SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
ukraine
Trump's Imperialism Atop Western Warmongering
The hypocrisy of the so-called "highly-developed" or "rule-of-law" democracies knows no bounds.
Jan 09, 2025
Conflicts across the world’s regions experienced a further surge in 2024, according to data provided by Armed Conflict Locations & Event Data (ACLED)—an independent, international non-profit organization that collects data on real time on locations, actors, fatalities, and types of all reported political violence and protest events around the world. While Ukraine and Gaza are considered the two major global hotspots of conflict, violence increased by 25 percent in 2024 compared to 2023 and conflict levels have experienced a two-fold increase over the past five years, according to ACLED. The intensity and human toll of armed conflicts are also on the rise as more civilians are exposed to violence and the number of actors involved in violence is proliferating.
What is also noteworthy about the data on violence collected by ACLED is that neither democracy nor more development appears to constrain violence. In fact, the data collected by ACLED shows that countries with elections in 2024 experienced much higher rates of violence than countries without elections.
As militarism and warmongering are pushed to new heights, the rhetoric of peace also goes into full swing.
Speaking of electoral democracies, warmongering talk is also sharply on the increase in developed nations, courtesy of major leaders of the western world, and comes with a rising militarism. Mark Rutte, NATO’s recently appointed secretary-general, warned last month that “danger is moving toward us at full speech” and that the west must face the fact that “what is happening in Ukraine could happen here too.” He urged NATO to “shift to a wartime mindset” and implored the citizens of NATO countries to tell their banks and funds that “it is simply unacceptable that they refuse to invest in the defense industry.” UK’s prime minister Keir Starmer has zealously endorsed the widening of NATO’s war against Russia and recently gave Ukraine permission to use Storm Shadow cruise missiles inside Russia. And Joe Biden delivered a warmongering rant at his final address to the United Nations (UN) General Assembly on September 24, 2024, urging an expansion of alliances against Russia and China and threatening Iran.
Warmongering is a constant element in the never ending obsession of U.S. presidents since the end of the Second World War to pursue a policy of what Andrew Bacevich described a few years ago as “militarized hegemony until the end of time.” Indeed, since the breakout of the Ukraine conflict, Washington has been more than eager to wage a proxy war against Russia while the U.S.-led western military bloc (NATO) has increased its military presence in the eastern part of the Alliance, seeks to expand its southern flank to Africa and looks toward the Indo-Pacific as part of its global approach to security. Meanwhile, all major western states have been behind Israel in its destruction of Gaza, offering the Jewish state an extraordinary level of support (weapons, cash and political support) as it carries out war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Of course, as militarism and warmongering are pushed to new heights, the rhetoric of peace also goes into full swing. Western hypocrisy knows no bounds. Biden spoke of the need for a peaceful world in his final address to the UN although he has done everything in his power to prolong the war in Ukraine and ensure Gaza’s destruction. His administration has vowed to fight Russia to the last Ukrainian and has fueled Israel’s war in Gaza, making the U.S. complicit in war crimes in Gaza.
Geopolitical forecasts for 2025 are grim.
The Biden administration did very little to prevent Russia from invading Ukraine as it totally ignored the question of Ukraine’s membership into NATO and has denied massacres, genocide and ethnic cleansing taking place in Gaza by the Israel Defense Fores (IDF). In fact, Biden himself called the International Criminal Court’s decision to issue an arrest warrant for the Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu “outrageous.” The icing on the cake was when Biden’s Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken, who will go down as the worse Secretary of State since World War II, had the audacity to write in a recent essay in Foreign Affairs that the United States is a country that, unlike Russia and China, seeks a “world where international law, including the core principles of the UN Charter, is upheld, and universal human rights are respected.”
Unsurprisingly, geopolitical forecasts for 2025 are grim. ACLED projects an annual increase of 20 percent in levels of violence in 2025. And then there is Trump’s return to the White House which surely adds another layer of unpredictability to an already volatile and highly dangerous world.
Imperialism is still about world hegemony and a struggle for the control of strategic resources.
Trump’s second administration seems set on advancing a new version of Manifest Destiny with threats of retaking the Panama Canal, which the U.S. ceded to Panama in 1999, forcibly buying Greenland, which is controlled by Denmark, and calling Canada “the 51st State,” a remark he repeated shortly after Justin Trudeau’s resignation.
Imperialism seems to be Trump’s new theme, but his overall vision of power is reminiscent of U.S. imperialist attitudes of the 19th century. He seems to believe that territorial expansion of the boundaries of the United States would make the country safer, stronger, and more prosperous. Of course, this could all just be a symptom of Trump’s arrogance and ignorance, but there can be no denying that imperialism is embedded in U.S. political culture. The U.S. has been preparing for a future global conflict for quite some time now, first with Russia and then with China.
Imperialism seems to be Trump’s new theme, but his overall vision of power is reminiscent of U.S. imperialist attitudes of the 19th century.
The U.S. set the theater for a conflict with Russia by orchestrating the 2014 coup in Ukraine, treating the country in turn as a NATO ally in all but name and subsequently engaging in military provocations with the hope of inducing Russia to embark on a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, which finally occurred on February 24, 2022. And it has been following the same scenario in the Asia-Pacific region by making Taiwan and the South China Sea the fuse for conflict.
The truth is that U.S. imperialism never died. And how could it when the U.S. still maintains around 750 military bases in at least 80 countries and territories (U.S. bases represent over 90 percent of the world’s foreign bases) and spends more on defense than the next nine countries combined, which include major powers such as China, Russia, India, Germany, France, and the United Kingdom? There are more active-duty U.S. Air Force personnel in Britain than in 40 U.S. states.
Of course, imperialism has taken new forms in the 21st century and the dynamics of exploitation have changed. But imperialism is still about world hegemony and a struggle for the control of strategic resources. Military and economic/natural resource interests are interrelated, and the major capitalist states are all caught in an inescapable struggle for survival, power, and prestige. In its turn, the U.S. continues to exercise imperial power by using all its available tools and weapons to make the world conform to its own whims and wants as it tries to shore up its declining economic dominance. But with Trump’s return to the White House, and armed as he appears to be with a new version of Manifest Destiny, U.S. imperialism may become more aggressive and even more dangerous to world peace. If that turns out to be the case, the world is headed for an even more violent future.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Humanitarian Groups Dread 2025 Aid Shortfall as Trump Term Looms
"At a time when the richest people on Earth can go to space as a tourist," said one advocate, "it is incomprehensible that we as an international community are unable to find the necessary funding to provide displaced families with shelter."
Dec 04, 2024
As the United Nations humanitarian agency and its partner organizations launched the annual Global Humanitarian overview on Wednesday to appeal for aid ahead of 2025, officials shared sobering numbers: 305 million people in dire need of assistance, 190 million people the agencies believe they can help next year if funding demands are met, and $47 billion that's needed to help the people facing the greatest threats.
Tom Fletcher, under-secretary-general at the U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), said governments, particularly those in wealthy countries like the United States, face "a choice" as the world bears witness to starvation, increasingly frequent climate disasters, and other suffering in Gaza, Sudan, Yemen, and elsewhere.
"We can respond to these numbers with generosity, with compassion, with genuine solidarity for those in the most dire need on the planet—or we can carry on," said Fletcher at a news briefing. "We can choose to leave them alone to face these crises. We can choose to let them down."
Fletcher and other humanitarian leaders noted that as of last month, just 43% of the $50 billion funding appeal made for 2024 had been met.
Food assistance in Syria has been cut by 80% as a result of the large funding gap, while protection services in Myanmar and water and sanitation aid in Yemen have also been reduced.
Fletcher said that with another major funding shortfall expected in 2025, OCHA and its partners are expecting to be forced to make "ruthless" decisions to direct aid to those most in need—likely leaving out 115 million people.
Fears that funding needs will be far from met in 2025 are arising partially from the election last month of U.S. President-elect Donald Trump, who pursued significant cuts during his first term to agencies including the U.N. Population Fund, UNAIDS, the World Health Organization, and the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East.
"America is very much on our minds at the moment, we're facing the election of a number of governments who will be more questioning of what the United Nations does and less ideologically supportive of this humanitarian effort that we've laid out in this report," said Fletcher. "But it's our job to frame the arguments in the right way to land and not to give up. And so I'll head to Washington. I'll spend a lot of time in Washington, I imagine, over the next few months, engaging with the new administration, making the case to them, just as I'll spend a lot of time in other capitals where people might be skeptical about the work that we are doing."
Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC) Secretary-General Jan Egeland, who led OCHA for three years, toldAl Jazeera that U.S. funding under the Trump administration is "a tremendous question mark."
"Should the U.S. administration cut its humanitarian funding, it could be more complex to fill the gap of growing needs," said Egeland.
The U.S. is the largest humanitarian donor in the world, contributing $10 billion last year—but its donations pale in comparison to its military spending, which was budgeted at more than $841 billion in 2024, and the earnings of its top corporations.
As NRC noted, Facebook parent company Meta earned $47.4 billion—about the same amount humanitarian agencies are requesting this year—before income taxes in 2023.
Without naming billionaire SpaceX CEO Elon Musk—a Trump ally and megadonor who's expected to have a role in his new administration—Camilla Waszink, director of partnership and policy at NRC, called out the widening gap between the world's richest people and those in desperate need of humanitarian assistance.
"At a time when the richest people on Earth can go to space as a tourist and trillions of U.S. dollars are used annually on global military expenditure, it is incomprehensible that we as an international community are unable to find the necessary funding to provide displaced families with shelter and prevent children from dying of hunger," said Waszink. "There is an urgent need for a revamp of global solidarity. Existing donor countries must ensure assistance keeps pace with needs and inflation, and emerging economies should compete to become among the most generous donors in the same way they compete to host expensive international sports events."
"It is devastating to know that millions of people in need will not receive necessary assistance next year because of the growing lack of funding for the humanitarian response. With a record number of conflicts ongoing, donors are cutting aid budgets that displaced and conflict-affected people rely on to survive," she added. "Conflicts and a blatant disregard for protection of civilians are driving massive humanitarian needs. It is essential that donors provide funding, but they must also invest in ending conflicts, bringing violations to a halt and preventing new needs from developing."
Fletcher noted that in addition to conflicts like Israel's U.S.-backed assault on Gaza, Russia's invasion of Ukraine, and the civil war in Sudan, the climate crisis is a major driver of growing humanitarian needs.
"2024 will be the hottest year on record," said Fletcher. "Presumably 2025 will then be the hottest year on record. Floods, droughts, heatwaves, wildfires affecting millions. We're on the brink of surpassing the 1.5°C in warming, and that will hit hardest in the countries that have actually contributed least to climate change. It wipes out food systems. It wipes out livelihoods, it forces communities to move from their homes and land. Drought has caused 65% of agricultural economic damage over the last 15 years, worsening food insecurity."
In conflict zones and in regions affected by the climate emergency, said Fletcher, "it's our mission to do more."
"My people are desperate to get out there and deliver because they really are on the frontline," he said. "They can see what is needed, but we need these resources. That's our call to action. And we also need the world to do more. Those with power to do more—to challenge this era of impunity and to challenge this era of indifference."
Keep ReadingShow Less
ICC President Warns Attacks on Court Threaten 'Future of Humanity'
The judge pointed to Russian arrest warrants for court leadership and U.S. threats of "draconian economic sanctions."
Dec 02, 2024
Less than two weeks after the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Israeli and Hamas leaders, the ICC president on Monday warned that the tribunal faces "existential" threats—taking aim at Russia and the United States without naming either.
Judge Tomoko Akane's comments came at the start of the 23rd session of the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, set to run through Saturday in The Hague, the Netherlands. Established in 2002, the treaty-based ICC prosecutes individuals for genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and the crime of aggression.
"We are at a turning point in history. Regretfully, this is not rhetorical," the ICC president said. "International law and international justice are under threat. So is the future of humanity. The International Criminal Court will continue to carry out its lawful mandate, independently and impartially, without giving in to any outside interference."
"The court has been subjected to attacks seeking to undermine its legitimacy and ability to administer justice and realize international law and fundamental rights; coercive measures, threats, pressure, and acts of sabotage."
Akane shared examples of what the ICC has faced while pursuing justice "as atrocities continue to plague the world," detailing how "the court has been subjected to attacks seeking to undermine its legitimacy and ability to administer justice and realize international law and fundamental rights; coercive measures, threats, pressure, and acts of sabotage."
Rather than naming Russia or the U.S., she called them out as permanent members of the United Nations Security Council.
"Several elected officials are being severely threatened and are subjected to arrest warrants from a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council, merely for having faithfully and diligently carried out their judicial mandate per the statutory framework and international law," she said, referring to Russia, which launched a full-blown invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
As Human Rights Watch (HRW) summarized Monday: "Arrest warrants issued by Russia against the ICC prosecutor and six of the court's current and former judges in retaliation to the court's March 2023 warrant against Russian President Vladimir Putin, remain pending, and a law criminalizing cooperation with the ICC remains in force in the country. In September 2023, the court was the target of a serious cyberattack."
In addition to Putin, the ICC last year issued a warrant for Russian Commissioner for Children's Rights Maria Lvova-Belova for allegedly abducting Ukrainian children and transporting them to Russia. At the time, neither Russia nor Ukraine was a party to the Rome Statute, but as Akane noted, Ukraine has since ratified the treaty that established the court and will be a state party beginning next year.
Highlighting U.S. attacks on the ICC, Akane said that "the court is being threatened with draconian economic sanctions from institutions of another permanent member of the Security Council as if it was a terrorist organization. These measures would rapidly undermine the court's operations in all situations and cases and jeopardize its very existence."
The ICC issued warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and Hamas leader Mohammed Diab Ibrahim Al-Masri last month despite pressure from the United States. Neither the U.S. nor Israel is a party to the ICC, but Palestine is.
As Palestine Chronicle editor Ramzy Baroud noted in a Monday opinion piece for Common Dreams, the November decision was significant in part because "historically, the vast majority of arrest warrants, and actual detention of accused war criminals seemed to target the Global South, and Africa, in particular."
The outgoing Biden administration and U.S. President-elect Donald Trump's pick for national security adviser have criticized the warrants for the leaders from Israel, which also faces a genocide case at the International Court of Justice over its assault on the people of Gaza.
Responding to the warrants on Fox News last month, U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)—a key ally of Trump in the upper chamber that will soon be controlled by Republicans—said: "So to any ally, Canada, Britain, Germany, France, if you try to help the ICC, we're gonna sanction you... We should crush your economy, because we're next."
While Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said last week that "we will abide by all the regulations and rulings of the international court" as a party to the Rome Statute, France has flip-flopped on warrant enforcement. Just a day after French Prime Minister Michel Barnier told Parliament that the government would fulfill its obligations, the Foreign Ministry announced it would not detain Netanyahu and Gallant, claiming they have "immunities" because Israel is not a party to the treaty.
The Associated Pressexplained Monday that "Graham's threat isn't seen as just empty words," considering that as president, Trump "sanctioned the court's previous prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, with a travel ban and asset freeze for investigating American troops and intelligence officials in Afghanistan."
Graham isn't alone in making threats. U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) targeted the court's current prosecutor in response to the warrants, writing on social media: "The ICC is a kangaroo court and Karim Khan is a deranged fanatic. Woe to him and anyone who tries to enforce these outlaw warrants. Let me give them all a friendly reminder: The American law on the ICC is known as the Hague Invasion Act for a reason. Think about it."
Officially titled the American Service Members' Protection Act, the 2002 law enables the president to use "all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any U.S. or allied personnel being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court."
Akane said Monday that "we firmly reject any attempt to influence the independence and the impartiality of the court. We resolutely dismiss efforts to politicize our function. We have and always will comply only with the law, under all circumstances."
"There isn't such a thing as selective sanctions or coercive measures. If the court collapses, this will inevitably imply the collapse of all situations and cases," she stressed. "The fall of the court would imply the fall of the rule of law in the international community and a final defeat of the fight against impunity."
Still, the judge concluded that "the court can continue to provide what for humanity is the most essential sentiment: hope," a sentiment echoed by Khan, who spoke after her at the opening of the conference.
The prosecutor said that "history will judge whether or not the promise of the Rome Statute is vindicated in practice in the maelstrom that we see around us, not only the storm we face but winds that are perhaps to come. But despite that, really the focus of my remarks today is that we don't have the luxury, nor do we need to give in to despondency and despair."
As the conference got underway, Human Rights Watch released a 24-page report with recommendations to ensure the court has everything it needs to advance cases and called on state parties to support the ICC in the face of global attacks.
"ICC warrants, whether against Vladimir Putin or Benjamin Netanyahu, send a critical message that no one is above the law," said Liz Evenson, HRW's international justice director. "ICC member countries should make a commitment during their annual meeting to take all necessary steps to ensure that the ICC's crucial work for justice can continue without obstruction."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular