Podcasts about united nations charter

The American invasion of Venezuela — along with fresh threats to annex Greenland — is seen by many commentators as marking the collapse of the international legal order, based on rules enshrined in the United Nations Charter of 1945. The events in Venezuela suggest that this system, with its emphasis on sovereignty and fundamental rights, has been replaced by one more like the pre-Second World War system, when nations could go to war for almost any reason. Jorge Sanchez-Perez says it's time to accept this reality if we are to build a better international order next time. Jorge Sanchez-Perez is Assistant Professor in the Department of Philosophy at the University of Alberta.

The United Nations Security Council's first meeting of 2026 heard a global chorus of UN member states strongly denounce the United States' strike in Venezuela as a grave violation of the UN Charter, although a US representative defended it as a "surgical law enforcement operation".At Monday's emergency session, Sun Lei, China's deputy permanent representative to the UN, urged Washington to heed the international community's "overwhelming voice", comply with international law and the UN Charter, halt actions that infringe on other countries' sovereignty and security, stop toppling Venezuela's government, and return to dialogue and negotiations as the path to a political solution.Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, seized and brought to the US on Saturday after a large-scale US strike in the South American nation, pleaded not guilty in federal court in New York on Monday to charges of narco-terrorism. Crowds of protesters gathered outside the courthouse, many voicing opposition to the US action against Venezuela.Sun expressed China's "deep shock" and strong condemnation of what he described as the "unilateral, illegal and bullying acts" of the US, and he called for Washington to ensure the safety of Maduro and his wife, and to release them immediately."The US has placed its own power above multilateralism and military actions above diplomatic efforts,"Sun said, warning that such actions pose a grave threat to peace and security in Latin America and the Caribbean and even internationally.He said the US military strikes "wantonly trampled" on Venezuela's sovereignty and violated core tenets of the UN Charter, including the principles of sovereign equality, noninterference in internal affairs, peaceful settlement of international disputes, and prohibition of the use of force in international relations."The lessons of history are a stark warning," Sun said, adding that military means are not the solution to international problems, and the indiscriminate use of force will only lead to greater crises.He cited past US actions, such as bypassing the Security Council to launch military operations against Iraq, attacks on Iran's nuclear facilities, and the imposition of economic sanctions, military strikes and armed occupations in Latin America and the Caribbean.Those actions caused persistent conflict, instability and immense suffering for ordinary people, he said.The envoy reiterated that China firmly supports the Venezuelan government and people in safeguarding their sovereignty, security and legitimate rights and interests, and supports countries in the region in upholding Latin America and the Caribbean as a zone of peace.He called on the US to change course, cease bullying and coercive practices, and develop relations and cooperation with countries in the region on the basis of mutual respect, equality and noninterference in internal affairs.Addressing the UN meeting, US economist Jeffrey Sachs said that the US military action and ongoing pressure violate Article 2, Section 4 of the UN Charter, which prohibits the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.Sachs, president of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network and director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, called these actions part of a long-standing US pattern of "covert regime change", citing a historical record of 70 such operations between 1947 and 1989 alone.The US should "immediately cease and desist from all explicit and implicit threats or uses of force against Venezuela", he said.Sachs said, "Peace, and the survival of humanity, depends on whether the United Nations Charter remains a living instrument of international law, or is allowed to wither into irrelevance."At the meeting, Russia's UN ambassador, Vassily Nebenzia, also called for the immediate release of Maduro and his wife.The Russian envoy called the US military action in Venezuela a "crime cynically perpetrated" and a harbinger of a return to an era of "lawlessness", stressing that any conflicts must be resolved through dialogue as enshrined in the UN Charter.Backers of the US military operation in Venezuela, including Argentina, framed the action as a law-enforcement, anti-narco-terrorism step and argued it could open a path to restoring democracy.Representatives of many countries pushed back by arguing that democracy cannot be delivered through force and coercion, and that any political outcome must be decided by Venezuelans through peaceful and lawful means.Leonor Zalabata Torres, Colombia's UN envoy, said that "democracy cannot be promoted or defended through violence or coercion", and Venezuela deserves peace and democracy, prosperity and dignity, with a government whose sovereignty is defined by no one but the Venezuelan people and their institutions.Mexico's UN envoy, Hector Vasconcelos, warned that "regime change by external actors and the application of extraterritorial measures" is contrary to international law and that, historically, all such actions have done is to exacerbate conflicts and weaken the social and political fabric of nations.Paula Narvaez Ojeda, Chile's UN representative, noted that foreign interference caused extreme damage to her nation, and she stressed that democracy is best recovered through "the strength of organized citizens and through our institutions".Spain's representative to the UN, Hector Gomez Hernandez, said that democracy "cannot be imposed by force" and "force never brings more democracy".Brazil's UN ambassador, Sergio Franca Danese, said that international norms are "mandatory and universal" and do not allow for exceptions based on ideological, geopolitical or economic interests, such as the "exploitation of natural or economic resources".The envoy dismissed the notion that "the end justifies the means", saying that such reasoning lacks legitimacy and grants the strongest the right to define what is just or unjust while imposing decisions on the weakest.Representatives from other countries also emphasized that the US military intervention constituted a fundamental breach of the UN Charter and the principles of sovereign equality.France's representative said that when a permanent member of the Security Council violates the UN Charter, it "chips away at the very foundation of the international order".South Africa warned that "no nation can claim to be legally or morally superior" to another.Pakistan said that unilateral military action "contravenes these sacrosanct principles", while the A3 group, consisting of the Democratic Republic of Congo, Somalia and Liberia, said full respect for states' sovereignty and territorial integrity under the UN Charter is an essential foundation for international cooperation and peaceful coexistence.

It's Tuesday, January 6th, A.D. 2026. This is The Worldview in 5 Minutes heard on 140 radio stations and at www.TheWorldview.com.  I'm Adam McManus. (Adam@TheWorldview.com) By Kevin Swanson Nigerian Muslims killed 32 Christians since Christmas Killings of Christians continue unabated in Nigeria, reports TruthNigeria.com. Islamist terrorists have killed at least 32 Christians since Christmas, and burned down hundreds of homes in the Adamawa, Kebbi, and Plateau states. Congressman asserts Nigerian Christians targeted for their faith On January 1st, Republican U.S. Congressman Riley Moore of West Virginia weighed in on X. He wrote, “If there were any remaining doubts that Christians in Nigeria are being targeted for their faith in Jesus Christ, this should end that debate.  This isn't about land usage, ‘climate change,' or any other argument the Left wants to make. “This is persecution of our brothers and sisters for their faith in Christ, plain and simple. ISIS is telling Christians they have an opportunity to ‘spare their blood' if they convert. Our brothers and sisters will not bend the knee to anyone but our Lord and Savior.” Also, late last week, the Islamic-supported Allied Democratic Forces carried out a deadly nighttime incursion, killing at least 15 people in the Lubero territory of Congo, Africa. 20 Iranians have died in protests in 78 cities Iranian protests enter Day 9 where at least 20 people have died in the unrest. Protests have been cited in 78 cities across 26 provinces, reports Iran International.  According to The Times on Sunday, Iran's Supreme Leader has a backup plan in place — to abscond to Russia should his security forces fail. North Korea shot hypersonic missiles Sunday North Korea successfully fired off several hypersonic missiles on Sunday, connecting with targets 700 miles away in Korea's East Sea. North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un called it a “very important strategic task to maintain and expand a powerful and reliable nuclear deterrent.”  Back in 2019, China deployed hypersonic technology. But the United States has yet to deploy its hypersonic technology — it is still in the testing phase.  Number of foreigners in Austria, Belgium and UK skyrocketing Remix News reports that over 41% of the population of Vienna, Austria's capital, is foreign born. And 50 percent of first-graders do not understand German. Also, Muslim students now account for 41.2 percent of all elementary school students, while Christian students fell to 34.5 percent. Plus, Austria, Belgium, and the United Kingdom have the highest percentages of babies born to immigrants — above 30%. Venezuelan dictator and wife plead not guilty The Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, both arrested by the U.S. government over the weekend, appeared in a New York City Court Monday to face charges of narco-terrorism conspiracy, cocaine importation conspiracy. and weapons offenses. They entered pleas of innocence to the charges. Psalm 37:9 is clear: “Evildoers shall be cut off; but those who wait on the Lord, they shall inherit the Earth.” China financed $60 billion loans to Venezuela Come to find out China has been a major player in Venezuela since 2000. The Council on Foreign Relations reports that Venezuela ate up $60 billion of Chinese loans accounting for fully half of all the money that China loaned to South America over the years. And China has been taking in about 80% of Venezuelan oil exports of late. Rubio objects to Iran, China, & Russia propping up Venezuela Appearing on NBC's Meet the Press on Sunday, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio objected to America's enemies propping up Venezuela in America's backyard. Listen. RUBIO: “We don't need Venezuela's oil. We have plenty of oil in the United States. What we're not going to allow is for the oil industry in Venezuela to be controlled by adversaries of the United States. You have to understand. Why does China need their oil? Why does Russia need their oil? Why does Iran need their oil? They're not even in this continent. “This is the Western Hemisphere. This is where we live, and we're not going to allow the western hemisphere to be a base of operation for adversaries, competitors and rivals of the United States. We want to see the oil proceeds of that country benefit the people of Venezuela. “Why have 8 million people left Venezuela? Eight million: the single largest mass migration probably in modern history, left Venezuela in 2014 because all the wealth of that country was stolen to the benefit of Maduro and his cronies in the regime, but not to the benefit of people of Venezuela. You know how destabilizing 8 million migrants is? “The number one fear that Brazil has, that Colombia has, that all these countries in the region have about what's happening in Venezuela and our involvement is they're afraid of another mass migration event. That's what they feel. This is deeply destabilizing stuff. ”It's not going to continue to happen. They are not going to come from outside of our hemisphere, destabilize our region in our own backyard, and us have to pay the price for it, not under President Trump.” Brazil, Chile, Columbia, Mexico, Uruguay & Spain upset about Maduro The governments of Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Uruguay and Spain have issued a statement airing their disagreement with the U.S. military actions taken against Venezuela over the weekend.   The statement appealed to what they called the “principles of the United Nations Charter.” Trump upset that drug cartels are running Mexico and Columbia President Donald Trump has also told the U.S. press that something has to be done with Mexico. He told Fox News that the  drug cartels are running the country.  Plus, he called Columbia a “sick country” run by a “sick” president who “likes to sell Cocaine to the United States.” Trump said he's not going to be doing this very long.   And the president said, “Cuba is ready to fall” as well.  But let us all remember Who rules. Psalm 22:28-29 says, “For the kingdom is the Lord's, and He rules over the nations. All the prosperous of the Earth shall eat and worship; all those who go down to the dust shall bow before Him, even he who cannot keep himself alive.” Dallas street preachers handcuffed and detained without cause Here in America, street preachers connected with a “Reformed Baptist evangelistic ministry, [Testimonies of God], committed to the supremacy of Scripture and the advancement of Christ's Gospel,” were handcuffed and detained by police officers in Dallas a few weeks ago. The Christian Post reports that an officer had required the evangelists to get off the public sidewalk and cross the street — an order the preachers believed was unlawful. So far, no charges have been filed in the case. 15 states still allow trans surgeries and drugs for kids Two hospitals in left-wing Colorado have decided to stop writing prescriptions for sex-change drugs for children, reports 9-News. Children's Hospital and Denver Health have cited warnings from the U.S. Health and Human Services Department. Colorado was the faux-sex-change capital of the world in the 1980s and 1990s.   Sadly, 15 states still allow gender-based mutilation or gender-debilitating drugs for kids including Colorado, California, Oregon, Illinois, and New York. Japanese restaurant paid $3.24 million for bluefin tuna And finally, a Japanese sushi chain set a record for the price paid for a fish yesterday.  The Japan Times reports that Sushi Zanmai paid $3.24 million for a Pacific bluefin tuna at Tokyo's fish auction. That's an astounding $6,600 per pound! Close And that's The Worldview on this Tuesday, January 6th, in the year of our Lord 2026. Follow us on X or subscribe for free by Spotify, Amazon Music, or by iTunes or email to our unique Christian newscast at www.TheWorldview.com.  I'm Adam McManus (Adam@TheWorldview.com). Seize the day for Jesus Christ.

China is deeply shocked by and strongly condemns the United States blatant use of force against a sovereign state and action against its president, a Foreign Ministry spokesperson said on Saturday following US military strikes against Venezuela.外交部发言人于周六就美国对委内瑞拉发动军事袭击一事表示，中方对美国公然对主权国家动武并针对该国总统的行径深感震惊，予以强烈谴责。"Such hegemonic acts of the US seriously violate international law and Venezuela's sovereignty, and threaten peace and security in Latin America and the Caribbean region. China firmly opposes it," the spokesperson said.发言人指出：“美国的此类霸权行径严重违反国际法和委内瑞拉国家主权，威胁拉丁美洲及加勒比地区的和平与安全。中方对此坚决反对。”The spokesperson called on the US to abide by international law and the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter, and stop violating other countries' sovereignty and security.发言人呼吁美方遵守国际法以及《联合国宪章》的宗旨和原则，停止侵犯他国主权和安全。According to reports, US President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social that the US had "successfully" carried out a large-scale strike against Venezuela, and said its leader, President Nicolas Maduro, along with his wife, had been taken and "flown out of the country".据报道，美国总统唐纳德・特朗普在 “真实社交” 平台发文称，美国已 “成功” 对委内瑞拉实施大规模袭击，并表示委内瑞拉领导人尼古拉斯・马杜罗总统及其夫人已被带走。hegemonic acts – 霸权行径international law – 国际法sovereignty – 国家主权

Immanuel Kant is undoubtedly the most important philosopher of the modern era. His Critique of Pure Reason, “categorical imperative,” and conception of perpetual peace in the global order decisively influenced both intellectual history and twentieth-century politics, shaping everything from the German Constitution to the United Nations Charter. Renowned philosopher Marcus Willaschek explains why, three centuries after Kant's birth, his reflections on democracy, beauty, nature, morality, and the limits of human knowledge remain so profoundly relevant. Weaving biographical and historical context together with exposition of key ideas, Willaschek emphasizes three central features of Kant's theory and method. First, Kant combines seemingly incompatible positions to show how their insights can be reconciled. Second, he demonstrates that it is not only human thinking that must adjust to the realities of the world; the world must also be fitted to the structures of our thinking. Finally, he overcomes the traditional opposition between thought and action by putting theory at the service of practice. In Kant: A Revolution in Thinking (Harvard UP, 2025), even readers having no prior acquaintance with Kant's ideas or with philosophy generally will find an adroit introduction to the Prussian polymath's oeuvre, beginning with his political arguments, expanding to his moral theory, and finally moving to his more abstract considerations of natural science, epistemology, and metaphysics. Along the way, Kant himself emerges from beneath his famed works, revealing a magnetic personality, a clever ironist, and a man deeply engaged with his contemporary world. Marcus Willaschek is Professor of Philosophy at Goethe University, Frankfurt, and a member of the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Science, where he is responsible for the German standard edition of Kant's works. The author of four books, he is also coeditor of the three-volume Kant-Lexikon. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/a48266/videos Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Immanuel Kant is undoubtedly the most important philosopher of the modern era. His Critique of Pure Reason, “categorical imperative,” and conception of perpetual peace in the global order decisively influenced both intellectual history and twentieth-century politics, shaping everything from the German Constitution to the United Nations Charter. Renowned philosopher Marcus Willaschek explains why, three centuries after Kant's birth, his reflections on democracy, beauty, nature, morality, and the limits of human knowledge remain so profoundly relevant. Weaving biographical and historical context together with exposition of key ideas, Willaschek emphasizes three central features of Kant's theory and method. First, Kant combines seemingly incompatible positions to show how their insights can be reconciled. Second, he demonstrates that it is not only human thinking that must adjust to the realities of the world; the world must also be fitted to the structures of our thinking. Finally, he overcomes the traditional opposition between thought and action by putting theory at the service of practice. In Kant: A Revolution in Thinking (Harvard UP, 2025), even readers having no prior acquaintance with Kant's ideas or with philosophy generally will find an adroit introduction to the Prussian polymath's oeuvre, beginning with his political arguments, expanding to his moral theory, and finally moving to his more abstract considerations of natural science, epistemology, and metaphysics. Along the way, Kant himself emerges from beneath his famed works, revealing a magnetic personality, a clever ironist, and a man deeply engaged with his contemporary world. Marcus Willaschek is Professor of Philosophy at Goethe University, Frankfurt, and a member of the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Science, where he is responsible for the German standard edition of Kant's works. The author of four books, he is also coeditor of the three-volume Kant-Lexikon. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/a48266/videos Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/critical-theory

Immanuel Kant is undoubtedly the most important philosopher of the modern era. His Critique of Pure Reason, “categorical imperative,” and conception of perpetual peace in the global order decisively influenced both intellectual history and twentieth-century politics, shaping everything from the German Constitution to the United Nations Charter. Renowned philosopher Marcus Willaschek explains why, three centuries after Kant's birth, his reflections on democracy, beauty, nature, morality, and the limits of human knowledge remain so profoundly relevant. Weaving biographical and historical context together with exposition of key ideas, Willaschek emphasizes three central features of Kant's theory and method. First, Kant combines seemingly incompatible positions to show how their insights can be reconciled. Second, he demonstrates that it is not only human thinking that must adjust to the realities of the world; the world must also be fitted to the structures of our thinking. Finally, he overcomes the traditional opposition between thought and action by putting theory at the service of practice. In Kant: A Revolution in Thinking (Harvard UP, 2025), even readers having no prior acquaintance with Kant's ideas or with philosophy generally will find an adroit introduction to the Prussian polymath's oeuvre, beginning with his political arguments, expanding to his moral theory, and finally moving to his more abstract considerations of natural science, epistemology, and metaphysics. Along the way, Kant himself emerges from beneath his famed works, revealing a magnetic personality, a clever ironist, and a man deeply engaged with his contemporary world. Marcus Willaschek is Professor of Philosophy at Goethe University, Frankfurt, and a member of the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Science, where he is responsible for the German standard edition of Kant's works. The author of four books, he is also coeditor of the three-volume Kant-Lexikon. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/a48266/videos Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/biography

Immanuel Kant is undoubtedly the most important philosopher of the modern era. His Critique of Pure Reason, “categorical imperative,” and conception of perpetual peace in the global order decisively influenced both intellectual history and twentieth-century politics, shaping everything from the German Constitution to the United Nations Charter. Renowned philosopher Marcus Willaschek explains why, three centuries after Kant's birth, his reflections on democracy, beauty, nature, morality, and the limits of human knowledge remain so profoundly relevant. Weaving biographical and historical context together with exposition of key ideas, Willaschek emphasizes three central features of Kant's theory and method. First, Kant combines seemingly incompatible positions to show how their insights can be reconciled. Second, he demonstrates that it is not only human thinking that must adjust to the realities of the world; the world must also be fitted to the structures of our thinking. Finally, he overcomes the traditional opposition between thought and action by putting theory at the service of practice. In Kant: A Revolution in Thinking (Harvard UP, 2025), even readers having no prior acquaintance with Kant's ideas or with philosophy generally will find an adroit introduction to the Prussian polymath's oeuvre, beginning with his political arguments, expanding to his moral theory, and finally moving to his more abstract considerations of natural science, epistemology, and metaphysics. Along the way, Kant himself emerges from beneath his famed works, revealing a magnetic personality, a clever ironist, and a man deeply engaged with his contemporary world. Marcus Willaschek is Professor of Philosophy at Goethe University, Frankfurt, and a member of the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Science, where he is responsible for the German standard edition of Kant's works. The author of four books, he is also coeditor of the three-volume Kant-Lexikon. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/a48266/videos Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

Immanuel Kant is undoubtedly the most important philosopher of the modern era. His Critique of Pure Reason, “categorical imperative,” and conception of perpetual peace in the global order decisively influenced both intellectual history and twentieth-century politics, shaping everything from the German Constitution to the United Nations Charter. Renowned philosopher Marcus Willaschek explains why, three centuries after Kant's birth, his reflections on democracy, beauty, nature, morality, and the limits of human knowledge remain so profoundly relevant. Weaving biographical and historical context together with exposition of key ideas, Willaschek emphasizes three central features of Kant's theory and method. First, Kant combines seemingly incompatible positions to show how their insights can be reconciled. Second, he demonstrates that it is not only human thinking that must adjust to the realities of the world; the world must also be fitted to the structures of our thinking. Finally, he overcomes the traditional opposition between thought and action by putting theory at the service of practice. In Kant: A Revolution in Thinking (Harvard UP, 2025), even readers having no prior acquaintance with Kant's ideas or with philosophy generally will find an adroit introduction to the Prussian polymath's oeuvre, beginning with his political arguments, expanding to his moral theory, and finally moving to his more abstract considerations of natural science, epistemology, and metaphysics. Along the way, Kant himself emerges from beneath his famed works, revealing a magnetic personality, a clever ironist, and a man deeply engaged with his contemporary world. Marcus Willaschek is Professor of Philosophy at Goethe University, Frankfurt, and a member of the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Science, where he is responsible for the German standard edition of Kant's works. The author of four books, he is also coeditor of the three-volume Kant-Lexikon. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/a48266/videos Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/book-of-the-day

In this excerpt from CBC Ideas, Augusto López-Claros reflects on a rapidly changing world and the civic movements demanding that the UN evolve with it. From the failures of the current system to the rising pressure from civil society, he outlines why the UN Charter's original architects left behind a little-known pathway — Article 109 — designed to ensure periodic review. Nearly 80 years later, that review has never happened. This episode explores why now may be the moment to invoke it, and how a global coalition is working to modernize multilateralism for the 21st century.Learn more on GlobalGovernanceForum.org

Today, we are talking about one of the most important documents in the world: the UN Charter. It constitutes the founding treaty of the United Nations. Yet, why was it written in the first place, and what does the Charter exactly say? That is what we will explain in today's episode. Great to have you back!Here are our three most frequently used references for this episode:United Nations Charter. United Nations. ⁠https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter/full-text⁠Die Charta der Vereinten Nationen. UNRIC Regionales Informationszentrum der Vereinten Nationen. https://unric.org/de/charta/ UN-Charta. BpB Rechtslexikon. https://www.bpb.de/kurz-knapp/lexika/recht-a-z/324179/un-charta/ Editing & Moderation: Laura Stettner & Sophie FasshauerPost-Production: Erwin Eisenhardt #UNBasics #10MinutesUN #DGVN

Eighty years ago, during the final weeks of the worst war ever fought, the United Nations Charter was signed in late June 1945, outlawing aggression and upholding universal human rights. World leaders agreed a legal edifice was necessary for the peaceful arbitration of disputes and protection of civilians after the horrors perpetrated by the Nazis and Imperial Japan. Today, however, the world is aflame in war and genocide, and some experts say international law is close to dead. In this episode, Adil Ahmad Haque, an expert on the rules and ethics of war, tells us what the rules-based order is breaking apart. Further reading: Law and Morality at War by Adil Haque

It's Tuesday, February 25th, A.D. 2025. This is The Worldview in 5 Minutes heard on 125 radio stations and at www.TheWorldview.com.  I'm Adam McManus. (Adam@TheWorldview.com) By Kevin Swanson Muslims beheaded 70 Christians in Congo The Islamic State of Central Africa Province, a terrorist group, is reported to have killed 107 Christians between mid-October 2024 and early January 2025 in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.   In fact, more than 5,000 Christians have been killed by this Muslim terrorist group since October of 2017, according to figures recorded by the Terrorism Research and Analysis Consortium.   This just in.  International Christian Concern reports that the Islamic State of Central Africa Province, formerly known as Allied Democratic Forces, is thought to be responsible for the horrific massacre of 70 Christians by beheading in Congo's eastern Lubero Territory near the country's border with Uganda and Rwanda last week. Pray for the Congo. It's the 35th most dangerous country worldwide for Christians, according to Open Doors. God transformed Central Asian prison with Bible In their March/April Magazine, Barnabas Aid included an article entitled ”God's Word Unchained.” (page 13) It tells the story of a Christian woman who was released from prison in Central Asia after serving four years.  The unnamed Christian was able to smuggle a Bible into the prison. When administrators confronted her, she told them, “The Bible is God's Word and shows you the way for eternal life.” Four days later, the official came into the cell and told her, “You must read the book -- all of you.” Pointing to the woman, the official said, “Let her teach you all and you must listen to her!” The Christian prisoner reported that she “started to read the Bible for everyone. Many women asked me to give them the Bible, so they could read it personally. … We read the Bible aloud during the day, and some women read it in the night. The cell in which discord, slander, and enmity reigned turned into a quiet place. Women became friendly with each other.”   The sister recounted how women were healed from sickness by prayer. and even the prison staff began to request prayer for themselves and their sick relatives. She was released from prison recently, after having served four years and one month of her ten-year sentence. In Isaiah 55:11, God makes a promise about His Word: “My Word that goes out from My mouth; it shall not return to Me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it.” German voters move right The German elections over the weekend produced one more political shake-up for Europe.   The far left gained only four percent, while the right gained 14%, reports the Associated Press. America refused to blame Russia for invasion of Ukraine On Monday, the United States parted with European countries in an important United Nations vote.  The United States refused to blame Russia for its invasion of Ukraine in votes on three U.N. resolutions Monday which sought an end to the three-year war. The resolution, which passed 93-18, called for the immediate withdrawal of Russian troops and referred to Moscow's aggression as a violation of the United Nations Charter.  America voted with Russia and 16 other countries. J.D. Vance affirmed young men at CPAC Last Friday, Vice President J.D. Vance had a word for young men at the Conservative Political Action Conference held in National Harbor, Maryland. VANCE: He told the group that “our culture sends a message to young men that you should suppress every masculine urge.” He also spoke to the cultural zeitgeist. VANCE: “Wants to turn everybody, whether male or female, into androgynous idiots who think the same, talk the same and act the same. We actually think God made male and female for a purpose. We want you guys to thrive as young men and as young women, (applause) and we're going to help with our public policies to make it possible to do that.” Gallup: 9.3% of Americans now identify as homosexual or transgender The prevalence of homosexuality in the United States increased by 22% in just a single year.  That's according to a recent Gallup poll, revealing that now 9.3% of Americans identify on the sexually-perverted LGBTQ spectrum. That's also up from 3.5% in 2012.   Incredibly, 31% of young Gen Z women, and 12% of Gen Z men identify themselves with some form of sexual perversion that violates the laws of God. Romans 1:25-27 explains how they “worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator. … For this reason, God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise, also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another.” West Virginia might allow religious exemption for vaccines West Virginia's legislature is considering a religious exemption for vaccinations applying to children attending schools in the state. The state senate voted 20-12 to approve the measure on Friday. Only seven states provide for no religious exemption on vaccinations.  How God used a one-arm woman to triumph in softball Despite the fact that Katelyn Pavey was born with only one arm, she excelled in women's softball. Conceived by parents involved in a sinful affair who became Christians, they raised her in the church. Remarkably, Katelyn became an all-state player in high school and received a full-ride to Cincinnati Christian University. Her story is told in a new movie entitled “I Can.” MovieGuide, the Christian movie review site, wrote, “'I Can' has a strong Christian, moral worldview stressing God's grace and forgiveness. … Ultimately, ‘I Can' tells an uplifting, inspiring, heartfelt story that champions God's faithfulness to help people overcome problems. The movie has many Christian elements like church and prayer. Circumstances point Katelyn to faith in God when she hits rock bottom. [However], due to some mature themes like death, an affair and injury, MovieGuide advises caution for younger children.” “I Can” can be streamed for free and is available on DVD through a special link in our transcript today at www.TheWorldview.com.   Blue Ghost spacecraft reveals new video of moon And finally, another moon landing with a craft produced by a private company is scheduled for March 2nd. This comes on the heels of last year's Odysseus landing last February. Blue Ghost, also known as one of the Ghost Riders in the Sky, produced by Firefly, is circumnavigating the moon right now, sending back some pretty awesome video of God's creation.  Check it out through a special link in our transcript today at www.TheWorldview.com. In Psalm 8:3-4, David asked, “When I consider your heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars, which you have set in place, what is mankind that you are mindful of them, human beings that you care for them?” Close And that's The Worldview on this Tuesday, February 25th, in the year of our Lord 2025. Subscribe by Amazon Music or by iTunes or email to our unique Christian newscast at www.TheWorldview.com. Or get the Generations app through Google Play or The App Store. I'm Adam McManus (Adam@TheWorldview.com). Seize the day for Jesus Christ.

In a fragmented world that needs to fix deficits in peace, development and governance, China's visions, proposed by President Xi Jinping at the 19th G20 Summit, of building a just world of common development and promoting a fair and equitable global governance system are of great relevance to making the world a better place, according to analysts. The G20 Summit, hosted by Brazil in Rio de Janeiro on Monday and Tuesday, took place amid shifting geopolitical dynamics and economic uncertainty, providing an opportunity for world leaders to get together to discuss solutions to address urgent global challenges, including economic stagnation, trade disruptions, food security, reform of multilateral institutions and climate governance. As leader of the second-largest economy and the largest developing country in the world, Xi's attendance and his interactions with other leaders at the summit were in the spotlight. Addressing the summit, he outlined China's eight actions to support global development, including pursuing high-quality Belt and Road cooperation, implementing the Global Development Initiative, supporting international cooperation on poverty reduction and food security, and supporting the G20 in carrying out practical cooperation for the benefit of the Global South. He called for improving global economic, financial, trade, digital and ecological governance to build a world economy characterized by cooperation, stability, openness, innovation and eco-friendliness.Evandro Menezes de Carvalho, a professor of international law at Fluminense Federal University in Brazil, said that taking a systemic view of global governance, Xi highlighted key actions in each of the main areas of global governance in his speech. "China has already given concrete demonstrations of being a country committed to the development of a more inclusive international order. In addition, it has been very active in promoting green development with significant investment in technology and environmental protection," he said. The professor noted that global economic development depends on a balanced, stable financial and trade system that takes into account the needs of developing countries in order to promote a more inclusive international order, highlighting the importance of Xi's remarks on improving global digital and ecological governance with the Global South and developing countries involved. "Global digital governance and ecological governance, which are increasingly linked to each other, if well directed towards the common good, could contribute to opening new paths for the future for humanity as they increasingly exert influence in today's world." Under the Brazilian presidency, the Rio G20 Summit adopted the motto "Building a Just World and a Sustainable Planet", focusing on three priority themes: energy transition, fair sustainable development (with an emphasis on combating hunger, poverty and inequality), and reform of multilateral institutions. China, standing at the forefront of the Global South, has been advocating for greater representation of developing countries in global governance to promote an international order that is truly democratic, inclusive and multilateral. From advocating the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence to proposing the construction of a new type of international relations featuring win-win cooperation, and building a community with a shared future for mankind, China's consistent goal has been to build a more equal and just world, ensuring that developing countries have a greater voice in global affairs, observers said.At the Rio G20 Summit, Xi urged the World Bank to carry out a shareholding review and the International Monetary Fund to carry out quota share realignment in line with the agreed time frame and road map in order to increase the voice and representation of developing countries. He said that China, alongside Brazil, South Africa and the African Union, is proposing an Initiative on International Cooperation in Open Science to help the Global South gain better access to global advances in science, technology and innovation. Anthony Moretti, an associate professor in the Communication and Organizational Leadership Department at Robert Morris University in the United States, said that Xi is spot on when he suggests that isolationism is not what the global community needs right now. This is especially true for the developing world, Moretti added.Mehmood Ul Hassan Khan, executive director of the Center for South Asia and International Studies in Islamabad, Pakistan, said that Xi has made proposals for an open, inclusive and non-discriminatory environment for international economic cooperation through a universally beneficial and inclusive economic globalization. His proposals support developing countries in better integrating into digital, smart and green development to bridge the North-South gap, and they constitute a holistic and comprehensive policy badly needed for economic recovery, poverty reduction and job creation, Khan said, adding they reflect the global need for complete transformation from isolation to integration, from Cold War mentality to international cooperation. As the Ukraine crisis and Palestine-Israel conflict remain protracted, Xi highlighted at the Rio G20 Summit that "global security governance is part and parcel of global governance". The G20 should support the UN and its Security Council in playing a greater role, and support all efforts conducive to the peaceful settlement of crises, he said. China and Brazil, together with some other Global South countries, have launched a group of "friends for peace" on the Ukraine crisis, with the goal of bringing together more voices for peace.Khan said that the proposal of the group of "friends for peace" is innovative and well-timed, which must be listened to and implemented for achieving peace in Ukraine and Palestine. Marcos Cordeiro Pires, a professor of international political economy at Sao Paulo State University, said that the China-proposed Global Development Initiative, Global Security Initiative, Global Civilization Initiative and Belt and Road Initiative are becoming international public goods that offer a path to building actions that help overcome the immense challenges faced by humanity. These initiatives are a counterpoint to selfishness and unilateralism by pointing out that development is essential to overcoming hunger and poverty, that no country can guarantee its security at the expense of others, that peaceful coexistence between civilizations presupposes respect for the uniqueness of each culture, and, above all, that building infrastructure is one of the best ways to guarantee progress and address inequalities, Pires said. The Chinese president also urged G20 countries to "see each other's development as opportunities rather than challenges and view each other as partners rather than rivals", highlighting the need to observe the basic norms of international relations underpinned by the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter and defend the international order based on international law. Xu Feibiao, a senior researcher and the director of the Center for BRICS and G20 Studies of China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations, said that China, unlike traditional Western powers, remains committed to safeguarding a multilateral system with the UN at its core, following the path of peaceful development, and advocating for the building of a community with a shared future for mankind. It calls for a new type of international relations and upholds the principles of "extensive consultation, joint contribution and shared benefits" in global governance, Xu said, adding these efforts and principles are gaining broader recognition and respect from countries all over the world, offering hope for the G20 to regain its relevance in global governance.The Rio G20 Summit adopted a leaders' declaration, with the G20 leaders reaffirming their strong commitment to multilateralism and pledging to reform the global governance system. The leaders pledged to work for a reinvigorated and strengthened multilateral system, rooted in the purposes and principles of the UN Charter and international law, with renewed institutions and a reformed governance that is more representative and effective, according to the declaration. They also pledged to reform the UN Security Council to align it with the realities and demands of the 21st century and make it more representative, inclusive and effective, the declaration said.

Charting a smooth transition of China-US ties, taking stock of the policy legacy and underlining Beijing's policy consistency were highlights of the third summit between President Xi Jinping and United States President Joe Biden, observers said.Prior to their meeting on Saturday in Lima, Peru, Xi and Biden had met face-to-face in Bali, Indonesia, in 2022 and in San Francisco last year.On Saturday, Beijing and Washington agreed to "continue to stabilize China-US relations, and ensure a smooth transition of the relationship", the Foreign Ministry said.Both leaders said they believe that "their meeting has been candid, profound and constructive, and they expressed their willingness to stay in contact", the ministry added.Xi and Biden agreed to maintain the momentum of communication and strengthen macroeconomic policy coordination.They also reviewed the important progress since their San Francisco meeting in dialogue and cooperation on counternarcotics, climate change, artificial intelligence and people-to-people exchanges.Diao Daming, a professor of US studies at Renmin University of China's School of International Relations, said, "The third Xi-Biden summit further plays the role as a navigator and a stabilizer for the ties, and taking stock of the policy legacy and lessons over the past four years and beyond is part of Beijing's clear, constructive solution for driving the relations' growth in the future."Whoever takes charge of the US' China policy should respect lessons from the past, face up to the US' international duties, act on the very interests of the American people and respond to global expectations for better well-being," Diao said.Xi's underlining of Beijing's consistency in US policy will help respond to the potential uncertainties that may be brought about by Washington in the future, he added.On Saturday, Xi said that China and the US should keep exploring the right way for two major countries to get along well with each other, realize long-term, peaceful coexistence, and inject more certainty and positive energy into the world.Xi also said that neither decoupling nor supply-chain disruption is the solution, and "small yard, high fences" is not what a major country should do.Citing the lessons from the two countries' diplomatic ties over the past 45 years, Xi said that if the two sides regard each other as rivals and pursue vicious competition, they "will roil the relationship or even set it back".He identified four red lines for China that must not be challenged: the Taiwan question, democracy and human rights, China's path and system, and China's development right."Major-country competition should not be the underlying logic of the times; only solidarity and cooperation can help humanity overcome current difficulties," Xi said.Biden said the US-China relationship is the most important bilateral relationship in the world, not just for the two peoples, but also for the future of the world.He underscored that the US does not seek a new Cold War, it does not seek to change China's system, its alliances are not targeted against China, it does not support "Taiwan independence", it does not seek conflict with China, and it does not see its Taiwan policy as a way to compete with China.The US will stay committed to the one-China policy and is prepared to enhance communication and dialogue with China during the US' presidential transition period to have a better perception of each other and responsibly manage differences, he said.He added that the two sides support each other's host roles for 2026 — China will host the APEC meeting that year and the US will host the G20 meeting — demonstrating "what we can do for the two peoples when we work together".On specific policy agenda items, Xi stated China's positions on Taiwan, economic and trade ties, science and technology, cybersecurity, the South China Sea, the Ukraine crisis and the Korean Peninsula.It is crucial for the US to handle the Taiwan question with extra prudence, unequivocally oppose "Taiwan independence", and support China's peaceful reunification, Xi said.In the South China Sea region, the US should not get involved in bilateral disputes over the relevant islands and the reefs of the Nansha Islands, and neither should it aid or abet making provocations, Xi said.China does not allow conflict or turmoil on the Korean Peninsula, and it will not sit idly by when its strategic security and core interests are under threat, Xi said.In Lima, the two presidents reiterated — and stated readiness to further uphold — the seven-point common understanding on the guiding principles for China-US relations.Worked out under the two leaders' instructions, the principles are treating each other with respect, finding a way to live alongside each other peacefully, maintaining open lines of communication, preventing conflict, upholding the United Nations Charter, cooperating in areas of shared interest, and responsibly managing competitive aspects of the relationship.Anthony Moretti, department head and an associate professor of the Communication and Organizational Leadership Department at Robert Morris University in the US state of Pennsylvania, said, "The US and China remain the best partners when it comes to solving vexing challenges like climate change, food insecurity, preparing to fight the next pandemic and more."But Washington must adopt a respectful tone in its rhetoric," Moretti added. "China has made clear time and again that mutual respect, peaceful coexistence and win-win cooperation are at the heart of its global agenda. The US can — and should — endorse a similar philosophy."Analysts noted that over the past four years, the China-US relationship, which went through ups and downs, remains stable on the whole.More than 20 communication mechanisms have been restarted or established, and positive achievements have been made in areas such as diplomacy, security, economy, trade, fiscal affairs, finance, military, counternarcotics, law enforcement, agriculture, climate change and people-to-people exchanges.In Lima, Xi underscored that "it is worthwhile to review the experiences of the past four years and draw inspirations from them".He listed seven items as lessons that should be learned: to have a correct strategic perception, to match words with actions, to treat each other as equals, not to challenge red lines and paramount principles, to conduct more dialogue and cooperation, to respond to the expectations of the people, and to step forward to shoulder the responsibilities of major countries.Xiaohua Yang, a professor of international business and founding director of the University of San Francisco's Center for Business Studies and Innovation, said that Xi made it clear at the Lima summit that China continues to believe the relationship is pivotal to the peace and prosperity of the whole world."Xi set a forward-looking tone in the US-China relationship — a stable and cooperative US-China relationship benefits the whole world, not just these two countries; decoupling, building up walls and being confrontational is not the solution," she said.

Lecture summary: The United Nations Charter order (UNCO) and the co-evolved liberal international order (LIO) are contested with a heretofore unknown force. The steep rise in contestations in the realm of public politics rather than the courtroom demonstrates a shift from normal contestation as a source of legitimacy and ordering towards deep contestation as a political challenge of foundational elements of liberal order. Today, not only in the Global South but also across Europe and North America, sceptics of globalization on the political left and nationalist-populists on the political right are challenging the fundamental pillars of the LIO (i.e., democracy, economic openness, and multilateralism). The process is paired by growing contestations of international law that is codified in the UN Charter including contestation of core norms of the UNCO (i.e., non-intervention, human rights, and sovereignty). While the effect of deep contestation is unknowable, we do know however that normal contestation is the essence of everyday politics. The clash of interests, norms, and ideas is entirely normal. Yet, contestation can also be degenerative, moving political outcomes away from desired ends through ad hoc and perhaps inconsistent compromises. As core norms of the LIO and UNCO have become deeply contested, we require a better understanding about the expected effects. Access to contestation as the right to speak and participate in political decisions is a necessary condition for normative legitimacy and mutual recognition of the norms that govern us. Achieving this condition involves struggles about norm(ative) meaning-in-use which take place on distinct sites of global order. This raises a question about time, substance, and norm(ative) change in global order more generally and, more specifically, which elements of international order ought to be retained. The lecture posits that the observed qualitative shift from constitutive everyday contestations towards potentially degenerative political contestation calls for a methodological stocktake of how contestations work with regard to global re/ordering, i.e. whose practices count and whose norms ought to count in that process?Professor Antje Wiener FAcSS, MAE, holds the Chair of Political Science, especially Global Governance at the University of Hamburg where she is a member of the Faculty of Business and Social Sciences as well as the Law Faculty. She is an elected By-Fellow of Hughes Hall University of Cambridge, a Fellow of the UK's Academy of Social Sciences, and a Member of the Academia Europea. Her research and teaching centres on International Relations theory, especially norms research and contestation theory. Previously she held Chairs in International Studies at Queen's University Belfast and the University of Bath and taught at the Universities of Stanford, Carleton, Sussex and Hannover. Current research projects include ‘Contested Climate Justice in Sensitive Regions' at the Cluster of Excellence Climate, Climatic Change and Society (CLICCS) as well as ‘Doing Theory – From Where and What For? A Backpackers' Guide to Knowledge Production' at the Centre for Sustainable Society Research (CSS) among others. With James Tully, she is co-founding editor of Global Constitutionalism (CUP, since 2012 ). And she also edits the Norm Research in International Relations Series (Springer). She serves on several Committees of the Academy of Social Sciences . In 2021, she concluded her second three-year term as elected member of the Executive Committee of the German Political Science Association (DVPW). Her book ‘Contestation and Constitution of Norms in Global International Relations' (CUP 2018) was awarded the International Law Section's Book Prize in 2020. And her most recent book ‘Contesting the World: Norm Research in Theory and Practice' co-edited with Phil Orchard was published with CUP in 2024.

Lecture summary: The United Nations Charter order (UNCO) and the co-evolved liberal international order (LIO) are contested with a heretofore unknown force. The steep rise in contestations in the realm of public politics rather than the courtroom demonstrates a shift from normal contestation as a source of legitimacy and ordering towards deep contestation as a political challenge of foundational elements of liberal order. Today, not only in the Global South but also across Europe and North America, sceptics of globalization on the political left and nationalist-populists on the political right are challenging the fundamental pillars of the LIO (i.e., democracy, economic openness, and multilateralism). The process is paired by growing contestations of international law that is codified in the UN Charter including contestation of core norms of the UNCO (i.e., non-intervention, human rights, and sovereignty). While the effect of deep contestation is unknowable, we do know however that normal contestation is the essence of everyday politics. The clash of interests, norms, and ideas is entirely normal. Yet, contestation can also be degenerative, moving political outcomes away from desired ends through ad hoc and perhaps inconsistent compromises. As core norms of the LIO and UNCO have become deeply contested, we require a better understanding about the expected effects. Access to contestation as the right to speak and participate in political decisions is a necessary condition for normative legitimacy and mutual recognition of the norms that govern us. Achieving this condition involves struggles about norm(ative) meaning-in-use which take place on distinct sites of global order. This raises a question about time, substance, and norm(ative) change in global order more generally and, more specifically, which elements of international order ought to be retained. The lecture posits that the observed qualitative shift from constitutive everyday contestations towards potentially degenerative political contestation calls for a methodological stocktake of how contestations work with regard to global re/ordering, i.e. whose practices count and whose norms ought to count in that process? Professor Antje Wiener FAcSS, MAE, holds the Chair of Political Science, especially Global Governance at the University of Hamburg where she is a member of the Faculty of Business and Social Sciences as well as the Law Faculty. She is an elected By-Fellow of Hughes Hall University of Cambridge, a Fellow of the UK’s Academy of Social Sciences, and a Member of the Academia Europea. Her research and teaching centres on International Relations theory, especially norms research and contestation theory. Previously she held Chairs in International Studies at Queen’s University Belfast and the University of Bath and taught at the Universities of Stanford, Carleton, Sussex and Hannover. Current research projects include ‘Contested Climate Justice in Sensitive Regions’ at the Cluster of Excellence Climate, Climatic Change and Society (CLICCS) as well as ‘Doing Theory – From Where and What For? A Backpackers’ Guide to Knowledge Production’ at the Centre for Sustainable Society Research (CSS) among others. With James Tully, she is co-founding editor of Global Constitutionalism (CUP, since 2012 ). And she also edits the Norm Research in International Relations Series (Springer). She serves on several Committees of the Academy of Social Sciences . In 2021, she concluded her second three-year term as elected member of the Executive Committee of the German Political Science Association (DVPW). Her book ‘Contestation and Constitution of Norms in Global International Relations’ (CUP 2018) was awarded the International Law Section’s Book Prize in 2020. And her most recent book ‘Contesting the World: Norm Research in Theory and Practice’ co-edited with Phil Orchard was published with CUP in 2024.

Lecture summary: The United Nations Charter order (UNCO) and the co-evolved liberal international order (LIO) are contested with a heretofore unknown force. The steep rise in contestations in the realm of public politics rather than the courtroom demonstrates a shift from normal contestation as a source of legitimacy and ordering towards deep contestation as a political challenge of foundational elements of liberal order. Today, not only in the Global South but also across Europe and North America, sceptics of globalization on the political left and nationalist-populists on the political right are challenging the fundamental pillars of the LIO (i.e., democracy, economic openness, and multilateralism). The process is paired by growing contestations of international law that is codified in the UN Charter including contestation of core norms of the UNCO (i.e., non-intervention, human rights, and sovereignty). While the effect of deep contestation is unknowable, we do know however that normal contestation is the essence of everyday politics. The clash of interests, norms, and ideas is entirely normal. Yet, contestation can also be degenerative, moving political outcomes away from desired ends through ad hoc and perhaps inconsistent compromises. As core norms of the LIO and UNCO have become deeply contested, we require a better understanding about the expected effects. Access to contestation as the right to speak and participate in political decisions is a necessary condition for normative legitimacy and mutual recognition of the norms that govern us. Achieving this condition involves struggles about norm(ative) meaning-in-use which take place on distinct sites of global order. This raises a question about time, substance, and norm(ative) change in global order more generally and, more specifically, which elements of international order ought to be retained. The lecture posits that the observed qualitative shift from constitutive everyday contestations towards potentially degenerative political contestation calls for a methodological stocktake of how contestations work with regard to global re/ordering, i.e. whose practices count and whose norms ought to count in that process?Professor Antje Wiener FAcSS, MAE, holds the Chair of Political Science, especially Global Governance at the University of Hamburg where she is a member of the Faculty of Business and Social Sciences as well as the Law Faculty. She is an elected By-Fellow of Hughes Hall University of Cambridge, a Fellow of the UK's Academy of Social Sciences, and a Member of the Academia Europea. Her research and teaching centres on International Relations theory, especially norms research and contestation theory. Previously she held Chairs in International Studies at Queen's University Belfast and the University of Bath and taught at the Universities of Stanford, Carleton, Sussex and Hannover. Current research projects include ‘Contested Climate Justice in Sensitive Regions' at the Cluster of Excellence Climate, Climatic Change and Society (CLICCS) as well as ‘Doing Theory – From Where and What For? A Backpackers' Guide to Knowledge Production' at the Centre for Sustainable Society Research (CSS) among others. With James Tully, she is co-founding editor of Global Constitutionalism (CUP, since 2012 ). And she also edits the Norm Research in International Relations Series (Springer). She serves on several Committees of the Academy of Social Sciences . In 2021, she concluded her second three-year term as elected member of the Executive Committee of the German Political Science Association (DVPW). Her book ‘Contestation and Constitution of Norms in Global International Relations' (CUP 2018) was awarded the International Law Section's Book Prize in 2020. And her most recent book ‘Contesting the World: Norm Research in Theory and Practice' co-edited with Phil Orchard was published with CUP in 2024.

Lecture summary: The United Nations Charter order (UNCO) and the co-evolved liberal international order (LIO) are contested with a heretofore unknown force. The steep rise in contestations in the realm of public politics rather than the courtroom demonstrates a shift from normal contestation as a source of legitimacy and ordering towards deep contestation as a political challenge of foundational elements of liberal order. Today, not only in the Global South but also across Europe and North America, sceptics of globalization on the political left and nationalist-populists on the political right are challenging the fundamental pillars of the LIO (i.e., democracy, economic openness, and multilateralism). The process is paired by growing contestations of international law that is codified in the UN Charter including contestation of core norms of the UNCO (i.e., non-intervention, human rights, and sovereignty). While the effect of deep contestation is unknowable, we do know however that normal contestation is the essence of everyday politics. The clash of interests, norms, and ideas is entirely normal. Yet, contestation can also be degenerative, moving political outcomes away from desired ends through ad hoc and perhaps inconsistent compromises. As core norms of the LIO and UNCO have become deeply contested, we require a better understanding about the expected effects. Access to contestation as the right to speak and participate in political decisions is a necessary condition for normative legitimacy and mutual recognition of the norms that govern us. Achieving this condition involves struggles about norm(ative) meaning-in-use which take place on distinct sites of global order. This raises a question about time, substance, and norm(ative) change in global order more generally and, more specifically, which elements of international order ought to be retained. The lecture posits that the observed qualitative shift from constitutive everyday contestations towards potentially degenerative political contestation calls for a methodological stocktake of how contestations work with regard to global re/ordering, i.e. whose practices count and whose norms ought to count in that process?Professor Antje Wiener FAcSS, MAE, holds the Chair of Political Science, especially Global Governance at the University of Hamburg where she is a member of the Faculty of Business and Social Sciences as well as the Law Faculty. She is an elected By-Fellow of Hughes Hall University of Cambridge, a Fellow of the UK's Academy of Social Sciences, and a Member of the Academia Europea. Her research and teaching centres on International Relations theory, especially norms research and contestation theory. Previously she held Chairs in International Studies at Queen's University Belfast and the University of Bath and taught at the Universities of Stanford, Carleton, Sussex and Hannover. Current research projects include ‘Contested Climate Justice in Sensitive Regions' at the Cluster of Excellence Climate, Climatic Change and Society (CLICCS) as well as ‘Doing Theory – From Where and What For? A Backpackers' Guide to Knowledge Production' at the Centre for Sustainable Society Research (CSS) among others. With James Tully, she is co-founding editor of Global Constitutionalism (CUP, since 2012 ). And she also edits the Norm Research in International Relations Series (Springer). She serves on several Committees of the Academy of Social Sciences . In 2021, she concluded her second three-year term as elected member of the Executive Committee of the German Political Science Association (DVPW). Her book ‘Contestation and Constitution of Norms in Global International Relations' (CUP 2018) was awarded the International Law Section's Book Prize in 2020. And her most recent book ‘Contesting the World: Norm Research in Theory and Practice' co-edited with Phil Orchard was published with CUP in 2024.

As the United Nations Charter marks 79 years since it came into force, the global institution faces increasing scrutiny over its lasting relevancy and impact in delivering the goals it set out to achieve.With the maintenance of international peace and security often reliant on the very powers threatening it, urgent reform of the UN's Security Council remains in the same deadlocked position its founding relied on.This year's adoption of a Pact for the Future promises change, but change may still depend on the willingness of those who seek to maintain the current order.

Judge Thomas G. Moukawsher is a retired Connecticut complex litigation judge and former lawyer, legislator and lobbyist. He is the author of “The Common Flaw: Needless Complexity in the Courts and 50 Ways to Reduce It. It is critical that the US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) have a strong Code of Ethics with enforcement penalties.   Recent SCOTUS decisions, especially the absolute immunity, have made it more confusing and difficult to prosecute a corrupt US President. For decades the US has been a beacon for justice and democracy; however, with an attack on our Rule of Law and democratic institutions many nations are alarmed. The US should strongly support the UN's  International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court to maintain our moral authority internationally. The US Constitution and other legal mechanisms played a critical role in developing the United Nations Charter in 1945 and the Universal Declaration for Human Rights in 1948

As French President Emmanuel Macron rolled out the red carpet for President Xi Jinping's state visit, which concluded on Tuesday, China and France, with ample outcomes from the visit, have sent the message that they will consolidate the strategic stability of bilateral ties and jointly contribute to global security and prosperity.The two countries signed 18 bilateral cooperation documents in areas such as green development, aviation, agrifood, commerce and people-to-people exchanges after the two presidents' official talks at the Elysee Palace in Paris on Monday.They also issued four joint statements on the situation in the Middle East, artificial intelligence and global governance, partnership in the fields of biodiversity and oceans, and agricultural exchanges and cooperation.This year marks the 60th anniversary of diplomatic ties between China and France, with the latter being the first major Western country to establish diplomatic relations at the ambassadorial level with China.Observers said that in an era in which mistrust often defines interactions between the West and China, the vibrant comprehensive strategic partnership between China and France stands as a beacon of hope, demonstrating that trust and collaboration are not only possible but essential for progress and prosperity.During their talks, the two presidents highlighted the countries' friendly relationship as well as the potential and prospects of cooperation. They pledged to step up the countries' cooperation in traditional areas such as aerospace, aviation and nuclear energy, expand collaboration in emerging areas such as green energy, smart manufacturing, biomedicine and AI, and jointly uphold multilateralism, the United Nations Charter and international law.Xi said that China is ready to maintain strategic communication with France, respect each other's core interests, unleash the great potential of mutually beneficial cooperation, and facilitate growth and balance in bilateral trade.Expanding opening-upHe reaffirmed the nation's commitment to expanding opening-up, saying that China has fully opened up its manufacturing sector and will move faster to expand market access in the service sector, such as in telecommunications and medical services.While saying that China welcomes investment by more French companies, Xi expressed the hope that the French side will provide a good business environment and stable development expectations for investment and cooperation by Chinese companies in France.China welcomes visits by more people from France, and will extend the short-stay visa-exemption policy for citizens from 12 countries, including France, to the end of 2025, bring the total number of French students in China to more than 10,000, and double the number of young Europeans on exchange programs to China in the next three years, Xi said.He also pledged to increase dialogue and communication with France in areas including AI governance and reform of the international financial system.Macron said that as the world faces many pressing challenges, the profound and rich France-China relationship is at a critical juncture of building on the past and looking to the future.The two sides, through mutual respect, a long-term perspective and strengthened cooperation, will play an important and positive role in addressing global challenges and opposing any logic of bloc confrontation, he said.Macron assured Xi that France will continue to open its market to China and will not adopt discriminatory policies against Chinese companies.David Gosset, founder of the China-Europe-America Global Initiative, said that as France and China translate their affinities into concerted action, they forge pathways for enhanced synergies between the European Union and the world's second-largest economy."This collaboration also signals to the United States that the Western world can engage in strategic partnerships with China," Gosset wrote in an opinion piece published by China Global Television Network."President Xi's visit is an opportunity for both sides to envision new dimensions and responsibilities for their relationship. By exploring innovative approaches and forging new cooperation, France and China can effectively address the complex challenges of the present era while nurturing their long-standing bond."As the world continues to evolve and confront new challenges, Gosset said that the partnership between France and China will remain essential in shaping a more peaceful, prosperous and sustainable future for all.During their talks, Xi and Macron also exchanged views on international and regional issues of mutual interest, including the Ukraine crisis and the Palestine-Israel conflict.While meeting the media with Macron following their talks, Xi called on all parties to resume engagement and dialogue to build mutual trust in order to address the Ukraine crisis. China opposes attempts to use the Ukraine crisis to scapegoat or smear a third country or to stoke a new Cold War, he said.On the Palestine-Israel conflict, Xi urged the international community to work together for an immediate, comprehensive and sustainable cease-fire in Gaza. "We support Palestine's full membership in the UN, and support restoring to Palestine its legitimate national rights and restarting the two-state solution, so as to achieve lasting peace in the Middle East."Xi and Macron also met on Tuesday at Col du Tourmalet in southwestern France, before Xi left for a state visit to Serbia.Reporter: Cao Desheng

The Foreign Ministry said in an online statement on Sunday that Beijing has expressed deep concern over the situation in the Middle East following Iran's drone and missile strikes on Israel, and has called for relevant parties to exercise calm and restraint to prevent further escalation of tension.2024年4月14日，外交部在线上发布一则声明表示，中方对伊朗无人机和导弹袭击以色列后中东局势深表关切，呼吁有关各方保持冷静和克制，防止紧张局势进一步升级。The strikes, which started late Saturday, were in retaliation for an airstrike on April 1 that hit an Iranian diplomatic building in the Syrian capital of Damascus, killing at least one senior figure in Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and several other officers.这场空袭从13日晚间开始，是对4月1日伊朗在叙利亚首都大马士革的一座外交大楼发动的空袭的报复。那次空袭造成伊朗伊斯兰革命卫队至少一名高级官员和其他几名军官死亡。Noting that the situation is the latest increase in hostilities related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in Gaza, the ministry said that there should be no more delays in implementing United Nations Security Council Resolution 2728, which calls for an immediate cease-fire in Gaza.外交部指出，这种情况是与加沙地带的巴以冲突有关的敌对行动的最新增加，外交部说，在执行联合国安理会第2728号决议方面不应再拖延，该决议要求在加沙地带立即停火。Beijing called on the international community, especially countries with influence, to play a constructive role in maintaining peace and stability in the region, the ministry added.外交部补充说，中方呼吁国际社会，特别是有影响力的国家，在维护该地区的和平与稳定方面发挥建设性作用。The Israel Defense Forces said on its X social media account that its multilayered Aerial Defense Array system, "together with Israel's strategic allies", successfully intercepted the majority of the missiles and drones before they crossed into Israeli territory, where small hits were identified, including at an IDF base in southern Israel.以色列国防军在其社交媒体账户X上表示，其多层防空阵列系统“与以色列的战略盟友一起”成功拦截了大部分导弹和无人机，然后才进入以色列领土，在那里发现了小型袭击，包括以色列南部的一个以色列国防军基地。Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said that Israeli military targets were hit.伊朗伊斯兰革命卫队称以色列军事目标被击中。After the launches, Iran's mission to the UN said on its X social media account that Iran's military action was "conducted on the strength of Article 51 of the United Nations Charter" pertaining to legitimate defense, in response to "the Zionist regime's aggression against our diplomatic premises in Damascus".在导弹发射后，伊朗驻联合国代表团在其社交媒体账户X上表示，伊朗的军事行动是“根据《联合国宪章》第51条”进行的，该条款涉及合法防御，是对“犹太复国主义政权对我们在大马士革的外交场所的侵略”的回应。"The matter can be deemed concluded," it said.“此事可以视为已经结束。”Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz, in an interview with Israeli Army Radio, said: "We said that if Iran attacks Israel, we will attack it back and this is still effective. We need to deepen our cooperation with our allies. I will lead a political attack against Iran."以色列外交部长以色列·卡茨在接受以色列陆军电台采访时说:“我们说过，如果伊朗攻击以色列，我们将予以还击，这仍然有效。我们需要深化与盟国的合作。我将领导对伊朗的政治攻击。”Israeli media quoted Immigration Minister Ofir Sofer as telling Army Radio that "Iran's audacity in such an attack must be erased".以色列媒体援引移民部长奥菲尔·索弗对陆军电台的讲话称，“伊朗在这种袭击中的胆大妄为必须被抹去”。Iran's mission to the UN warned that "should the Israeli regime make another mistake, Iran's response will be considerably more severe. It is a conflict between Iran and the rogue Israeli regime, from which the US must stay away".伊朗驻联合国代表团警告称：“如果以色列政权再犯错误，伊朗的反应将会严重得多。这是伊朗和流氓以色列政权之间的冲突，美国必须置身事外。”In a statement, United States President Joe Biden praised US forces, which he said "helped Israel take down nearly all" the drones and missiles. Biden also condemned the attacks, and was joined by French President Emmanuel Macron and Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez.在一份声明中，美国总统乔·拜登赞扬了美国军队，他说美国军队“帮助以色列击落了几乎所有的”无人机和导弹。拜登也谴责了袭击事件，法国总统马克龙和西班牙首相桑切斯也加入了谴责行列。Iran's UN mission said, "Iran's invocation of Article 51 of the UN Charter occurred following a 13-day period marked by the Security Council's inaction and silence, coupled with its failure to condemn the Israeli regime's aggressions."伊朗驻联合国代表团表示，“在安理会13天的无所作为和沉默，加上未能谴责以色列政权的侵略行为之后，伊朗援引了《联合国宪章》第51条。”"Certain countries' precipitous condemnation of Iran's exercise of its legitimate right suggests a reversal of roles, equating the victim with the criminal," it added. “某些国家对伊朗行使合法权利的突然谴责表明了角色的逆转，将受害者等同于罪犯。”The UN Security Council said it had scheduled an open emergency meeting under the agenda item "the situation in the Middle East" to consider the drone and missile attacks by Iran on Israel, according to Vanessa Frazier, permanent representative of Malta to the UN.马耳他常驻联合国代表瓦妮莎•弗雷泽说，联合国安理会表示，已安排在议程项目“中东局势”下召开一次公开紧急会议，审议伊朗对以色列的无人机和导弹袭击。The increase in tensions also prompted Jordan, Iraq, Lebanon, Israel and even Iran to temporarily close their airspace after reports of interference with the GPS navigation system, Al Jazeera reported.据半岛电视台报道，紧张局势的加剧还促使约旦、伊拉克、黎巴嫩、以色列，甚至伊朗在受到GPS导航系统干扰的报道后，暂时关闭了领空。Jasem Mohamed Albudaiwi, secretary general of the Gulf Cooperation Council, said in a statement that all relevant parties should commit to upholding regional and global security and peace in the Middle East, the Saudi Press Agency reported.据沙特通讯社报道，海湾合作委员会秘书长贾西姆·穆罕默德·阿尔布达维在一份声明中表示，所有有关各方都应致力于维护中东地区和全球的安全与和平。He urged all parties involved to exercise maximum self-restraint to prevent further escalation that could threaten regional stability and the safety of civilians.他敦促有关各方保持最大限度的自我克制，防止可能威胁地区稳定和平民安全的进一步升级。The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Saudi Arabia expressed deep concern over the developments in the region and called for all parties to exercise maximum restraint "and to protect the region and its people from the dangers of war".沙特阿拉伯外交部对该地区的事态发展深表关切，并呼吁各方保持最大限度的克制，以“保护该地区及其人民免受战争危险”Ali Khansari, an international affairs analyst and graduate of regional studies at Allameh Tabataba'i University in Teheran, told China Daily that Iran's strikes on Israeli military facilities were "unprecedented".毕业于德黑兰阿拉梅大学区域研究专业的国际事务分析师阿里·汉萨里告诉《中国日报》，伊朗对以色列军事设施的袭击是“前所未有的”。"It can be said that Iran's military action was not an attack but a response to Israel's actions to prevent future Israeli attacks. Iranian authorities consider it a punishment, not a military attack," said Khansari.Khansari also noted that the military action "occurred at a time when Israel and its allies were on high military, security and intelligence alert, indicating that Iran's attack was not a surprise action and that Israel was fully prepared when attacked".汉萨里还指出：“可以说，伊朗的军事行动不是袭击，而是对以色列行动的回应，以防止以色列未来的袭击。伊朗当局认为这是一种惩罚，而不是军事攻击。军事行动发生在以色列及其盟友的军事、安全和情报高度戒备的时候，这表明伊朗的袭击不是一次意外行动，以色列在受到袭击时已经做好了充分准备”。Israeli-Palestinian conflict巴以冲突social media account社会媒体帐户

This Day in Legal History: The United Nations Security Council Convenes its First MeetingOn January 17, 1946, the United Nations Security Council convened for its inaugural meeting, marking a crucial moment in international law and governance. This event symbolized the global commitment to peace and security following the devastations of World War II. The meeting, held at Church House, Westminster, London, brought together representatives from 11 nations, reflecting the diverse political landscapes of that era.The council's establishment under the United Nations Charter represented a new approach to international conflict resolution and legal diplomacy. Unlike its predecessor, the League of Nations, the Security Council was endowed with the authority to make binding decisions. This feature underscored a collective endeavor towards maintaining international peace and stability.Discussions at this first meeting set the tone for future operations, emphasizing cooperation and legal frameworks to address global challenges. The Security Council's ability to impose sanctions, authorize military interventions, and make legally binding decisions was a novel development in international law. It signaled a shift from purely diplomatic negotiations to actionable, enforceable resolutions.Importantly, the Security Council's first session underscored the principles of sovereign equality and non-intervention, foundational elements in modern international law. It highlighted the role of international cooperation in addressing conflicts, a principle that continues to influence global legal practices and policies.This historic meeting laid the groundwork for numerous legal precedents and interventions in the years to follow. It showcased the potential of international law as a tool for peace and justice, shaping the landscape of global governance in the 20th century and beyond.California's leading role in the artificial intelligence (AI) industry is being challenged by new initiatives in New York and New Jersey. These states, under their respective governors, are positioning themselves as emerging centers for AI. New York Governor Kathy Hochul announced a partnership with state universities and a $250 million investment over ten years to create a super-computer facility in upstate New York. New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy has aligned with Princeton University and the New Jersey Economic Development Authority for a similar AI endeavor.Both governors are focused on enhancing research capabilities to attract more AI firms and jobs. New York is already home to companies like IBM and PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, while New Jersey hosts Panasonic Corp.'s North American headquarters and a major IBM facility. In contrast, California hosts many of the largest AI companies, including OpenAI, Alphabet, and Meta, as well as major research centers like UC Berkeley and Stanford University.California Governor Gavin Newsom is determined to maintain California's AI dominance, promoting a hands-off approach to AI regulation in the private sector, while ensuring state agencies effectively control AI systems. Other governors are adopting similar administrative strategies, avoiding sweeping regulations that could hinder AI development. These approaches echo federal AI rules introduced by President Joe Biden, allowing government use of AI with monitoring of its impacts.New York and New Jersey have avoided imposing broad restrictions on AI, focusing instead on facilitating its growth and mitigating potential risks. Their budget processes and collaborations with academic institutions will shape the scope of these AI initiatives. New York Assemblymember Alex Bores highlighted the importance of computing power as a key factor in attracting tech talent and industry growth, aiming to rival California's AI dominance.Elected officials in other states also express a desire to diversify the AI landscape beyond Silicon Valley. Efforts are underway to ensure wider participation in AI development and to address concerns such as algorithmic discrimination, job losses, surveillance, and misinformation. This national interest in AI underlines its potential to reshape the economy and influence a variety of sectors.California Tech Dominance Challenged By AI Initiatives in NY, NJApple Inc. is adjusting its US App Store policies to include external payment options, following the Supreme Court's decision not to hear its appeal in an antitrust lawsuit. This change will allow third-party apps to use links directing to external websites for processing in-app purchases, thereby bypassing Apple's own payment system which typically charges a 15% to 30% commission. However, Apple intends to collect a revised revenue share of 12% or 27% from developers opting for external payment systems.The Supreme Court's choice left in place a 2023 appeals court ruling, which found Apple's business model compliant with antitrust laws but in violation of California's Unfair Competition Law due to restrictions on developers' communication about alternative, potentially cheaper, payment systems.The decision comes amidst the legal battle between Apple and Epic Games, with both companies having sought the court's review. The ruling impacted Apple's stock, which experienced a temporary decline.Developers will now need to apply for an "entitlement" to access external payment options. Apple had previously allowed reader apps to direct users to external websites for subscriptions. The company will issue a warning to customers about external transactions before proceeding.Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney criticized Apple's plan to charge a fee on external transactions, arguing it would prevent developers from offering lower costs to consumers. Sweeney also disapproved of Apple's warning message to customers, calling it a "scare screen," and plans to challenge Apple's compliance approach in court.The stakes are high, with in-app spending projected to reach $182 billion in 2024 and $207 billion by 2025. Competitors like Microsoft Corp. are already considering entering the mobile app market, with a focus on gaming.The decision aligns with previous court findings largely rejecting claims by Epic that Apple's App Store policies violated federal antitrust law, while acknowledging some issues with its business practices. This ruling also concludes the temporary stay in the case, allowing Apple to proceed with its new policy. The case is one among several global challenges Apple faces, including pending antitrust cases in Europe against its App Store rules.Apple to Allow Outside Payments for Apps After US Decision (4)Coinbase, a major cryptocurrency exchange, is set to argue in federal court that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) should not regulate the tokens traded on its platform as securities. This hearing marks a significant development in the ongoing legal battle between Coinbase and the SEC, which could have major implications for the digital asset sector. The SEC's lawsuit against Coinbase, filed in June, claims the exchange facilitated trading in at least 13 crypto tokens that should have been registered as securities. The agency also targeted Coinbase's "staking" program, asserting it should have been registered. Coinbase has requested the dismissal of the lawsuit, referencing a separate case where a judge ruled in favor of Ripple Labs, while the SEC cites another case to support its stance.Coinbase, SEC set to face off in federal court over regulator's crypto authority | ReutersThe U.S. Supreme Court is set to hear a case that could significantly impact the regulatory powers of federal agencies, centered on a dispute over a government program monitoring overfishing of herring off New England's coast. Two fishing companies, Loper Bright Enterprises and Relentless Inc, are challenging the National Marine Fisheries Service's requirement for commercial fishermen to help fund this program. This case presents an opportunity for the Court's conservative majority to reconsider the 1984 "Chevron deference," a legal doctrine that directs judges to defer to federal agencies' interpretations of ambiguous U.S. laws. If you have any interest in Chevron deference and learning a bit more about what might be at stake, see our Max Min episode on the topic. The Supreme Court case, seen as part of a broader effort to limit federal bureaucratic power, involves the cost of monitoring fishing activities, with implications for other cases concerning agency authority, including those involving the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Decisions in these cases are expected by the end of June.Supreme Court may reel in US agency powers in fishing dispute | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

The International Court of Justice is currently hearing South Africa's case accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza. Professor Geoffrey Corn from Texas Tech University joins us to explain how we got here, the case's significance, and why the claims of genocide are baseless.  *The views and opinions expressed by guests do not necessarily reflect the views or position of AJC.  Episode Lineup:  (0:40) Geoffrey Corn Show Notes: Explainer: What You Need to Know about South Africa's Baseless Genocide Accusation Against Israel Go Deeper: 5 Reasons Why the Events in Gaza Are Not “Genocide”  Listen – People of the Pod on the Israel-Hamas War:  Countering the Denial and Distortion of the 10/7 Hamas Attack 4-Year-Old Hostage Abigail Idan is Free–Her Family is On a Mission to #BringThemAllHome What Happens Next: AJC's Avital Leibovich on the Hostage Deal and Challenges Ahead What Would You Do If Your Son Was Kidnapped by Hamas? Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts. Transcript of Interview with Geoffrey Corn: Manya Brachear Pashman:   The International Court of Justice is holding its first hearings in a case filed by South Africa, accusing Israel of committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. While it could take years for the panel of judges to rule on the genocide accusation, South Africa has asked the judges to issue a restraining order of sorts in the coming weeks that could among other things, call on Israel to halt its effort to root out Hamas and bring home the remaining hostages, at least until a verdict is reached. Here to explain what's at stake and the questions that the court will need to weigh is Professor Geoffrey Corn, Director of the Center for Military Law and Policy at Texas Tech University. Professor Corn. Welcome to People of the Pod. Geoffrey Corn: Thank you for having me. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So you are an expert in international humanitarian law and the law of war, which to some those terms might seem contradictory, or are the? Are they actually one in the same?  Geoffrey Corn: No, they refer to the identical branch of international law, historically, we call this branch of law, the laws and customs of war. Before the end of World War II, it was referred to as the law of war. And then, of course, with the advent of the United Nations Charter, technically war was prohibited. And states engaged in armed conflicts.  And so the name evolved for many years to be referred to as the law of armed conflict, the Loack, that's still what it's called. And in official US circles, we have the Department of Defense law of war manual, and the army law of armed conflict manual, most of the world today refers to it as international humanitarian law. And that, as you know, it can be misleading because it suggests that it's really focused on human rights. In fact, IHL, or international humanitarian law is a synonym for the law of armed conflict. It's the law that regulates the conduct of hostilities, during conflicts between states or between states and non-state groups, and protects victims of war. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So let's cover another basic distinction or definition that will help listeners decipher all of this, the charges that I spoke of in the introduction, they had been brought in the International Court of Justice. And now that's the 15 judge panel of the United Nations.  Not the International Criminal Court, which is also in The Hague, but charges individuals with war crimes. So can you explain for our audience the purpose of the International Court of Justice? Geoffrey Corn: Sure, the International Court of Justice is part of the mosaic of the Charter of the United Nations, a treaty that was created in the aftermath of World War II, to manifest the international community's determination that wars not be the mechanism by which states resolve their disputes. So there are a variety of mechanisms built into the Charter of the United Nations, the one people are most familiar with is the Security Council, which is vested by the treaty with enforcement power.  So the Security Council has the authority to authorize measures for the restoration of international peace and security. So for example, in 1991, when the coalition conducted military action against Iraq to force it out of Kuwait, that was done under the authority of the Charter of the United Nations and the Security Council resolution to restore international peace and security.   One of the four components of the United Nations is the International Court of Justice. It is a successor to a prior international court that sat in the Hague, and its singular jurisdiction is over disputes between states, or to give advisory opinions on international law as requested by the Security Council or the General Assembly. But the primary function of the International Court of Justice is to serve almost like an arbitration mechanism when states have disputes so that they can resolve them in accordance with international law without resorting to force to resolve those disputes. And so it has no jurisdiction over individuals.  It is, as you know, very different from the International Criminal Court, which is a treaty based criminal tribunal, and its jurisdiction is dependent on whether or not the individual is a national of one of the treaty parties, or whether the alleged crimes occurred in the territory of one of the treaty parties is Israel is not a party to that treaty, nor is the United States. But Palestine is. They've accepted Palestine as a member of the court, which means the prosecutor for the international criminal court has jurisdiction to investigate and pursue charges for any alleged war crimes that he believes have occurred in Palestinian territory, which includes Gaza. So two very different courts, very different consequences for their assertion of jurisdiction. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So now, both Israel and South Africa are signatories of the 1948 Genocide Convention. That is precisely why these charges have been brought to the ICJ. It's because they are both signatories of that treaty. Geoffrey Corn: Yeah, so I wouldn't say charges, I would say accusation. Right, because when we say charge, we tend to think of a criminal accusation.  Let's remember that an accusation is just that. It's not proof, it doesn't prove anything. If you read the filing by South Africa, it really is an exercise in selective fact assertion and ignoring inconvenient facts, there's a lot more to this story that we're going to see when we see the Israeli filing in response. So the Genocide Convention says, if there's a dispute between signatories or contracting parties to the treaty, they agree to allow the International Court of Justice to resolve that dispute. So one of the aspects of South Africa's filing is that they alleged that they've made a number of diplomatic forays to Israel demanding that they explain how what they're doing is legal and asserting that it's genocide. And Israel has not responded to those diplomatic forays, and therefore, that's created a dispute within the meaning of the treaty. And one of the things the court is going to have to resolve is whether there is in fact, a dispute between two members of the treaty as a jurisdictional predicate to even reaching the question of whether they should impose preliminary measures. Manya Brachear Pashman:   And does that precede the ruling on provisional measures?  Geoffrey Corn: It will be it will be part of the ruling. In any in any court of law, there's always a question of jurisdiction. Now, in most cases, it's not complicated. If you commit a crime where you live, the state has jurisdiction over that crime, but in the international realm, it's often a matter of debate as to whether or not the tribunal that has been requested to adjudicate an issue is actually vested under the law with the power, that's what jurisdiction means the power to resolve that issue. So the first issue that the court's going to have to resolve is whether it in fact, has jurisdiction pursuant to the terms of the Genocide Convention. And then if it says it does, then it will go to the question of whether there is a compelling case for preliminary measures. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So we know South Africa has a history of anti-Israel positions, it has historically sided with the PLO, Palestinian Liberation Organization and it now appears to be supporting the Hamas terrorists that govern Gaza. There also might be some political posturing going on here ahead of a national election. But how did we get here? A genocide claim against the Jewish state.  Geoffrey Corn: I think the answer to that is twofold. I mean, the first is that there is a widespread public perception that the level of carnage being inflicted as a result of Israeli Defense Force operations in Gaza is intolerable. And it's created a perception among many that the Israelis are actually not just trying to defeat Hamas' military capability–they are trying to destroy in part the Palestinian population of Gaza, that that's their intent.  Now, I personally believe that that is a highly erroneous inference to draw from the facts on the ground. But this is part of Hamas' information campaign. This should be unsurprising from the inception of this conflict, they know that they cannot defeat Israel in battle.  And this is one of the ironies of Israel's military struggle against Hamas. And I would say even if it occurs, Hezbollah. These highly capable organized military groups are under no delusion that they have the capability to confront the Israeli Defense Force and defeat it on the battlefield. For them, combat is not about defeating your enemy.  For them combat serves their information campaign. They use combat to create conditions to advance their strategic information campaign of delegitimizing Israel, but more importantly, in creating pressure both within Israel and externally to force Israel to terminate its operations before it achieves its combat objectives, which are much more traditional, which is to defeat your enemy on the battlefield.  So if you think about it, for Israel, what does operational success look like? It looks like Hamas' military capability has been completely destroyed. The word destroy is a military doctrinal term, and it means that you are combat and effective without substantial reconstitution. What is Hamas' is operational objective? It's to be there when the proverbial and literal dust settles.  And that means they've got to do something that compels Israel to stop before it achieves its military objective of destroying Hamas. They can't do that by force. They can only do that by getting the international community to pressure Israel to terminate its operations before they've achieved these objectives. And the best ammunition Hamas has to do that is creating the reality and the perception of the indifference to the human suffering that's occurring in Gaza.  So this is all connected to a strategic objective of Hamas. And that's why the most prominent statistic that we hear day in and day out is what? The civilian death toll in Gaza, which ironically, never apparently includes an enemy combatant. I guess the IDF is fighting shadows, because apparently they're not killing any enemy, because every casualty is asserted to be a civilian.  And I don't want to, in any way, minimize the tragedy of human loss and war. But you cannot find an enemy that's determined to create conditions where you have to inflict civilian casualties without doing so. And that's the strategy from inception that has snowballed into a public perception that Israel's objective is much more nefarious than simply defeating Hamas. That's one factor. The other factor to be to be candid, is the terribly bombastic statements of certain Israeli government officials that fuel this perception that you have an ulterior motive here that's separate from just achieving a legitimate military goal, and the failure of the Netanyahu administration to be more aggressive in sanctioning or isolating the officials in the government who make those foolish statements.  Manya Brachear Pashman:   To be fair, I should note that Prime Minister Netanyahu did post a statement to social media after this interview was recorded in which he insisted that Israel has no intention of displacing the Palestinian population from Gaza and permanently occupying the Strip, despite those calls from some Israeli government officials.  Israel's legal team is quite likely going to emphasize the extensive precautionary measures taken by the IDF to minimize civilian casualities and they will also quite likely emphasize the ongoing humanitarian relief being facilitated by Israel since mid-October – tens of thousands of tons of medical supplies, food, water, shelter equipment. Still, that doesn't change the level of carnage you mentioned, which is incredibly disturbing for all of us.  You predicted early on that the notion of proportionality would become an issue. You predicted that back in October, regarding Israel's response, and I'm curious if you could kind of explain the notion of proportionality, the misconceptions about proportionality when it comes to warfare. Geoffrey Corn: So it's a critically important question, because if you read the 84-page submission by South Africa, they make what they allege to be the indiscriminate nature of Israeli military action, a centerpiece of their proof of genocide. o when we talk about proportionality in war, there are two different aspects of proportionality we have to understand. The first relates to the right of the state to defend itself. And that really functions no differently than if you were walking down the street and somebody attacked you under the law of self defense. You are allowed to take self help measures to protect yourself, but those measures have to be proportional to the threat. It is a mistake to assume that that is only limited to tit for tat response. They fire a missile, you're allowed to fire a missile. If someone swung a punch at you on the street. The law doesn't say you're only allowed to swing one punch back and then wait for them to punch you again. You're allowed to take reasonable measures.  So if we think about Israel's action of self defense against Hamas, what do we know? We know Hamas represents an ongoing threat of significant military and terrorist violence against Israel. And the only way that Israel would be able to be confident that it's restored its security, the security of its population, the security of its territory, would be to take military action to completely destroy Hamas' military capability.  So the way that that self defense objective is translated into military terms, in the military as a whole, you need to do what is necessary to be able to come back to the political leadership and say, the people in southern Israel are safe again. And so the idea that Israel should just terminate operations and build a wall is unrealistic, because they tried that already. They've had more limited military action against Hamas in the past, and Hamas has demonstrated over and over again, an ability to bypass their defensive measures and inflict death and injury on Israelis.  Once you're fighting, there's another component of proportionality, which is the one that we're all focused on now. And that has to do with what we call the incidental or collateral consequences of attacking a legitimate target. So if I'm going to attack a building, because there's an enemy fighter in the building, and I know that in doing so, I cannot avoid killing civilians, I have to make a proportionality assessment under the law of armed conflict or international humanitarian law. For each individual attack, the commander has to make a judgment.  First, the commander has to assess the military value of attacking the target, then the commander has to assess the unavoidable civilian risks that will be created by conducting that attack. If the commander concludes that the risk, the harm to civilians would be excessive, compared to the concrete and direct military advantage, then the attack would be considered disproportionate and indiscriminate within the meaning of international law.  So if I were to put a question to your audience: you have an enemy commander, you identify him in a bunker, that's the enemy has put under a congregation of civilians deliberately, maybe the bunker is under a school. And he's a high-level enemy commander. And you've done everything you can to get civilians to evacuate. But you know that the only way you can kill that commander is to conduct an attack that will result in 20 civilian casualties.  If we took a poll right now, is 20 civilian casualties excessive in relation to the value of attacking that target–we'd probably have as many answers as we had participants. So the reality is that when we look at an aggregate number, even if we take Hamas as numbers at face value–23,000 civilians have been killed. And we say that proves all of the attacks were indiscriminate. It's a complete distortion of the process of analysis. Because you don't do an aggregate number, you look at the individual attack, you have to decide what was the value of the attack? What was the risk that was anticipated? What measures did the attacking side do to mitigate risks? What measures did the defending side do to exacerbate risk? And you put all that into the equation. So there's been a complete distortion of the way this is actually supposed to function. And what we've created and what South Africa has done in its filing is it's created, almost a strict liability standard. If you kill X amount of civilians, your attack is indiscriminate and it violates the proportionality rule. I always ask a question in response, if you tell me that killing 100 civilians as a consequence of killing a high level enemy commander is too much. How many are okay? Can you give me a number? Is 50 okay, 20,10. There's no book. There's no manual, there's no equation.  And that's why my view from inception has been the much better mechanism for mitigating civilian risks are the steps you take before the attack to reduce that risk. And when we look at that, we see no moral equivalency because you have the Israelis trying to figure out ways to reduce civilian risk, and we have Hamas deliberately engaging in conduct that exacerbates civilian risks. Manya Brachear Pashman: There's been a longstanding concern that in the United Nations, Israel faces a double standard. Other nations don't face this kind of scrutiny when they are involved in armed conflicts, though this court has taken up separate Genocide Convention cases filed by Ukraine against Russia and another filed by Gambia against Myanmar. So is this once again a double standard or is this different?  Geoffrey Corn: Here's one of the ironies, because the effects of combat had been so visible in Gaza. The assumption is we should be dwelling on whether or not Israel is conducting war illegally. Hamas has fired over 10,000 rockets at Israel, they don't even pretend to be trying to attack military targets. They're just firing rockets at the civilian population, which is the blatant first level of violation. Now, fortunately, Israel has prevented most of those attacks from achieving their intended objective. But that doesn't mean they weren't illegal, because the law doesn't focus on whether you achieve your illegal result. It focuses on what you're trying to do.   So when people like Bernie Sanders writes an op-ed in the New York Times and says, Okay, I can see that what Hamas did on October 7 was a war crime. Well, first off, that's, you know, I mean, that's self evident. But what's ironic is he doesn't acknowledge that what they've been doing ever since October 7 is war crimes. Every time they fire another rocket it Israel. They are the ones that are blatantly an indisputably violating the law of armed conflict. And yet it's the Israeli Defense Force that is the subject of international scrutiny persistently And it's no surprise because this is the nature of modern warfare. It's a bigotry of disparate expectations. And the Israelis know it, and they're not released from their obligation because they're fighting an illicit enemy. But it is it is corrosive to fail to acknowledge that the pernicious tactics of that enemy are largely responsible for the level of civilian suffering destruction, that is becomes unavoidable when you're fighting them.  Manya Brachear Pashman:   There are still more than 50 hostages still being held by Hamas, their well-being unknown. Does that change the equation for these court proceedings or the court's decision on provisional measures? Or is that a variable for the International Criminal Court to take up? Geoffrey Corn: There's no doubt that Hamas' has objectives and its stated purpose is to commit genocide of the Jewish people in Israel. There's not going to be but what about them argument. I don't see that happening. I think it becomes much more significant for the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, because hostage taking inhumane deprivation of liberty or war crimes within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. We know Hamas is not going to prosecute its own individuals.  And so the credibility of that court is going to, I think, demand that they investigate and prosecute the summary execution of civilians on October 7, the sexual violence against victims, the hostage taking, the deprivation of access to the International Committee of the Red Cross. All of these are blatant violations of the law of war, and are within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. So if I were the ICC prosecutor, and I would look at this as objectively as I could, I would look at the conduct of the Israeli Defense Forces and whether or not they've taken corrective measures against what I believe were violations of the law. No military is perfect. There have been examples of Israeli soldiers engaging in ill discipline and unjustified conduct in Gaza. And the Israeli Defense Forces have an obligation to investigate and discipline their own. I would look at how effectively that had been done.  I would look at Hamas' actions. And if I believed there was credible evidence of a violation of the charter that was being ignored by the institutional leadership, I would indict. And if I never got them in front of the court, that's not my problem. My objective is to demonstrate that there have been violations that are worthy of being adjudicated. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Thank you so much, Professor Corn. I really appreciate you breaking this down for us. Geoffrey Corn: Thank you for having me. Manya Brachear Pashman:   If you missed last week's episode, be sure to tune in for my conversation with Dr. Robert Williams, Executive Director of the USC Shoah Foundation. He joined us to discuss the history and tendency to deny atrocities committed against Jews and the foundation's added mission of collecting the testimonies of October 7 survivors. 

This Day in Legal History: 28 Countries United Against the Axis PowersOn January 2, 1942, a landmark event in the annals of international law and global diplomacy unfolded when twenty-eight nations unified under a significant pledge: they agreed not to seek separate peace treaties with the Axis Powers during World War II. This collective decision was part of the Declaration of the United Nations, signed the previous day. It represented a major commitment by the Allied nations to maintain a united front against the Axis Powers, consisting of Germany, Italy, and Japan.The term "United Nations," coined by U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt in December 1941, effectively captured the essence of this alliance. The idea was to create a coalition that was not only military in nature but also diplomatic, presenting a unified opposition to the aggression of the Axis. The signatories included major powers like the United States, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, and China, along with a diverse array of other nations, each bringing unique strategic, economic, and military strengths to the table.The path to this agreement was marked by escalating global tensions and the realization that a fragmented approach against the Axis Powers could lead to disastrous results. The attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941, which prompted the United States' entry into the war, was a turning point. It spurred the urgent need for a coordinated and unified strategy among the nations fighting against the Axis. The Declaration of the United Nations was not just a military alliance but a significant diplomatic gesture. It signaled a commitment to a post-war order where international cooperation would be paramount. This agreement laid the groundwork for the modern concept of collective security, a principle that became a cornerstone of the United Nations Charter established in 1945.Moreover, this event underscored the importance of legal agreements in international relations. It demonstrated how treaties and declarations could be used effectively to bind countries together in pursuit of a common goal. The commitment of these 28 nations to not negotiate separately with the Axis Powers was a strategic move that helped to isolate the enemy and reinforce the Allies' resolve.This day in legal history thus reflects a moment when international law and diplomacy converged to shape the course of world events. It marked a departure from the traditional bilateral treaties and alliances that had previously dominated international relations, paving the way for a new era of multilateralism and cooperation. The unity and resolve displayed by these 28 nations not only played a crucial role in the outcome of World War II but also laid the foundation for a new international order that would emerge in the post-war world.The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is intensifying its efforts to make companies disclose more about the impact of climate change in their financial statements. This comes as the SEC is close to finalizing its climate disclosure rules, with a focus on companies like Estée Lauder, Oracle, and Eli Lilly. The SEC's queries to these companies have centered on why there is less information on climate risk in their annual financial reports compared to their sustainability reports.The SEC's 2022 proposal would require detailed information on greenhouse gas emissions and climate-related risks to operations. This rule was expected to be finalized by 2023 but is now postponed to 2024. Currently, U.S. securities law doesn't mandate specific climate change disclosure, but material risks to businesses must be disclosed. This has led to inconsistencies, where companies often disclose more in sustainability reports aimed at a broader audience, including customers and NGOs, than in financial filings intended for regulators and investors.In 2021, the SEC announced a focus on these reporting gaps and has been persistent in its inquiries, asking companies to justify their materiality assessments and provide supporting data. Companies like Eli Lilly and Estée Lauder have responded to SEC queries about extreme weather costs, often arguing that these have not yet materially affected their finances. In most cases, the SEC staff has accepted these explanations, although they continue to scrutinize the materiality and relevance of such risks.Beyond Inc., a retailer, responded to the SEC's inquiries about carbon emissions' impact on consumer choices, highlighting other competitive factors like product quality and shipping. Meanwhile, Penn Entertainment Inc., a casino and hotel operator, agreed to include new disclosures about the impact of severe weather on their operations.Independently, companies are increasingly including climate risk details in their financial reports. In 2022, 150 S&P 500 companies added new standalone climate-related risk disclosures in their 10-Ks, covering both sustainability goals and physical risks of climate change. This trend indicates a growing recognition of climate risk in corporate reporting, spurred by both investor and regulatory interest.SEC Presses Companies on Climate Risk With New Rules on HorizonThe U.S. National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has recently made several rulings that significantly bolster union organizing, setting the stage for a transformative year in labor relations. These rulings, initiated by President Joe Biden's appointees, have made it easier for workplaces to unionize beyond the traditional secret ballot election process, facilitating unionization of franchise and contract workers and expanding worker conduct protections under U.S. labor law.These changes have prompted business groups and employers to challenge the decisions in court, anticipating an increase in union organizing. Union organizing has seen a rise since the COVID-19 pandemic, with major companies like Starbucks, Amazon, Wells Fargo, and Apple facing unprecedented unionizing efforts. Unions filed nearly 2,600 petitions for elections in fiscal 2023, a significant increase from previous years, although union membership in the private sector remains around 6%.Key to these developments is an August ruling in the case involving Cemex Construction Materials Pacific LLC. The NLRB stated that when a union demonstrates majority support in a workplace, an employer must recognize the union or request an election. This ruling deviates from the decades-old requirement of winning secret ballot elections before employer recognition.The White House and NLRB supporters argue this change counters widespread illegal union-busting tactics by employers. Critics, however, see this as conflicting with a 1974 Supreme Court ruling and argue it imposes unionization without proper employee consent. The NLRB's new rule, effective December 26, which accelerates the union election process, and another rule effective in February regarding bargaining with franchise and contract workers, are also pivotal.The NLRB has also broadened labor law protections, covering actions like profane outbursts from legitimate complaints and advocacy for non-employees such as unpaid interns. These rulings, combined with the Cemex standard, are expected to ease union organization and recognition.As 2024 unfolds, these developments suggest a significant increase in election petitions and unfair labor practice complaints, urging employers to be prepared for potential union elections at any time. The NLRB's recent actions mark a notable shift in U.S. labor relations, potentially leading to a more robust union presence in the American workforce.Unions poised to capitalize on U.S. labor board rulings that bolstered organizing | ReutersIn 2024, U.S. courts are set to address several significant antitrust issues affecting various industries, including real estate, technology, and healthcare. A key focus is the real estate industry, where national brokers face litigation over the buyer broker commission, a practice where sellers pay agents a percentage of the home sale price. The industry was shaken by a $1.8 billion class-action verdict in Missouri, and related lawsuits are proliferating in other states. Additionally, the D.C. Circuit will decide whether the Justice Department can investigate the National Association of Realtors, amidst antitrust concerns.The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is involved in multiple cases that could redefine its powers. In Seattle, a ruling is expected on the FTC's lawsuit against Amazon for allegedly keeping prices high, a claim Amazon denies. In Texas, the FTC's case against private equity firm Welsh Carson Anderson & Stowe could challenge established corporate law principles if it proceeds.Facebook also faces a potential 2024 trial in the FTC's case accusing it of monopolizing the personal social network market. Another major antitrust area involves allegations of price-fixing through algorithms, as seen in the case against RealPage. This company is accused of conspiring with property managers to maintain high rental prices using its pricing technology, a claim it denies.Google faces multiple legal challenges, including a Department of Justice case over its dominance in internet search and ad tech business, and litigation from Epic Games over its Play store practices. Google has agreed to a $700 million settlement in a related case, but the broader implications of these cases for tech giants remain to be seen. These court battles in 2024 are poised to answer crucial questions about the scope and enforcement of U.S. antitrust laws across various sectors.Key US antitrust questions the courts could answer in 2024 | ReutersU.S. prosecutors are challenging former President Donald Trump's claim of "absolute immunity" from criminal charges related to his actions in the 2020 election. Special Counsel Jack Smith, overseeing the prosecution, submitted a court filing arguing that the U.S. Constitution and legal tradition do not support granting former presidents immunity for actions taken while in office. Smith contends that such immunity would effectively place presidents above the law.Trump has asserted that his presidency provides him with absolute immunity from prosecution, a claim disputed by Smith. The focus of the legal argument is whether a former president can be charged for crimes committed in office, particularly those aimed at illegally remaining in power after losing an election.Trump, a leading candidate for the Republican presidential nomination in 2024, is appealing a lower court's decision that denied his request to dismiss the election charges based on his immunity claim. His legal team argues that prosecuting him for actions related to his official responsibilities would undermine the presidency.The case is set for arguments before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on January 9. Trump faces multiple criminal prosecutions, including charges of defrauding the United States, obstructing Congress, and violating voters' civil rights in efforts to overturn his loss to Joe Biden. This case is one of four criminal prosecutions against him, two of which are related to his alleged efforts to subvert the 2020 election.Trump has denounced the prosecutions as politically motivated, aimed at damaging his 2024 election campaign. The timing of the court's decision is crucial, as it will determine whether Trump's trial, scheduled to begin in March, will proceed on time. The progress of the case has been on hold pending the resolution of the immunity appeal, with Smith previously requesting the Supreme Court to expedite a decision, a request that was denied. The issue remains with the D.C. Circuit court for now.US urges appeals court to reject Trump immunity claim in 2020 election case | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

RR The Wire 1830Z December 7, 2023PRECEDENCE: ROUTINE RRDTG: 183007Z DEC 23ICOD: 173007Z DEC 23CONTROLS: Public ReleaseQQQQBLUF: U.S. BEGINS INVOLVEMENT IN VENEZUELA/GUYANA DISPUTE. -----BEGIN TEARLINE------International Events-Middle East: UN Secretary-General António Guterres invokes Article 99 of the United Nations Charter regarding the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. AC: Invoking Article 99 is a rarely utilized (and largely symbolic) gesture intended to raise awareness on a particular issue. In effect, this action mostly schedules a meeting to discuss the Gaza issue. This move is probably intended to keep the spotlight on the exceptionally desperate humanitarian crisis that is worsening within Gaza.South America: Yesterday a Guyanese military helicopter crashed due to possible bad weather in the Esequibo near the Venezuelan border. Most of the personnel on board were high ranking military officers. Due to the restrictive terrain, rescue crews have not yet accessed the crash site. However, signs of life have reportedly been observed from the air. US SOUTHCOM has announced they will be conducting joint military exercises within Guyana's airspace. AC: The “joint” nature of these exercises is probably overstated as Guyana has no attack aircraft whatsoever.-Analyst Comments-The US military flights within Esequibo are probably intended to deter Venezuelan aggression in the region, as well as to quietly serve as intelligence collection opportunities. However, the concept of deterrence assumes that the adversarial force knows and understands the consequences of such action. Right now, the chances are high for a random soldier in the jungle to fire off a MANPAD at any aircraft they don't visually recognize. As such, the risks of conducting these “deterrence” operations are very high. Relying on countermeasures onboard aircraft as a safety measure is also a risky gamble, considering the adversary being one of the most technologically advanced military forces on the continent. A shootdown incident involving a US aircraft would be a great justification for the US to become directly involved in what would immediately become a wider conflict.-----END TEARLINE-----Analyst: S2AEND REPORTNNNN

Contrary to the popular narrative, Americans overwhelmingly agree on a startling range of issues. So why is there such a disconnect between what Americans want and what Americans get?  Robert Weissman, President of Public Citizen, and co-author of the book “The Corporate Sabotage of America” identifies the culprits and outlines what we, the people, can do about it. Then, Ralph welcomes Ambassador Chas Freeman, who brings his vast diplomatic experience and historical insight to bear on the ongoing collective punishment raining down on the people of Gaza.Robert Weissman is a staunch public interest advocate and activist, as well as an expert on a wide variety of issues ranging from corporate accountability and government transparency, to trade and globalization, to economic and regulatory policy. ​​For 20 years, he edited the Multinational Monitor magazine, and as the President of Public Citizen, Weissman has spearheaded the effort to loosen the chokehold corporations and the wealthy have over our democracy. He is the author, with Joan Claybrook, of The Corporate Sabotage of America's Future And What We Can Do About It.More than three in four people want to have CEOs held accountable for the crimes they commit. Eight in ten think the minimum wage is too low. Four in five support paid family leave, and on and on and on. By way of context, those are not regular numbers when you get polls. In fact, if you ask people, “Does the earth revolve around the sun?” only 80% of Americans agree that the earth revolves around the sun. So, when you get numbers in the 90% or 85%, these are extraordinary levels of national agreement.Robert WeissmanIf you step back from the immediate moment, I think the big-picture story is that the bounds of what's considered important—or the policy solutions that are considered acceptable or reasonable—are really constructed by corporations and their lobbyists, and that's the problem we face every day.Robert WeissmanAmbassador Chas Freeman is a senior fellow at Brown University's Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs, a former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense, ambassador to Saudi Arabia, acting Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, and Chargé d'affaires at both Bangkok and Beijing. Ambassador Freeman is the author of several well-received books on statecraft and diplomacy, including The Diplomat's Dictionary, America's Misadventures in the Middle East, and America's Continuing Misadventures in the Middle East.I think one of the great pieces of collateral damage from this (Israeli/Gaza conflict) is the United Nations Charter, international law, and the credibility of these institutions at the UN. But more particularly, I think the next time Americans lecture foreigners about human rights, they're not going to laugh at us—they're going to sneer. Because this is such a tremendous demonstration of hypocrisy on our part.Ambassador Chas FreemanIt (the bombing of Gaza) is a gross violation of any standard of human rights. And the fact that we support it is discrediting us. We started out claiming that the eyes of the world were upon us, and we should shine like a city on the hill. I think much of the world looks at us now and they see dead babies in rubble, not a shining city on the hill.Ambassador Chas FreemanIn Case You Haven't Heard with Francesco DeSantis1. On Tuesday, political titans like Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries rallied in support of Israel in Washington. While supposedly condemning antisemitism, the speakers were joined by Pastor John Hagee, a rabid Christian Zionist who wrote in his book Jerusalem Countdown: A Warning to the World that Hitler was a "half-breed Jew" he was sent by God, as a "hunter," to persecute Europe's Jews and drive them towards "the only home God ever intended for the Jews to have – Israel." John McCain rejected Hagee's endorsement in the 2008 presidential campaign. Meanwhile, the Intercept reports that the ADL plans to add Jewish peace rallies to their map of antisemitic incidents.2. Axios is out with a report on an “internal State Department dissent memo [which] accuses President Biden of "spreading misinformation" on the Israel-Hamas war and alleges that Israel is committing "war crimes" in Gaza.” Axios continues “The memo — signed by 100 State Department and USAID employees — urges senior U.S. officials to reassess their policy toward Israel and demand a ceasefire in Gaza, where more than 11,000 Palestinians have been killed in the war.” This memo comes as the State Department is attempting to establish red lines on Israeli aggression, with Secretary of State Blinken stating “The United States believes key elements [for peace] should include no forcible displacement of Palestinians from Gaza. Not now, not after the war…No reoccupation of Gaza after the conflict ends. No attempt to blockade or besiege Gaza. No reduction in the territory of Gaza,” per the Washington Post.3. Al Mayadeen reports that Colombian President Gustavo Petro will cosponsor Algeria's war crimes case against Israel at the International Criminal Court. Petro has previously voiced support for ICC action, stating “what is happening in Gaza are crimes against humanity.” TimesLIVE reports South Africa's Foreign Minister Zane Dangor is also calling for an ICC investigation of Israeli leaders for “war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide,” stressing that “Failure to do so will exacerbate the growing cynicism that international law is applied selectively for political purposes.”4. From the Huffington Post: “Staffers from more than two dozen Democratic [congressional] offices say they are receiving an unprecedented number of calls and emails demanding for members to support a cease-fire…“Let it go to voicemail” was the prevailing guidance in several offices, one staffer said.” Yasmine Taeb of Mpower Change, a Muslim advocacy group lobbying on behalf of the ceasefire resolution, said there have been over 380,000 letters sent to the House alone. Last week, more than 100 staffers staged a walkout calling for a ceasefire in Gaza.5. Journalists have also begun speaking up for Palestine. Over 1,200 journalists have signed a letter “condemn[ing] Israel's killing of journalists in Gaza and urg[ing] integrity in Western media coverage of Israel's atrocities against Palestinians.” The letter names many of the reporters injured or killed by Israeli air strikes in Gaza, including Mohammad Abu Hassir, who was killed along with 42 of his family members in a strike on his home. The journalists write “This is our job: to hold power to account. Otherwise we risk becoming accessories to genocide.”6. Pro-Palestine protesters have also been taking the fight directly to the arms manufacturers. CT Insider reports protesters “blocked entrances at Colt…to protest…the gun manufacturer's sale of arms to Israel.”  Protester Mika Zarazvand is quoted saying that Israel is requesting 24,000 guns from the United States, and “we know that two-thirds of them are going to come from Colt.” In Arizona, the Tucson Coalition for Palestine staged a “die-in” blocking the roads to Raytheon's facilities, according to Arizona Public Media. Meanwhile in Cambridge, Massachusetts, 50 protesters chained themselves to the door of Elbit systems, decrying the company for profiting “from genocide” per NBC 10 Boston.7. Abed Ayoub, Director of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, reports that 5 U.S. citizens from Pennsylvania were “seriously injured after their bus out of Gaza was bombed. The family was on the State Department list of evacuees, and followed instructions.” Instead of speaking out for these victims, Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman has instead been antagonizing pro-Palestine protesters. At a recent veterans protest in favor of ceasefire, Fetterman laughed at veterans being arrested and waved an Israeli flag at them, per progressive veterans group About Face.9. In other news, details of the SAG-AFTRA deal have been released. In a note to members, the Guild wrote “In a contract valued at over one billion dollars in new wages and benefit plan funding, we have achieved a deal of extraordinary scope that includes "above-pattern" minimum compensation increases, unprecedented provisions for consent and compensation that will protect members from the threat of AI, and for the first time establishing a streaming participation bonus. Our Pension & Health caps have been substantially raised, which will bring much needed value to our plans. In addition, the deal includes numerous improvements for multiple categories including outsize compensation increases for background performers, and critical contract provisions protecting diverse communities.” A full summary of the deal is available at SAG-AFTRA.org.10. Finally, ProPublica reports that for the first time, the Supreme Court has adopted a code of conduct intended to avoid improper outside influence on the Justices. This code establishes guidelines for acceptance of gifts and recusal standards, both of which have become major points of contention following ProPublica's reporting on Harlan Crowe's influence network targeting Justice Thomas. However, the publication is quick to note that this code does not come equipped with any sort of enforcement mechanism. Law Professor Stephen Vladeck is quoted saying “Even the most stringent and aggressive ethics rules don't mean all that much if there's no mechanism for enforcing them. And the justices' unwillingness to even nod toward that difficulty kicks the ball squarely back into Congress' court.”This has been Francesco DeSantis, with In Case You Haven't Heard. Get full access to Ralph Nader Radio Hour at www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/subscribe

President Xi Jinping hailed on Thursday the "historic" expansion of BRICS, the group of leading emerging economies, to include six new members, saying that the move marks a new starting point for BRICS cooperation and will provide fresh momentum for the mechanism.8月24日，习近平主席称赞金砖国家扩员为“历史性”的事件。他表示，这次扩员也是金砖合作的新起点，将给金砖合作机制注入新活力。Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates were invited to become new BRICS members. The decision was announced at a special news conference during the 15th BRICS Summit in Johannesburg, South Africa. The membership will take effect on Jan 1.阿根廷、埃及、埃塞俄比亚、伊朗、沙特阿拉伯和阿拉伯联合酋长国应邀成为金砖国家新成员。这一决定是在南非约翰内斯堡举行的第15届金砖国家峰会期间的一次特别记者会上宣布的。新成员资格将于1月1日生效。Speaking at the news conference, Xi said the expansion of the grouping — whose current members are Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa — speaks volumes for BRICS' resolve to bolster solidarity and cooperation with other developing nations.习近平在新闻发布会上说，金砖国家目前的成员包括巴西、俄罗斯、印度、中国和南非，这次扩员是历史性的，体现了金砖国家同发展中国家团结合作的决心。"It meets the expectations of the international community and serves the common interests of emerging markets and developing nations," he said.他指出，这符合国际社会期待，符合新兴市场国家和发展中国家共同利益。The expansion marks a new starting point for BRICS cooperation, Xi said, adding that it will inject new vitality into the mechanism of BRICS cooperation and further strengthen the forces of global peace and development.“这次扩员也是金砖合作的新起点，将给金砖合作机制注入新活力，进一步壮大世界和平和发展的力量。”"I believe that as long as we work together, there is great potential for BRICS cooperation, and the future of BRICS countries is promising. Let's make joint efforts to write a new chapter of unity, cooperation and development among emerging market countries and developing nations."“我相信，只要我们齐心协力，金砖合作大有可为，金砖国家未来可期。让我们共同努力，谱写新兴市场国家和发展中国家团结合作谋发展的新篇章！”Last year, BRICS started the expansion process during China's chairmanship of the group, and China has since been working with other BRICS members to advance the expansion process, a spokesperson for China's Foreign Ministry said on Thursday.8月24日，外交部发言人答记者问，去年，中国担任金砖国家主席国，启动了扩员进程。此后，中方一直同金砖成员一道，稳步推进扩员进程。Many emerging markets and developing countries have shown keen interest in joining BRICS, "and more than 20 countries submitted their applications, which speaks volumes about the appeal of BRICS and the enthusiasm and aspiration of emerging markets and developing countries for cooperation", the spokesperson said.发言人指出，许多新兴市场和发展中国家积极考虑加入金砖，20多个国家提出了申请，彰显了金砖国家的吸引力和感召力，以及新兴市场和发展中国家开展合作的热情和愿望。The five member countries have reached agreement on the guiding principles, standards, criteria and procedures for the BRICS expansion process, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa said at the news conference.南非总统西里尔·拉马福萨在新闻发布会上说，五个成员国已就金砖国家扩员进程的指导原则、标准、准则和程序达成一致。"We value the interests of other countries in building a partnership with BRICS. We have tasked our foreign ministers to further develop the BRICS partner country model and a list of prospective partner countries and report by the next summit," Ramaphosa said.“我们重视其他国家与金砖国家建立伙伴关系的利益。我们已责成各国外长进一步制定金砖国家伙伴国模式和潜在伙伴国名单，并在下次峰会前提交报告。”拉马福萨说。The five leaders shared a vision for BRICS as a champion of the needs and concerns of the peoples of the developing Global South, including the need for beneficial economic growth, sustainable development and reform of multilateral systems, he said.他说，五位领导人对金砖五国的共同愿景是成为全球南部发展中国家人民需求和关切的倡导者，包括实现有益的经济增长、可持续发展和多边体系改革的需要。"We reiterate our commitment to inclusive multilateralism and upholding international law, including the purposes and principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter," Ramaphosa added.拉马福萨补充说：“我们重申致力于包容性多边主义和维护国际法，包括《联合国宪章》所载的宗旨和原则。”Wang Lei, director of Beijing Normal University's Center for BRICS Cooperation Studies, said the fact that the BRICS countries have reached consensus on the expansion of membership is a key indicator of mutual trust within the group.北京师范大学金砖国家合作研究中心主任王磊说，金砖国家就扩大成员达成共识是集团内部互信的重要标志。"The joining of six new members will substantially elevate the strength of the grouping and enable it to play an increasingly important role in the global governance system," Wang said.“六个新成员的加入将大幅提升金砖国家集团的实力，使其在全球治理体系中发挥越来越重要的作用。”The inclusion of the six additional countries in BRICS will help further demonstrate the solidarity among the Global South and demonstrate the BRICS spirit of openness, inclusiveness and win-win cooperation, he said.他说，新加入金砖五国的六个国家将有助于进一步展示全球南方国家的团结，彰显金砖五国开放、包容、合作共赢的精神。Wang added that the expansion of the group will enhance the representation of BRICS in the Middle East, Africa and South America. "The rise in the global representation of the grouping will help build up solidarity among developing nations and effectively improve the influence in various regions," he said.王磊还说，金砖国家集团的扩大将增强金砖国家在中东、非洲和南美洲的代表性。他说：“金砖国家集团全球代表性的提升将有助于加强发展中国家间的团结，有效提升在各地区的影响力。”Expansion英/ɪkˈspænʃ(ə)n/ 美/ɪkˈspænʃ(ə)n/Cooperation英/kəʊˌɒpəˈreɪʃ(ə)n/ 美/koʊˌɑːpəˈreɪʃ(ə)n/n.合作，协作

Download the Volley.FM app for more short daily shows!

On this day, June 26th, in legal history, the Statute of the International Court of Justice was signed, establishing the International Court of Justice at The Hague. The history of the Statute of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) can be traced back to its predecessor, the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ), which was established under the League of Nations in accordance with Article 14 of the Covenant of the League of Nations. The Council of the League of Nations was responsible for developing the idea of the PCIJ and formed an Advisory Committee of Jurists in 1920 to prepare a report on its establishment. A draft scheme was subsequently presented to the League's Assembly and was unanimously adopted as the Statute of the PCIJ in 1920.While the PCIJ operated independently from the League of Nations, it played a crucial role in resolving contentious cases and providing advisory opinions from 1922 to 1940. In 1946, the ICJ was established with its own Statute, building upon the foundations of the PCIJ's Statute. This process involved redrafting the statute with adjustments based on historical experience. The United Nations Committee of Jurists and the Fourth Committee of the United Nations Conference on International Organization (UNCIO) in San Francisco in 1945 were responsible for finalizing the ICJ Statute.One significant innovation introduced by the ICJ Statute was its close relationship with the United Nations Charter, which provided a structural interrelationship between the ICJ and the broader framework of the United Nations. Significantly, the ICJ defines its role in the judicial settlement of international disputes, as the judicial organ of the legal order of the international community as a whole, and not only of the contending parties appearing before it.Here is kind of a mini-column Tuesday, on a Monday. I wrote in the Week in Insights for Bloomberg on a recent study that had some interesting implications for where the IRS should be directing its influx of capital under the Inflation Reduction Act.Recent research from Harvard University reveals that auditing high-income individuals yields a higher return, with a $1 investment in audits of the top 10% income bracket resulting in a $12 return, compared to $5 for those below the median income. These findings hopefully have policy implications for the IRS and will impact tax practitioners and taxpayers.Week in Insights: Harvard Study Shows Auditing the Rich Pays OffThe US Supreme Court has ruled in favor of Coinbase Global Inc., affirming the company's ability to direct customer and employee disputes into arbitration. The decision, with a 5-4 vote, states that lawsuits filed in federal court must be paused while the defendant pursues an appeal to send the case to arbitration. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, writing for the court, argued that allowing district courts to proceed with pre-trial and trial proceedings during an ongoing appeal would undermine the advantages of arbitration. Business groups supported Coinbase, claiming that permitting litigation to continue would impose unnecessary costs, while consumer advocates argued that judges should have discretion in deciding which claims can proceed during an appeal. The case involved claims against Coinbase by Abraham Bielski regarding losses due to a scammer and allegations of inadequate disclosure in a Dogecoin sweepstakes. The ruling reinforces the power of companies to enforce arbitration clauses and the benefits associated with arbitration agreements in various industries, including the cryptocurrency sector.Coinbase Wins at Supreme Court as Ruling Backs Arbitration (1)U.S. Special Counsel Jack Smith has requested a delay in the start of former President Donald Trump's trial on charges of willful retention of classified government records and obstruction of justice. Smith asked the federal judge to push the trial start date from August 14 to December 11, citing the need for reasonable time for effective preparation. Trump, who is seeking the Republican nomination for the 2024 presidential election, pleaded not guilty to the charges in a federal court in Miami. The trial will adhere to the Classified Information Procedures Act, which governs the handling and disclosure of classified evidence. Smith stated that the delay is necessary to allow Trump's lawyers to obtain security clearances and review classified documents. While Trump's lawyers do not oppose scrapping the August 14 start date, they are expected to file a motion opposing the proposed schedule.US special counsel seeks delay to start of Trump documents trial until December | ReutersU.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland has denied allegations made by an Internal Revenue Service whistleblower that the investigation into Hunter Biden's tax affairs was impeded by the Justice Department. Garland stated that U.S. Attorney David Weiss, who was appointed by former President Trump, had complete authority to make charging decisions on his own regarding Hunter Biden's case. Hunter Biden, the son of President Joe Biden, was charged with two misdemeanor counts of willfully failing to pay income taxes. The charges were revealed in a court filing by Weiss's office, and Hunter Biden has agreed to plead guilty to the charges. Republicans have criticized the plea deal, claiming it is a lenient arrangement. A transcript of an interview with an IRS agent involved in the probe, Gary Shapley, was released, alleging that the Justice Department delayed the case. Shapley claimed that Weiss sought permission to bring charges from anywhere in the country but was denied by Garland. Garland denied the claim, stating that Weiss never made such a request, and emphasized that Weiss had more authority than a special counsel. Hunter Biden's attorney also defended the thoroughness of the investigation.U.S. attorney general denies allegations that Hunter Biden tax probe was stymied | ReutersThe U.S. Justice Department has filed criminal charges against four Chinese chemical manufacturing companies and eight individuals for allegedly trafficking the chemicals used to produce fentanyl, a highly addictive painkiller that has contributed to the opioid crisis in the United States. This marks the first time the U.S. has sought to prosecute Chinese companies involved in manufacturing precursor chemicals for fentanyl. China's foreign ministry responded by urging the U.S. to stop using fentanyl-related pretexts to sanction and prosecute Chinese entities, demanding the release of those "illegally arrested." The move comes after U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken's visit to China, where he emphasized the need for Chinese cooperation to address the fentanyl trade. The indicted companies are accused of supplying precursor chemicals to Mexico's Sinaloa Cartel, which has flooded the U.S. with fentanyl. The cases aim to disrupt the fentanyl supply chain and highlight the unique threat posed by the synthetic drug. In addition, Blinken announced plans to convene a virtual ministerial meeting to establish a Global Coalition to Address Synthetic Drug Threats.US files first-ever charges against Chinese fentanyl manufacturers | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Good afternoon, I'm _____ with today's episode of EZ News. **Tai-Ex opening ** The Tai-Ex opened up 5-points this morning from yesterday's close, at 15,874 on turnover of 2-billion N-T. The market lost ground on Tuesday amid investor pessimism over global uncertainties despite China reporting better-than-expected economic growth data. Analysts also say that news that Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing could report a 5-per cent decline in first-quarterly net profit also weighed on investors minds during the trading day. T-S-M-C is set to announce its first-quarter figures tomorrow. **G7 Foreign Ministers Issues Communique Warning China on Taiwan ** The G-7 foreign ministers are stressing their solidarity against China's moves to alter the status quo in the Taiwan Strait following talks in Japan. According to a communique, the G-7 "reminds China of the need to uphold the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter and abstain from threats, coercion, intimidation, or the use of force." The G-7 stated it "strongly opposes any unilateral attempts to change the status quo by force or coercion" and said that peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait are "an indispensable (必不可少) element in security and prosperity in the international community.” And the communique also called for "peaceful resolution of relevant issues." **Monkeypox Cases See Marked Rise ** The Centers for Disease Control is reporting a new weekly high of 13 domestically transmitted monkeypox cases over the last week. C-D-C deputy head Philip Luo says, of the new domestic cases six are from New Taipei, five from Taoyuan and one from Taipei, while the other case is from Kaohsiung. According to Luo, the infected individuals have received medical treatment at hospitals and health officials have identified 19 high-risk close contacts, who have been asked to observe (遵守) self-health management for 21 days. Taiwan has reported a total of 31 domestic monkeypox cases and nine imported one since June of last year. **NKorea Kim Claims Spy Satellite ot Launch ** North Korean leader Kim Jong Un says his country has completed the development of its first military spy satellite and ordered officials to go ahead with its launch (發射). He didn't say when it would be, but an outside expert expects a launch in coming months. Putting a satellite into orbit requires a long-range missile launch. Kim was quoted in state media as saying space-based surveillance is needed to deal with U.S.-led security threats. The U.S. and South Korean militaries began a 12-day aerial exercise this week and also held a naval exercise with Japan. **US Fox News Settles with Dominion Voting System ** Fox News has settled with Dominion Voting Systems for $787 million, just ahead of the start of a much anticipated trial for defamation. As part of the settlement, the network admitted (承認) that some of the claims made on air related to voter fraud in the 2020 election were false. US correspondent Ira Spitzer has more. That was the I.C.R.T. news, Check in again tomorrow for our simplified version of the news, uploaded every day in the afternoon. Enjoy the rest of your day, I'm _____.

On February 24, China offered a 12-point peace plan, in an attempt to end the war in Ukraine. President Biden said the plan was "not rational." Here are the first four points of the plan. 1. Respecting the sovereignty of all countries. Universally recognized international law, including the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter, must be strictly observed. The sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all countries must be effectively upheld. All countries, big or small, strong or weak, rich or poor, are equal members of the international community. All parties should jointly uphold the basic norms governing international relations and defend international fairness and justice. Equal and uniform application of international law should be promoted, while double standards must be rejected.  2. Abandoning the Cold War mentality. The security of a country should not be pursued at the expense of others. The security of a region should not be achieved by strengthening or expanding military blocs. The legitimate security interests and concerns of all countries must be taken seriously and addressed properly. There is no simple solution to a complex issue. All parties should, following the vision of common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security and bearing in mind the long-term peace and stability of the world, help forge a balanced, effective and sustainable European security architecture. All parties should oppose the pursuit of one's own security at the cost of others' security, prevent bloc confrontation, and work together for peace and stability on the Eurasian Continent. 3. Ceasing hostilities. Conflict and war benefit no one. All parties must stay rational and exercise restraint, avoid fanning the flames and aggravating tensions, and prevent the crisis from deteriorating further or even spiraling out of control. All parties should support Russia and Ukraine in working in the same direction and resuming direct dialogue as quickly as possible, so as to gradually deescalate the situation and ultimately reach a comprehensive ceasefire.  4. Resuming peace talks. Dialogue and negotiation are the only viable solution to the Ukraine crisis. All efforts conducive to the peaceful settlement of the crisis must be encouraged and supported. The international community should stay committed to the right approach of promoting talks for peace, help parties to the conflict open the door to a political settlement as soon as possible, and create conditions and platforms for the resumption of negotiation. China will continue to play a constructive role in this regard.

Meet the women who helped to draft the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.Click to join my mailing listIf you would like to support the podcast, you and Buy Me a CoffeeWrite a review on Podchaser, Apple or Spotify.The History Detective Season 1 & 2 Album is  now available on Spotify and all of your music streaming services.Accompanying teaching resources for season 1-4 episodes can be found on my Amped Up Learning Store or on my Teachers Pay Teachers store.Listen to As the Money Burns on SpotifyContact: Twitter @HistoryDetect, Instagram @HistoryDetective9, email  historydetective9@gmail.comHistory Detective WebsiteAll  music written and performed by Kelly Chase.

President Xi Jinping said on Thursday that the Asia-Pacific region is no one's backyard and should not become an arena for big power contests, and he called for advancing regional economic integration and building an Asia-Pacific community with a shared future.Xi made the remarks in a written speech at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation CEO Summit in Bangkok, Thailand. He arrived in the Thai capital on Thursday to attend the 29th APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting, which will be held on Friday and Saturday, and to visit Thailand.In the speech, Xi analyzed the regional situation amid changes in the international environment, saying that the overlapping effects of intensifying geopolitical tensions and the evolution of the economic landscape have had an impact on the development environment and cooperation architecture of the Asia-Pacific region.The Cold-War mindset, hegemonism, unilateralism and protectionism are rising, and moves to distort international norms, disconnect economic exchanges, instigate regional conflict and thwart development cooperation are often seen, Xi said. All of these have posed a grave threat to Asia-Pacific peace and development, he added.Xi underlined the need to follow a path of peaceful development, saying that bloc confrontation solves no problems, and prejudice brings disasters.It is because the Asia-Pacific region was freed from the shadow of the Cold War that the regional economies, particularly small and medium-sized ones, can enter the expressway toward modernization, Xi said. "No attempt to wage a new Cold War will ever be allowed by the people or by our times," he added.Xi called for upholding openness and inclusiveness and said that openness leads to progress, while exclusiveness surely results in backwardness. Undermining the long-lasting industrial and supply chains in the Asia-Pacific region will lead regional economic cooperation to a dead end, he said.As regional economies face difficulties related to disrupted supply chains, strained food and energy supplies and mounting inflationary pressure, Xi emphasized the need to strengthen solidarity and enhance mutual support and assistance to enable the Asia-Pacific to be a leader in boosting global economic recovery.In order to bolster the foundation for peaceful development, Xi called on countries to abide by the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter, pursue the vision of common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security, and jointly reject the Cold War mentality and bloc confrontation."We need to build an Asia-Pacific security architecture to create conditions for ensuring economic development and durable peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific," he said.Xi called for forging a new partnership of unity and equality in the Asia-Pacific region — a partnership that will be balanced and inclusive."We need to deepen cooperation within the APEC framework, advance the building of a free trade area of the Asia-Pacific, ... achieve better alignment among the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Digital Economy Partnership Agreement, and build an open Asia-Pacific economy," he said.Xi urged the promotion of higher-standard connectivity. "Unilateralism and protectionism should be rejected by all; any attempt to politicize and weaponize economic and trade relations should also be rejected by all," he said.Xi also reiterated China's commitment to peaceful development, saying that to follow the path of peaceful development is a strategic choice made by China in the fundamental interests of the Chinese people."We will strive to safeguard world peace and development as we pursue our own development, and we will make a greater contribution to world peace and development through our own development," Xi said.China stands ready to provide more resources for global development cooperation and work with all other parties to build a global community of development, Xi said.Raymund Chao, chairman for the Asia-Pacific region and China of professional services provider PwC, said Xi's proposal for advancing more inclusive and resilient global development with benefits shared for all is greatly important and positive in promoting world economic recovery, stability and growth.Ukrist Pathmanand, director of the Mekong Research Center of the Institute of Asian Studies at Bangkok's Chulalongkorn University, said Xi's idea for greater Asia-Pacific regional economic integration is important, as the region needs a quick socioeconomic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic.He said that Xi's speech aligns with Thailand's Bio-Circular-Green national strategy, and he noted that the BCG economic model is an overarching theme of this year's APEC meeting.记者：曹德胜杨涵对本文亦有贡献

Virginia C. Gildersleeve was the most influential dean of Barnard College, which she led from 1911 to 1947. An organizer of the Seven College Conference, or “Seven Sisters,” she defended women's intellectual abilities and the value of the liberal arts. She also amassed a strong set of foreign policy credentials and, at the peak of her prominence in 1945, served as the sole woman member of the U.S. delegation to the drafting of the United Nations Charter. But her accomplishments are undercut by other factors: she had a reputation for bias against Jewish applicants for admission to Barnard and early in the 1930s voiced an indulgent view of the Nazi regime. In this biography, historian Nancy Woloch explores Gildersleeve's complicated career in academia and public life. At once a privileged insider, prone to elitism and insularity, and a perpetual outsider to the sexist establishment in whose ranks she sought to ascend, Gildersleeve stands out as richly contradictory. The book examines her initiatives in higher education, her savvy administration, her strategies for gaining influence in academic life, the ways that she acquired and deployed expertise, and her drive to take part in the world of foreign affairs. Woloch draws out her ambivalent stance in the women's movement, concerned with women's status but opposed to demands for equal rights. Tracing resonant themes of ambition, competition, and rivalry, The Insider: A Life of Virginia C. Gildersleeve (Columbia UP, 2022) masterfully weaves Gildersleeve's life into the histories of education, international relations, and feminism. Jane Scimeca is Professor of History at Brookdale Community College. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Virginia C. Gildersleeve was the most influential dean of Barnard College, which she led from 1911 to 1947. An organizer of the Seven College Conference, or “Seven Sisters,” she defended women's intellectual abilities and the value of the liberal arts. She also amassed a strong set of foreign policy credentials and, at the peak of her prominence in 1945, served as the sole woman member of the U.S. delegation to the drafting of the United Nations Charter. But her accomplishments are undercut by other factors: she had a reputation for bias against Jewish applicants for admission to Barnard and early in the 1930s voiced an indulgent view of the Nazi regime. In this biography, historian Nancy Woloch explores Gildersleeve's complicated career in academia and public life. At once a privileged insider, prone to elitism and insularity, and a perpetual outsider to the sexist establishment in whose ranks she sought to ascend, Gildersleeve stands out as richly contradictory. The book examines her initiatives in higher education, her savvy administration, her strategies for gaining influence in academic life, the ways that she acquired and deployed expertise, and her drive to take part in the world of foreign affairs. Woloch draws out her ambivalent stance in the women's movement, concerned with women's status but opposed to demands for equal rights. Tracing resonant themes of ambition, competition, and rivalry, The Insider: A Life of Virginia C. Gildersleeve (Columbia UP, 2022) masterfully weaves Gildersleeve's life into the histories of education, international relations, and feminism. Jane Scimeca is Professor of History at Brookdale Community College. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

Virginia C. Gildersleeve was the most influential dean of Barnard College, which she led from 1911 to 1947. An organizer of the Seven College Conference, or “Seven Sisters,” she defended women's intellectual abilities and the value of the liberal arts. She also amassed a strong set of foreign policy credentials and, at the peak of her prominence in 1945, served as the sole woman member of the U.S. delegation to the drafting of the United Nations Charter. But her accomplishments are undercut by other factors: she had a reputation for bias against Jewish applicants for admission to Barnard and early in the 1930s voiced an indulgent view of the Nazi regime. In this biography, historian Nancy Woloch explores Gildersleeve's complicated career in academia and public life. At once a privileged insider, prone to elitism and insularity, and a perpetual outsider to the sexist establishment in whose ranks she sought to ascend, Gildersleeve stands out as richly contradictory. The book examines her initiatives in higher education, her savvy administration, her strategies for gaining influence in academic life, the ways that she acquired and deployed expertise, and her drive to take part in the world of foreign affairs. Woloch draws out her ambivalent stance in the women's movement, concerned with women's status but opposed to demands for equal rights. Tracing resonant themes of ambition, competition, and rivalry, The Insider: A Life of Virginia C. Gildersleeve (Columbia UP, 2022) masterfully weaves Gildersleeve's life into the histories of education, international relations, and feminism. Jane Scimeca is Professor of History at Brookdale Community College. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/biography

Virginia C. Gildersleeve was the most influential dean of Barnard College, which she led from 1911 to 1947. An organizer of the Seven College Conference, or “Seven Sisters,” she defended women's intellectual abilities and the value of the liberal arts. She also amassed a strong set of foreign policy credentials and, at the peak of her prominence in 1945, served as the sole woman member of the U.S. delegation to the drafting of the United Nations Charter. But her accomplishments are undercut by other factors: she had a reputation for bias against Jewish applicants for admission to Barnard and early in the 1930s voiced an indulgent view of the Nazi regime. In this biography, historian Nancy Woloch explores Gildersleeve's complicated career in academia and public life. At once a privileged insider, prone to elitism and insularity, and a perpetual outsider to the sexist establishment in whose ranks she sought to ascend, Gildersleeve stands out as richly contradictory. The book examines her initiatives in higher education, her savvy administration, her strategies for gaining influence in academic life, the ways that she acquired and deployed expertise, and her drive to take part in the world of foreign affairs. Woloch draws out her ambivalent stance in the women's movement, concerned with women's status but opposed to demands for equal rights. Tracing resonant themes of ambition, competition, and rivalry, The Insider: A Life of Virginia C. Gildersleeve (Columbia UP, 2022) masterfully weaves Gildersleeve's life into the histories of education, international relations, and feminism. Jane Scimeca is Professor of History at Brookdale Community College. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

Virginia C. Gildersleeve was the most influential dean of Barnard College, which she led from 1911 to 1947. An organizer of the Seven College Conference, or “Seven Sisters,” she defended women's intellectual abilities and the value of the liberal arts. She also amassed a strong set of foreign policy credentials and, at the peak of her prominence in 1945, served as the sole woman member of the U.S. delegation to the drafting of the United Nations Charter. But her accomplishments are undercut by other factors: she had a reputation for bias against Jewish applicants for admission to Barnard and early in the 1930s voiced an indulgent view of the Nazi regime. In this biography, historian Nancy Woloch explores Gildersleeve's complicated career in academia and public life. At once a privileged insider, prone to elitism and insularity, and a perpetual outsider to the sexist establishment in whose ranks she sought to ascend, Gildersleeve stands out as richly contradictory. The book examines her initiatives in higher education, her savvy administration, her strategies for gaining influence in academic life, the ways that she acquired and deployed expertise, and her drive to take part in the world of foreign affairs. Woloch draws out her ambivalent stance in the women's movement, concerned with women's status but opposed to demands for equal rights. Tracing resonant themes of ambition, competition, and rivalry, The Insider: A Life of Virginia C. Gildersleeve (Columbia UP, 2022) masterfully weaves Gildersleeve's life into the histories of education, international relations, and feminism. Jane Scimeca is Professor of History at Brookdale Community College. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Virginia C. Gildersleeve was the most influential dean of Barnard College, which she led from 1911 to 1947. An organizer of the Seven College Conference, or “Seven Sisters,” she defended women's intellectual abilities and the value of the liberal arts. She also amassed a strong set of foreign policy credentials and, at the peak of her prominence in 1945, served as the sole woman member of the U.S. delegation to the drafting of the United Nations Charter. But her accomplishments are undercut by other factors: she had a reputation for bias against Jewish applicants for admission to Barnard and early in the 1930s voiced an indulgent view of the Nazi regime. In this biography, historian Nancy Woloch explores Gildersleeve's complicated career in academia and public life. At once a privileged insider, prone to elitism and insularity, and a perpetual outsider to the sexist establishment in whose ranks she sought to ascend, Gildersleeve stands out as richly contradictory. The book examines her initiatives in higher education, her savvy administration, her strategies for gaining influence in academic life, the ways that she acquired and deployed expertise, and her drive to take part in the world of foreign affairs. Woloch draws out her ambivalent stance in the women's movement, concerned with women's status but opposed to demands for equal rights. Tracing resonant themes of ambition, competition, and rivalry, The Insider: A Life of Virginia C. Gildersleeve (Columbia UP, 2022) masterfully weaves Gildersleeve's life into the histories of education, international relations, and feminism. Jane Scimeca is Professor of History at Brookdale Community College. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/education

Virginia C. Gildersleeve was the most influential dean of Barnard College, which she led from 1911 to 1947. An organizer of the Seven College Conference, or “Seven Sisters,” she defended women's intellectual abilities and the value of the liberal arts. She also amassed a strong set of foreign policy credentials and, at the peak of her prominence in 1945, served as the sole woman member of the U.S. delegation to the drafting of the United Nations Charter. But her accomplishments are undercut by other factors: she had a reputation for bias against Jewish applicants for admission to Barnard and early in the 1930s voiced an indulgent view of the Nazi regime. In this biography, historian Nancy Woloch explores Gildersleeve's complicated career in academia and public life. At once a privileged insider, prone to elitism and insularity, and a perpetual outsider to the sexist establishment in whose ranks she sought to ascend, Gildersleeve stands out as richly contradictory. The book examines her initiatives in higher education, her savvy administration, her strategies for gaining influence in academic life, the ways that she acquired and deployed expertise, and her drive to take part in the world of foreign affairs. Woloch draws out her ambivalent stance in the women's movement, concerned with women's status but opposed to demands for equal rights. Tracing resonant themes of ambition, competition, and rivalry, The Insider: A Life of Virginia C. Gildersleeve (Columbia UP, 2022) masterfully weaves Gildersleeve's life into the histories of education, international relations, and feminism. Jane Scimeca is Professor of History at Brookdale Community College. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Virginia C. Gildersleeve was the most influential dean of Barnard College, which she led from 1911 to 1947. An organizer of the Seven College Conference, or “Seven Sisters,” she defended women's intellectual abilities and the value of the liberal arts. She also amassed a strong set of foreign policy credentials and, at the peak of her prominence in 1945, served as the sole woman member of the U.S. delegation to the drafting of the United Nations Charter. But her accomplishments are undercut by other factors: she had a reputation for bias against Jewish applicants for admission to Barnard and early in the 1930s voiced an indulgent view of the Nazi regime. In this biography, historian Nancy Woloch explores Gildersleeve's complicated career in academia and public life. At once a privileged insider, prone to elitism and insularity, and a perpetual outsider to the sexist establishment in whose ranks she sought to ascend, Gildersleeve stands out as richly contradictory. The book examines her initiatives in higher education, her savvy administration, her strategies for gaining influence in academic life, the ways that she acquired and deployed expertise, and her drive to take part in the world of foreign affairs. Woloch draws out her ambivalent stance in the women's movement, concerned with women's status but opposed to demands for equal rights. Tracing resonant themes of ambition, competition, and rivalry, The Insider: A Life of Virginia C. Gildersleeve (Columbia UP, 2022) masterfully weaves Gildersleeve's life into the histories of education, international relations, and feminism. Jane Scimeca is Professor of History at Brookdale Community College.

Russian President Vladimir Putin annexed four additional Ukrainian regions Friday. It's a move that Ukraine said it will never accept and goes against the United Nations Charter and international law. What impact will it have on the war moving forward? Plus, living under Russian occupation.

Sandra Wisner is a senior staff lawyer with the Institute for Justice & Democracy in Haiti (IJDH), a U.S. human rights organization, working in partnership with the Haiti-based public interest law firm the Bureau des Avocats Internationaux (BAI) [Garment Industry] At first glance, the garment workers' protests sweeping Haiti appear to be the result of a grossly inadequate minimum wage. But listen closely to the organizers and you will see they are rooted in decades of rights violations perpetrated by foreign states' approach to investment in Haiti. Foreign actors must be held accountable to their legal obligations both for the harm they have caused and to ensure that future investment in Haiti is fair and sustainable. [Food Insecurities] A series of international economic assistance programs in Haiti has led to a protracted and worsening food crisis in the country, amplifying the country's vulnerability to starvation and malnutrition, as well as natural disasters, like earthquakes and pandemics. These economic programs, which dealt a crushing blow to the country's domestic agriculture and left the erstwhile self-sustaining nation vulnerable to chronic food insecurity, have ultimately impeded the ability of Haitian people, and their future generations, to enjoy their right to food, health, education, work, and other fundamental human rights. The lack of responsibility taken by those who imposed these policies—among them, international financial institutions like the World Bank—reveals the need for foreign actor compliance with human rights obligations and remediation. This paper proposes that the food insecurity Haitians face today constitutes a violation of the right to food—a territorial and extraterritorial obligation that foreign actors have pledged themselves, both under the United Nations Charter and other human rights instruments, to promote and respect. As such, this paper outlines the emerging recognition of extraterritorial obligations (“ETOs”) around the globe; suggests available mechanisms at the domestic, regional, and international level for adjudication of cases arising from ETOs; and proposes ETOs' application to traditional policies and remedies meant to protect individuals from harm and compensate them for harm caused. [Peacekeeper Exploitation & Abuse] In Haiti, UN peacekeeping troops have been tied to sexual exploitation and abuse towards local communities. In pursuit of justice and accountability, BAI has been supporting claims for child support on behalf of children fathered by UN peacekeepers. Our teams at BAI and IJDH are leading the litigation in Haiti and both local and international advocacy to fight for justice and defend the rights of women and children. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/negmawonpodcast/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/negmawonpodcast/support

英语新闻︱白皮书诠释中央对实现祖国统一的坚定立场The Communist Party of China is committed to the historic mission of resolving the Taiwan question and realizing China's complete reunification, said a white paper issued on Wednesday.8月10日发表的《台湾问题与新时代中国统一事业》白皮书称，中国共产党始终把解决台湾问题、实现祖国完全统一作为矢志不渝的历史任务。"The historic goal of reuniting our motherland must be realized and will be realized," said the white paper named "The Taiwan Question and China's Reunification in the New Era", which was published by the Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council and the State Council Information Office of the People's Republic of China.国务院台湾事务办公室、国务院新闻办公室发表《台湾问题与新时代中国统一事业》白皮书强调：祖国完全统一的历史任务一定要实现，也一定能够实现！As China has embarked on a new journey to build a modern socialist country in all respects, it is necessary to issue a new white paper on national reunification, a spokesperson for the Taiwan Work Office of the CPC Central Committee said in a statement on Wednesday.8月10日，中共中央台办发言人受权就发表《台湾问题与新时代中国统一事业》白皮书发表谈话表示，踏上全面建设社会主义现代化国家的新征程，面对新形势，有必要发表新的国家统一白皮书。Amid the current complex international and cross-Straits situation, the release of the white paper is also conducive to exposing "Taiwan independence" separatist forces' collusion with external forces in making provocations and their attempt to undermine China's sovereignty and territorial integrity, the spokesman said.发言人说，在当前错综复杂的国际形势和台海形势下，发表该白皮书，有利于揭批“台独”分裂势力和外部势力勾连挑衅，企图损害中国主权和领土完整的恶劣言行。In 1993 and 2000, the Chinese government published white papers on Taiwan. Over more than the past two decades, especially since the 18th National Congress of the CPC in 2012, theories on national reunification and policies toward Taiwan have been developing.中国政府于1993年和2000年分别发表了《台湾问题与中国的统一》《一个中国的原则与台湾问题》白皮书。20多年来，特别是中共十八大以来，国家统一理论和对台方针政策持续丰富发展。The new white paper offers a systematic elaboration of the principles and policies put forward by the CPC and the Chinese government in advancing national reunification in the new era. It also conveys the willingness of the CPC and the Chinese government to continue to achieve peaceful reunification and win the understanding and support of compatriots on both sides, especially Taiwan compatriots, and the international community, said the spokesperson.发言人强调，新白皮书系统阐述了中国共产党和中国政府在新时代新征程上推进祖国统一的大政方针与政策主张，展现了中国共产党和中国政府愿继续争取和平统一的立场和态度，最大限度地争取两岸同胞特别是台湾同胞与国际社会的理解和支持。The white paper said that, under the Party's leadership, people on both sides of the Taiwan Straits have set out on a path of peaceful development and made many breakthroughs in improving cross-Straits relations. Increased exchanges, broader cooperation and closer interactions have brought tangible benefits to people across the Straits, especially in Taiwan, which demonstrates that cross-Straits friendship and cooperation are mutually beneficial.白皮书指出，中国共产党团结带领两岸同胞，走出了一条和平发展道路，两岸关系不断取得突破性进展。两岸交流合作日益广泛，互动往来日益密切，给两岸同胞特别是台湾同胞带来实实在在的好处，充分说明两岸和则两利、合则双赢。"Never before have we been so close to, confident in, and capable of achieving the goal of national rejuvenation. The same is true when it comes to our goal of complete national reunification," it said.白皮书说：“我们比历史上任何时期都更接近、更有信心和能力实现中华民族伟大复兴的目标，也更接近、更有信心和能力实现祖国完全统一的目标。”Peaceful reunification and "one country, two systems" are the basic principles for resolving the Taiwan question and the best approach to realizing national reunification, according to the white paper.白皮书表示，“和平统一、一国两制”是我们解决台湾问题的基本方针，也是实现国家统一的最佳方式。"We are ready to create vast space for peaceful reunification, but we will leave no room for separatist activities in any form," it said, adding that the use of force would be the last resort taken under compelling circumstances.白皮书强调：“我们愿意为和平统一创造广阔空间，但绝不为各种形式的‘台独'分裂活动留下任何空间。”同时白皮书补充说，非和平方式将是不得已情况下做出的最后选择。The actions of the Democratic Progressive Party authorities in Taiwan have resulted in tension in cross-Straits relations, and external forces have encouraged and instigated provocative actions by separatist forces, according to the white paper.白皮书指出，民进党当局坚持“台独”分裂立场，勾连外部势力不断进行谋“独”挑衅，导致两岸关系紧张。"Relying on external forces will achieve nothing for Taiwan's separatists, and using Taiwan to contain China is doomed to fail," it said.白皮书强调：“‘挟洋谋独'没有出路，‘以台制华'注定失败。”Wu Yongping, director of Tsinghua University's Institute of Taiwan Studies, said it is the general will and a historic mission for the Chinese nation to achieve the reunification of the two sides of the Straits.清华大学台湾研究院院长巫永平表示，实现国家统一是中华民族的民族意志和历史使命。Although differences do exist between the two sides, people from the Chinese mainland and Taiwan are all Chinese, and more exchanges and integrated development can help resolve differences and find more in common, Wu said, adding that when conditions permit, the two sides will be reunified.巫永平说，虽然两岸之间存在分歧，但两岸人民同根同源，更多的交流和融合发展有助于化解分歧，找到更多共同点。条件允许时，便能实现中国统一事业。He emphasized that reunification is a matter between the two sides, so no other country should interfere, and it is believed that through peaceful consultation, people on the two sides have the wisdom to discuss a set of solutions to solve their problems.巫永平强调，中国统一事业纯属中国内政，不容任何外部势力干涉，相信两岸人民有足够的智慧，通过和平协商的方式，讨论出一套解决办法。State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi said that the white paper, which fully elaborated the historical context of the Taiwan question and China's policy and stance, aims to send the most authoritative message to the world about the Taiwan question.国务委员兼外长王毅表示，白皮书全面阐述了台湾问题的历史经纬和政策主张，旨在正本清源，向世界发出最权威的声音。As the situation across the Straits is still developing, Wang called for staying vigilant about the United States, which might not be resigned to its failure on the Taiwan question, and may gang up with others to add fuel to the flames by expanding military presence in the region to escalate tensions in an attempt to create new, bigger crises.王毅说，台海形势目前还在发展，尤其要警惕三个危险动向。一是警惕美国不甘心失败，纠集其他国家拱火浇油，加大地区军事部署，推动形势进一步升级，图谋制造新的更大危机。He called for keeping a watch on "Taiwan independence" forces, who might miscalculate the situation and redouble their efforts to collude with external forces to willfully go further on the path of splitting the nation.二是警惕“台独”势力误判形势，继续加紧内外勾连，在分裂国家和民族的道路上一意孤行，越走越远。He also underlined the need to be wary of politicians from certain countries who might attempt to follow suit in performing political stunts based on their political interests. Such acts would severely damage the political foundation of foreign countries' diplomatic relations with China as well as having an impact on the United Nations Charter and the international system established after World War II, he added.三是警惕一些国家的政治人物罔顾是非，跟风炒作，甚至企图借机效仿，进行政治表演，谋取政治私利。这将严重破坏与中国交往的政治基础，严重冲击联合国宪章和二战后国际体系。记者：张怡赵佳新华社对本文亦有贡献conducive英[kənˈdjuːsɪv]；美[kənˈduːsɪv]adj.有助于…的;有益于…的instigate英[ˈɪnstɪɡeɪt]；美[ˈɪnstɪɡeɪt]vt. 教唆;煽动;激起vigilant英[ˈvɪdʒɪlənt]；美[ˈvɪdʒɪlənt]adj. 警惕的，警觉的;警戒的;机警的stunt英[stʌnt]；美[stʌnt]n. 引人注意的花招;噱头; (电影中的)特技表演v.阻碍(生长);妨碍(发展);遏制

Who is the Most Lawless? International Law Expert Critiques all Countries Involved in the Ukraine Crisis & Suggests it did not Start with the Russian Invasion but with the 2014 Coup International law expert Alfredo de Zayas joins Bringing Light Into Darkness to discuss International Law and ongoing events and the context of those events connected to the Ukraine, NATO, US Russian invasion crisis. De Zayas is a law professor at the Geneva School of Diplomacy and served as a United Nations Independent Expert on International Order 2012-18. The United Nations Charter is described as the ‘world constitution' if you will and the violations thereof by world powers is discussed as well as the concepts of ‘preemptive self-defense' and ‘responsibility to protect' (R2P). Does a country have the right to attack another country and if so when does a country have that right under international law? An inalterable principle of the UN Charter is the prohibition, not only of the use of force but of the threat of the use of force. Our guest discusses its relevance in the context of the current Ukraine war crisis. Another international law issue connected to the fact that sanctions kill and the present world context in which unilateral coercive measures in the form of sanctions in which finds today we find some one third of the world's people under sanctions, yet he only legal sanctions are sanctions imposed by the UN under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter. The UN General Assembly has condemned the unilateral sanctions repeatedly. Our guest describes the complicity of the MSM in misleading the US public and the geopolitical forces in the world today and while condemning Russia for its ‘illegal invasion' of Ukraine he also provides evidence to support his claim and belief that in the context of recent history, it is the US not Russia which is guilty of violating more international law than any other country. Don't Be Late! and siempre fieles, Pgatos 4/11/2022 pgatos00@gmail.com

Who is the Most Lawless? International Law Expert Critiques all Countries Involved in the Ukraine Crisis & Suggests it did not Start with the Russian Invasion but with the 2014 Coup International law expert Alfredo de Zayas joins Bringing Light Into Darkness to discuss International Law and ongoing events and the context of those events connected to the Ukraine, NATO, US Russian invasion crisis. De Zayas is a law professor at the Geneva School of Diplomacy and served as a United Nations Independent Expert on International Order 2012-18. The United Nations Charter is described as the ‘world constitution' if you will and the violations thereof by world powers is discussed as well as the concepts of ‘preemptive self-defense' and ‘responsibility to protect' (R2P). Does a country have the right to attack another country and if so when does a country have that right under international law? An inalterable principle of the UN Charter is the prohibition, not only of the use of force but of the threat of the use of force. Our guest discusses its relevance in the context of the current Ukraine war crisis. Another international law issue connected to the fact that sanctions kill and the present world context in which unilateral coercive measures in the form of sanctions in which finds today we find some one third of the world's people under sanctions, yet he only legal sanctions are sanctions imposed by the UN under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter. The UN General Assembly has condemned the unilateral sanctions repeatedly. Our guest describes the complicity of the MSM in misleading the US public and the geopolitical forces in the world today and while condemning Russia for its ‘illegal invasion' of Ukraine he also provides evidence to support his claim and belief that in the context of recent history, it is the US not Russia which is guilty of violating more international law than any other country. Don't Be Late! and siempre fieles, Pgatos 4/11/2022 pgatos00@gmail.com

Transcript of Episode 1Valdes: This is Panther personalities presented by Florida International University.Drucker: Hello FIU family and friends and welcome to Panther personalities, where students are stars, research is relatable. And FIU tells its own stories. I'm your host, David Drucker and I am pumped to be here with you all today beginning the first episode of this thing. Okay, so let's talk about what we're doing here. So what we're doing as FIU is making a show where we can connect Panthers with Panthers. We want to create a podcast that will help us build up our F IU community. How are we going to do this? You might say, well, through conversation, oh, yes, we're going to bring in a student, every episode, we're gonna talk to them about what it's like being a student here, you know, what kind of things they do, what kind of their majors, their research, but like life in general to their Panther journeys, you know, how they got here. You know, what they're doing, what they want to do, all these sorts of things. And then also, every episode, we're going to bring you one nonstudent interview. So what does that mean? So we're gonna bring in a faculty member, a professor, a staff member, or an alumna or alumnus, you know, someone who, you know, comes from our community, but isn't a student as well. So this way we can, we can fit in some things about, you know, like, what, what you ended up doing for your career if you are an alumni for example, or we have a professor and talk about, you know, some research that we think our university community would be interested in. And then we also, you know, can get it in a staff member who will, a lot of the times are alumni themselves. And so they can kind of give us a perspective of what it's like to be at FIU, whether they are an alumni or nut. So we have we have a lot to get to over the course of the rest of this podcast, super excited to be here with you all. And so let's talk about our first episode today. So we have two fresh interviews for you today. First, we have a man named Professor Charles Jalloh. He's from the FIU law school. And he also serves on this thing called the UN, United Nations International Law Commission. It's a group of 34 legal scholars from around the world. And what they do is they talk about, you know, the most pressing issues to humanity around the world and how they can discuss law around them. So sea level rise is something we talked about. We also talked about his personal story a little bit, and he gave some advice for students, you know, who are coming out of college. And then we have our student interview coming up. Her name is Teresa Schuster. She's on the Model UN team. And so she talked about what Model UN is, and also what they do in their competitions. She talked a little bit about working for the student paper on campus and her FIU journey. And, and yeah, so it was great having her come by as well. So lots of get to, I'll talk to you guys later in the show. For now, let's bring in Professor Jalloh.Drucker: Professor Charles Jalloh, welcome to the show. Jalloh: Thank you for having me. Drucker: Thank you for being our first faculty instructor on Panther personalities. Jalloh: Thank you. It's a big honor to be here. Drucker: Are you concerned at all about coming on a podcast with zero subscribers at the time of our recording?Jalloh: No, I'm happy to support FIU and all the initiatives that we have.Drucker: So what do you do at FIU? And what do you do on the UN international law commission? Jalloh: Well, thank you for the two-part question. Firstly, at FIU, I am a professor of law at the College of Law. I teach primarily in the area of international law. And I also have a specialty in criminal law. I also have the honor of being a member of the United Nations International Law commission. And that's a body created by the UN is a body of legal experts from around the world that assistance on issues of international law. Drucker: Okay, so you guys do a lot with international law and a lot of like, kind of new issues that you guys are tackling that I know of because we talked before for a separate thing we're working on but um, but before I kind of get into like what you officially do with the UN and international law commission, I kind of wanted to go with your story. And maybe you could tell me a little bit about about growing up and where you're from. Jalloh: Okay, yes. So I grew up in In a country called Sierra Leone, in West Africa, and it's a country that is known, unfortunately for conflict in the 1990s. This is a country that was basically in the throws of an authoritarian regime for a long time. And so a civil war started in March of 1991. And ended about a decade later, I fled Sierra Leone, more or less at the halfway point of the war, and ended up in Canada, where I had the opportunity to study law and then moved into legal academia. Drucker: Wow, yeah. So Sierra Leone, that conflict, that's what blood diamonds is about?Jalloh: That's right. That's right. It is a famous movie with Leonardo DiCaprio, I think that's one of the main actors are called blood diamonds. And basically, it's a riff off of this early on story in terms of this country that has a lot of diamonds blessed with a lot of natural resources, including diamonds, but that those diamonds became a reason for the atrocities in the sense of those who were waging war, were claiming, on the one hand to be interested in issues of governance, and to deal with serious political problems, but actually spent a lot of time pilfering the diamonds and selling them outside. So it's one of those tragic stories of a post-colonial African state that was generally doing very well. But that fell into conflict on hard times. The good news is that it's now moved on and is trying to become a better member of the international community. Drucker: Yeah. And you're actually a part of that story, which is really interesting. And we'll talk about that a little later. But can first you tell me, but that transition from Sierra to from Sierra Leone to Canada was like, did you know anyone over there? What like, what, what was that journey like?Jalloh: It was a bit of a transition in the sense that Sierra Leone in West Africa has completely different weather from Canada, we think about coming to Canada and going to Toronto. So I got to see snow for the first time in my life coming from this very tropical, kind of country closer in weather to Miami, right in South Florida. So here we are, we have this very nice warm weather and humidity. That's what I'm kind of used to growing up and, of course, also the positive side of the beaches and all of that real country on the coast, and then ended up in Canada and having to figure out how to wear winter boots. So that's a little bit of that transition. So you know, another was massive weather shock, but also culture shock in other ways. Drucker: Professor Jalloh, you went on to get five degrees from three different countries. Tell me about like that educational journey. And where did that emphasis on education come from? Jalloh: I was very fortunate growing up, I come from a family, where my dad was very big on the idea of education. So he did not get an opportunity to get formal schooling and promised himself that he would do that for all of his kids. So I was a beneficiary of that commitment that he made. I went all the way to high school and what will be grade 12. In the US system in Sierra Leone, I was injured just at the cusp thinking about university when the conditions with the war made that impossible. So when I ended up in Canada, I still had in my mind, the importance of education and was able to continue that education and went to university in Canada. And driven really in part because of the experience I had had, got an interest in law. So went to law school, and then got called to the bar and went to work in this area of international criminal law, which is the body of law that deals with responsibility for atrocities that occur in conflict. Drucker: Now, I have a question about international law as a concept, I guess, because I understand that, you know, each country has their laws and whatnot. But is there really like one international law? Jalloh: Well, the idea of international law is basically premised on the notion that states have to have a way, states themselves realize they have to have a way to deal with each other. Right. So if you want to, for example, do business with another country, you have to have a common set of rules. So international law from just about the rise of the nation state in Europe, going back to the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648, has really developed as a body of rules that are the common rules that countries would agree to, in terms of how they deal with each other across all spheres of possible state relationships. So because of international legal rules, you can have predictability in your relations with other states, you can have peace, because one of the core goals of international law is for the system of rules to replace the system of power. So if you will, the strongest states don't take advantage of what will be seen as weaker states, because after all, we are operating on the same rules. And we are bound by those commitments that we're making towards each other. So the notion of international law really goes above and beyond what you do in your own territory. Clearly, international legal rules may be influenced by the different legal systems that we have. But this is the body of law that's really about regulating interstate relationships. And it's a body of law that has matured quite a bit in the last three or 400 years. Drucker: So what kind of what are some examples of things that international law applies to? Jalloh: So one of the perhaps the best examples would be the law prohibiting the use of force. So for the longest time in history, states have gone to war with each other. And war was seen as a regular way of doing business. So when you wage war and you're the strongest state, against the state that you if you will win win the war, you get to decide the fate of that state. So this was a major issue in Europe, in the 18th and 19th centuries, to the point that when we got World War One, states decided to come together to create an organization called the League of Nations, which was actually the precursor to the United Nations. So by the time we got to World War Two, the rules that we had prohibiting the use of force were not strong enough. So that in 1945, now stung by a second war in Europe, with all the casualties that we know of states decided to write a rule that prohibited the use of force. So all states agreed that they will not go to war with each other. And the only circumstances where it's allowed, if you will, to use force to use when you are responding to an attack effectively. So when you're acting in self defense, and the second situation is where all of the states would agree that the use of force is necessary. So this is so called collective action through the United Nations Security Council. So just an example of one area where the rules of international law have developed quite significantly, and they are meant to provide that peaceful world that we all aspire to have, right? Because otherwise, in the old days, that was the way you did business. And if you are stronger state, you could always wage a war against another weaker state, and have your way with that state. that is no longer permissible. So I cannot imagine a better example, obviously, a sensitive example for a lot of for a lot of states, in terms of the prohibition on the use of force, especially the bigger, stronger ones.Drucker: Tell me about your journey to the UN international law commission, like, Where is this place? You know, do you guys have a headquarters? And how are you invited? And what is your job look like there?Jalloh: So the UN international law commission actually fits very nicely into the conversation we're just having, in terms of the place of international law. So one of the ambitions of the founders of the United Nations, obviously, including the United States, and the countries that had won World War Two, was not only to prohibit the use of force, and create a mechanism to achieve self determination of all peoples. This is a commitment to advancing human rights, which is found in the United Nations Charter that have been the instrument that created the UN as an organization. One of the other ambitions was to actually develop the body of rules that would actually promote that peaceful intercourse in international relations between states. So what states agreed to in San Francisco in August of 1945, in this UN Charter was viewed the responsibility to the representative part of the organization known as a general assembly, to promote international cooperation in the political field, and to promote the progressive development of international law and this qualification. Remember, a system of rules is better than anarchy, right? A system of rules replaces using force and so on. So what did the General Assembly do with that mandate? That's the mandate that was given to it under the charter that states agreed to in 1945 was to turn around and say, “Okay, well, let's consult with legal experts on how best we can go about promoting international cooperation in the political field and progressive development of international law and its qualification. And when that body of experts came back with was the proposal that states create something they call the international law commission. And the idea of the international law commission then was as adopted by states, ultimately in 1947, in a statute that the General Assembly gave his blessing on was a body of experts that will be selected representative of the body of states that are out there from all the different regions, and they will be a part-time commission.So these are folks who are given their time, so to speak, working primarily in the summers. The Commission, many years later, by the 50s, was working out of Geneva, Switzerland. So Geneva has effectively become the home of the international law commission, there are legal experts today, 34 in number from all the different regions of the world, meet in Geneva each year, and work on issues considered to be of pressing concern to States and the international community as a whole. So for example, the commission would choose topics that reflect the difficulties that cities are having in areas of regulation, and present some proposals in the form of draft treaties to states for them to adopt if they decided that they like the product from the commission. So really, the international law commission, as a function of that responsibility given to the 1947 has played a seminal role in developing the body of international law in different areas that we have today, some of which are significant in the sense of setting the benchmark for how states will behave at the international level towards a chart. Drucker: So basically, what you guys do is you consultant and provide recommendations for things that go on in international law?Jalloh: Yes, so we take difficult legal questions that are of importance to states and international community, and try to propose, depending on the project, what states ought to do on those issues in terms of the rules that they would agree to. So for example, to just make it very concrete, in 2019. So that's fairly recently, the commission concluded this study that is started in 2014 on crimes against humanity, crimes against humanity, where international crimes that were forced prosecuted at Nuremberg, after the end of World War Two, but the way international law has developed since 1945, and the trials at Nuremberg, is that we've had this crime that's defined on the customary law, but no treaty, no treaty at all, defining what those crimes are. Now, if you contrast that particular crime, crimes against humanity, with the two other widely accepted crimes under international law, the crime of genocide, this is the famously associated with the Holocaust unfold in, in during Nazi Germany when a lot of Jews were killed and targeted, essentially, because of the belonging to a particular group, the international community in 1948, could conclude a Genocide Convention, learning right out of the experience of world war two to prohibit that behavior at the international level. Right. So that's genocide. war crimes is another crime in 1949, was codified in a set of instruments called the Geneva Conventions. So for Geneva Conventions adopted by states. Now, war crimes and genocide were regulated as a matter of treaty law, but not crimes against humanity. So here's the IRC coming into the mix and saying, “Okay, well, we have a gap in international law. So what can we do to learn from the previous is 1945, to today, to see what the rules ought to be in terms of prohibiting and actually preventing crimes against humanity.” So that project took the commission from 2014 to 2019. And the commission concluded a draft set of articles that they forwarded to states that we forwarded to states in the general assembly with a recommendation that states conducted diplomatic conference to negotiate a convention on the basis of the draft articles that the IOC had produced. So in other words, is a perfect example of the function of the ILC putting something in the bucket for states to say, “Okay, if we like this product, we could actually move forward and negotiate a convention that will create the legal framework for both the prevention of crimes against humanity, but also their punishment, if they are caught.”Drucker: There's another one that you're that you're working on. Right now, right, which is kind of the drafting or the definition of ecocide. Can you tell me about that a little bit.Jalloh: Sothe work on ecocide is actually quite interesting and is a fairly new initiative. Actually, there is some relationship in terms of the work of the international law commission. In the past, the Commission had worked at the request of the General Assembly on an instrument known as a draft code of crimes against the peace and security of mankind. The Commission proposed set of tests in 1954, and also in 1996. The Commission has also worked on what are known as the draft articles on the responsibility of states for internationally wrongful acts. So the state responsibility articles, and in each of those instances, the Commission had actually looked at crimes that may cause damage to the environment. So in fact, in the state responsibility articles, they actually included environmental crimes, the this was not well received by state. So in fact, the commission went back and revisited the text. So the final test that the Commission proposed did not include those environmental crimes, even though the Commission's work with respect to petition the environment did have an influence in what we later ended up having.In Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court adopted in 1998. The ecocide project as it is now is not happening within the framework of the Commission. There's a foundation in Europe, that is actually leading this charge and taken advantage of a lot of interest by this space. So the Swedish parliament, and now the French president and a number for the high officials in Europe. In fact, Europe just passed a decision, the level European Union, encouraging their members to push this idea of ecocide at the level of the international criminal courts, I have the privilege, I think, in part because I'm a member of the commission and somebody who's been doing a lot of work in international criminal law, have been invited to be part of this panel, independent experts to help draft a definition of the crime of ecocide, our work has just begun. And I can tell you, I'm looking very closely at the precedents from the IOC and what the Commission has done in the past to see what lessons we could learn to feed into this other process. That is a norm we want out hopefully will result in it in the new crime in Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court prohibiting severe destruction of the environment. Drucker: Yeah, I mean, like that, that stuff is super relevant nowadays, especially for us here in Miami, right? Where I mean, there's so many of us just living right at surface level. And so you told me another discussion we had, that another thing that's being considered as there's these people who I think you're Indonesia, who, whose islands are going underwater, right, and they have nowhere to go. And so they have to go somewhere. And then there's, you know, people trying to figure out, hey, you know, what's the law around these people? Can you speak about that? Jalloh: Yes. Well, you know, in fact, David, this is a problem that's closer to us, right, as you say, living in South Florida, because we have an increasing encroachment of the ocean, right. So the sea level rise that we experienced in in Florida, is something that's happening also in other parts of the United States. So in Louisiana, we're actually losing an entire small island that's going to disappear shortly. And they've been trying to deal with the effects of that in among talking about the level of the state and the federal government. So we have the first situation where Americans are being relocated from the community that they've lived in for hundreds of years, as far as we know, to other parts because their land is disappearing. So that is a problem that is local, in that sense, is something that we're experiencing right here in Florida and in the United States. But it's also a problem that's very, very prominent for countries in the Pacific Islands. So there we see the similar phenomenon. We, in fact, see this phenomena in the Caribbean. We're seeing it now in Africa, if you think about the west coast of Africa, of the islands, near Senegal, we are seeing territories that are disappearing. So one of the big questions now is how do we deal with this problem, right? Because obviously, for the longest time, nobody was thinking about climate change having these kinds of effects. So presumably, we want to have a system that's orderly, there is the relevance of international law for you, even if you are skeptical about it, in terms of what the powers can get away with. And part of the problem is a what you deal with the populations. Where do you relocate these people because obviously, we don't want the islands to swallow entire populations and not relocate them elsewhere. And in that area, a lot of policy and international cooperation has been coming into the mix. For example, Australia taken in quite a few people coming from those islands and countries closer to them In the Pacific doing a little bit of that, but the question would be, how do we deal with it at the global level so that the burdens are shared equally? There are other questions from the point of view of international law that are also relevant into in terms of how international law deals with even recognizing estate. So international law actually requires the state to have territory. Well, what happens if you don't have territory anymore? you disappear in a legal sense? Or do you move into something else? How should we address that problem is not something we've encountered. So what the ILC has done recently, several projects that have international environmental law that are quite relevant. So the first project which was actually concluded in 2016, is protection of persons in the event of disasters. So in fact, the idea of people disappearing could be part of a disaster, right. So this is the argument that the Commission is making, there's a body of law that surrounds our practices surrounds this. But even more centrally now, the ILC has a new topic that we've added to the program of work, which is sea level rise in relation to international law that's trying to tackle all these different questions. And the hope is, we'll be able to come up with some sensible proposals based on the legal precedents that are out there, and what systems are doing to propose to the General Assembly so they can take it forward. And I can tell you, as a final note, that countries in the Pacific region, on surprisingly, are the most enthusiastic about this proposal, because they've been pushing more and more international attention to this problem. And for a variety of reasons, states have been moving as much as the urgency demands. So I'm very, very pleased that the Commission is doing its own two cents worth to chip into that big bucket to hopefully help move the needle for all these populations and communities. As I said, as you know, that will eventually become a wider problem for everybody, including us right here in South Florida. Drucker: Professor Jalloh, how did you get chosen for the UN international law Commission, the ILC, as you're saying?Jalloh: Well, the ILC is a state created body. So much like other state created bodies, states members of the UN. So at the moment, 193 states can nominate a legal experts from their own countries, but also from other countries if they wish. And then those individuals have to be elected by the grouping of all the states sitting in the form of what they call the General Assembly. So 193 states will come together and elect the individuals who got the largest support, basically. And so I was nominated. I was quite honored to be nominated in 2016 by the Government of the Republic of Sierra Leone, and supported by the African state, so to the African Union, so about 55 countries from African region, endorsed me and supported my candidacy. And I was elected by the broad membership in November of 2016. I took up my seat at the commission in January of 2017, for a five year term. And by the way, actually, the elections have reopened because our five year term is coming to an end. And I also have the further honor of being nominated again, for a second term by the government of Sierra Leone. And this is an election that will happen in November this year. Drucker: Congratulations.Jalloh: Thank you.Drucker: So tell me about your trip back to Sierra Leone and Africa. Because I know you did some work there. And you wrote a book about some of your research there, correct?Jalloh: Yes. So my interest in international criminal law issues has led me to have a research program over the years, we're focused quite heavily on the question of accountability. How do we ensure that individuals who commit some of the worst crimes known to law are held accountable in a fair process that withstands our sensibilities about the rights of defendants? And so I spent a lot of time thinking about this issue, this issues at a global level, but particularly from the perspective of African states, given that, of course, African states have had or the unfortunate experience more recently, have been the region of the world that is afflicted with a lot of conflicts, my home country of Sierra Leone being one of them. So one of my own, surprisingly, I would think, research agendas has been a focus on the work of the special court for Sierra Leone. That been a mechanism that actually is quite historic in the sense that it was the first international tribunal created by the United Nations and one of its member states to prosecute international crimes committed in the territory of that state. So my recent book is on the legal legacy of the special court for Sierra Leone, published by Cambridge University Press in July of 2020. And it reflects many years of research and thinking about the impact and legacy of the special court for Sierra Leone, for Sierra Leone, for Africa, and also for the international community. Because after all, the whole body of international criminal law we have is fairly new. It only goes as far back as 1945. So we're still doing a lot of experimentation in terms of developing and the law. Drucker: Can you give the name of that book, please? Jalloh: Yes, so the title of the book is the legal legacy of this special court for Sara Leone, published by Cambridge University Press in July of 2020, by Charles Chung. Drucker: Thank you. And one of the cool things that I want you to tell me about before we get you out of here, I know you're a busy guy, is you run a program where you take students to actually go do work at this ILC. What's that about? Jalloh: Well, you know, it's this is this is something that I'm very proud of, if I may be a bit immodest here.Drucker: Yeah!Jalloh: I am a faculty member, and I have this fantastic opportunity. This is a dream of a lifetime for a lot of international lawyers to be able to serve on the commission in the entire history of the Commission, we have heard only about 230 members, I'm talking about the 73 year-old organization. So to be among those is quite a honor. And I thought that I got to look back because one of the fantastic things about FIU, especially FIU Law, is our focus on international law. So in fact, because of the big vision behind the university, which is that international, in our name, we attract students that who are internationally minded. So one of the things that we immediately thought of when I approached my Dean was quite supportive of this. And this is really hats off to the dean as well as supporting, it was how could we make the ILC experience open to FIU students. So the Dean was kind enough to provide some kind of funding support. So we have actually have now a competitive fellowship program where NYU law students can compete to go work as a research assistant to me and last year to also other ILC members in Geneva for the summer, where they get Class A experience. Like there is no other place you could go to experience international law in this kind of way. Drucker: What are they? What kind of stuff are they doing over there? Jalloh: Well, they do research, intense research, I might add, working very closely with it. With me, as a faculty member who's also serving on the commission, they basically assist in preparing everything from statements that the members would make on the floor in the plenary debate, definitely, they've been doing that, for me, this fantastic group of students I've been able to take to Geneva, but also to participate in some of the processes where the commission is doing drafting work, again, for a lawyer, even if they don't end up practicing a day of international law just to be in the room, when all these international instruments have been considered. we're debating legalistic issues that get lawyers very excited about whether we should may versus shall. And the difference between the two, that shall mean the same thing as may? Or where the commas should go. This is geeky, right? We are so excited. But again, this is what lawyers do for a living, we have to be frank. So they get that experience, and I'm very proud of the group of students have been able to take and the fact that we're able to do that every year has been really quite remarkable. Drucker: Professor Jalloh, I imagine that there's not a lot of other universities around the country doing this? Jalloh: No, no, only a handful of law schools, NYU, and GW have been the ones that have had some kind of program, taking students to Geneva. Now on the other hand, at an international level, we get a lot of students from Oxford and the big universities like that. So it's necessary. Therefore, you see us in there competing among the best and the brightest. Drucker: Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. So I have one last question. For you, sir. Thank you for your time. Um, you were once a very highly motivated, well, you still seem very highly motivated, 21 year old, right? And we have a lot of students listening to this podcast. And so what I'm wondering is, what advice would you give to a 21 year old student who is coming fresh out of their, you know, undergrad college, and is highly motivated to get to the top of what they do, but it's anxious about how they'll get there? Jalloh: Well, maybe if I could sum it up, I would say two things. One, persevere. Okay, so don't give up. You got to push for your dream. That has definitely been my own experience. I mean, the fact that I'm able to come from where I did, and to be where I'm at today, definitely have had a measure of luck along the way, but it's been a lot of hard work. And of course, good people have also assisted along the way. So it's really pursue your dream and persevere, don't give up. And secondly, don't be stuck in a traditional route. If you're able to do whatever the traditional route may be in your field, go for it all power to you. But if you're not able to do that, don't hesitate to try to be creative. So it took me many years to actually be able to work in the field of international law. And the reason is, when I came out of law school uses the passion I had, but we didn't have as many jobs in this area. So what I did was I tried to find the kind of experience that will build my profile, and worked my way towards international law. And now I'm happy today to report that that has worked out very well for me, and I hope that it works out for our next generation of law students at FIU, students who are pursuing their dreams after graduating.Drucker: Very cool, can you give the names of the classes you teach at FIU, and how our listeners can get in contact with you if they have any follow up questions?Jalloh: So I teach at the College of Law, as I said at the opening, and I have a number of classes that I teach, that are primarily of international law, some of the advanced classes or seminars that are available also because we have been joined program with School of Public Policy, a number of other departments. So people who are in interdisciplinary programs want to get for example, an international law background could take a course with me I've had students from other disciplines take the international law course with me that start every fall every spring, I also teach criminal law at the College of Law, I have an advanced topics in international law as a seminar that actually used to train students to prepare for Geneva. So it's high level thinking about international legal questions. And oftentimes, I've taught a number of hodgepodge of courses. But really, if you're keen and interested, have a look at the FAQ law website, you'll see the offerings that you will normally see Jalloh especially against international law courses. Drucker: Okay. Awesome. Professor, thank you so much. Jalloh: Thank you for having me.Drucker: All right. Thank you to Professor Jalloh for coming by and sharing some time with us. All right, we're about to get to our our second interview with Teresa Schuster. But before we do that, I want to give a big thank you to our friends at FIU Online for letting us use their sound booth to record our podcast. It is giving us nice, clean sound. And we deeply appreciate it. Okay. Let's go and bring in Teresa.Drucker: Teresa, welcome to the show. Schuster: Thank you. It's great to be here.Drucker: Congratulations on being our first student interview on Panther personalities. Schuster: Yeah, it's an honor.Drucker: That's nice you to say. So what is your major here at FIU? Schuster: So I'm an early admission student, but I'm currently majoring in political science. And I'm planning to do a double major in philosophy. Drucker: Cool, cool. Yeah, yeah. Well, Teresa, you know, I wanted to have you on the show. Because you know, you seem like a high achiever. And also, I'm interested in your story of how you came to F Ru, and like at an early age, and also kind of your involvement on the Model UN team, which I understand is one of the most competitive Model UN teams in the country. And so I guess my first question is, how would you explain Model UN. Schuster: So Model UN, in general, is an extracurricular activity popular both in the US and around the world in general. So high schools, as well as universities, like FIU have their own teams. And what we do is participate in these conference simulations. And they're of the United Nations committees. So we all come together, each representing a country or a character. And what we do is we discuss global issues such as terrorism, human rights, financial transparency, and explore potential solutions to them as a team. And so basically the same types of things that the real un would do, but just on a lower level. And so our team, like you said, is really great, really competitive. We've ranked in the top five for over a decade. And so it's a really valuable experience in learning about diplomacy, about international relations and developing the same types of solutions that could actually make a difference in the world. Drucker: That's really cool. So how did you get involved in this stuff in the first place?Schuster: Well, after I came to FIU, I'd heard a lot about our program, a lot of really good things from fellow students. It's probably one of the best known programs edify you just because it's been here for so long, and we have a very close relationship with the SEPA school. So I definitely knew I wanted to attend and, and to join the program and I think it's probably one of the best decisions I've made. During my time at FIU, we have a very supportive team. And I've learned so much there. And so definitely, I would highly recommend it to anyone else. Drucker: That's great. And we'll talk about like, what kind of experiences you're having over there specifically a little bit later. First, though, you know, a lot of our listeners, you know, they might not even know that people are going to FIU at the age of 16, like you did. So can you first tell us where you're from, where you grew up, and how you came to fit you at such an early age? Schuster: Sure. So I'm I grew up in Miami, and I knew I wanted to take dual enrollment courses in high school, which in Florida, you can do at public colleges and universities, we have a very large school enrollment program. So I had enrolled at Miami Dade College for two years and then I began taking classes at FIU because I had hoped I would find more challenging classes here. I'm studying political science. Like I said, I'm interested in law especially and they didn't really offer many classes there. So I looked forward to taking more of those here. And that's why I decided decided to come here. That's what brought me here. Drucker: How old are you now? Teresa?Schuster: I just turned 18. Drucker: Oh, wow. Oh, my God. Okay. Oh, you're a superstar. Okay. All right. You're very smart. Alright. So Teresa, tell me about what it was like getting here when you're 16. And all of a sudden you're on, you know, the big campus here. Well, where do you at South Campus or BBC? I've, I've only been at Modesto middie. campus? But yeah, so So tell me about like, you know, you're coming in here. And there's people, you know, like, of all walks of life? I imagine it must be very kind of like, Whoa, experience for you at that time? Schuster: Yeah, definitely somewhat. I mean, I was at Miami Dade College, like I said, For two years before. So I'd already been a little bit familiar with a college environment. So but yeah, it was kind of a shock coming to a bigger campus, lots of people, lots of organizations, I will say everyone here has been very welcoming. And overall, I wouldn't say my ages affected my experience too much. And probably that's because I tried not to let it I told very few people about my age. But I think although I was younger than your average student at that point, there were plenty of other people on campus, my age, you know, we have triple eight here and actual High School on campus. And even today, in my classes, I run into many other dual enrollment students. And you know, in the lower division courses, I'm sure you can find even more. So I don't think there's too much of a difference between your average college student here and your average high school student here. And I think I've been in very few situations where I felt my age and my background mattered, thankfully, because I think we have a lot of non traditional students, we have a lot of people from different backgrounds. And I think that's part of what makes it so special here.Drucker: Can you tell the story of when you first got involved with Model UN? Was there an experience that like, made you say, Alright, like, this is what this is something I want to pursue.Schuster: So I think probably my first experience was our tryout simulation. And so I just come out of finals for my summer term classes. And we had to prepare for it right, an entire research guide, and it was on food scarcity in, in the world. And so I was representing Indonesia, a country, which I knew very, very little about. So I was kind of thrown into that I'd actually never done Model UN before. So it was an entirely new experience with parliamentary procedure and everything. But immediately, everyone was so helpful and welcoming. And I realized this was really fun. You know, I've always loved Politics and International Relations, but I never had so much of an experience where I could see how it applied to real life issues. And for me, Model UN really showed me how that could actually be done because I was there. And it was a day and at the end of the day, we actually wrote a resolution on things that could be done and policies that could be implemented to address that issue. So I would say that was the moment I realized that this is where I wanted to be.Drucker: Okay, so you have to tell me about that experience. You're getting up there, you have to speak in front of the whole group is how many people are in that room?Schuster: Well, it's been different Now that everything's on zoom. So that said, you know, upsides and downsides. But I would say generally about 40 people. So yeah, it's kind of, you know, if you're not used to public speaking, it's kind of a shock at first.Drucker: But what I mean public speaking about, you know, you said you didn't know much about Indonesia as a country. How did you get through that?Schuster: I did some research, you know, hide Google tab open during the whole time. I kept I Looking at facts to use in speeches, case studies, things like that. You know, I, I learned a lot about Indonesia during that. And so I think that's one of the most valuable things about Model UN you learn so much about things and issues you never knew about before.Drucker: So how, because I know these are competitions, how do you win a diplomacy competition like this?Schuster: Well, so you're right, that the main thing, and Model UN is really just diplomacy, you're competing against students from other universities most of the time, and you're representing different countries or different characters. And so really demonstrating diplomacy is how you win. And so that can be done in a variety of ways. You know, giving speeches that address these issues in ways that are compelling to a variety of countries, not just yours, not just ones like yours, making alliances with others to write resolutions on issues, developing solutions. And showing leadership is also incredibly important. So you really need to demonstrate the ability to work with others representing countries very different from yours, and still take initiative in solving these issues. So the way to win is to show the committee leadership that you yourself are diplomatic leader.Drucker: Oh, cool. So the committee of leadership is like, is the one who hands out points.Schuster: Yes, it's every committee is run by there's a there's a chair who kind of monitors the whole committee keeps order, we follow parliamentary procedures. So they're the ones who to assign points at the end and choose the winner the winner.Drucker: Okay. Okay. So, um, what was like, what, what has been like the craziest Model UN competition that you've been a part of?Schuster: I would say the craziest Model UN competition I was part of was one on terrorism, and I was Saudi Arabia. And so, yeah, we had many resolutions, many speeches dealing with state sponsored terrorism, you know, we have, we can get into very passionate speeches and heated arguments over things. But at the end of the day, our job is to find solutions. So it's always an interesting experience when you're there having to balance representing your country, which can have very strong and controversial opinions on an issue, but also having to garner support from other countries on these solutions. So it's a very fun, but very chaotic experience, especially because you're trying to do all of this and, you know, a week end up the most.Drucker: So so you're representing Saudi Arabia in this instance. And so like, what what are you saying during this, during this time, like, like, what, what are you doing?Schuster: Well, it was a few months ago, so I don't remember my exact speeches. But, you know, you have to kind of say, oh, we're, we're very against terrorism, we understand the immense throughout this poses to countries around the region. That's why we have to ensure that all countries have the ability to control terrorism within their own borders, and, you know, play that to Saudi Arabia. And really, for us, that would mean the ability to prosecute people just critical of our own regime and things like that. So it's kind of discussing an issue in a way that your country would support. But of course, every country has an ulterior motive.Drucker: I mean, this, this has got to be such like a crash course, if you haven't done this before, on just the different perspectives there are in the world. I mean, wow. Like, I'm not just sitting in on one of these things. And you're like, Whoa, I did not know, all these countries had these stances and takes.Schuster: yeah, definitely, it can be, it can be kind of overwhelming at first, but I think that's, that's how many things in life are, you know, it's complicated, and you just have to go in and do it. And I think it's a really great experience being there and learning how to adapt to ever changing situations. And so those skills that you learn in Model UN, really helped you in the future, especially if you're interested in a career in international relations.Drucker: And I imagine, you know, excuse me, you're going up against a lot of the the brightest, you know, young people in the country. Um, can you talk about, like, What the Who your competitors are, you know, at Model UN?Schuster: Well, like I said, we're in the top five teams in the country. So our main competitors are also teams there. So generally, you Chicago, Harvard, American University, medical schools like that top schools, both in the US and Canada, other countries. So those are generally our main competitors.Drucker: Cool, cool. So okay, so thank you for talking to me about Model UN. Now. Let's talk a little bit about your FIU journey because you know, I know you're busy. We'll get you out of here soon. But you are a news director at Panther now? I'm a fellow Panther now alumnus myself, so I got that Panther now pride. it was the beacon when I was there, but you know, still got that Panther now pride. So tell me like, what, how you got involved with that. And you know what that experience has been like?Schuster: Well, I'm an assistant news director at a Panther. Now before that I was involved in student media at Miami Dade College. So it's something I've always been interested in. And it's really been wonderful, we have a great team. And for me, the opportunity to talk with people from all walks of life and share their stories with others is very enjoyable. And I've also written several investigative pieces that I felt had a significant impact here at FSU. So I would say I fell in love with journalism and with Panther now because I've always just loved questions. I've loved discovering new things, meeting new people learning how things are and asking if they should change. And for me, that's what journalism is all about. And that's what Panther now is about to so it's been very special for me.Drucker: That's great. That's great. So if our audience, you know, if someone listening out here is like, hey, Teresa is cool. And Model UN is cool. You know that I want to find out more. What would you Is there like a Twitter handle or a website you would toss out for people who want more information? Schuster: Yeah we have several social media accounts. I would say Instagrams the best you can find us at FSU Model UN. And our annual High School conference is actually approaching, we're holding a variety of training workshops. On our Instagram, we also have an application and information forum. So I encourage everyone listening to check it out and consider joining us.Drucker: Cool, cool. All right, one last question for you to Teresa. Um, you know, I think a lot of students, you know, who want to be more involved. You know, some students are shy, right? So, you know, some students are a little bit shy about reaching out to one of these clubs or whatever. So, you were, you know, a young student once, and you kind of have seemed to have no problem getting involved here at NYU. But for someone who, you know, is maybe, you know, a little, you know, hesitant about reaching out, what tips would you give for, like, let's say, an incoming fpu student in terms of, you know, how to be more involved, how to get engaged?Schuster: Yes, so I'm an introvert. So I definitely understand it can be difficult to reach out sometimes. And I'd say the most important thing is to just not feel uncomfortable with it. Because even though you might feel like you don't belong here, you do belong here. And so whether you weren't involved previously, maybe you're a non traditional student as I was, or you just don't know where to start, at least in the organizations I've been in, people are generally very welcoming. So just ask other students in your classes, look online for organizations you think you would want to be a part of and just sign up? And if you don't find one, you know, that's, I think that's great, because it means you should create your own for always, there's always room for more here.Drucker: Great, great. Awesome, Teresa, thanks so much for coming on the pod.Schuster: Thank you so much for having me.Drucker: Okay, thank you to Teresa Schuster for coming by. And that's about to be it for today's episode, I do want to let you guys know about what we got coming up, this show is a monthly show for now, we may increase, you know, our production schedule, if demand increases, if we see that, we are definitely open to that. And, and what's going on is you know, we're just gonna talk to you again next month, we're gonna bring your fresh two new interviews next month. And also what you need to know is that the interviews are not going to be all that the show is going forward. See, what we want to do is we want to get, you know, more pieces involved. We want to get more people involved. We want to kind of create new things. And one of the things we're one of the tools we're going to use to do that to get to know people and and to get new information into the show is segments, segments events. You've probably heard them on radio shows. You've probably heard them on other podcasts. You listen to other podcasts. And so our first segment is going to debut next episode, and that's going to be called campus headlines will let you know what's going on around you. So okay, looking forward to that next episode. And it was a great one. First one in the can love it. All right, thanks to the members of our university community that have made Panther personalities possible. Barry Bernhardt, Director of fit bands provided our theme music, the IU Samba, Barbie Ramos, Oscar Negret and Dave Roberts designed our artwork and logo. Our intro was voiced by SGA President Alexandra Valdez and edited by multimedia guru, Eddie Merille. We'll be back before you know it and in the meantime, you can check out more stories about FIU and news.fiu.edu. Talk with you soon Panther friends and family. Paws Up.

On the seventieth anniversary of the signing of the United Nations Charter, Gray Brechin spoke about the Roosevelts and their moral vision; the New Deal's public works projects (many of them in San Francisco); the beginnings of the U.N.; the politics of fear; the nuclear arms buildup; and more. The Living New Deal Shaping San Francisco   The post The New Deal and the Roosevelts appeared first on KPFA.