African countries.

I am Ernest Tchiloemba-Tchitembo, Dr Ernest Tchiloemba-Tchitembo from the Republic of Congo, diplomat, lawyer, teacher and diplomatic adviser to the head of government. I would like to thank the distinguished organizers of this event, in particular Mr Nikolay Malinov, Mr Alexander Dugin, Mr Rafael Machiado and all the moderators. So I am very happy and at the same time very honored to be among the participants in this exchange on a cross-border term of equal importance and the emergence of a new multipolar world.

Speakers, who are authorities in international public opinion, have pointed out with great relevance the importance of the term. I don't think I have anything more intelligent to add. However, by way of contradiction, I would like to develop some arguments that make our conviction about irreversibility.

The multipolar world in international relations in the twenty-first century. The developments lead us to find answers to the following questions: What kind of international geopolitical and legal order do we expect? This is the first question. And the second question: What are the poles and mechanisms for the emergence of the multipolar world?

So, for the first question, the first question "What geopolitical and legal international order do we hope for", I would like to start by saying this. In a world where man's capacity is to constantly design and produce weapons that can annihilate planet Earth in mere minutes and perhaps other planets as well, in a world where we know with certainty that planet Earth is the only place in the universe that harbors life and there are no alternatives to the preservation of life, states and nations have at least a universal consensus on consolidating the mechanisms that preserve the institutions of planetary civilization.

This is an issue that keeps coming up in the debates in the UN bodies and in the debate on multilateralism and global governance at the United Nations. Today, humanity needs universal and inclusive multilateralism, which implies the management of world affairs in permanent consultation with all actors in international relations, even in the context of the unequal balance of forces in the world and the often divergent national interests. This is what justifies the existence of mechanisms and the exclusivity of multilateralism and global governance such as the UN General Assembly and the Security Council. In contrast, regional multilateralism, as practiced in restricted institutions such as the G7, the G8 or in regional organizations such as the European Union and NATO, would not be substituted for multilateralism in the United Nations.

Since the adoption in September 2000 of the Millennium Summit Declaration, which affirms the unique role that the United Nations is called upon to play in this new world era, in the new epoch introduced by the now familiar term globalization. The ever-increasing challenges facing international communities are increasingly challenging the management of global governance exercises. The preservation of peace and national security, for which the Security Council is collectively the outstanding guarantor, should be at the heart of the debates on inclusive universal multilateralism. These debates should no longer overshadow the question of the existence of NATO and the presence of foreign military bases on the territories of other states, especially African countries.

President Putin's proposal of a united security for Europe is reasonable to extend to the five continents of the planet by strengthening the international system of collective security. Once  the contours of the leadership of this organization have been outlined, the question of the means and mechanisms to make this leadership more effective in global governance arises. However, for several decades now, this global governance has known two problems. The first is the place and role of states in the decision-making process within the United Nations. It is well known that the de jure legality of member states does not actually guarantee an equal place and role in the decision-making bodies. The decision-making process, for example, in the Security Council, was an example and perfect illustration of the imbalance that still exists.

The second issue that I would like to address quickly in the time available to us is the poles and the mechanisms for the emergence of a multipolar world. This is where the problem and the role of Russia and the United States of America in the construction of a new world order is surely addressed. The first meeting in June 2021 in Geneva, Switzerland, between the President of the Russian Federation, Mr Putin, and the President of the United States of America, Mr John Biden, raised a great deal of hope in the world beyond the borders of Europe in order to make progress towards the universal consensus that I mentioned earlier. Despite the differences noted on many points, in particular on issues of human rights or cyber attacks, the two presidents appreciated their exchange. This meeting was a positive signal, but unfortunately it could not withstand the evolution of events, especially the Ukrainian crisis. In the construction of a multipolar world, we can also think about the rol and capacity of the BRICS and impose a world, indeed, more of multipolarity. The growing interest this week, as we have noted, of the many countries that want to join the BRICS, in particular African countries – we have 19 of them and perhaps a few more – shows that the BRICS have the capacity to rebalance multilateralism on an international scale. Once again I thank you all for your patience in listening to me.

Oumy Sene (Senegal)

Hello! My name is Oumy Sene, I am General Secretary of the Kalinka RCC in Senegal.

When I was privileged to say a few words about today's subject — multipolarity in the world — at first, I was surprised, but then I thought: yes, this is a crucial point to discuss.

Where was Africa during globalization? Africa was ignored and was at the rock bottom. All international approaches, global solutions, the whole economic development went past Africa. I really hope that now, with the realization that there are many centres to approach directly, Africa can become the pivotal point of communication which it was not back then. Among other things, it can decide for itself who its key partners are — whether they will be from Asia, Russia, other countries, even Latin America. It does not have to be controlled from Europe and America.

Today's situation is exceedingly difficult, I agree with all [the speakers] and no one is sure about the future, and no one is clear whether there even will be one or not. But it also gives tremendous perspective and understanding that our future depends on us more than ever.

We at Kalinka will strive every day to strengthen relations between Russia and West Africa, talk to people, find new partners, find new roads — not only for Africans and West Africans from partner countries, but to represent our countries to them, because they do not know us, just like we do not know them.

The point of today's conversation about multipolarity is that we are breaking down the idea of globalization — and that is great, because it gives a real hope for the future.

Thank you to everyone, including Mr. Malinov, for the invitation and for participating! Thank you very much, and goodbye.

Lucien Cerise (France) – author, geopolitician

Good morning to all,

First of all, I would like to announce that I will be in Moscow from May 24 to May 29, and then in St. Petersburg from May 30 to June 4 If you are available during this time, I would be very happy to meet you in Russia.

Then, I would like to specify a second thing, which is the reason for my presence at this conference: I participated in 2012 in the translation into French of Aleksandr Dugin's book, "The Fourth Political Theory". I have a beginner's level of Russian language, so I didn't do the first translation, but I corrected the translation errors by comparing the French translation with the original text. I also wrote the summary of the book that you can find on the back cover, and that I will read to conclude my speech.

My field of research is social engineering. Multipolarity is synonymous with decentralized governance. Each people is responsible for its territory because it is best placed to take care of it. I am in a better position than my neighbor to take care of my house and garden. Multipolarity is synonymous with governance by order and social negentropy. Globalists, on the other hand, try to govern by chaos and social engineering, a scientific approach to social phenomena from a "change management" perspective derived from the applications of cybernetics and psychology in the fields of management, marketing and systems security. It is the general method of hacking and transforming any social being, allowing the stealthy, planned and lasting modification of the behavior of this social being (company, organization, population), most often to destroy it. The two key concepts of social engineering are phishing, a kind of "deadly seduction" based on the abuse of trust and identity theft, and triangulated conflict, or "war by proxy". This method is widespread in the collective West, which made Vladimir Putin say that it was the empire of lies. Indeed, these notions find geopolitical applications in transitology, the globalists' method of provoking putsches, colored revolutions, psychological operations, false flag terrorism, hybrid wars and regime changes, the dramatic consequences of which are visible in Ukraine and Syria. The question is therefore urgent: what to do about this global and unipolar governance by chaos? I summarized my view in the back cover written for Aleksandr Dugin's book, The Fourth Political Theory - Russia and the Political Ideas of the 21st Century:

"When the Right and the Left in politics no longer mean anything, when liberals and libertarians agree on the essentials, when the three great political theories of the twentieth century, communism, fascism and capitalism, have proven their inability to govern, what is left to do? We still have to invent a Fourth Political Theory, says Alexander Dugin, one of the most listened-to thinkers in Russia today. His thought, which goes beyond artificial ideological divisions and reflexes conditioned by the media, advocates a return to traditional spiritualities in order to face the future in a resolutely conquering manner. War is thus declared on Western postmodernism, this morbid mixture of the society of the spectacle and consumption emanating from the Anglo-Saxon empire and its projects of definitive world domination. Dugin shows that the construction of a multipolar world based on authentic values of life will only be possible by maintaining at all costs an exteriority to the Atlanticist and globalist West. How can this be done? By unconditionally preserving the geopolitical sovereignty of the powers of the Eurasian continent, Russia, China, Iran, India, as well as the African continent, guarantors of the freedom of other peoples on the planet. A veritable manual of cultural guerrilla warfare, this book demonstrates once again that ideas can only be defended with weapons as a last resort."

 Intervention de Lucien Cerise lors de la conférence mondiale sur la multipolarité

 Beitrag von Lucien Cerise auf der Weltkonferenz über Multipolarität

 Toespraak van Lucien Cerise op de Wereldconferentie over Multipolariteit

 Discurso de Lucien Cerise en la Conferencia Mundial sobre la Multipolaridad

Alexandre Guerreiro (Portugal) – Political and Security Analyst Academic, UNHRC TV Commentator

Bom dia a todos os elementos da organização, aos colegas palestrantes e a todos os que nos acompanham um pouco por todo o mundo, em particular, endereço os meus cumprimentos ao Professor Aleksandr Dugin, à Nova Resistência (Brasil), à Iniciativa Nova Ordem Internacional (Turquia), ao Movimento Internacional Eurasiático (Rússia), ao Fórum de Pensadores (China) e ao Movimento Internacional Russófilo.

For centuries, relations between peoples were dominated by the prevalence of individual interests, thus contributing to permanent tension and conflict.

Later, the “social contract” has reached relations between peoples and the States in which they are located, but it took a while to reach relations between States and between the peoples of different States. It is fallacious to say that the countless sovereign States currently form an “international community”, since a community corresponds to the essential aspirations of human nature and there is a communion of values and solidarity among its members.

In fact, until 1945, States coexisted based on a model of “international society”, aiming to coexist in an environment that would allow them to jointly pursue certain deliberately chosen ends and in which the corresponding social bonds would always be created by the will of the members of the society.

With the end of World War II, it also ended the notion of “absolute sovereignty” – meaning no recognition of any entities above each State and granting them full exclusivity over their territory. The International Court of Justice, for example, was one of the first institutions to recognize the conditional and limited character of the exercise of the right of sovereignty, which moves away from the view of absolute sovereignty that tended to prevail in the period immediately prior to World War II and consolidated the ideal of peace and security as achievable through the fulfillment of duties vis-à-vis third States.

The world witnessed a progressive communitarianization of several domains of the old and classic international society, in such terms that its communitarian traits overlapped its societal characteristics. Thus, after 1945, International Law entered a new phase destined to restrict the unconditional right of States to wage war and to harass other countries; and, additionally, to transform the mere coordination of sovereign States into a system of cooperation and mutual benefit.

Humanity had reached such a point of wear that it felt the need to reconfigure the order on which coexistence between states was based as a way of ensuring international peace and security. It was therefore no accident that the victorious States chose the expression “We, the peoples of the United Nations” over “We, the States” or “We, the Governments representing the peoples”. After all, we can have a People without a State, but we can no longer have a State without a People.

This is a clear allusion to the subjects of International Law who express a common will to entrust the United Nations with the pursuit of the aim of “maintaining international peace and security”. More than treaties celebrated between States, the international order that was formed from 1945 onwards reflected the celebration of a real “social contract” between the different peoples that recognized the pursuit of common objectives, as well as the use of a forum where everyone would have equal value and where agreements would be debated and reached that mirrored the will of humanity as a whole: the UN.

By being celebrated by agreement of the peoples and by raising the peoples to the top of the hierarchy of subjects of international law, the Charter of the United Nations established a multipolar international order that assumes as fundamental the participation of all peoples, in their multiple political, social, economic and cultural differences, in the formation of values and norms that underpin the “international community” and without being the target of interference.

Based on the efforts launched by the peoples to legitimize the UN and taking into account the set of resolutions adopted and the conventional instruments celebrated between the States in representation of the peoples, there is a global conscience, at least since 1945, that peace and international security can only be effectively achieved if the challenges that fall to the States are addressed from a perspective of community and not isolation and if the horizontality between all State actors is effectively respected.

From this derives a notion of equality that determines, on a practical level, that the right of a State to sovereignty can only be fully achieved if that State respects the right to sovereignty of the rest and if it complies with the principle of sovereign equality, thus recognizing multipolarity as an essential condition for healthy coexistence in an international community. We will thus have relations between States that are based on a principle of sovereign equality that presupposes a horizontal relationship between all States. In this way, any sign of unilateralism demonstrates a legally non-existent verticality, as well as an absence of the sense of community that seems capable of affecting international security and peace.

Political and social multipolarity found its catalyst at the end of the Cold War with the evolution and consolidation of the concept of humanity and with the notion of an international community of States being deemed of secondary importance. In fact, there has been a transition from a paradigm in which different States coexist and make efforts to find points of balance that guarantee peaceful coexistence among all, to a reality in which the borders of States are overcome, continuing, primarily, the defense of humanity through the recognition of a core of values common to all human beings.

In an era in which unilateralism has consequences – not only at the level of international responsibility, but also at the political and diplomatic levels – interstate relations forced on the basis of the will of a State or a group of States deserve international condemnation for the most varied levels. It takes legitimacy to do so.

Thus, the multipolar order can only truly exist and contribute directly to international peace and security if it is accompanied by multilateralism. The loss of confidence in the UN and in the Charter of the United Nations resulting from unilateral decisions outside the forum that represents the multipolar order can give rise to a multipolar unilateralism, in which each people, while recognizing the other peoples, insists on taking precedence everyone, creating imbalances and threats for everyone. It is not possible, therefore, to recognize as multilateralism a set of dynamics or initiatives in which one party imposes its conditions while demonstrating relative inflexibility to yield and the others have no alternative but to assent.

Hence, one of the great challenges of Public International Law in the 21st century is to find mechanisms capable of combining the effects of the phenomenon of globalization with the unavailability of States, as a whole, to maintain their identity and sovereignty while recognizing the need to harmonize concepts in transversal areas.

This transfer of issues and matters to the UN domain seems to us to be an important evolution of the system insofar as it reinforces the need for multilateralism in matters that thus favor greater involvement of the community in matters of general interest and the deterrence of unilateral actions – both in the sense of shielding the States in the commission of acts against the interests of the peoples in their own territory, as well as protecting it from unilateral interpretations and approaches by third States.

In the end, it is fundamental to understand the importance of self-determination as an essential component of a multipolar multilateralism. The principle of self-determination has matured since the beginning of the 20th century and had a strong impulse from 1945 onwards, with special focus on the Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States and the Protection of Their Independence and Sovereignty, of 1965, in which not only was it declared that no State has the right to interfere in the internal or external affairs of another State, but it was also reiterated that the right to self-determination must be exercised freely and without external pressure. Therefore, Resolution 2131 (XX) reflects the intention to accelerate the decolonization process in a context of growing threat arising from unilateral interference in a bipolar world.

Accepting unilateralism or an unipolar order would actually mean going back to the first decades of the 19th century and, in a way, recovering the genesis of Iberian Catholic doctrine for the Americas, initiated by Francisco de Vitoria in the 16th century and based on the idea of a superior morality of an elite that gives this elite legitimacy to conquer territory and change a previously established legal and social order.

Refoyo Enrique (Spain) – political scientist, translator

La necesidad de un Gran Espacio Mediterráneo Europeo

La fórmula 4+3: Portugal, España, Italia, Grecia + Malta, Chipre y Montenegro. Discurso en la 1ª Conferencia sobre Multipolaridad Mundial

En febrero de 2022 inició un acontecimiento de inusitada importancia global. Aquello fue la operación militar especial de Rusia en Ucrania. Para los globalistas occidentales, la llamada “guerra de Ucrania” se convirtió en el monotema mediático y político, como si el mundo no siguiera girando en torno a problemas y diatribas mucho más grandes. 

Así pudimos ver el surgimiento del mundo multipolar de la siguiente forma: Desde el occidente globalista (el mundo unipolar), se quitaron todas las caretas basadas en sonrisas y falsos discursos de bondad y progresismo pues lo único que querían era la imposición de sus intereses a costa de cualquier pueblo en el mundo. No solo imponen sanciones o amenazan con la imposición de más sanciones, sino que directamente hablan del genocidio y la destrucción de pueblos y países díscolos con su mundo unipolar. 

Así lo hemos visto contra Rusia y China de forma absolutamente clara y manifiesta; llaman a la destrucción y división de ambos países en pequeñas piezas domesticadas según las reglas occidentales y desprovistas de cultura y valores propios. Solo quieren pueblos sumisos, carentes de voluntad propia. 

El desenfreno genocida de los globalistas occidentales no quedó sin respuesta, pues para su inesperado agravio, resultó que la técnica de insultar, amenazar y atacar no sirve para tener más “amigos” en el mundo sino todo lo contrario. Cada vez más países del mundo durante el año 2022 iniciaron un viraje geopolítico hacia el multipolarismo. Se constata en las diferentes cumbres internacionales como el G-20, así como otras cumbres bilaterales entre países ajenos al marco occidental.

En este contexto de la llamada guerra de Ucrania, todo el mundo ha visto la existencia de dos occidentes: El eje anglosajón y la Unión Europea. En cuanto al eje anglosajón, solo podemos decir que es el núcleo mundial del globalismo y se denota por su belicismo especialmente destacado en Estados Unidos, Canadá, Reino Unido y Australia. 

Respecto a la Unión Europea, solo es un títere globalista. Es la anti-europa, que actúa como un agente servil y arrastrado a los conflictos que siempre son, tan ajenos como contrarios a Europa. Es ahí donde surge la especial y urgente necesidad de construir una Europa soberana e independiente que represente un futuro polo en el mundo multipolar. 

Los futuros polos se construyen a través de los grandes espacios que están relacionados por factores de civilización existentes de antemano y que requieren la unidad por factores políticos si reúnen la voluntad y fortaleza necesaria para presentar y defender un proyecto soberano e independiente. Civilización e Imperio: La unión cultural y la unión política. Dos partes de una misma ecuación.

Desde España propongo trabajar sobre una fórmula mediterránea europea del “4+3”, con 4 grandes países como son Portugal, España, Italia y Grecia, a los que se sumen 3 pequeños países como son Malta, Chipre y Montenegro. En el futuro podría ampliarse a otros países de los Balcanes occidentales y orientales, es decir, en un sentido europeo meridional; y por otro lado, servirá de bisagra entre otras partes centrales, orientales y septentrionales de Europa, así como del lado meridional y oriental del Mediterráneo (es decir, de las partes africanas y asiáticas del Mediterráneo). 

Actualmente somos la parte marginada del núcleo de la Unión Europea. Somos la periferia que consideran un simple títere que debe someterse a las decisiones del poder establecido (establishment). Es decir, actualmente somos los títeres de un títere y por ello tenemos doble motivación para realizar este cambio esencial y beneficioso para todos nosotros. Así pues, aquí tienen presentada mi idea básica de un gran espacio mediterráneo europeo que sirva como uno de los varios grandes espacios europeos que sirvan para crear nuestra Europa independiente y soberana.

 Need to create a Bigger European Mediterranean Area

Lorenzo Pacini (Italy) – professor of political philosophy and geopolitics, and Italian referee for International Eurasian Movement

The Star of Ishtar: multipolar symbol for a multipolar future

I would like to introduce the Star of Ishtar, the symbol of Eurasianism. The symbolism of this icon is so powerful and, in my opinion, necessary of a deeper understanding for the future of our world.

The star has 8 points branching off in 8 different directions. the centre is the spiritual pole, the unique core, the One of Plotinus and the Greek Fathers, but also the divine One that the Far Eastern tradition delivers to us. The eight arrows spread this Spirit to every frontier, tracing routes and writing different histories and anthropologies, yes, but all sharing the same origin and profound meaning. The 8 arrows are also 8 directions of building multipolarity, reminding us of the multidimensional approach we need. The reality in which we live is a fractal not only on the plane of physics, of physical science, but also on the plane of culture, civilisations, geopolitics, which we are discussing together today. this multidimensionality is now inescapable and reminds us that the world is a complex system, whose explanation is not simple and, therefore, we cannot discount or live superficially. Knowledge is a human being's duty.

Descending a little more into the esoteric, reserved, sacred aspect of the symbol, we note numerologically 8 points, where 8 is the sacred number of the beatitudes and perfection of a complete order, but also of creation and the passage to something new; it is the number of the Mother of God, She who generates the Christic Logos in the world and who redeems all humanity; it is the symbol of sacred geometry par excellence, where the 8 points bind and intersect, creating a network of lines, angles, proportions that open up on multiple planes and manifest the entity in matter. We thus have an extremely powerful symbol, a key to understanding the present time, which acts as a link between Tradition and exploration of the new, a sort of portal to the plurality of those existential dimensions of which multipolarity is composed.

We cannot therefore renounce this elevative dimension. The metaphysics of multipolarity is a metaphysics with new, unexplored directions. Accepting this is not easy, because it means having to give up many of our beliefs in part; but it is indispensable, because without considering all directions, even opposing ones, we will never arrive at genuine multipolarity. This does not mean that we have to give ourselves up or that we have to destroy everything. Multipolar nihilism is a matter of inner transmutation, not existential destruction, it is quite different. Here we are talking about becoming aware that everything is part of a divinely established order of perfection, where the map is not the territory, so our individual vision is inevitably imperfect and needs the support of that of others. Multipolarity is anti-dividualistic, reminding us of the importance of the in-individual, which is undivided, unique, whole.

The understanding of multipolar metaphysics passes, in my opinion, through the inner experience of death and redemption, of the alchemical transmutation that has a political aspect and effect, as Prof. Dugin has explained several times in his writings. Multipolarity must be a feature, a style, not just a concept, and that is what we see now: for years we considered multipolarity as a theory, today we have entered a new era in which multipolarity will be the main theme.

Multipolarity as an innovative avant-garde concept

Multipolar theory is a particular trend that cannot be qualified simplistically in terms of progress/conservatism, old/new, development/stagnation, etc. The unipolar view of history and, consequently, the globalist perspective present the historical process as a linear movement from worst to best, from undeveloped to developed, etc. Globalisation is then seen as the horizon of a universal future, while anything that hinders globalisation is seen as the inertia of the past, atavism or the desire to preserve the status quo at any cost. By virtue of such an attitude, globalism and the 'civilisation of the sea' also attempt to interpret multipolarity, which is exclusively interpreted as a conservative position of resistance against 'inevitable change'. If globalisation is the Postmodern (global society), then multipolarity is presented as a resistance to the Postmodern (where there are elements of the Modern and even the Premodern).

It is indeed possible to look at things from a different perspective and set aside the dogma of linear progress (or 'monotonous process'). The notion of time as a sociological category, on which the philosophy of multipolarity is based, helps to interpret the general paradigm of multipolarity in a completely different frame of reference.

Multipolarity as opposed to unipolarity and globalism is not simply a return to the old, a call to keep things as they are. Multipolarity does not insist on the preservation of nation states (the Westphalian world), nor on the restoration of a bipolar model (the Yalta world), nor on the freezing of the transitional state in which international life now finds itself.

Multipolarity is a vision of the future (of a kind never seen before), a project of world organisation and order based on completely new principles and foundations, a serious revision of the axioms on which modernity rests in an ideological, philosophical and sociological sense.

Multipolarity, just like unipolarity and globalisation, is geared towards the construction of something that has never been before, the creative tension of the free spirit, the philosophical quest and aspiration to build a better, more perfect, just, harmonious and happy society. But only the image of this society, its principles and values, as well as the methods of building its foundations are seen as radically different (by globalists). Multipolarity sees the future as multidimensional, variable, differentiated, heterogeneous, preserving a wide palette of choices of self-identification (collective and individual), as well as half-tones of neighbouring societies, with an overlap of different identification matrices. It is a model of the 'blossoming complexity' of the world, where many places combine with many times, where collective and individual actors of different scales enter into dialogue, clarifying, and sometimes transforming, their identities in the course of this dialogue. Western culture, philosophy, politics, economics and technology is seen in this future world as a local phenomenon, in no way superior to the culture, philosophy, politics, economics and technology of Asian societies, and even archaic tribes. All that we have to deal with in the form of different ethnicities, peoples, nations and civilisations are equal variations of 'human society' (Menschliche Gesellschaft), some 'enchanted' (M. Weber) and materially developed, others poor and simple, but 'enchanted' (M. Eliade), sacred, living in harmony and balance with the surrounding existence. Multipolarism accepts any choice a society makes, but any choice only becomes meaningful when it is linked to a space and a historical moment, and thus remains local. Western culture itself, perceived as something local, can be admired and looked up to, but its claim to universality and separation from historical context turns it into a simulacrum, a 'pseudo-Western', a caricature and kitsch. To a certain extent, this is what has happened to American culture, in which Europe is easily recognisable, but a hypertrophied, sterilised Europe, lacking internal harmony and proportion, charm and tradition, Europe as a universalist project rather than as an organic, albeit complex, paradoxical, dramatic, tragic and contradictory, historical and spatial phenomenon.

Multipolar versus unipolar (globalist/antiglobalist) Postmodernism

When it comes to the measurement of things in the world of the future, multipolar theory and postmodernism begin to have serious contradictions. Liberal and neo-Marxist postmodernism operate with the basic notions of the 'individual' and linear 'progress', which are conceived from the perspective of the 'liberation of the individual', and in the last phase from the perspective of the 'liberation of the individual' and the transition to the posthuman, the cyborg, the mutant, the rhizome, the clone. Moreover, it is the principle of individuality that they consider universal.

In these matters, the multipolar idea diverges sharply from the main line of postmodernism and affirms society, the collective personality, the collective consciousness (E. Durkheim) and the collective unconscious (C. G. Jung) at the centre of things. Society is the matrix of being; it creates individuals, people, languages, cultures, economies, political systems, time and space. But there is not just one society, there are many societies, and they are incommensurable with each other. Only in one type of society, Western Europe, has the individual become the 'measure of things' in such an absolute and complete form. And in other societies it has not become and will not become so, because they are organised in a completely different way. And every society must be recognised as having the inalienable right to be what it wants, to create reality according to its own concoctions, giving or not giving a higher value to the individual and the human being.

The same applies to 'progress'. Since time is a social phenomenon, it is structured differently in each society. In one society it contains an escalation of the individual's role in history, while in another it does not. Therefore, there is no predetermination on the scale of all societies on Earth regarding individualism and post-humanity. This is probably the fate of the West, linked to the logic of its history, but for other societies and peoples, individualism is indirectly relevant, and if it is present in their culture, it is usually in the form of colonial attitudes imposed from outside and alien to the paradigm of the local societies themselves, but it is the imperialist colonial universalism of the West that is the main opponent of the multipolar idea.

Using the terms of geopolitics, we can say that multipolarity is a terrestrial, continental and telluric version of postmodernism, while globalism (as well as anti-globalism) is its maritime and thalassocratic version.

That’s why, to conclude my speech, I think it’s pretty necessary to focus on our star as example, leader and vision of a multipolar future: the only possible, the only one with justice, with integral realization of human being, with a prosper horizon for all the lands of the Earth.

  La Stella di Ishtar: simbolo multipolare per un futuro multipolare

  L'étoile d'Ishtar : un symbole multipolaire pour un avenir multipolaire

  Το Αστέρι της Αστάρτης: Πολυπολικό σύμβολο για ένα πολυπολικό μέλλον

Israel Lira (Peru) writer, director of the Center of Crisolist Studies of Peru.

El Horizonte Iliberal como base y transición al Nuevo Orden Económico Multipolar y su trascendencia para el Perú e Iberoamérica

1 Introducción: el fin de Fukuyama por el paso de la historia

Fukuyama en 1992 nos dijo claramente que el fin de la historia era la victoria de la democracia liberal por sobre todo el orbe como última fase del desarrollo ideológico humano. Sin embargo, esa misma historia le ha jugado una mala pasada al politólogo estadounidense, en tanto que a la fecha el rechazo de esa forma de sistema político (democracia liberal) y socioeconómico (capitalismo liberal) es cíclico y se agudiza en tiempos de crisis. El mismo Fukuyama ha tenido que aceptar el nuevo escenario en una entrevista que diera a la revista londinense New Statesman en octubre de 2018, en donde refrenda el hecho que las democracias liberales ni siquiera tratan de definir lo que es una buena vida, sino que la dejan en manos de personas que se sienten alienados, sin propósito, y que por eso cada vez más es mayor el fenómeno en donde el pueblo se identifica con proyectos y grupos identitarios que les dan un sentido de comunidad. Pero eso no es todo, ya que, en una total contradicción con lo dicho en 1992, y en una clara muestra de la derrota de Fukuyama por la historia, este concluye que el socialismo debería volver. Desconocemos que entiende Fukuyama por socialismo, sin embargo, allí están sus declaraciones.

En esa misma línea, y cuando pensábamos que ya nada podía hacer que Fukuyama se desdijera aún más, no solo aceptando el retorno de políticas socialistas en determinadas áreas, en otra parte de la entrevista, y para sorpresa del entrevistador y de nosotros también, terminó por aceptar que Marx tenía razón en algunas cosas, ese fue el fin de Fukuyama.

Esto refrenda el hecho que estamos ante un nuevo escenario en la política internacional, bajo una visión que no es lineal, sino cíclica, que no es unipolar, sino multipolar, que no es individualista sino comunitaria, que no es liberal sino iliberal, y que no es capitalista sino anticapitalista o por lo menos orientada a formas alternativas, y que el matrimonio entre democracia y capitalismo (liberales) ha llegado a su fin (surgiendo democracias iliberales y capitalismos dirigidos), el matrimonio que Fukuyama vio como la última frontera, se tornó en sitio de descanso final, ante el inminente divorcio bajo la experiencia de las potencias emergentes, el rechazo a la globalización, la reafirmación del patriotismo como fenómeno popular y el fortalecimiento de las identidades étnicas y culturales de los pueblos.

2 El divorcio entre democracia y capitalismo (liberales) y el nuevo horizonte iliberal

Este divorcio ahora es un hecho consumado y solo sigue el camino de la desintegración, augurando el surgimiento de nuevos sistemas políticos y socioeconómicos, no por la subjetividad de nuestras palabras, sino por la objetividad de los hechos, y nos vamos directamente a las premisas fácticas, parafraseando a Mounk y Foa (2018), en el transcurso de un cuarto de siglo, las democracias liberales  han pasado de una posición de fortaleza económica sin precedentes a una posición de debilidad económica sin precedentes…(…). De los 15 países del mundo con los ingresos per cápita más altos, casi dos tercios son democracias no liberales. A ello se aúna la reciente noticia (RT, 13.04.2023) de que los BRICS han superado en creces al G7 en crecimiento económico, respecto del PBI Mundial.

Esto nos reafirma el hecho que las democracias liberales pierden terreno frente a las llamadas democracias iliberales que están teniendo una mayor fortaleza política y económica en la arena internacional y eso comprueba que, como decía Zizek (2018) el vínculo entre democracia y capitalismo está roto.

Dicho esto, queda claro que el nuevo horizonte no es de ninguna forma como Fukuyama lo previó, sino que se acerca cada día más a la visión del filósofo ruso Alexander Dugin, de un mundo multipolar, de una geopolítica de los grandes espacios, de una reversibilidad del tiempo, del advenimiento de una auténtica laocracia y del retorno a una visión comunitaria de la existencia humana como revalorización del ethos particular de los pueblos. Es decir, todo esto significa que el nuevo horizonte, es un horizonte iliberal que augurará el surgimiento de nuevos paradigmas políticos y socioeconómicos.

Es por estas razones que el factor socio-cultural está muy presente en la formación del poder actual de las potencias y de sus particulares sistemas y estructuras políticas y socio-económicas, en tanto han sabido reconocerse como civilizaciones. En lo que al Perú en particular como al continente iberoamericano en general respecta, tenemos todas las herramientas para tornar al continente en una gran potencia emergente, sin embargo, el Perú, como las democracias iberoamericanas en general, aún están en una transición a modelos cada vez más iliberales producto de las constantes luchas con sus oligarquías locales que por lo general siempre han sido serviles y funcionales a los modelos de democracia y economía liberales, particularmente neoliberales. Sin embargo, cada día se reafirma la voluntad nacional de optar por modelos iliberales (es decir, no-liberales) tanto en lo político como en lo económico, para efectos de trocar la posición económica de las naciones iberoamericanas siempre relegadas a la función de simples productores de materias primas, y no de productos manufacturados con valor agregado en la división internacional del trabajo.

3 El horizonte iliberal como etapa de transición a la Cuarta Teoría Económica

Volviendo a las potencias emergentes, es esta la razón por la que se habla cada vez más de democracias iliberales en detrimento de la democracia liberal, así como la razón de que se hable de capitalismo con valores asiáticos, de economía social de mercado o de socialismo con características chinas en detrimento del capitalismo liberal habitual. Es decir, sistemas políticos y económicos que se muestran como alternativas mixtas ante el fracaso de la tricotomía globalizante (en referencia al individualismo como propuesta ético-moral, a la democracia liberal como sistema político y al capitalismo liberal como sistema económico), y que está (tricotomía como decía Alain de Benoist, 2002) por su misma naturaleza totalitaria siempre es ajena e indiferente a las herencias culturales, las identidades colectivas, los patrimonios y los intereses nacionales.

Es en este escenario que la Cuarta Teoría Política de Alexander Dugin se está comenzando a manifestar también en el plano económico como Cuarta Teoría Económica (la cual está basada en tres principios que inferimos a nuestro parecer,  que sin ser limitativos, consideramos los centrales, como síntesis derivada de la exposición que Dugin hace respecto al tema: 1 Principio integral tanto del trabajador como sujeto como del trabajo como actividad; 2 Principio de interpretación escatológica de la realidad económica; y 3 Principio de equilibrio entre producción y consumo), en tanto no puede ser ajeno al hecho que si se parte del reconocimiento que el liberalismo se ha tornado en la única realidad existencial de la posmodernidad y que vivimos un tercer totalitarismo, no puede también dejar de aceptar que el capitalismo liberal es el sistema económico predilecto de esta realidad posliberal (en su tercera fase de capitalismo financiero).

Finalizando la presente, la Cuarta Teoría Económica como nuevo horizonte de interpretación de la economía, es precisamente eso, una guía de acción para una nueva orientación ontológica de la economía, y como guía se enriquecerá de las tradiciones y costumbres de los pueblos ancestrales y en ello su trascendencia tanto para el Perú como para el resto del continente iberoamericano en sus procesos de potenciamiento emergente para formar parte de esta naciente realidad multipolar con dignidad civilizacional. Es por ello que en el Perú los estudios políticos y socioeconómicos orientados cuarto teóricamente han derivado en la creación del Crisolismo como teoría política y económica peruana que integra las guías de acción de la Cuarta Teoría Política en general con el pensamiento andino en particular, y enello con la tradición ancestral peruana, con el Dasein peruano, el Dasein Andino- Amazónico al que también se agrega la tradición hispánica producto del sincretismo cultural, ya que, como el pueblo peruano, en lo que respecta a las formas políticas y económicas del mundo andino, como p.ej. en el tiempo de los Incas, siempre estuvieron guiados por dos principios: reciprocidad y redistribución. Son estos dos principios los que dieron forma al Tawantinsuyo como Imperio Hidráulico (en referencia al servicio y al sistema de administración del agua en el Imperio) que, con los matices del caso, sus vestigios, luego de casi 1,600 años, aún siguen en funcionamiento hasta nuestros días, aun beneficiando a muchas poblaciones locales. Eso es por lo que luchamos, un sistema político y socioeconómico para la eternidad.

 The Illiberal Horizon as a basis and transition to the New Multipolar Economic Order and its relevance for Peru and Ibero-America

  L'horizon illibéral comme base et transition vers le nouvel ordre économique multipolaire et sa transcendance pour le Pérou et l'Amérique latine

  De Illiberale Horizon als basis en overgang naar de Nieuwe Multipolaire Economische Orde en de transcendentie ervan voor Peru en Ibero-Amerika

 Der Illiberale Horizont als Grundlage und Übergang zur Neuen Multipolaren Wirtschaftsordnung und ihre Transzendenz für Peru und Iberoamerika

Lucas Leiroz (Brazil) journalist, secretary of foreign relations of Nova Resistência.

Christos voskrese! Christ is risen!

Dear friends, colleagues, brothers and comrades,

my most sincere gratitude to each of you for this event. As a member of Nova Resistência, I’m immensely grateful to Professor Alexandr Dugin and his team, the International Russophile Movement and the Chinese friends of the Thinker’s Forum for making this event a true pillar for the construction of the Multipolar World.

I think this conference is precisely the model we want of a new world. Often, people think Multipolarity means ideas such as isolationism and less integration between nations. But this has nothing to do with Multipolarity.

In recent decades, we were led to believe that liberal globalization was the greatest advent in human history, integrating peoples, cultures and civilizations in a world of greater mutual respect between people and a greater level of tolerance for differences. But we know this is a lie.

Globalization is a false concept. It has never existed as in academic terms. "Globalization" is nothing more than "Westernization". And we only use the word "globalization" precisely because the West has somehow become "global".

With the end of the Cold War and the victory of the US, we absolutely lost the geographical and ideological perception in our minds. Liberalism has become nature itself. And the West became the globe itself. What was once ideological became normal and natural. What was once modern western civilization became global civilization itself.

But it didn't take long for us to remember the words of Proudhon and Carl Schmitt: whoever invokes humanity wants to cheat. In the years following the victory of the capitalist West, wars of aggression and invasions of all kinds began around the world. Wars were waged in the name of what they called “humanity” and so we, non-Western peoples, realized very quickly that we were not really members of that "global civilization", of that "humanity". We realized that globalization was not peaceful, but a violent process of forced domination of all peoples, guaranteed by wars and terror.

And it was at that moment that we understood we were alone. That the western powers would not come to our rescue and save us of the misery and chaos to which they themselves have subjected us. It was also then that we realized that to overcome such situation we needed to unite, cooperate with each other, and rewrite the history of nations.

This awareness that we, non-western peoples, only had each other made us gradually recognize that everything we had been taught was wrong. It made us see that we did not live in any global civilization without borders, but in a determined physical, geographical space, filled with our symbols, our language, our culture, our religion.

It made us acknowledge that we were not the outsiders of a global union called "humanity", but that we are true humanity, in the full sense of the term: the qualitative harmony of all peoples. And only then were we able to begin our march towards freedom.

This march is above all mental and spiritual. Our war starts in our minds and our hearts. It is there that we must free ourselves from the main western chains. And until this is done, we will not be able to face the physical battles properly. As long as we are colonized in our minds and spirits, no matter how much our countries have some kind of formal sovereignty, we will remain hostages to our oppressors.

I consider this event, therefore, the result of this human consciousness that we are developing. The result of the Great Awakening, which makes us realize that in fact we, not them, are Humanity.

So, this is precisely what I mean by Multipolarity. The human awakening. The awareness that we are together in a war against those who want to subjugate, colonize and annihilate us. That is why we must always be together, united, integrated and exchanging perspectives and knowledge. We have a lot to learn and gain from each other. And this conference is proof of that.

We know that ideas only are not enough and that there is also a physical war. We know that right now our heroes are sacrificing their lives on the battlefield to fight for Multipolarity. And we honor their necessary work beyond everything. However, we must also have in minds that this is a mental and spiritual war and that our philosophers and saints are the number one enemies of the globalists.

Thank you all.

 Discurso de Lucas Leiroz para a Conferência Global Multipolar

 La nostra guerra inizia nelle nostre menti e nei nostri cuori

 Discours de Lucas Leiroz à la Conférence mondiale sur la multipolarité

 Discurso de Lucas Leiroz para la Conferencia Global Multipolar

 Toespraak van Lucas Leiroz voor de Global Conference on Multipolarity

 Rede von Lucas Leiroz für die Global Multipolar Conference

Juan Gabriel Caro Rivera (Colombia) –  metapolitical and geopolitical analyst, founder of Vanguardia Colombia

I would first like to thank the organizers of this event for allowing me to participate in it. Specially the professor Alexander Dugin and Raphael Machado for invite it me to this important event.

I would like begin this intervention say the rise of multipolarity implies the awakening of the great civilizations, both past and future, which today is taking place everywhere. Some of the poles of the multipolar world are already de facto tangible realities, as is the case of the United States, Russia or China. However, there are other poles that have not even been established yet, as is the case of our continent. If we want to become an independent pole, we must first carry out a process of conceptual decolonization of our vocabulary, which implies the deconstruction of the predominant discourses. Broadly speaking, there are three discourses about our continent:

1. The first discourse is that which has been traced from the West and which is expressed in liberal, communist and nationalist ideologies alike. For this Westernized discourse, Latin America as a whole is a territory without history that has not managed to modernize successfully and, therefore, to integrate itself to the benefits of globalization. Due to its historical defects, superstitions, myths and lack of rationalism, its peoples and cultures have been incapable of assuming modernization and progress. This discourse is common to both conservative and progressive currents that wish to impose the standards of European and American Modernity on our lands. Speeches such as that there is more territory than State or lack of rationalization of the economy belong to this modern and enlightened scheme. The main representative of this trend was Domingo Faustino Sarmiento, who established a disjunction between civilization and barbarism. By civilization Sarmiento understood the Yankee culture and its modern man, while he condemned as barbarism the Catholic Baroque culture of the Indians, blacks and gauchos of the continental peoples as residues of a bygone era, a culture belonging to the twelfth century.
2. The second discourse on our continent is the one expressed by Hispanists, reactionaries, Catholics, Carlists and all the pro-monarchist and traditionalist Hispanic-American currents. For these currents everything that is perceived as noise or lack of history and modernity by the dominant ideological currents of the Enlightenment is rather considered by them as an expression of the traditions of the Hispanic-Lusitanian peoples. This current of thought considers that the Hispanic monarchy, its institutions and its geopolitical unity was destroyed by modern ideologies such as nationalism, liberalism and communism, all of them being equally guilty of eliminating the universal Catholic monarchy that had dominated this continent. This discourse, of course, is typical of the intellectual, juridical, traditionalist and monarchist elites who long to return to a past destroyed by the subsequent enlightened revolutions. This discourse is not the discourse of the people either, and the Logos of our nations does not shine in it.
3. The third discourse on our continent does not belong either to the modern majority enlightened elites or to the minority and marginal traditionalist elites. This third discourse was created by a series of heterodox, baroque and popular movements that expressed the originality of the mixtures and manifestations of our peoples from their particular ethnogenesis to the present day. We could say that it is the language of the poets and writers who, through literary modernism, made the Logos of our continent speak. This third discourse is based on the thesis that the first discourse is false, but the second discourse is incomplete and it is necessary to search deeper and deeper in our imaginary or ethnic sense, understanding that the Logos of our people cannot be expressed by an elitist or nostalgic language. That is why literary modernism, represented by Rubén Darío, José Asunción Silva, José Enrique Rodó or José Martí, focused their attention on myths, stories, legends and pre-modern structures that sought to abolish progress, seeking to return to the archaic and mythical elements that had given birth to our ethnic groups. Thus it was necessary for modernist poets and writers to re-sacralize reality and overcome Western nihilism by going much further than the ancients: inspired by Nietzsche, they all proposed the superman as the conqueror of God and Nothingness. This last discourse is neither about the future (progressive) nor about the past (reactionary), but about the abolition of time and the opening to Eternity (the present). It is worth noting that Latin American modernism was contemporary to the Russian Silver Age and has many parallels with it, how, for example, the exploration of pagan themes and spirituality against the positivist and scientific world.

If our continent wants to become a multipolar pole of the world, then it is necessary for us to take on the task of creating a new culture that can confront Modernity. Such a task has already been taken on by many of our thinkers and must be taken on by us today.

 Los tres discursos sobre el mundo indiano

Iubinda Habazoka (Zambia) – President of the Economic Association of Zambia

Thank you very much for letting me speak from the perspective of the African continent. The world as we know it has actually not been able to develop to provide basic necessities to its citizens due to the unfair conditions in the global financial economic architecture. If you look to the history of the development, we had different empires, from the Greek Empire up to the Soviet Union, and it is USA who created hegemony and unipolar world.

When you look from the African perspective to develop this world, should be able to develop a system where all countries are equal

Look at the issues that happened in countries like Cuba. For example, there`s a lot of discussions about which economic system is better: capitalism, socialism, elements of communism or mixed market economy. But unfortunately, socialism, for example, in countries like Cuba, has been unable to succeed , because of laws that world police made impossible for such countries to succeed. If sanctions were lifted today from Cuba, it would be one of the most developed countries in the world. If you look to the Cuban economy, it has one of the most advanced health systems, unfortunately due to unfair sanctions, pushed on it, it’s economy the economy is not performing well

Developments in Ukraine and other regions have shown, that even countries like Russia can be sanctioned, and that should be a signal to Africa, Latin America, even Asia, that even member of UN with the power of veto, a superpower with missiles can be sanctioned, removed from SWIFT, which two years ago was before a global instrument… Countries can be removed from SWIFT, which means than nobody is insured from such acts. It is quite important that countries realised (Latin America, Africa) that the world is unipolar, and we need multipolar world, we need competing powers, and of course the history gives the opportunity to Brazil, Argentina, South Africa and Africa, Nigeria, China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Iran (which was attacked by sanctions) – each country has its own government system. There is no country that should force government system on another one. The United Kingdom, monarchy – nobody condemn that, but you find that it condemn countries like Eswatini which is also monarchy.

But the British monarchy is funded 100% government sources, and nobody has the same. You go to Saudi Arabia, and they all say there`s unfair system. Iran has its own system, that`s what they want to do, you can`t force them. Israel has its own system, African countries have their own system. Each one should live the way they want to live. But the world itself should be developed the way that there`s no country dictating on another – how we should live.

Why haven`t we developed, as economies? We didn`t develop, because the system created Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, United States in 1944, the dollar system. There was no way for countries like Zambia, where I come from, South Africa or China. But unfortunately we need to go on by US dollar just to ship goods across the border. We need to use US dollar just to buy goods, or sell goods to China.

And because we have to deal with that, we suffer just looking for the greenbacks. Because of that we are all dependent on a system where there is only one international currency.

We are also not able to speed out or implement necessary economic reforms that we want, because of the power of international economic institutions. We have IMF, where we are second class membersб where we have no say.

In conclusion, I`d like to say that the world should take this opportunity to ensure that BRICS and other big platforms create alternatives to make the multipolar world possible. We need strong Russia, strong China, and even strong US, or Italy. But we should not have one country dictating us how to live.

Carlos Mamani  (Peru) –  geopolitical analyst, Director of the think-tank Proyecto Patria

Tras la caída de la URSS, en las postrimerías del Siglo XX hasta la primera década del siglo XXI, el orden anglosajón mantuvo su indiscutible hegemonía unipolar atlantista a escala global, en dónde con ímpetu luciférico trató por todos los medios de frenar el avance del devenir histórico, cantando victoria y enarbolando precisamente ”el fin de la historia" (al decir de Fukuyama), propugnando e imponiendo a sangre y fuego un mundo regentado bajo las premisas del liberalismo en lo económico (neoliberalismo), en lo cultural (posmodernismo), y en ético-axiológico (individualismo); sin embargo, este breve como intenso periodo de hegemonía unipolar, empezó a dar evidentes signos de desgaste, fundamentalmente debido a condiciones geopolíticas objetivas y concretas, que simplemente hacen ya insostenible cualquier pretensión de perpetuar el dominio anglosajón bajo el formato del proyecto de "Un Nuevo Siglo Americano".

Y en efecto, la imposibilidad de un "Nuevo Siglo Americano" es ya un hecho y no solo una mera expectativa, pues durante las primeras décadas de este incierto e inquietante Siglo XXI, actores revisionistas de primer orden en el globo, principalmente como Rusia (que ha recuperado importantes capacidades militares) y China (que es ya la primera economía mundial), están socavando las bases del desgastado orden unipolar atlantista, y se posicionan a la vanguardia en la construcción de un Nuevo Orden Internacional de Naturaleza Multipolar, centrado geoestratégicamente en el retorno de los grandes espacios civilizatorios, expresado en la idea del "Estado Civilización" frente al cada más obsoleto Estado-Nación westfaliano, que ya cumplió su rol en la historia, y que simplemente ya no puede ser ningún obstáculo para los intereses predatorios de las elites tecno-plutocráticas del Foro de Davos.

Evidentemente, a la luz del Siglo XXI estamos adentrándonos en un mundo cada vez más y más Post-Occidental, en la medida de que hoy el denominado "occidente colectivo" sufre y padece la multipolaridad, esto es: el ascenso de otros centros/polos de poder en el globo, que ponen en jaque sus intereses hegemónicos durante esta centuria. Y en efecto, hoy "movimientos tectónicos" flagelan al declinante orden unipolar atlantista, hoy la mayoría demográfica global habitante del sur geográfico global, reclama su parte en la nueva configuración internacional fundamentada en economía física/real (esto es: materias primas, producción e infraestructura), en dónde todos los pueblos históricamente postergados por los proyectos imperialistas del norte global, puedan hacer prevalecer sus intereses nacionales para así garantizar el acceso al verdadero desarrollo, y al mismo tiempo garantizar el respeto irrestricto a las sanas diferencias civilizatorias/culturales entre los mismos.

Evidentemente, a la luz del Siglo XXI estamos adentrándonos en un mundo cada vez más y más Post-Occidental, en la medida de que hoy el denominado "occidente colectivo" sufre y padece la multipolaridad, esto es: el ascenso de otros centros/polos de poder en el globo, que ponen en jaque sus intereses hegemónicos durante esta centuria. Y en efecto, hoy "movimientos tectónicos" flagelan al declinante orden unipolar atlantista, hoy la mayoría demográfica global habitante del sur geográfico global, reclama su parte en la nueva configuración internacional fundamentada en economía física/real (esto es: materias primas, producción e infraestructura), en dónde todos los pueblos históricamente postergados por los proyectos imperialistas del norte global, puedan hacer prevalecer sus intereses nacionales para así garantizar el acceso al verdadero desarrollo, y al mismo tiempo garantizar el respeto irrestricto a las sanas diferencias civilizatorias/culturales entre los mismos.

En este escenario de transición sistémica hacia el Nuevo Orden Internacional Multipolar del Siglo XXI, es de vital importancia asumir con responsabilidad el rol que la historia en estos momentos tan aciagos para la humanidad nos delega; el de ser embajadores en nuestros respectivos países del mensaje multipolar, esto es, sentar precedente a través de la praxis de la Diplomacia Popular, proponiendo la multipolaridad cómo nuevo paradigma realista de la política exterior en esta centuria, y como superador de los desfasados marcos teóricos de nuestros lamentables servicios diplomáticos, arbitrariamente hegemonizados por el idealismo y el internacionalismo jurídico de la teoría liberal de las relaciones internacionales, que ya no da cuenta de la actual realidad mundial, y siempre funcional al hoy declinante orden atlantista-anglosajón.

Gracias!!!

  Stiamo entrando in un mondo sempre più post-occidentale

Mario Padilla (Cuba) – professor of the Center of the investigations of international politics.

¿Hacia dónde vamos? Una visión reflexiva y futura de la multipolaridad solidaria.

Ponente: Dr. Mario Antonio Padilla Torres. Estimados organizadores de la Global Conference on Multipolarity. Queridos colegas, amigos de todo el mundo. Agradezco el desarrollo de esta conferencia y la invitación que me han hecho.

Soy cubano y ante todo abogo por un mundo multipolar solidario Hay que invocar a la sensatez si queremos que nuestro bello planeta azul no desaparezca. Hay que evitar a todo costo que prevalezca la máxima romana de… “Divide et impera”, propia de un mundo unipolar, donde un solo país quiere imponer los designios imperiales sin importar las propuestas de otros.

En un mundo unipolar lleno de problemas globales y tendencias apocalípticas, el nuevo coronavirus, las guerras y el militarismo ha zarandeado el entramado de las relaciones internacionales, en las economías de países de diferentes estadios de desarrollo, se agudizan las crisis, removido los cimientos del comercio, restringido la comunicación humana, se desarrolla la fakenews y una infodemia sin límite en las telecomunicaciones.

¿Qué hacer? ¿Cómo podría ser el futuro? ¿Cómo serían las relaciones internacionales entre los países de diferente desarrollo económico? ¿Cúal sería las perspectivas de los países del Sur, ¿Qué pasará con la verdadera justicia social?, ¿Tendremos paz o tocarán los tambores de la guerra global? Todas estas interrogantes podría preguntarse cualquier ser humano humilde en este mundo.

Es necesario recordar desde nuestras tierras latinoamericanas que en 1492 cuando Cristóbal Colón llegaba a nuestras tierras nacía una Era en la historia de la humanidad, la vida comenzaba a transformarse de forma vertiginosa, y fue involucrándose el mundo en lo económico, político y cultural, el llamado encuentro entre dos culturas, no era más que un acto de conquista. Nadie podría imaginarse cuanto cambiaría el orbe 531 años después.

Por otra parte como elemento interesante y complementario de los próximos cambios mundiales nace la Primera Revolución Industrial que fue el proceso de transformación económica, social y tecnológica que se inició en la segunda mitad del siglo XVIII en el Reino Unido y se extendió unas décadas después a gran parte de Europa occidental y Norteamérica, y que concluyó entre 1820 y 1840 Durante este periodo se vivió el mayor conjunto de transformaciones económicas, tecnológicas y sociales de la historia de la humanidad desde la antigüedad y dio el paso desde una economía rural basada fundamentalmente en la agricultura y el comercio a otra de carácter urbano, industrializada y mecanizada.

Dentro de las transformaciones tecnológicas se destacan: la introducción de la máquina de vapor de James Watt en las diferentes industrias, el desarrollo de los barcos y ferrocarriles, la aparición del motor de combustión interna, la energía eléctrica y otros.

Como consecuencia del desarrollo industrial nacieron nuevos grupos o clases sociales encabezadas por los trabajadores industriales y campesinos pobres— y la burguesía dueña de los medios de producción y poseedora de la mayor parte de la renta y el capital.

Esta nueva división social dio pie al desarrollo de problemas sociales y laborales, protestas populares y nuevas ideologías que propugnaban y demandaban una mejora de las condiciones de vida de las clases más desfavorecidas, por la vía del sindicalismo, el anarquismo y el socialismo.

La Segunda Revolución Industrial se destacó por el conjunto de transformaciones socio económicas interrelacionadas que se produjeron aproximadamente entre 1870 y el comienzo de la primera guerra mundial en 1914 Durante este período los cambios se aceleraron fuertemente. El proceso de industrialización cambió su naturaleza y el crecimiento económico varió de modelo. Los cambios técnicos siguieron ocupando una posición central, junto a los ocurridos en los mercados, en su tamaño y estructura.

Las innovaciones técnicas concentradas esencialmente, en nuevas fuentes deenergía como el gas, el petróleo o la electricidad; nuevos materiales y nuevos sistemas de transporte (avión y automóvil) y comunicación (teléfono y radio) indujeron transformaciones en cadena que afectaron al factor trabajo y al sistema educativo y científico; al tamaño y gestión de las empresas, a la forma de organización del trabajo y la aparición y utilización de nuevos materiales: acero, zinc, aluminio, níquel, manganeso, cromo, cobre.

El desarrollo vertiginoso de la industria química como la aparición de: la sosa, el bicarbonato sódico, surgimiento de colorantes artificiales de productos derivados de la hulla, como el alquitrán, el benzol. Se descubren nuevos explosivos químicos que estallan por percusión como la nitrocelulosa y la nitroglicerina, así como el invento de la dinamita

En el campo la demanda dio lugar al desarrollo de los abonos químicos o fertilizantes sintéticos. Se van a elaborar superfosfatos y nitrato sódico, este último se elabora a partir de nitratos minerales procedentes de la Antártida. Otros elementos minerales indispensables para las plantas también se sintetizaron químicamente como el abono de potasio.

Pero en esta época tan dinámica nacen los síntomas del imperialismo según expresó Lenin al referirse a la guerra- cubana-española-norteamericana (como la primera guerra imperialista de la historia).A partir de ese momento se empieza a reflejar un unipolarismo en la historia de la humanidad, aunque la narrativa la cuenten distinta, el nacimiento de la Gran Revolución Socialista de Octubre, fue otro cambio de época, surge un nuevo paradigma: un nuevo sistema económico político y social, fue la primera resistencia a ese mundo unipolar que quería nacer.

Bueno, malo o con errores, esa revolución, más tarde la URSS y después el campo socialista, frenó los impulsos imperiales y se pudo salvar el mundo de su autodestrucción por los tambores de la guerra iniciada por el extremismo nacionalista y fascistas en varias regiones del planeta, el mundo se mantuvo bipolar aunque hay algunos que plantean que tripolar por el nacimiento y desarrollo de los movimientos de liberación nacional en varios lugares del orbe.

La caída del campo socialista y el derrumbe de la URSS, fueron fenómenos funestos para la humanidad, el imperialismo norteamericano aprovecho las brechas de los errores e intentó convertirse en el gendarme mundial y en muchos aspectos lo logró, a pesar del reducto socialista ( China, Corea del Norte, Laos, Vietnam y Cuba) y de movimientos progresistas. Los imperialistas gobernaban, imponían, el unitarelalismo se desarrollo a pesar de los esfuerzos revolucionarios. Que le brindo al mundo el unitarelalismo: más miserias, hambre, conflictos, terrorismo de Estado, xenofobia en fin un neoliberalismo atroz. Todo país que no repitiera o aceptara los designios de los imperialistas eran enemigos no importaba ahora las ideologías, lo importante era el reinado imperial y cada día las perspectiva del Sur Global se veía más lejos.

La tercera revolución industrial comienza en el año 2006 según los especialistas, a esta revolución se le conoce como una revolución científico – tecnológica, resultante de una nueva fusión de ideas de esos dos ámbitos y además se le añade el calificativo de Revolución de la Inteligencia o tercera revolución tecnológica.

Esta revolución se destacó por los nuevos modelos de comunicación, se transforman y se logra una conjunción entre el avance tecnológico de las comunicaciones, el uso y desarrollo del internet y las nuevas modalidades de energía renovables.

La Cuarta Revolución Industrial se caracteriza por una gama de nuevas tecnologías que fusionan los mundos físico, digital y biológico, impactando en todas las disciplinas, economías e industrias, e incluso desafiando ideas sobre lo que significa ser humano. Las principales tecnologías de la cuarta revolución industrial son las siguientes: internet de las cosas, cobots, realidad aumentada y la realidad virtual, Big data, impresión 3D y 4D, desarrollo de la robótica, nanotecnología y la 5G

El desarrollo de la cuarta revolución industrial no se localiza en un solo país, otros participan de esa globalización que repercute de forma positiva en algunas naciones mientras otras son cada día más recolonizadas. En fin, el desarrollo de las fuerzas productivas esta vez como un soplo abre más la brecha en los procesos de las relaciones de producción.

Sin embargo hoy diariamente llegan noticias que nos confirman una crisis globalizadora, la cual abarca no solo la economía y las finanzas, se enfatizan también en los procesos culturales y en el fenómeno ecosistémico y por supuesto lo más crítico: la pandemia del nuevo coronavirus que ha situado al mundo al borde de un descalabro sanitario y económico global. ¿Es posible así tener un mundo multipolar solidario? Claro que no, la multipolaridad no es solo un desarrollo tecnológico universal, también el desarrollo de la cultura como proceso general humano que incluye las posibilidades para las grandes masas desposeídas.

El problema del cambio climático es una realidad universal: aumentos o bajas temperaturas, incendios periódicos en amplias áreas boscosas, elevación del nivel del mar, deshielización de los cascos polares y otros fenómenos naturales presentan la realidad del desequilibrio ecosistémico.

La monopolización prácticamente total de internet posibilita al imperio del norte tener un control casi universal, la guerra se traslada de lo real a lo virtual, el ciberterrorismo se desarrolla en casi todas las regiones del mundo.

Las mentiras se transforman por el imperio en parecidas verdades, el mundo se actualiza con mentiras o se desactualiza con verdades. La Xenofobia un fenómeno peligroso en las actuales relaciones internacionales, ya influye con fuerza, y se va internacionalizando una vez renacido en países donde la práctica de la xenofobia siempre estuvo presente y que renace por haber llegado al poder grupos de este tipo o habérseles permitido por la ultraderecha que sean más visible en sus países, regiones o a nivel mundial.

El surgimiento de nuevas potencias entre ellas se encuentran China Rusia, la India, Irán, y otras constituye un cierto freno hacia la preeminencia de otros países imperiales en la arena internacional, la visibilidad y posicionamiento fundamentalmente de Rusia (mayor extensión territorial y elevado desarrollo militar) y China país más poblado del mundo y desarrollo económico con ímpetu sistemático se ve como un peligro en los gobiernos de los países imperialistas, fundamentalmente en el de los EUA.

Debemos buscar mecanismos que nos lleven a otras narrativas y el surgimiento de otro paradigma multipolar, que nos ayude a pensar diferente, que busquemos una paz verdadera y no hipócrita, una solidaridad sin límites en la salida de este laberinto unipolar, apostar con resolución con alianzas a la multipolaridad solidaria es la utopía a lograr y hoy se nos están dando las condiciones. Es difícil vaticinar cual sería en unas décadas el nuevo orden mundial, lo que si la vida ha demostrado es que de las crisis surgen nuevos paradigmas. Roma vivió muchos años de imperio, aplastó regiones del mundo, pero su propio poderío lo llevó a la destrucción desde sus entrañas.

Los imperios de hoy tarde o temprano también perecerán, quizás estepensamiento sea una fantasía sin salida hoy, pero de los más diversos laberintos se sale a la claridad y lejos del cerco imperial, el optimismo y voluntad de lucha, más las condiciones creadas conllevan a un nuevo paradigma en los cuales creo e invito a la reflexión y la acción.

La ciencia y la tecnología a pesar de sus avances en los grandes países ricos de la misma forma que forjó un camino, deteriora economía de países pequeños económicamente y lo que es mucho más grave está rompiendo con el equilibrio de ecosistemas donde peligra la especie humana: ya se habla y en algunos sitios se palpa la influencia de los cambios climáticos, las grandes sequías, inundaciones, elevaciones del nivel del mar la aparición de nuevas y desconocidas enfermedades, y la pandemia de la pobreza ¿Cómo imaginarse un mundo hacia el futuro? Creo que será atrevido, incoherente en ocasiones, pero tengo el optimismo que no habrá quien lo gobierne todo. Tiene que existir un mundo entrelazado, vinculado donde prime la comunidad de intereses reales.

No se trata de llamar al cataclismo universal, sino de reflejar qué tendremos si seguimos por los caminos del egoísmo, la incomprensión, la falta de humanismo y solidaridad.

Llamar la atención a la opinión pública internacional por todas las vías es el papel que le corresponde a los seres humanos que sienten y padecen el golpe en la mejilla del prójimo, a aquellos que con su inteligencia y humanismo luchan como científicos en laboratorios por destruir el virus de las incomprensiones, a políticos, intelectuales, dirigentes sociales y académicos que queremos un mundo mejor para nuestros descendientes, va mi mensaje desde mi pequeña isla que ha sufrido los embates de un feroz bloqueo durante más de 60 años y seguimos luchando por salir adelante, la vida nos ha demostrado que podemos vencer los obstáculos, la unidad en la diversidad debe ser nuestra divisa, buscar lo que nos une para lograr un mundo multipolar y solidario.

Concluir este tema es imposible, son muchas los fenómenos cognoscibles y aun ignotos que forman parte de nuestro mundo y particularmente de las relaciones internacionales. El mundo científico-técnico mientras más se desarrolla, complica la comprensión de los problemas económicos, políticos, culturales y sociales y aun más cuando quien posee el poder lo utiliza para su conveniencia.

Los problemas globales se multiplicarán si no se logra confianza en las relaciones entre los Estados, cuestión lejana aun, máxime cuando la lucha por el posicionamiento geopolítico se hace cada día más visible.

O perece el mundo por el egoísmo de algunos países o se buscaran alianzas amplias o regionales que mejore el status económico, político y social hasta lograr un nivel de desarrollo donde los resultados sea el fruto igualitario de los integrantes de las alianzas.

La multipolaridad se está abriendo camino, un solo país no puede ser el máximo gobernador, el liderazgo, la política de alianzas compartidas puede ocurrir si se logra el reconocimiento de otros países desarrollados o de desigual desarrollo o desaparecerá la humanidad, por conflictos de todo tipo, incluyendo nucleares y grandes enfrentamientos que involucrarían prácticamente todos los países del mundo.

La vida en la tierra está en peligro, no debemos subestimar esto, el nuevo coronavirus, las viejos conflictos y los nuevos han sacado a la luz problemas éticos y culturales de los seres humanos; ingratitudes, calumnias mentiras y egoísmo lo hemos vivido sin reparo alguno, como al mismo tiempo se han alzado con humanismo países desarrollados y menos desarrollados que han dado ejemplos al mundo de modestia y desinterés, pero eso no es todo, hay que invocar a la sensatez, a la multipolaridad solidaria, ajena del hegemonismo, si queremos que nuestro bello planeta azul no desaparezca. Tenemos que recordar la máxima romana….”Alea Jacta est. Muchas gracias.

La Habana, Cuba 29 de abril 2023

Luis Bozzo (Chile) - philosopher and national director of Chilean Center of Patriotic Studies

Concepto de Originalidad en Nuestra América y su potencia política en los procesos de transformación de la realidad para la multipolaridad

Un cordial saludo, amigos, camaradas y oyentes de todo el mundo. La breve ponencia que os traigo se titula: “Concepto de Originalidad en Nuestra América y su potencia política en los procesos de transformación de la realidad para la multipolaridad”.

“El Dasein son los pueblos” fue una frase que nos dijo el Profesor Dugin en la conversación por video llamada pública que tuvimos a finales del año 2020 Este relevante concepto de la filosofía del Dasein, Ser-ahí, popularizado por el filósofo alemán Martin Heidegger, ha retomado bastante relevancia en la actualidad, comenzando por re-ejercer la clásica pregunta por el Ser, pregunta que no trata precisamente de una cuestión de mera metafísica o de especulación retórica, sino de un asunto fundamental que apunta a una máxima comprensión de la realidad y entendimiento de la originalidad como fenómeno, en una época donde el espejismo y la ilusión, la repetición de la producción en masa, la moda, se transforman en un paradigma existencial, es decir, impera una existencia inauténtica prolongada dentro un plano universal, cuya extensión imperialista se corona en lo que se conoce como globalización.

¿Y que sucede en nuestra América?, ¿Qué es el Ser?, ¿Qué somos?, ¿Para qué somos?, son preguntas que la mayoría no se hace, y quienes las han realizado no suelen llegar a la profundidad del asunto. Si lo lograron ver variados legendarios libertadores, revolucionarios y grandes del pensamiento de nuestro continente. En la pregunta por el Ser, radica el significado de la originalidad, que va más allá de la palabra origen, pues, es cierto que todos descendemos y cargamos con una cultura, ancestros, formas de concebir la existencia, tradiciones, etc, pero también consideramos el potencial de la transformación de nuestro entorno, la praxis, por tanto, es incompleto decir que somos solo una consecuencia del pasado, o que nuestro destino es conservar un pasado, estar condicionados por destino, no, esa es una parte de la dimensión, porque también somos nuestro futuro (nuestro, entendiendo nuestra realidad particular como continente). El poder de la obra humana puede sacudir el mundo, borrar y crear épocas. El poder de la rebelión, de la revolución.

En nuestra américa por ejemplo, se da el fenómeno del mestizaje y la transculturización, la interculturalidad y la interacción de los más variados pueblos y en diferentes escalas. Han surgido conceptos como la raza cósmica y la patria grande, el gran crisol. A todo esto se le suele contraponer un falso mito occidental que habla de una supuesta pérdida de la pureza del origen del viejo mundo, un pecado original, pureza diluida en este exótico nuevo continente, desarrollándose en los pueblos una concepción falsa que acepta con resentimiento lo que otros piensan de nosotros, eliminando la conciencia de lo que nosotros pensamos sobre nosotros y para nosotros. Aquellos que se perciben como hijos bastardos del viejo mundo, aceptan la dogmática ajena a nuestro ser, aceptan la imposición, y olvidan la reafirmación de sí mismos. Necesitamos de campeones de la creación, de la rebelión y no de imitadores conformistas.

Las élites liberales-conservadores y mercantiles semicoloniales, las oligarquías que erradicaron a muchos libertadores y se asentaron en el poder hasta nuestros días, han intentado ser una prolongación imitadora de Occidente, aman los Estados Unidos, occidente en general. Por lo mismo, los pueblos, los trabajadores, los soldados, los pescadores, los pequeños negocios tradicionales, los campesinos no ejercen  Las élites liberales-conservadores y mercantiles semicoloniales, las oligarquías que erradicaron a muchos libertadores y se asentaron en el poder hasta nuestros días, han intentado ser una prolongación imitadora de Occidente, aman los Estados Unidos, occidente en general. Por lo mismo, los pueblos, los trabajadores, los soldados, los pescadores, los pequeños negocios tradicionales, los campesinos no ejercen soberanía ni política ni económica, aceptan la imposición, aceptan el paradigma que otros arrojan sobre ellos.

Por todo esto, en esta realidad de estar arrojados sobre el mundo, cuando nacemos nos enfrentamos como eyectados sobre una realidad determinada, nos estrellamos de cara con estos espejismos que reinan. La filosofía del Ser es un arma que nos permite comprender donde estamos arrojados. Si me veo arrojado en un mundo que me interpone un falso paradigma, me veo en la obligación de construirme a mí mismo, de emprender la rebelión, ser para la liberación, ser soberano de mi existencia, desarticulando la cadena, haciendo desaparecer la sombra de lo que dicen que somos, para afirmar lo que de verdad soy, contraponiendo esto a una matriz inauténtica. Esta visualización de la realidad, me otorga la herramienta lúcida para hacer política, organizar fuerza revolucionaria efectiva, concretando la posibilidad de ejercer el poder y conquistar aquella soberanía en su totalidad, despertando al gigante continental para la lucha contra el imperialismo de la falsedad. He ahí la capacidad de potencia de comprender y aceptar nuestra originalidad. Me valida por afirmación y no por negación.

Manuel Espinoza (Nicaragua) – geopolitical analyst, Director of the Regional Center of International Analysis of Nicaragua

La Construcción Practica del Orden Multipolar desde el 2000

Manuel Salvador Espinoza Jarquín

Director Del Centro de Estudios Internacionales (CREI-Nicaragua)

Las bases teóricas de la Multipolaridad son varias teorías y enfoques de las relaciones internacionales que incluyen:

1. Realismo: que sostiene que el poder como factor más importante en las relaciones entre los estados. En un sistema multipolar, varios estados tienen un equilibrio de poder relativo y ninguno tiene un poder abrumador. Como resultado, los estados deben equilibrar sus intereses y evitar la guerra.
2. Constructivismo: es un enfoque sobre que las normas, valores y creencias tienen un impacto significativo en las relaciones internacionales. En un sistema multipolar, los estados pueden cooperar y competir en función de las normas y valores compartidos.
3. Teoría de los sistemas internacionales: se refiere a la idea de que el sistema internacional es un sistema complejo de interacciones entre los estados. En un sistema multipolar, varios actores tienen influencia y poder en diferentes áreas y regiones del mundo, y estos actores interactúan en un sistema complejo.
4. Teoría de la interdependencia compleja: sostiene que los estados están interconectados y dependen unos de otros en muchas áreas diferentes, como la economía, la seguridad y el medio ambiente. Los estados deben cooperar para abordar problemas globales y maximizar sus intereses económicos.

Podemos asegurar entonces, que la teoría de la multipolaridad se basa en la idea de que varios actores internacionales tienen influencia y poder en diferentes áreas y regiones del mundo, y que ninguno de ellos puede imponer su voluntad sobre los demás de manera unilateral.

La construcción del orden multipolar, ha sido un proceso complejo que ha implicado varias etapas hasta ahora:

1. El debilitamiento del orden unipolar existente: Esto es el resultado de una serie de factores, como el declive del poder de un estado, como los EE.UU.
2. El surgimiento de nuevos actores internacionales: Nuevas potencias, que buscan ejercer su influencia en el sistema internacional. Estos pueden ser estados, organizaciones internacionales o incluso actores no estatales.
3. La competencia entre los actores internacionales: Con el surgimiento de nuevos actores internacionales, se produce una competencia entre ellos por la influencia y el poder en diferentes regiones del mundo. Esta competencia puede llevar a conflictos y tensiones entre los diferentes actores.
4. La formación de bloques y alianzas: En respuesta a la competencia, los actores internacionales pueden formar bloques y alianzas para aumentar su influencia y poder en el sistema internacional. Estos bloques pueden estar basados en la geografía, la ideología, la cultura o la economía, generando una creciente interdependencia económica.
5. El equilibrio de poder: A medida que se forman bloques y alianzas, se produce un equilibrio de poder entre los diferentes actores internacionales. Este equilibrio puede ser dinámico y cambiar con el tiempo a medida que los diferentes actores ganan o pierden influencia y poder.
6. La consolidación del orden multipolar: Finalmente, si el equilibrio de poder se mantiene y se consolida a largo plazo, se puede hablar de la consolidación del orden multipolar.

Es así, que se ha combinado la teoría de la multipolaridad con las etapas de construcción del orden multipolar en casos concretos desde el 2000 al 2023

1. Surgimiento de China como potencia mundial: China ha experimentado un rápido crecimiento económico en las últimas décadas, lo que ha llevado a que muchos analistas la consideren una potencia mundial emergente. El surgimiento de China aumenta el número de actores internacionales con influencia y poder en el sistema internacional.
2. El Reset de Rusia. Como actor equilibrante del sistema internacional.
3. La guerra en Siria: La guerra en Siria ha involucrado a varios actores internacionales, incluidos Estados Unidos, Rusia, Turquía e Irán. Siria es un ejemplo de un conflicto que se produce en un sistema internacional multipolar, ya que varios actores internacionales tienen intereses en juego.
4. La crisis en Ucrania: En la crisis en Ucrania participan Estados Unidos, Rusia y la Unión Europea, OTAN. La teoría de la multipolaridad sugiere que la crisis en Ucrania es un ejemplo de un conflicto que se produce en un sistema internacional multipolar, ya que varios actores internacionales tienen intereses en juego.

Muchas Gracias

Jose Francisco Herrera (Costa Rica) scholar, specialist in multipolar world theory for Latin America.

Prof. Alexandre Hage (Brazil) – independent researcher

Cecile Johnson (USA), a human rights activist originally from Jamaica, speaks at the very end. A beautiful speech by a deep and sincere thinker.

Greetings my name is Cecile Johnson and I am an Afro-descendant

Human Rights Defender originally from Jamaica but who lives in the USA.

I am happy to be a part of this multipolarity conference. Thank you for hosting it.

This conference recognizes that “multipolarity is built on the recognition of the equal right of all peoples and cultures to go their own way, to build their own socio- political, economic and cultural systems.” Yet in the case of the Afro descendants in the USA that has not been the case. They are unrecognized as colonized by the USA and the world, when clearly the conditions and outcomes of their lives is that of a colonized people who should have fallen under the 1960 Decolonization act, and been allowed to create space within the US so that they are able to achieve Self Determination. Especially since many of their ancestors were actually indigenous to the land, having come through the 4 migrations already documented which place African people firmly in the Americas thousands of years ago.

So before we speak of creating new systems to initiate a new and better world order it’s important to me that the issue of the African descendant in America be addressed. We are over 42 million people and our plight cannot be left out of the movement to go forward to create a more just world.

This inability to see our need for decolonization is further exacerbated by our living in America, a country bent on forcing its social construct of race on us, “where Blacks were to be property that served Whites, and Whites were to be the only beneficiaries of the new country they created.”

This thought pattern exist globally where Western elite have been allowed to “pretend to have the right to establish international norms and rules,” through what Edward Shill describes as the concept of “Center and Periphery” where all the major institutions that are created by the elite set the rules and have the power. Where you are in the structure, depends on how much or how little power you have.

We of the Black race though acknowledged the cradle of civilization are in a constant struggle with Western thought which insist on marginalizing us and pretending through academia that we have made no contributions and that its Eurocentric thought is the only thoughts to be heard. What is it that facilitates this mindset that has allowed this Eurocentric group of less that 10% of the world’s population to dominate the world’s thought till now?

I say it’s the Trojan horse we called Western style education and academia which is used as a standard globally. They are elitist and created systems through curriculum which reinforces their worldview and dehumanizes those of the Black race.

It is also clear that the Catholic Church through its Papal Bulls set the stage for domination and slavery. This memory is important because this was the beginning of the 500+ year war launched against Africans and other indigenous people of the Americas and world and created these structures we are here to talk about today. This war has never officially ended.

The role of the church was critical in Colonization and its legacy cemented these dehumanizing anti-African/anti-Black attitudes amongst the people of the world and the remnants of this way of thinking form the baseline for all attitudes and actions towards us as people till today.

Through miseducation, it has become instinctual for most people to fear and or hate Black people. Even Black people hate themselves as evidenced by the use of skin bleachers to look more white. Why?

Edward Shill defines the relevance of color as “differences in pigmentation symbolizes ….

Differences between present wealth and power and present poverty and weakness, between present eminence in intellectual creativity and present intellectual unproductiveness. It is correlated with past events, above all, with past events of humiliation, injury and insult. Color is the short hand that evokes all of these grievances”.

The white media reinforces the negative images and the education given universally reinforces this low regard for people of African descent sometimes more pronounced in the absence of information on Black People, on Africa on our culture or numerous contributions. Why would I have learnt of John Glenn the Astronaut but not Katherine Goble Johnson, Dorothy Vaughan and Mary Jackson, the 3 AA mathematicians who worked for NASA and helped get the US into space. Why did it take 50+ years to learn of this? Because it didn’t match the lie that we were non- productive non contributors to the success of this nation.

“Multipolarity is built on the recognition of the equal right of all peoples and cultures to go their own way, to build their own socio-political, economic and cultural systems.” I call this SELF DETERMINATION. So why has the African/ the black man and woman in the world not been allowed to experience this these last 500  years? Why is our inheritance ethnocide, genocide, structural racism, poverty and underdevelopment?

How do we solve this challenge? This body of scholars needs to consider making education that is reflective of true history and values that espouse self determination and multi-polarity a first step in creating a world that is more equal. As a man thinketh so he is. And in this also acknowledge that the African descendants right to an education that reflects true history are a first step in the restoration of a people to their rightful place on the world stage. We cannot move forward without acknowledging how the world sees African people. It is time for a new multipolar way.

Thank you

 Многополярность и самоопределение

Alejandro Valenzuela (Argentina) explains how multipolarity resonates with Argentina's interests

Rodolfo Treber (Argentina)

Fernando Esteche (Argentina)

Souleymane Anta Ndiaye – Senegal (Vice-President of the International Russophile Movement)

Juan Miguel Díaz Ferrer (Venezuela) – professor, ex-Vice-Minister of Culture of Venezuela

Aportes de la República Bolivariana de Venezuela a la lucha por un mundo multipolar más justo

Por Profesor, Dr. Juan Miguel Dìaz Ferrer 

Movimiento Internacional de la Rusofilia-Venezuela

¡Estimados ponentes y participantes en general de esta importante cita internacional sobre la multipolaridad!

¡Felicitaciones a los organizadores y en especial a Nueva Resistencia!

El objetivo de nuestra breve ponencia es promover la idea que la lucha por un mundo multipolar no es solo atributo de las grandes potencias y que países que no son potencias mundiales pueden y deben hacer una importante contribución a esa lucha. A veces cuando se habla de cambiar el orden mundial se piensa solo en grandes poderes mundiales.

Por supuesto, el papel de las grandes potencias es muy relevante, Rusia, China, la India, pero sin la participación y la alianza de la mayoría de los países del llamado Sur Global, será muy difícil lograr éxito en esa lucha.

La República Bolivariana de Venezuela no es una potencia mundial, pero ya ha realizado importantes contribuciones al proceso de construcción de ese mundo multipolar. Aquí debemos referirnos en primer lugar al legado del Comandante Eterno Hugo Chávez Frías. Con su extraordinaria visión estratégica de la geopolítica mundial, muy tempranamente, en las primeras décadas de este siglo, avizoró el nacimiento de un nuevo orden mundial multipolar, y se convirtió en uno de los más destacados estadistas internacionales que más luchó y aportó a esa batalla por superar al orden unipolar injusto.

De su genio creativo y ejecutivo, en unión con otros líderes populares de países hermanos, creó la Alternativa Bolivariana para las Américas (ALBA), la Unión de Naciones Suramericanas (UNASUR), la Comunidad de Estados Latinoamericanos y Caribeños (CELAC), PetroCaribe, Telesur, Radio del Sur, y otras iniciativas. Contribuyó a reactivar la OPEP, reimpulsó el Movimiento de Países No Alineados. Insertó a Venezuela en la nueva geopolítica mundial, estableciendo alianzas y estrechas relaciones con los nuevos grandes poderes emergentes como  Rusia y China, la India, también con potencias como Irán, Turquía, Sudáfrica, y otros. Logró la entrada de Venezuela en MERCOSUR, y desarrolló la integración latinoamericana. Con ello Hugo Chávez logró crear importantes alianzas sobre todo en América Latina con Argentina y Brasil, y una fraterna relación con el líder brasileño, el Presidente Lula da Silva-

A su vez, el Presidente Nicolás Maduro Moros, fiel continuador del legado de Hugo Chávez, continúa esa senda y ha seguido desarrollando el papel de Venezuela en la nueva geopolítica mundial, a pesar de todas las brutales agresiones de las sucesivas administraciones de los gobiernos de los Estados Unidos de América.

En América Latina están ocurriendo cambios en la dirección de superar el orden unipolar bajo la hegemonía del imperialismo de Estados Unidos de América. El flamante Grupo de Lima terminó como cadáver político, el gobierno de la narco y la parapolítica del señor Duque, como principal perro de presa del imperio contra Venezuela, fue barrido por el pueblo colombiano. En la Argentina, México, y Honduras han llegado al poder gobiernos progresistas con una actitud positiva ante Venezuela. En Brasil el gran amigo de la Revolución Bolivariana, veterano dirigente político, Luis Ignacio Lula Da Silva, está de nuevo en la presidencia de la República. El golpe de Estado ejecutado por el imperio en Bolivia fracasó en sus objetivos, y el pueblo boliviano dio un ejemplo de democracia y recuperó su revolución.

Una de las líneas más importantes de la política exterior del gobierno bolivariano ha sido el continuo fortalecimiento de las relaciones con los países latinoamericanos y caribeños, el fortalecimiento del ALBA, la solidaridad inclaudicable con la Revolución Cubana, y la Revolución nicaragüense. Se fortalecen las relaciones con países aliados como la República Popular China, Irán, Bielorrusia, y se considera la alianza estratégica con la Federación Rusa como la piedra angular de la inserción de la República Bolivariana de Venezuela en la geopolítica mundial.

La lucha contra el hegemonismo occidental toma la forma de lucha contra el nazi fascismo y su forma más agresiva de expresión; la rusofobia

Desde Venezuela, consideramos que, al seguir un rumbo euroasiático para lograr un mundo multipolar, América Latina como región debe asumir que la lucha contra el hegemonismo de occidente presente en el orden unipolar, adquiere hoy la forma de lucha contra el nazi fascismo y su forma más agresiva de expresión; la rusofobia.

La operación militar especial desplegada por Rusia en Ucrania, está orientada a desnazificar a ese país, el supuesto occidente “democrático”, usa a las fuerzas nazi fascistas en Ucrania como punta de lanza no solo contra Rusia, sino contra la creación de un mundo multipolar sin hegemonismo, por eso el lugar de América Latina debe ser oponerse a la intervención y escalada de la OTAN en Ucrania, no suministrarle armas, no sumarse a ningún bloqueo contra Rusia, y abogar por la paz y la mediación. El nuevo Presidente de Brasil, Ignacio Lula Da Silva ha propuesto un plan de mediación por parte de América Latina en el conflicto en torno a Ucrania.

Líneas principales del movimiento de América Latina hacia un nuevo orden mundial multipolar

Desde Venezuela consideramos que las principales líneas de acción del movimiento de América Latina hacia un nuevo orden mundial multipolar, serían las siguientes:

• Movimiento de América Latina hacia el eje euroasiático: orientación hacia China, Rusia, República Islámica de Irán, diversificación del comercio con países del Asia.

• Acercamiento a los BRICS como núcleo principal de poder del nuevo orden mundial

• Además de Brasil se plantea la entrada de Argentina a los BRICS, dos países de América Latina, y posiblemente la entrada de Venezuela.

• Apoyo a la membresía del Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU de dos miembros de los BRICS, Brasil y la India.

• Rechazo a las presiones del imperialismo de EEUU para sumar a América Latina a las sanciones y bloqueo de Rusia.

• El rescate de la soberanía y capacidad de integración de la región Potenciación de las fortalezas de América Latina: los recursos naturales: América Latina es el mayor exportador neto de  alimentos y productos agrícolas del mundo. Es una de las pocas regiones del mundo con importantes recursos de tierras agrícolas no desarrolladas y agua dulce. Posee grandes recursos energéticos, América Latina, tiene el 20 por ciento de las reservas mundiales de petróleo, tiene recursos suficientes para ofrecer a Asia. También está bien posicionado en el suministro de minerales.

• Aceleración del rumbo hacia una mayor industrialización e innovación tecnológica

• La reactivación de la CELAC y la construcción de una estrategia propia de inserción de la región en el nuevo orden mundial. Una de esas estrategias se planteò en la reciente reunión cumbre de la CELAC en Buenos Aires Argentina, que es la posible creación de una moneda única en Amèrica Latina para poder liberarse del poder del dólar que es la principal arma económica del mundo unipolar/Enero 2023.

• Lucha por participar en la toma de decisiones globales. Alianzas y Grupo de los 20

 Il contributo della Repubblica Bolivariana del Venezuela alla lotta per un mondo multipolare più giusto

Lorenzo Pacini (Italy) – professor of political philosophy and geopolitics, and Italian referee for International Eurasian Movement

Final speech at the Global Conference on Multipolarity

Maram Susli (Australia) – aka "Syrian Girl," is a Syrian activist and commentator, who lives in Australia.

I’m honoured to be here amongst highly respected speakers, and I’d like to give a salute, to our host Professor Alexander Dugin the father of the hero, Darya Dugina.

My name is Maram Susli, I was born in syria, and live in Australia. As such I live between two worlds, and since this is a conference about a multipolar world, it may be fitting to discuss how polar these two worlds are.

Where I live in Australia, I can turn on the tap, and I have clean running water.

Yet in Syria water shortages mean some neighbourhoods in the capital city of Damascus,
receive running water for only two hours every four days.

5 million people are without clean water. Sewage systems are crumbling.

As a result, Disease is spreading. There has been a cholera outbreak.

Where I live in Australia, I have a health care system that i can rely on.

In syria, life saving medications have become scarce. Syria’s which once had a pharmaceutical industry that supplied the entire middle east with affordable and safe medication, can no longer supply itself.

Where I live in Australia, when I turn on my light switch, I never have to worry about wether there will be light.
In the capital Syria, Damascus, they are down to 1-4 hours of electricity per day, and in the rural areas they receive one hour of electricity every three days.

In Syria, there are fuel shortages, and food shortages.

There is no heating in winter, and no water in summer.
The weak and the elderly are dying, wether rich or poor.

I do not speak in abstractions, but from personal tragedy.

All of this suffering, isn’t the result of mismanagement, nor natural disaster.

This suffering has been caused intentionally by war, occupation and sanctions, imposed by the US, UK and their allies .

The US occupies Syria’s oil fields and Syria’s wheat fields, preventing access to food and fuel. Their sanctions prevent fertiliser from reaching thirsty soil.

As a result Syria has the six highest rate for food insecurity in the world, meanwhile Australia has the 6th highest rate of obesity.

And yet Inspite of all the comparisons I have made between Syria and Australia, Syria is still in a better position, because Syria still has its soul.

In Syria i see a nation who has not forgotten her history nor her identity, but in Australia i see a nation that does not know where it is going. It has been absorbed into the ideology of unipolar world, and is not a master of her destiny, she follows the US into miss-adventures.

The western hegemon demands hegemony, and no ideas but its own are allowed to exist. A recent article in Bloomberg titled “How wokeism will rule the world”, makes no secret that it aims to impose this liberal vision on the world by force.

But this vision has become a dystopian nightmare and a denial of humanity.
It is a nihilistic ideology that demands depopulation, and destruction of traditional moral values.
It creates a suicidal nations with plummeting birth rates. A vestige of sanity cannot survive as a counterbalance, it would be akin to pointing out that the emperor has no clothes.

That is why the US is tries to starve Syria into submission, yet her spirit is not broken.

But in the last two decades, I have witnessed the US destroy nation upon nation, upon nation for simply having the desire to live their own way of life.

To stop this path of destruction, We need a multipolar world. We look east towards Russia and china, to rise, stand up and end our suffering. In particular we see in China the economic basis for an independent future.

The US may fear Russia nuclear weapon, and while this does deter them, it is Russia’s faith that it frightens them the most, it stands an example of an alternative way of life, a shining beacon of hope not only to those nations targeted by the US empire, but for people inside the west who want to live in a nation that has not lost its sanity nor its values.

It is for this reason, that the US and its allies have been trying to surround and isolate Russia, by sacrificing Ukraine on the alter of woke-ism. There’s no regard for civilians or the future of even their own allied nations. They are prepared to destroy infrastructure like Nordstream 2, and Kerch bridge.  It is a force of destruction, and an empire of chaos

Make no mistake the world is at war, and it is not just for land or power, but for the future of humanity. The liberal values they aim to impose on the world could will ensure the extinction of humanity as a species. For this reason Russia cannot lose and China must rise. The idea that an empire must be destructive must be challenged. A multipolar world will show that nations cal deal with other with respect and can peacefully co-exist, for mutual prosperity.

 PARA DETENER ESTE CAMINO DE DESTRUCCIÓN, NECESITAMOS UN MUNDO MULTIPOLAR

 Per fermare questo percorso di distruzione, abbiamo bisogno di un mondo multipolare

 Para deter esse rastro de destruição, precisamos de um mundo multipolar

 ΓΙΑ ΝΑ ΣΤΑΜΑΤΗΣΟΥΜΕ ΑΥΤΗΝ ΤΗΝ ΚΑΤΑΣΤΡΟΦΙΚΗ ΠΟΡΕΙΑ, ΧΡΕΙΑΖΟΜΑΣΤΕ ΕΝΑΝ ΠΟΛΥΠΟΛΙΚΟ ΚΟΣΜΟ

Dr. Naing Swe Oo – Founder and Executive Director of Thayninga Institute for Strategic Studies, Senior Advisor of Myanmar Institute of Strategic and International Studies under Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Myanmar

Transcript of Dr. Naing Swe Oo's speech at the Global Multipolar Conference on 29 April 2023.

The Global Conference on Multipolarity သို့ တက်ရောက် ဆွေးနွေးကြသော ကမ္ဘာ့နိုင်ငံအသီးသီးမှ ဂုဏ်သရေရှိ လူကြီးမင်းများအားလုံး မင်္ဂလာပါခင်ဗျာ။

Ladies and gentlemen, very good morning to you all.

It is my great honour to participate in this Global Conference on Multipolarity.

My name is Dr. Naing Swe Oo. I am the Founder and executive director of Thayninga Institute for Strategic Studies as well as the Senior Advisor at Myanmar Institute of Strategic and International Studies under Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Myanmar.

Today, I’d like to share my views on Multipolarity and Global South.

Today the world as it is is fragmented, torn by crosscurrents, contradictions, and multivalent forcefields, not singular visions. Currently the world is facing many difficulties including pandemics and crises.

We are now witnessing a geopolitical transition of global hegemony from the West to the East, which is unprecedented in the history of the capitalist world-system. 

Multipolarity has come to figure prominently in the everyday vocabulary of diplomats and world leaders. For example, the first BRIC Summit in June 2009 expressed support for “a more democratic and just multipolar world order.”

No single country or group of countries dominates the world stage, and power is shared among several significant players.

Currently, the world can be considered multipolar as there are several major powers that wield significant influence and control over different aspects of global affairs.

China, Russia, The United States and the European Union are all major powers with significant economic, military, and diplomatic power. Other countries like Japan, India, Brazil, and South Africa also have significant regional influence and are emerging as major global players.

This multipolar world order has significant implications for international relations and global governance. It means that no single country can dictate the rules of the international system, and cooperation and collaboration among countries are necessary to address global challenges such as climate change, terrorism, and pandemics.

The current multipolar world presents both opportunities and challenges for countries and the international community as a whole, and navigating this complex and evolving landscape will require careful diplomacy, cooperation, and dialogue among all actors involved.

The emergence of a multipolar world presents a range of opportunities for countries and the international community as a whole. Some of these opportunities include:

1. Greater diversity of perspectives and ideas:
2. Increased cooperation and collaboration:
3. Shared responsibility for global governance:
4. Economic opportunities and
5. Greater respect for diversity and different civilizations:

Overall, the multipolar world presents opportunities for greater cooperation, diversity, and inclusivity in global affairs. However, realizing these opportunities requires a commitment to dialogue, collaboration, and respect for diversity among all actors involved.

The emergence of a multipolar world has significant implications for the Global South, which includes countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. In a multipolar world, the Global South has the potential to gain more influence and leverage in global affairs by aligning with one or more of the major powers or forming coalitions among themselves.

The ‘Global South’ has been on the rise. The Global South is generally understood to refer to less economically developed countries.

It is a broad term that comprises a variety of states with diverse levels of economic, cultural, and political influence in the international order. The global south is becoming more visible—and influential—in every arena.

The non-Western world—the long-ignored global south, or the “Rest,” as it’s often called—is making its voice heard. These parts of the planet, younger and faster-growing than the West but also more vulnerable to climate change, are becoming increasingly powerful and more assertive stakeholders in global politics. 

It is commonly said that the world is entering a multipolar phase in global governance with the “rise of the South” or the increasing powers of emerging economies China, India, Brazil, Russia and South Africa (the BRICS) and the strengthening of their relations.

The multipolar world also presents challenges for the Global South, as it may lead to increased competition and rivalry among the major powers for access to resources, markets, and influence in the region. This could exacerbate existing conflicts and power struggles, and potentially lead to the exploitation of the Global South by competing powers.

To navigate the complexities of the multipolar world, countries in the Global South will need to pursue strategic partnerships and alliances that balance their own interests with those of the major powers. This will require a careful assessment of the benefits and risks of engaging with different powers, as well as a commitment to promoting cooperation and collaboration among all actors in the international system.

The Global South faces a range of challenges that can impede its development and progress, despite the opportunities presented by the emergence of a multipolar world. Some of these challenges include:

1. Poverty and inequality:
2. Political instability and conflict:
3. Weak institutions and governance:
4. Climate change and environmental degradation:
5. Access to education and healthcare:
6. Digital divide: and
7. Debt and financial vulnerability:

Addressing these challenges requires sustained and coordinated efforts by governments, international organizations, and civil society actors. It also requires a recognition of the diverse needs and priorities of different countries and communities in the Global South, and a commitment to promoting inclusive and sustainable development.

Today, the world is going through momentous changes, and humanity is entering a new era of rapid development and profound transformation. It sees the development of such processes and phenomena as multipolarity, economic globalization, the advent of information society, cultural diversity, transformation of the global governance architecture and world order; there is increasing interrelation and interdependence between the States; a trend has emerged towards redistribution of power in the world; and the international community is showing a growing demand for the leadership aiming at peaceful and gradual development. , As mention in The ‘Joint Statement of the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China on the International Relations Entering a New Era and the Global Sustainable Development.”

As a conclusion,

The future of the Global South in a multipolar world is complex and uncertain, but it is likely to be shaped by a range of economic, political, and social factors. Some of the potential implications for the Global South include:

1. Economic opportunities
2. Political alliances:
3. Greater bargaining power:
4. Technological innovation:
5. Challenges of globalization:

And the future of the Global South in a multipolar world will depend on a range of factors, including political alliances, economic trends, technological innovation, and global governance structures. To thrive in this new world order, countries in the Global South will need to adopt flexible and adaptive strategies that can respond to the opportunities and challenges presented by a rapidly changing global landscape.

I thank you very much.

 Perspectives sur la multipolarité et le Sud global

 Perspectieven op multipolariteit en het globale zuiden

 Perspektiven der Multipolarität und des globalen Südens

Dr. Tawfique Haque (Bangladesh) – Professor, Department of Political Science and Sociology (Chair), South Asian Institute of Policy and Governance (Director),  the founder of the Mercy Mission movement.

Challenges of Intellectual Exercises on ‘Multipolarity’ in Academic institutions in Global South

Dr Sk Tawfique M Haque, Bangladesh

Political, economic and cultural hegemony of Western civilization is widely discussed and debated in the intellectual platforms such as university classrooms of the Global South. In comparison to that the discussion on knowledge hegemony is a less discussed topic though the ramification of it is no less than other forms of hegemony. There are several challenges for creating an open and diversified platform of intellectual exercises in the universities of the South:

1. Many of the faculty members who are teaching at the classrooms of the universities are Western educated. This so called ‘liberal education’ actually made their thinking process unidirectional and eventually handicapped their ability to think alternatively for explaining the rapid changes happening in different fields.

2. The knowledge industry is fully controlled by the Western intellectuals who have created a domain of knowledge creation and publication which is not ready to accept the ‘unbiased truth’ coming from alternative sources.

3. The narratives created by the Western intellectuals and media are based on information and facts provided by their ruling elites which have not been challenged by the academics in most of the cases. These narratives are used in the class room discussion and intellectual discourses of Global South without any critical assessment.

Though the Western universities claim to produce ‘critical thinkers’, but they have failed to do so. Many of the Western educated economists, political scientists, security analysts or in general, social scientists are not capable to understand, explain, assess, and analyze the fast changing political, social, and economic world order. That’s why the political scientists and media experts of the Western countries failed to predict Brexit, winning of Donald Trump, rise of economic nationalist/anti globalist in different parts of the world. The theories they are teaching in the class rooms and research methods that they are using for knowledge generation are getting invalid in many cases to explain the current world. But the problem is- they are not ‘critical’ enough to challenge the existing theories and models and accept the truth coming from alternative sources. The failure of generating and disseminating true knowledge at Western educational institutions has impacted the universities of Global South also. Their dependency on the source of Western knowledge made them incapable also to explain and address the fast-changing realities in politics, economics, technology and social arena.

We hope that there will be more South-South knowledge collaboration in coming days to address these gaps. The academics and intellectuals of South can create a multipolar knowledge hub instead of surrendering to the unipolar Western dominated knowledge industry. A new set of methodologies, theories and models will be needed to be evolved in coming days to understand and explain the future multipolar world which is already in place.

Ajay Kamalakaran (Mumbai, India) - Writer

It is in the best interests of New Delhi, Beijing and the Global South as a whole for Sino-Indian ties to thrive.

Ajay Kamalakaran

The world’s two most populous nations have thriving economies that continue to witness growth levels that are unheard of in most parts of the world. Although, highly in favour of Beijing, India-China bilateral trade stood at almost $136 billion in 2022. Unfortunately, the political and diplomatic relationship between the two countries is facing a series of challenges. The last few years have led to a mutual trust deficit between the two Asian powers.

If Russia’s quest for a truly multipolar world is to become a reality, then it is pivotal for Sino-Indian relations not only to be normalized, but to thrive. India and China have civilizational ties that go back thousands of years, but a border dispute that arose in the late-1950s holds the countries hostage.

However, the thaw in India-China relations in the mid-1980s brought a fresh impetus to bilateral ties, which once began to flourish right until the middle of the last decade. When then Chinese President Hu Jintao met then Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in Moscow in 2005, during the 60^th anniversary celebrations of the end of the Second World War, the latter is believed to have said the following: “When we shake hands, the whole world will notice.”

Russia has been a key supporter of friendly ties between India and China. The Primakov Doctrine, which was formulated by Russian Foreign Minister Yevgeny Primakov in the 1990s advocated the formation of strategic alliance between Russia, China and India. This was essentially the precursor to BRICS.

Since the 1990s, Russia’s friendship with China and India has grown, but the relationship between Moscow’s two important friends has not kept pace. It can be safely assumed that it is not in the best interests of the West for New Delhi and Beijing to shake hands, but countries such as Russia that are well-wishers of India and China need to encourage these countries to sort out differences or at least freeze their disputes and focus on areas of convergence.

Indian leaders repeat a Sanskrit phrase that means the whole world is one big family, while their Chinese counterparts stress on the need for the lesser developed nations to grow together so that no one is left out. There is clearly no contradiction in the global aims of both countries, and it is in their best interests to follow the principle of harmony in differences.

Better ties between China and India will not just help both countries, but also the Global South as a whole, while also bringing about a multipolar world. The fact that the countries cooperate in multilateral formats such as BRICS and SCO and that India is a key partner of the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is proof that the countries are capable of cooperating on a global scale. The time has come to scale up the RIC (Russia-India-China) format as well as upscale bilateral ties.

When the Chinese Defence Minister Li Shangfu visited India for a SCO meeting, he told his Indian counterpart Rajnath Singh, “Common interest between China and India prevails over discrepancies, thus both sides should view bilateral ties and their development in a comprehensive, long-term and strategic way.” This was a clear sign that Beijing would like the relationship with New Delhi to improve. The latter has to accept the hand of friendship that has been extended by the former. The world will indeed take notice when India and China shake hands and the world gets closer to multipolarity.

Ajay Kamalakaran is a writer based in Mumbai, India. He is an editorial advisor to RT. Views expressed here are personal.

Fabrice Sorlin (France) – political scientist, journalist.

Nous assistons ces derniers mois à un formidable élan de libération des nations et des peuples. Une libération des chaines du monde unipolaire et de l’oligarchie occidentale. Un rééquilibrage des mondes en en cours.

Le vide laissé par l’effondrement de l’Union Soviétique après les années 90 a mis les Etats-Unis dans une position de domination effrénée. L’équilibre du monde de l’époque reparti entre deux blocs avait disparu. Les Etats-Unis ont alors profité de leur statut de superpuissance pour exercer leurs ambitions et atteindre leurs objectifs partout où ils le souhaitaient.

Pour ce faire, ils ont mis en place une politique étrangère agressive et sans partage, basée sur la stratégie politique « divide et impera » (diviser pour régner), n’hésitant pas à se servir du chantage (le dollar) et de la menace (l’armée) pour parvenir à mettre en coupe réglé la quasi-totalité des pays du monde.

En tenant tête à l’hégémon américain et à son bras armé l’OTAN, la Russie a récemment offert au reste du monde un formidable accélérateur de l’histoire. Les nations et les peuples ont subi pendant des décennies le chantage et les menaces de la superpuissance américaine car ils n’avaient pour la plupart ni les moyens financiers, ni les moyens politique et encore moins les moyens militaires de mettre un terme à cette domination du fort sur le faible.

Mais les choses sont en train de changer, le chamboulement géopolitique actuel est perçu comme une réelle opportunité pour ces pays de se libérer de leurs chaines.

Dans un effort commun de libération et suivant l’exemple de pays pouvant tenir tête à l’Occident collectif, de très nombreuses nations bravent maintenant les intimidations et ne tiennent plus compte des sanctions occidentales.

Un large mouvement de libération est en train de voir le jour.

C’est la libération des peuples de l’idéologie néolibérale destructrices.

C’est aussi la libération des États de l’ingérence occidentale dans les affaires intérieures.

Et c’est enfin la libération de l’économie mondiale d’un système financier supranational truqué. 

Si nous regardons de plus près, les évènements historiques en cours, trois grands mouvements systémiques sont aujourd’hui à l’œuvre :

Tout d’abord le mouvement pour la paix. Sous l’impulsion de la diplomatie chinoise et russe, qui promeuvent les relations internationales fondées sur le respect mutuel et non plus sur l’affrontement, l’Arabie saoudite, leader du monde musulman sunnite, et l’Iran, leader du monde musulman chiite, signent un accord qui clôt de longues années de guerres et d’influence occidental. C’est un événement majeur, qui rend enfin possible une ère de paix au Moyen-Orient. Toujours dans cette dynamique, des tractations sont aussi en cours pour une réconciliation entre la Turquie et la Syrie. Syrie qui pourrait d’ailleurs réintégrer la ligue arabe dans les semaines à venir.

Ensuite vient le mouvement de la dédollarisation. De nombreux pays dépendants des institutions financières internationales trouvent maintenant des moyens de se dissocier du dollar américain. Les pays annoncent audacieusement des plans visant à contourner le dollar dans leurs échanges commerciaux (en particulier pour l'achat de pétrole), dans le commerce électronique et dans le tourisme. Ce n'est pas seulement la Russie, mais aussi des partenaires des États-Unis comme l'Inde, l'Afrique, les pays de l’ANASE, l'Amérique latine, l'Arabie saoudite.

Enfin, il s‘agit du mouvement de la révolte des nations contre l’hégémonie américaine.

A l'occasion du 85^e anniversaire de la nationalisation du pétrole au Mexique le président mexicain Lopez a déclaré "Le Mexique n'est pas une colonie des États-Unis".

De même, le jeune et dynamique président salvadorien Bukele a averti les États-Unis que la doctrine Monroe était morte.

Un autre pays d'Amérique latine, le Honduras, vient de mettre un terme à ses relations diplomatiques avec Taïwan au profit de la Chine.

Même certains dirigeants allemands parlent de réparer le gazoduc Nord Stream et de relancer le commerce avec la Russie.

La révolte contre l’unipolarité est donc en cours. Elle va dans le sens de l’histoire et il semble que rien ne pourra plus l’arrêter.

Dans ce contexte, notre pays la France aurait eu tout à gagner à rejoindre le sens de l’histoire. Elle aurait pu profiter du conflit en cours en Europe pour renouer avec sa grandeur passée. Pour ce faire, elle aurait dû renouer avec la proposition internationale de 3^ème voie que le Général de Gaulle avait fait en son temps. Ni USA, ni URSS mais universalisme français, qui était déjà une proposition de multipolarité. L’honneur de la France aurait donc été de proposer une grande conférence sur la paix à Versailles. Mais n’est pas le Général de Gaulle qui veut. Et la France d’aujourd’hui est entièrement sous tutelle américaine et cette soumission ne fait qu’allait en s’aggravant. Cependant, depuis plusieurs années, un fossé de plus en plus grand se creuse entre le peuple français et son élite. Ça été tout le sens de la révolte des gilets jaune en 2018. Et de même qu’on ne peut pas arrêter le vent, personne ne pourra arrêter le peuple français d’aller chercher sa liberté.

 The revolt of the peoples against the unipolar world

 Nessuno potrà impedire al popolo francese di andare verso la propria libertà

Arnaud Develay  (France) – an international human rights lawyer, member of the Washington State Bar (USA) and the Paris Bar (France).

THE GREAT POLARITY INVERSION

Introduction

We shall not inasmuch inquire into the theosophical nature of the period initiated with the so-called Plague as examine how the roll-out of the Great Reset operation of March 2020 managed to surf on a wave of of carefully-laid mass-hypnosis which in turn allowed for the destruction of the constitutional order in much of the Collective West.

Indeed, only States which retained antibodies against the emerging dystopia owing to their own recent experience with totalitarianism have managed to ride the wave of totalitarianism that has descended onto the West.

1. COVID 19: The Great Accelerator

The historical sequence which started in March 2020 represents the final step of a process of deconstruction initiated in the late 1960s. During that period, the West underwent a radical transformation which set out to deconstruct every pillar of traditional life as western societies had known for millennia. This project was carried out through the systematic application of social engineering measures originally conceived by the School of Frankfurt only to be accelerated by the so-called tenants of the French Theory such as FOUCAULT, ALTHUSSER and DERRIDA. These individuals benefitted from support from intelligence agencies as they slowly but surely first set out to conquer the realm of academia (starting in BERKELEY).

Throughout the next 50 years, this relentless and pernicious assault on what had been anthropological constants laid the ground for a complete anthropological eradication of what had made the Western Man resilient in the face of threats and challenges to his world view owing to his attachment to empiricism and rationality. The assault was even made more brutal owing to the relatively short period during which this happened.

The combined rise of aggressive feminism, mass immigration, institutional abortion, divorce and self-hatred was fueled by the corporate endorsement of such ideologies which the Left then promptly embraced as substitutes for its own forsaking of the working class.

On a spiritual level, the reform of Vatican II paved the way for the advent of the secular “human rights” ideology. This departure from tradition allowed for subversive elements to penetrate the ecclesiastical institutions and turn them into compliant appendixes of those advocating for a “liquid” society: a spiritual wasteland whereupon Man has no history…and so no destiny. This atomization process was further characterized by a period of frantic consumerism. The Market became the Ultimate Arbiter of the Agora. In this context, mercantile concerns slowly replaced the State’s sacred duty to preserve the interests of its constituency. Meritocracy was abandoned. Sycophancy was promoted. So-called experts invested the realm of public discourse. Charlatanism and false idols became the new High-Priests of corporate interests. This descent into civilizational oblivion was greatly facilitated by the concentration of media in a few hands. The media achieved to manipulate public perception of reality at the expense of sound empiricism. The verticality of old made room for the equivalency of opinions whereupon everyone was henceforth deemed to be an authority on all topics in the name of “tolerance” and “free speech”.

All of the above made it easy to then subjugate the remnants of a constitutional order in the name of so-called progress and later so-called “science”.

2. 1990-2020: The Great Polarity Inversion

But then, there were those who would not conform. Once dissipated the lure and sirens of unabated “freedom” through abundance, there arose those having lived in the former totalitarian realm of the Communist bloc who came to question the ideology of the End of History.

In those lands, Christianity had played a significant role in keeping the populations hopeful for the day which would see the tyrannical yoke of the Nomenklatura shatter under the weight of its own internal promethean contradictions.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn had long embodied these longings when in 1978, he was already warning the world that “the grass was not necessarily greener on the other side of the fence”.

In Poland, the former leader of the Solidarity Movement himself came to express his own disillusions with Western gnostic thought of what was meant by “progressivism”. He recalled the old injunctions of his youth when the western establishment castigated him for deviationist thoughts about same sex marriages and the disastrous civilizational effect of the migrant onslaught on Europe and he promptly exercised self-repentance by advocating for the “reduction of the Russian people down to 50 millions.”

This emerging polarity inversion can also be witnessed as the Brussels Politburo attempted to take control over national courts or impose sanctions against those having deemed to have passed legislation preventing Open Society organizations to engage in subversive activity in countrries such as Hungary.

In the Russian Federation, the constitutional referendum of August 2020 reestablished the primacy of Russian constitutional law over international legislations whose aims are to call into question the cultural and spiritual foundation of Orthodoxy.

This paved the way for Russia to engage in a comprehenside review of its international obligations within the context of Western-imposed ideological diktats which had no substance left in the wake of the admissions uttered by frmer French and German leaders bearing on the ir willingness to ignite a conflict in Ukraine.

Clearly, in those countries the defense mechanisms needed to preserve society against the leviathan of dissolution were shown to still be functioning and the Moloch of Davos in turn brought to show its true face for in order to succeed with its final push for total control over the souls and bodies of those living under its sway does not suffer the very existence of an alternative to its dystopian agenda.

The emergence of this renewed dichotomy will over time reaffirm the validity of age-old principles of rooted interdependence and rejection of materialism as an end unto itself. Even if the false god of Davos initially succeed in coercing its population to comply in becoming tenants of what Slobodan Despot has referred to as an electronic prison, this attempt has already lost its momentum and the intuitive power of the masses is slowly reasserting itself owing to the very tools upon which the Babylonian Order has relied on for so long.

Conclusion

In its attempt to maintain control over the financial system, the architects of the Great Reset have been forced to move forward and activate the COVID 19 narrative earlier than what had been initially envisioned.

In doing so, the DAVOS men gravely underestimated the need to wait until the time was ripe to achieve corrupting the traditional principles shared by populations who once lived under Communist dystopia as had been done successfully over the last 50 years in the formerly democratic West.

This in turn revealed ab ibnitio the fundamentally malign nature laying behind the motives of the 2030 Agenda and set the stage for a renewed ideological confrontation which over time will expose the internal contradictions of a project which at its core rejects all transcendence in the name of a Promethean aspiration which itself is doomed to fail.

Raphael Machado (Brazil) – Head of Nova Resistência

Courage as a Fundamental Virtue in the Transition to Multipolarity

If we place our feet on the Hellenic tradition, which has relevance for European civilization, but also for other nearby or related civilizations, such as Ibero-America, we will see the emphasis given by philosophers like Aristotle to the virtue of courage (ἀνδρεία). Considered the Spartans' highest virtue, as we can deduce from Plutarch's Sayings of the Spartans, according to Aristotle, the virtue of courage involved a willingness to face a serious but not hopeless existential risk for the sake of a worthy end.

Aristotle therefore denies that we are dealing with the virtue of courage when the danger is not existential, when there is no chance of triumph, or when there is no worthy end. Courage, therefore, like all Aristotelian virtues, involves a right object, a right way, and a right time, in a kind and trust.

We might here, too, evoke the concept of yong ( 勇 ), the virtue of courage as it is presented in Chinese civilization by the writings of Confucius. Here, courage appears as one of the three virtues of the noble man, but courage also involves a question of measurement for Confucius. It must be framed by a sense of propriety or rite, in other words there is a right way to be courageous, and it is also preceded by knowledge. It is, in short, the willingness to risk oneself to prevent evil in obedience to ethical norms.

Well, one might question the reason for this short speech on virtue in a lecture on multipolarity. But it is possible to justify this discourse by appealing to a rather traditional notion: according to the Ancients, there is a homology between man and the city (in other words, the State, in modern terms), so that it is possible to transplant human virtues to the political dimension, the communal and institutional dimension of the public thing.

We need, therefore, to think about the multipolar transition and the attitude of countries in the face of this transition in the light of traditional courage as a public virtue.

It is something perceived by everyone that we are at a historical crossroads, facing epochal circumstances that can change the course of the historical unfolding of the peoples. We must see the present moment as as astonishing as the period of the Fall of Constantinople. These possibilities were inaugurated by the deflagration of the Russian special military operation on its southwestern border. The Russian decision to launch this operation, at just the right kairos, has opened up a myriad of possibilities for the other peoples of the world. They, too, find themselves in the kairos of making some kind of decision.

The myriad of possibilities opened up by the Russian decision can be condensed into the overcoming of the unipolar Atlantic moment by the establishment of a multipolar global order. We would now be in the transition, in the interval, on the threshold between these two directions, and if the final outcome depends on the result of the Russian military operation, the materialization, stabilization and ordering of the multipolar order depends on a decision made by each people in this kairos that is unique and therefore requires a decision. The consequences of not making a decision or making the wrong decision and the doors of this kairos closing can be drastic.

It is in this context that we can introduce courage as a public virtue and, more, as the fundamental public virtue in this international kairos.

Here with us, at our Conference, we have with us representatives from over 64 countries. In the audience we have representatives from even more countries, perhaps all the countries of the world. So it will not be alien to say that at this time of multipolar transition there are several countries, among the small and the large, that are recalcitrant about the possibility of drastic changes in the international order.

Beyond the bourgeois fear of the unknown, these countries fear: a) sanctions; b) military interventions; c) color revolutions, or a combination of these tools, should their States take steps aimed at breaking with the status quo.

According to Aristotelian criteria, all these fears fit the type of object apt to be addressed by the virtue of courage. These are existential risks, which can lead to the destruction of a country, the goal is noble, since multipolarity is the international condition that allows the sovereign self-fulfilling of each people in its civilization, and the, most important here, this danger can be overcome. There’s hope.

Because many countries, remembering situations in the past when countries were attacked with sanctions, interventions and color revolutions, have an exaggerated fear precisely at the moment of weakness of the hegemon and the hegemonic structures, and therefore these countries hesitate to actively position themselves in the transition to multipolarity, insisting on trying to postpone this transition.

This is not to say that all countries in the world must assume the same position as Russia and other countries that openly and actively challenge the old unipolar structure. It is a characteristic of courage to be aimed at the right object, in the right way and at the right time, and the time is the same for everyone, but the way varies according to the objective conditions (of power, geography, etc.) of each country.

Nevertheless, even if the method differs, even the smallest country in the world, if it has the courage, can take a risk, show its worthinness, and help accelerate and consolidate the multipolar transition.

For some, this will simply mean refusing to support sanctions against Western cancellation targets, or voting, in the UN, according to multipolarist principles. Perhaps even something as simple as promoting dialogue on an official or cultural level with the countries "cancelled" by the globalists.

What is fundamental, however, is to understand the moment, the kairos, and to act accordingly, so that each of our peoples and civilizations participates in the construction of multipolarity.

Friends of all the peoples of the world, let us be bold.

 A Coragem como virtude fundamental na transição para a Multipolaridade

 Il coraggio, una virtù fondamentale nella transizione al multipolarismo

 El coraje como virtud fundamental en la transición a la Multipolaridad

 Le courage, une vertu fondamentale dans la transition vers la multipolarité

 Moed als fundamentele deugd bij de overgang naar multipolariteit

 Mut als grundlegende Tugend beim Übergang zur Multipolarität

 ΤΟ ΘΑΡΡΟΣ ΩΣ ΘΕΜΕΛΙΩΔΗΣ ΑΡΕΤΗ ΚΑΤΑ ΤΗΝ ΜΕΤΑΒΑΣΗ ΣΤΗΝ ΠΟΛΥΠΟΛΙΚΟΤΗΤΑ

Dimitrios Konstantakopoulos (Greece) – independent researcher, Former adviser to the Greek Prime Minister Andreas Papandreou and former Member of Secretariat of the Central Committee of the SYRIZA Party

Vicente Quintero (Venezuela) – Venezuelan social scientist

The Spirit of a New Age

We live in a new time. Those of us who lived through the first two decades of the twentieth century had the opportunity to witness a period of relative international integration. It was, of course, nothing more than an illusion. Mirage. Wars are still going, and the Middle East is proof of that. It was not exactly quiet and peaceful in Europe then either, but there was a greater sense of stability than at other times.

Looking back and analysing the preconditions of what is happening, as well as their likely consequences as a projection of the present, and the diverse ways in which they can be understood from a historical and ideological perspective, we begin to reflect on the spirit of the times. Now the old conflicts are getting increasingly heated. What was warned about is coming true. The subject of history assumes the role assigned to it at this point.

The conflict in Ukraine affects not only neighbouring countries, but the entire world. We must be ready for war and not shy away from the responsibility that is on everyone. We are the makers of our own destiny. It is up to us to change the reality around us when the time comes. We are matter, but we are also spirit. We are essence, and we are substance.

When the time comes, we will not have to sit idly by. And whether it is North, Central or South America, all of us Americans have a task to accomplish. This separation will be left behind when our energy, our common energy, flows in one direction. We live in a new time; this is not the kind of globalization that we are used to. The balance of power has changed, and we must be prepared for the unexpected.

Respected Russophiles Brothers and Sisters,

I highly appreciate Russophiles initiatives to oppose the Russophobic campaign and interest for mutually beneficial humanitarian cooperation and people-to- people dialogue.

I am inspired and strongly admires Russia or its people, culture, customs, influence, Russian history, traditional Russian hospitality and Russian tenderness as well as on in-depth study of Russian mentality. I love Russians for their dramatic, emotional nature. They're not afraid to love, not afraid to get hurt, not afraid to exaggerate or act impulsively. I congratulate Mr. Nikolai Malinov, the newly elected president of the International Russophile Movement founding congress and dream under his flagship and vision we will share love for Russia all around the world. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, Businessman and Chairman of the Tsargrad Society Konstantin Malofeev, philosopher Alexander Dugin, actor Steven Seagal and other international participants in the event are to be congratulate who proposed manifesto declared the need to promote Russian culture and spirituality, “reliable information” about Russia, and to strengthen “people’s diplomacy in defense of a multipolar world.”

Russophile moment is gift that never has any price, because natural human love is always greater than any price. So we treat our movement as a gift of love, where friends come and give their attention, their presence, and their wishes and smiles. Russia always reimburse with the gift, too: the gift of attention, gratitude and mutual love. This is the alternative civilization that Russophiles are building for peace and love to save mother earth.

Current conflicts of Russia and Ukraine represent ideological conflicts in defense of Russia’s traditional values, family and religion. Russophobia is a virus that has affected only the Western countries elites. It has not affected ordinary people in Europe, as well as in Africa, Asia and Latin America, where the help and support of the Soviet Union is well remembered.

The neoliberal model, based on the cult of pleasure and excessive consumption, corrupting the values of the society, which provoked serious economic, cultural and environmental crises. Sensible people opposes this model. In these complicated international circumstances, it is precisely Russia that is the source of this goodwill that will save the human traditional values. Current sanctions on Russia were not only wrong but divisive, divisive at a time after COVID-19 pandemic when we need unity; racially charged at a time when we need to come together to solve a set of monumental problems— a terrorist threats, a falling economy, a chronic health care crisis and potentially devastating climate change; problems that are neither black or white or Latino or Asian, but rather problems that confront us all.

The fact is that the comments that have been made and the issues that have surfaced over the last few years reflect the complexities of race in the world that we’ve never really worked through—a part of Russophile union have yet to be perfect. And if we walk away now, if we simply retreat into our respective corners, we will never be able to come together and solve challenges like health care, or education, or better climate, or the need to find good environment for every human being and coming generations.

All accomplishments in the life of a person, in the life of a nation, begin with a vision. A vision of freedom and independence, A vision of social justice, universal education, health for all citizens, decent housing, a vision of wealth distribution, A vision of emancipation, where Russian national unity, harmony, peace and solidarity reign.

Russian president Mr. Vladimir Putin will determine to bring Russia far, towards a new destiny. He dared to dream, and he had a firm conviction in the capacity of the Russian people to transform their country. His determination and conviction bore fruit on that day, that night, when Ukraine regions became a nation, sovereign and free.

I congratulate Russian brothers and sisters for their trust, hard work, commitment and patriotism for upcoming Russian National Day and 30th anniversary is also a commemoration of our love, unity and trust.

As President of BRICS International Forum, I closely observed that during current world turbulence, we have no other option. Despite the diversity of our opinions, despite the diversity in our points of view, we must work together.

If we abandon this, if we get derailed from this path, we will not get far. Worse still, we shall enter a period of self-destruction, anarchy and violence. That's when we shall see, and we shall understand, the true meaning of abject poverty.

We have enough examples of places where this is happening in this sadly divided world. Is this the kind of tragedy that we want for our countries? Is this the kind of pain that we want to inflict on our own brothers and sisters? No! And a thousand times, No! We do not want division. We do not want violence. We do not want the destruction of our cities. We do not want poverty. We do not want threats hanging over us, over our future and the future of our children.”

BRICS countries very well overcome and passionate about to develop new world economic order with consensus and equality of all friendly nations for human well being.

Let peace, unity, love and respect become part of our lives so that the future of green planet is bright and promising. It’s an appeal to the Russophile people to have unity, love, friendship, respect, tolerance, solidarity, compassion, work together and make Russia move forward towards better world and Sustainability of traditional human values.