Lonely US holds title of main predator of humanity as it deliberately harms innocent civilians including its own by labeling other countries “terrorists”-Meyssan, 11/27/2018

“Whatever the sympathy we may have for the people of the United States, their country is still the main predator of humanity. We can in no circumstance claim to share their “values."” July 2019, Manlio Dinucci

11/27/2018, “When we want to sanction States, we say that they are “terrorists”,” by Thierry Meyssan

“The new unilateral sanctions of the United States against Iran, Russia and Syria are in addition to the previous ones concerning these same three targets. This set now forms the toughest embargo in history. The way they are organized is illegal under the UN Charter:

they are weapons of war designed to kill.”

“Defense Secretary James Mattis applauded by Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin.”

“On his way to Moscow on November 8, [2018] Ambassador James Jeffrey had the mission of explaining US concern over the expansion of Persian influence in the Arab world (Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen). Washington now wishes to pose this question in geostrategic terms and no longer in religious (Shiite/Sunni) terms, even as Tehran organizes its national defense around Arab Shiite outposts.

Moscow then imagined negotiating for Tehran the relaxation of unilateral US sanctions in exchange for Iranian military withdrawal from Syria. President Vladimir Putin confirmed his proposal, not only to his US counterpart, but also to the Israeli Prime Minister,

when they met in Paris on the occasion of the

centenary of the end of the First World War, on November 11.

He tried to convince Westerners that Russia alone in Syria was preferable to the Iranian-Russian tandem. He could not, however, assert

that Iran would have sufficient authority over Hezbollah—as Washington and Tel Aviv claim—

to order it to withdraw as well.

In response, [Donald Trump] Washington announced, nine days later, the eleventh set of unilateral sanctions against Russia since the beginning of August [2018]. This is

accompanied by a ridiculous speech

according to which Russia and Iran have jointly organized a vast traffic aimed at keeping President Assad in power

and extending Persian control in the Arab world.

This rhetoric, which was thought to have been abandoned,

equates three states (the Russian Federation, the Syrian Arab Republic and the Islamic Republic of Iran)

with machines in the service of three men (Bashar al-Assad, Ali Khamenei and Vladimir Putin),

united by the same hatred of their respective people.

It ignores the massive popular support they have, while Americans are deeply torn.

Let’s skip the inane claim

that Russia would help Persia conquer the Arab world.

According to [Trump appointee] the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States, Steven Mnuchin,

who presented

the unilateral US sanctions on November 20,

these do not form the economic component of the current war,

but punish the “atrocities” of these three “regimes”.

However, on the eve of winter,

they mainly concern the supply of the Syrian people

with refined oil so that they can light and heat themselves.

Needless to say, the three target states deny the “atrocities” of which they are accused,

while the United States claims to continue

the war it started in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The US sanctions were not decided by the United Nations Security Council

but by [Trump] the United States alone.

They are not legal in international law because, to make them lethal, [Trump] Washington

tries to force third States to join them,

which constitutes a threat against the target States and therefore

a violation of the United Nations Charter.

The United States has the sovereign right to refuse to trade with others,

but not to pressure others to hurt their targets.

The Pentagon once claimed that

inflicting mistreatment on a particular nation

would lead its people to overthrow their government.

This was both the theoretical justification for the bombing of Dresden during World War II and the endless embargo against Cuba since the Cold War.

However, in 75 years,

never, absolutely never,

this theory was checked in the facts.

From now on, the Pentagon considers mistreatment against a nation

as a weapon like any other.

Embargoes are made to kill civilians.

The whole system in progress against Iran, Russia and Syria constitutes

the largest siege system in history  [ 1 ] .

These are not economic measures, but—without any possible doubt—

military action

implemented in the economic field.

They should lead over time to dividing the world in two again, as at the time of the USA-USSR rivalry.

Secretary Mnuchin insisted at length on the fact that these sanctions aim

above all to interrupt the sale of hydrocarbons,

that is to say to deprive these countries – in principle exporters –

of their main financial resource.

The mechanism described by Steven Mnuchin is as follows:

Syria can no longer refine oil since its facilities were destroyed either by Daesh or by bombings from the International Coalition Against Daesh.

For four years, Iran has been supplying refined oil to Syria

in violation of previous unilateral US sanctions.

This oil is transported by Western companies working for the Russian public company Promsyrioimport.

This company is remunerated by the private Syrian company Global Vision Group,

which is itself bailed out by the Iranian company Tabir Kish Medical and Pharmaceutical.

Ultimately, the Global Vision Group

pays part of what it has received

to Hezbollah and Hamas.

This is a story to sleep tall:

The International Coalition’s official objective is to fight against Daesh. However, numerous testimonies during the last four years attest that it…

on the contrary parachuted weapons into it....The two entities

worked together to destroy Syrian refineries.

Why involve the Russian government in an oil transfer from Iranian refineries to Syrian ports?

Why would Iran suddenly need Syria to funnel money to Hezbollah and Hamas?

Why would Syria funnel Iranian money to Hamas when the Palestinian organization

—whose leaders are members of the Muslim Brotherhood–

is waging war on it?

Steven Mnuchin does not bother with long explanations. For him,

Syria is criminal, Russia is [its] accomplice, while Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas

are all “terrorists”.

This is the most important word,

the word that cuts short all reflection….

No logic should be expected in Secretary Mnuchin’s response to President Putin’s mediation proposal.

Gradually, the United States withdrew its troops from the conflicts in which they were engaged.

They replace them with mercenaries on the ground (the [US taxpayer funded] jihadists)

and economic sanctions,

a modern version of the medieval siege.”

Thierry Meyssan

“[ 1 ]  If in the Middle Ages Christendom allowed wars between the armies of Catholic sovereigns, 

it condemned deliberate military actions against civilians. 

In the 13th century, the Catholic Church therefore condemned all sieges when they concerned not only soldiers, but also populations. This ethic has remained that of the Holy See until today. For example, Pope John Paul II opposed the United States when it took economic sanctions against Iraqis during the era of Saddam Hussein. His successor, Pope Francis, is now silent on the issue.”

 

 

.........

Crowd awaiting Naftogaz default: “Western lenders,” “international investors,” “Western bondholders,” “debtholders,” “creditors,” and “financiers.” Their law firm Dechert advised them to reject Ukraine’s offer-Wall St. Journal, Reuters

“"...international investors voted against a proposal to delay payments by two years.“ Why are none of these investors named, but a law firm [Dechert LLP] that recommended they vote down the delay in payments is named?” commenter….Reuters: “Creditors of Ukraine’s state-owned energy firm Naftogaz have been urged to reject the company’s request this week for a two-year debt payment freeze…in a call organised by London-based legal firm Dechert, which has been appointed by creditors….Many of the Naftogaz bondholders also lent money to the government.”

7/26/22, “Ukraine’s State Energy Firm Nears Default After Failure to Pay Bondholders," Wall St. Journal, Caitlin Ostroff, Joe Wallace

“Kyiv vetoes payout after Naftogaz bondholders reject request to delay payments.”

“Ukraine’s NJSC Naftogaz said it was near default after the government rejected its request

to make payments to Western lenders.

The state energy company had sought the government’s approval to repay a $335 million bond that matured last week

after international investors

voted against a proposal to delay payments by two years. The five-business-day grace period for making the payment elapses Tuesday.

Defaulting would complicate the operations of a company playing a pivotal role in Ukraine’s wartime economy, producing gas and oil and subsidizing fuel for swaths of the population. Naftogaz is also overseeing an uneasy arrangement under which Moscow pays Kyiv to transit billions of cubic meters of natural gas through Ukrainian pipes to Europe.

Naftogaz’s failure to pay

Western investors

has heightened

concerns

about the health of Ukraine’s public finances.

Default would also allow

holders of another Naftogaz bond

with payments due later this year

to accelerate repayment,

adding to financial pressure on the company.

[Unnamed person in] Kyiv separately asked

Western bondholders

to grant payment delays on sovereign bonds last week,

a proposal expected to pass

after the U.S., U.K.

and other governments

urged investors

to cut Ukraine some financial slack.

The Ukrainian government is pursuing a balancing act between

maintaining the trust of

Western financiers

and funneling funds toward fighting the war.

Naftogaz’s last-minute request for a deferral

rankled some Western investors.

The company had previously indicated it would meet payments, but said

an order from [an unnamed person in] Kyiv

to sock 19 billion cubic meters of gas into storage

by the winter

blindsided it

and would tie up billions of dollars in cash.

Naftogaz Chief Executive Yuriy Vitrenko had

campaigned to convince

[unnamed] bondholders

over the past week,

hitting the phones to win their support.

The $335 million note

was one of three

on which the company asked to delay interest payments and repayments.

The euro- and dollar-denominated

bonds added up to more than $1.4 billion.

Some bondholders

were bothered by the mixed messages from Naftogaz

and questioned

whether Ukraine needed to stash so much gas

when would-be consumers had fled to neighboring countries.

Naftogaz’s proposed deferral

needed the approval of

at least 75% of debtholders

voting on each of the bonds.

Some investors

sought advice from law firm

Dechert LLP,

which encouraged bondholders to vote the proposals down.

Fitch Ratings downgraded Ukraine’s credit rating to C from CCC on Monday, indicating that the country is near default. It cited the requested extension on debt payments and noted that it expected the country would need to restructure its debt in the future due to the war.

Fitch recently also cut Naftogaz’s credit rating to C, following its proposals.”

…………………………………

Added: 7/14/22, Reuters, “G7 wealthy democracies have pledged some $20 billion in support to keep Ukraine’s government operating over the next few months.”…"IMF says it expects Ukraine to keep paying debt despite default speculation,” Rodrigo Campos, David Lawder

………………………………………

7/14/22, Reuters, London: “Creditors of Ukraine’s state-owned energy firm Naftogaz have been urged to reject the company’s request this week for a two-year debt payment freeze….

In a call organised by London-based legal firm Dechert,

which has been appointed by creditors,

advisors said they did not think the company was facing an immediate cash crunch and was viewed as a profitable going concern.

As a result, they would demand full repayment of one of the firm’s bonds which is due next week, along with an additional ‘coupon’ interest payment

on another bond that runs until 2024.

“The advice is to vote this down,”

one investor on the call said….

Naftogaz is a major source of income for Ukraine, accounting for almost 17% of the country’s total state budget revenue last year and

employing more than 50,000 people before the war.

Its underground storage facilities hold over 30 billion cubic metres of gas,

making them the third largest in the world

after the United States and Russia.

It also has Europe’s second largest

oil transportation pipeline network.

The company’s request on Monday caught many creditors off guard, coming with little over a week to go before a $335 million bond is due to pay out on July 19.

It has also raised expectations that Ukraine’s government may look to do something similar itself ahead of a near

$1 billion sovereign bond payment

due in September.

Kyiv has so far said that it intends to make that payment but

many of the

Naftogaz bondholders

also lent money to the government,

meaning that sentiment could suffer.

The International Monetary Fund, which the country relies on heavily for support, said on Thursday that it expects Kyiv to continue paying its debt.”…”Ukraine’s Naftogaz bondholders urged to reject debt freeze plan,” by Mac Jones

……………………….

7/26/22, Ukranews.com: “In November 2019, the Naftogaz of Ukraine national joint-stock company placed 7-year Eurobonds in the amount of USD 500 million with a rate of 7.625% per annum.

Also in July 2019, Naftogaz placed 5-year Eurobonds for EUR 600 million at an annual rate of 7.125% and 3-year Eurobonds for USD 335 million at an annual rate of 7.375%.

The Kondor Finance company is engaged in the issue of Naftogaz Eurobonds.”…"Government Defaults On Naftogaz Eurobonds”

........................

Pathetic Bellingcrap Denies Officials Responsible For Failed Ukrainian Plot–Zelenski Fires Said Officials-Moon of Alabama, 7/26/22

7/26/22, “Bellingcat Denies Officials’ Responsible For Failed Ukrainian Plot – Zelenski Fires Said Officials,” Moon of Alabama

“A few hours after the revelations about the failed Ukrainian secret operation to hijack Russian fighter airplanes were published, Bellingcat’s lead Russia investigator Christo Grozev added a few

more flimsy excuses

for his deep involvement in the failed clandestine scheme:

“Christo Grozev @christogrozev – 14:52 UTC · Jul 25, 2022

“An important P.S. based on questions from readers. The Ukrainian operation was not a project of either SBU or GUR. (If it were, there’d be no way we would – or want to – get access to it). It was organized by maverick ex operatives whom we got to know in the Wagner investigation.

So all the Russian statements from today – claiming this was a “GUR” (Military Intel) operation “with support from NATO” – total, unadulterated bollocks. The whole of the FSB CI were fighting tooth and nail against a bunch of, essentially, volunteers. And not for the first time.”

Ah. Sure. The following is just a weird ‘unadulterated bollocks’ coincidence …

Russians With Attitude @RWApodcast – 16:27 UTC · Jul 25, 2022

“Zelensky has removed Ruslan Demchenko from his position as First Deputy Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council & dismissed Grigoriy Galagan as commander of the AFU Special Operations Forces, replacing him with Viktor Horenko.”

Erik Zimerman @ZimermanErik – 1:39 UTC · Jul 26, 2022

“[…] After the release of this information, we learned of two high level dismissals in the Ukrainian government. #Zelensky fired the First Deputy Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council Ruslan Demchenko. As part of the Council, which among other tasks coordinates security matters and advises the president, he very well may have been involved in clandestine matters such as this operation. He also worked as deputy minister of foreign affairs.

Perhaps more tellingly Zelensky also fired the commander of Special Operations Forces (SSO), Hryhoriy Halahan. Until 2016 these units were under the Chief Directorate of Intelligence (HUR / GUR), and so are highly correlated with this kind of operation. The SSO includes psychological warfare units and can be regarded as special forces (Spestnaz) of military intelligence.

An operation such as the one Bellingcat and Christo Grozev,

aiming at the defection of Russian pilots and their planes to Ukraine,

would be right up the alley of the SSO.”

More of Erik Zimerman’s interesting thoughts about the case can be found here and here.

The whole thing wasn’t Mr. Grozev’s first foray into making stuff up to further a false narrative. Here is a video documenting previous dishonest behavior by him:

Bellingcat Scams MH17 Warplane Witness

Posted by b on July 26, 2022 at 7:05 UTC | Permalink”

**************************

Among comments at Moon of Alabama

***************************

“Grosev got caught with his pants down so he lit them on fire.

Posted by: Deepfake | Jul 26 2022 7:16 utc | 1″

.................................

“What a farce. The fact this is a central element of the Anglosphere deep states reveals how far things have declined.

Posted by: exiled off mainstree | Jul 26 2022 7:38 utc | 2″

...................................

“This smells of MI6 and Brits. It is their way of doing things – dirty “clever” propaganda stuns while they are getting their a**ess kicked in all the things that really matters. Or as they say, sore losers.

Posted by: Abe | Jul 26 2022 7:46 utc | 3″

................................

“It is not for nothing that most here give RF the benefit of the doubt in all things even vaguely Ukraine-related and, increasingly, in all things generally.

Posted by: anon2020 | Jul 26 2022 7:50 utc | 4

.....................................

This was as badly managed as the Skripal affair. it does stink of MI6.

Posted by: pretzelattack | Jul 26 2022 7:55 utc | 5

...................................

When the SBU failed in 2020 in its attempted kidnapping of those former soldiers whom they fooled into travelling to Minsk, Zelensky distanced himself from that operation. It was reported at the time that he called the whole thing off as soon as he heard about it, but that story was more likely just damage control after the Russians uncovered the operation. It would not be surprising though if he was kept in the dark by the SBU about that operation.

The same thing could have happened in the latest hare-brained SBU scheme, but this time Zelensky has more power and he was able to fire some high-ranking officials.

Posted by: Brendan | Jul 26 2022 8:04 utc | 6″

......................................

“Bellingcat was founded by MI6 to pose as a competitor to Wikileaks while publishing British & US intelligence propaganda. This has been glaringly obvious since it launched. A bootstrapped grassroots news organization doesn’t have six figures to spend on a superfluous logo designed by the same agency (Pentagram, the most expensive branding agency on the planet) that designed Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign and some of the most famous brands in the world.

Posted by: Francis | Jul 26 2022 8:05 utc | 7″

................................

“@exiled off mainstree | Jul 26 2022 7:38 utc | 2

For amusement try this URL ==> https://www.google.com/search?q=Grozev+site:.uk&tbs=qdr:d

The UK is beyond bonkers.

Posted by: too scents | Jul 26 2022 8:24 utc | 8″

..................................

“The MH17 false flag is not going away.

Posted by: Norwegian | Jul 26 2022 8:37 utc | 9″

................................

“It is very interesting how the English Wikipedia article on Bellingcat completely removes any reference to any criticism of it whatsoever. Looking under the Talk tab for the article reveals why this is so: the article is carefully policed by some kind of activist editors to prevent any negative word about Bellingcat from appearing. This is quite contrary to the practice on many other topics, where a section of criticism of the subject is often included. Such a section could entirely legitimately cite the published criticism of Bellingcat, which is a lot, without actually endorsing it, but, oh no, the editors can’t allow a single negative word to get through and even delete comments from the Talk page. This illustrates a weakness in the whole Wikipedia idea, as on Bellingcat it is certainly nothing but imperialist propaganda. The article also ought to mention at least that Bellingcat has a particular political stance, but that is also elided.

Interestingly, Russian Wikipedia on Bellingcat, in a much shorter article, also gives little criticism of Bellingcat but at least provides three statements from critics. While this is still thin, it is way better than the disgusting English propaganda piece. I would suppose, though I do not know, that English editors do not intrude into the editing in other languages, but since I don’t know, I am also suspicious of that point….

Posted by: Cabe | Jul 26 2022 9:06 utc | 10″

................................

“Also, I wonder why the Russian FSB should be taking the lead on the Russian side, as alleged by Bellingcrap. The FSB is the civilian agency. Any Ukrainian operation targeting active pilots would certainly alert the GRU first, the military intelligence agency.

Posted by: Scotch Bingeington | Jul 26 2022 9:15 utc | 11″

...............................

“Wikipedia has been slowly compromised by the War Party over the last decade.

Posted by: Exile | Jul 26 2022 9:29 utc | 12″

......................................

.............

Subprime mortgage crisis of 2007-2010 marked end of US hegemony and rise of BRICS. Small countries now have alternative to being bullied by the US, a humane one in which they have a voice-Adriel Kosanta

“The single event that did the most to catalyze the multipolarization trend was the U.S.’s subprime-mortgage crisis from 2007 to 2010."…BRICS is “a grouping of major emerging economies–Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa...What BRICS is against are power politics, hegemony, the law of the jungle, all of which basically determine that in international politics…Small countries must be obedient, or even be exploited.”

7/19/22, “The Corners of the Multipolar World Order," The American Conservative, Adriel Kosanta

“The BRICS nations seek to shape the end of the American unipolar moment.”

“Much has been said about Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa separately.  

 

Still, remarkably little attention has been paid to the joint attempt to institutionalize the emerging powers’ ties in BRICS—an acronym crucial to understanding the multipolar framework of the emerging world order.

………

Although the acronym initially served to address investment objectives, economist Jim O’Neill—who coined BRIC, without South Africa, in a 2001 paper—admitted in a 2013 interview for Der Spiegel magazine that he was perfectly aware of the

impact the new country players’ emergence would have

on global governance.

The geopolitical debate in the years after the 9/11 attacks focused on terrorism and the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan

instead of the rise of BRICS.

This created a false assumption that there is no alternative to the U.S.-led unipolar world order, which was quite ironically described in 1999 by Dartmouth’s William Wohlforth as “not only peaceful but durable.”

The same year, Harvard political scientist Samuel P. Huntington described the global order in an essay for Foreign Affairs magazine as “unimultipolar,”

where the United States plays the role of

“the lonely superpower”

with “the reach and capabilities to promote its interests in virtually every part of the world,” but which

sometimes needs smaller countries’ help

to achieve its foreign-policy goals.

Meanwhile, no serious thought was given to China’s development potential. The country’s prospect of becoming a significant regional and international power was thought to be almost nonexistent; Wohlforth and his Dartmouth colleague Stephen G. Brooks, for example, questioned Beijing’s ability to keep up with the U.S. in the technology development area in a 2002 Foreign Affairs magazine’s essay titled “American Primacy in Perspective.”

But by that time, the world had been already undergoing massive change, with power rapidly shifting away from the global North to the global South. The global system has been steadily moving towards a “Post-American World” or a “Post-Western World”—both of which capture the same geopolitical phenomenon, relating to what Amitav Acharya in 2014 called

“the end of American world order.”

The single event that did the most to catalyze the multipolarization trend was the

U.S.’s subprime-mortgage crisis 

from 2007 to 2010.

The crisis marked the moment when a growing number of international investors and economists

started to take BRICS more seriously.

Due to developing countries’ governance failures in response to the recession, the international financial order faced a legitimacy crisis.

BRICS economies increased their intra-bloc cooperation in international finance and successfully established themselves as

new pillars of stability in the world economy,

with the nations enjoying an average annual economic growth of 10.7 percent from 2006 to 2008. 

Since then, the bloc’s primary objective has been to promote

a shift from the Western-led global governance system

to a more inclusive paradigm of multipolarity that could serve as

an alternative to the U.S.-hegemonic unipolar model.

“We underline our support for

a more democratic and just

multi-polar world order based on the rule of

international law, equality, mutual respect, cooperation, coordinated action and collective decision-making of all states,”

reads the Joint Statement of the BRIC Countries’ Leaders, published at its 2009 meeting in Yekaterinburg. This position regarding

multipolarity has been maintained throughout the following years.

Despite the initial disbelief in BRICS’s effectiveness and cohesion 

among Western commentators,

the Financial Times finally admitted in 2014

that “shifts in global economic power suggest that

changes in institutional power may be logical—or even inevitable.”

Following the BRICS summit in China in 2017, members published the Xiamen Declaration, which laid out a 68-point manifesto for

a multipolar world order aimed at

replacing Pax Americana.

The “strategic partnership” status of intra-bloc relations was approved, and the

centrality of the United Nations,

the need to reform the UN Security Council, and Bretton Woods institutions were reaffirmed. 

Notably, at the same summit, Beijing came up with the idea known as “BRICS+” that has paved the way for the bloc’s

cooperation with non-member states

and created a solid base for a truly “collective leadership.”

As the recent BRICS forum proved, more and more countries are becoming interested in cooperating with the bloc, with Middle East and Latin American nations keeping a close eye on the group of emerging economies, and 

Argentina and Iran already desiring to become full members.

Both China and Russia appear to look favorably at BRICS enlargement

as a way “to embrace changes and keep abreast with the times,” and have said they look forward to clarifying “the guiding principles, standards, criteria and procedures” of the enlargement process.

The BRICS nations account for more than 40 percent of the Earth’s population. Their collective GDP amounts to 25 percent of global GDP ($21 trillion), and the nations’ share in world trade was close to 20 percent ($6.7 trillion) in 2020. It should be obvious that BRICS is a force to be reckoned with.

The dominant position of the Western powers is eroding. In contrast, powers like China and India have come to the fore, making the

global decision-making elite less Western

and ideologically more diverse. 

As Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro rightly noted, “the growing weight of the emerging economies in the world

requires a proper representation.”

This process is organic and irreversible. It is represents an order in which

the U.N. and G20 are given preference

over NATO and the G7 group.

The BRICS nations are laying the foundations of a multipolar world order that is

genuinely democratic, where states act as sovereign entities

co-managing the international system

through international law

rather than

under a hegemonic [US taxpayer funded]

“rules-based order.””

………………………………………….

“ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Adriel Kasonta is a London-based political risk consultant and lawyer. His work has been published in Forbes, CapX, National Review, the National Interest, The American Conservative, and Antiwar.com, to name a few. You can follow him on Twitter @Adriel_Kasonta.”

**************************

Added: All G7 “really cares about is

containment of China and Russia:”

7/22/22, “More countries knocking on BRICS’ door, a sign the world needs fairer governance,” Global Times commentary, via manilatimes.net

“BRICS, a grouping of major emerging economies — Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa — has become one of the trending buzzwords in global public opinion lately….

What BRICS is against are

power politics, hegemony, the law of the jungle, all of which basically determine that in international politics,

only major powers have a say, and small countries

must be obedient,

or even be exploited.

Against this backdrop, BRICS calls for fairness and justice, a global governance in which developing countries have their due status and their voices can be heard. The BRICS just want to bring a

balance in the current global order.

When the West compares BRICS with G7 and NATO, it has turned a blind eye to the fact that

G7 has long become a rich countries’ club, and

NATO’s mentality is still trapped in the Cold War.

Whenever G7 attempts to put up a show to discuss various global issues nowadays,

all it really cares about

is containment of China and Russia.”…

 

.................