Tag Archives: withdrawal

US withdrawal from WHO ‘risks global safety’, agency says in detailed rebuttal

Posted on by
Reply

The statement, released on Saturday, also includes a rebuttal of the US administration’s reasoning for the measures. In response to government statements that the WHO has “trashed and tarnished” and insulted it, and compromised its independence, the agency notes that “the reverse true,” and that the WHO has always sought to “engage with the United States in good faith, with full respect for its sovereignty.”

The accusation by the US administration that the WHO has “pursued a politicized, bureaucratic agenda driven by nations hostile to American interests” is countered and described as untrue. The agency, the statement reads “has always been and remains impartial and exists to serve all countries, with respect for their sovereignty, and without fear or favour.”

Defence of COVID-19 response 

A significant portion of the statement is dedicated to defending the WHO against US accusations of “failures” during the COVID-19 pandemic: according to the administration, the WHO obstructed the “timely and accurate sharing of critical information” and “concealed those failures”. 

The agency counters this by noting that, throughout the pandemic, it acted quickly, shared all information it had rapidly and transparently with the world, and advised Member States on the basis of the best available evidence. 

WHO recommended the use of masks, vaccines and physical distancing, but at no stage recommended mask mandates, vaccine mandates or lockdowns.

Immediately after receiving the first reports of a cluster of cases of “pneumonia of unknown cause” in Wuhan, China on 31 December 2019, WHO asked China for more information and activated its emergency incident management system.

By the time the first death was reported from China on 11 January 2020, WHO had already alerted the world through formal channels, public statements and social media, convened global experts, and published comprehensive guidance for countries on how to protect their populations and health systems.

When the WHO Director-General declared COVID-19 a public health emergency of international concern under the International Health Regulations on 30 January 2020 – the highest level of alarm under international health law – outside of China there were fewer than 100 reported cases, and no reported deaths.

In the first weeks and months of the pandemic, the Director-General urged all countries repeatedly to take immediate action to protect their populations, warning that “the window of opportunity is closing”, “this is not a drill” and describing COVID-19 as “public enemy number one”.

In response to the multiple reviews of the COVID-19 pandemic, including of WHO’s performance, WHO has taken steps to strengthen its own work, and to support countries to bolster their own pandemic preparedness and response capacities. The systems WHO developed and managed before, during and after the emergency phase of the pandemic, have contributed to keeping all countries safe, including the United States.

Door open for US return

Despite the withdrawal notice, WHO remains committed to global cooperation and expresses hope that the United States will re-engage in the future. The agency highlights recent milestones, including the adoption of the WHO Pandemic Agreement, described as “a landmark instrument of international law” aimed at preventing and responding to future pandemics.

As a founding member of the WHO, the United States of America has contributed significantly to many of the agency’s greatest achievements, including the eradication of smallpox, and progress against many other public health threats including polio, HIV, Ebola, influenza, tuberculosis, malaria, neglected tropical diseases, antimicrobial resistance, food safety and more.

“WHO remains steadfastly committed to working with all countries in pursuit of its core mission,” the statement concludes, reaffirming its mandate to advance “the highest attainable standard of health as a fundamental right for all people.”

What US withdrawal from UN bodies could mean?

Posted on by
Reply

When UN Spokesperson Stéphane Dujarric briefed correspondents in New York on Thursday following the release of the White House Memorandum, he insisted that the Organization will continue to carry out its mandates from Member States “with determination.”

Wednesday’s memorandum states that the US administration is “ceasing participation in or funding to those entities to the extent permitted by law.”

Several of the bodies listed in the memo are funded principally or partially by the regular UN budget, implying that voluntary funding will be impacted, although central funding will continue.

However, the White House notes that its funding review of international organisations “remains ongoing,” and it is currently unclear what the impact of the announcement will be.

Here’s a breakdown of the 31 UN entities mentioned in the memorandum, and how they are making a positive difference to people, communities and nations, worldwide.

Development

  • UN Human Settlement Programme (UN Habitat): Promotes sustainable towns and cities and provides technical and policy advice for the improvement of living conditions and the reduction of urban poverty

Education and training

  • UN Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR): Provides training and capacity-building for individuals, organisations, and countries (especially developing nations) on areas like diplomacy, sustainable development, climate change and crisis management
  • UN System Staff College: Equips UN personnel with learning, training and advisory services to ensure a capable, adaptable and collaborative UN workforce
  • UN University: The UN’s global think tank and postgraduate teaching organisation conducts research and provides policy advice on pressing global issues
  • Education Cannot Wait: The UN global fund dedicated to education in emergencies and protracted crises, to ensure that children and youth affected by conflict, displacement, and disasters have access to safe, quality education

Gender

Health

  • UN Population Fund (UNFPA): Promotes sexual and reproductive health and rights for all, promotes gender equality and collates population data for development, helping to reduce maternal mortality and expand access to family planning

International Law

  • International Law Commission: Mandates the development and codification of international law by drafting legal instruments and clarifying principles; fostering the rule of law, and supporting peaceful relations among states
  • International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals: Carries out essential functions of the former International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, completing ongoing cases, protecting witnesses and preserving archives, ensuring accountability for serious international crimes

UN laments US withdrawal from educational and cultural agency

Posted on by
Reply

“I deeply regret President Donald Trump’s decision to once again withdraw the United States of America from UNESCO,” Audrey Azoulay, Director-General of the Paris-based agency, said in a statement.

In New York, UN Spokesperson Stéphane Dujarric said that the Secretary-General joins Ms. Azoulay “in deeply regretting the decision by the United States.”

The US first withdrew from UNESCO in 1984 under President Ronald Reagan and didn’t rejoin for two decades. Fourteen years after re-entry, the first Trump administration withdrew from the organization in 2017, but the decision was reversed under President Joseph Biden in 2023.  

Ms. Azoulay underscored that “this decision contradicts the fundamental principles of multilateralism,” and she highlighted that this decision would affect UNESCO partners in the United States, including communities seeking site inscription.

A White House press statement on the withdrawal said the decision had been taken to protect American interests from UNESCO’s work to advance “divisive social and cultural causes.”

The statement also said the organization is focused on the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which it described as “a globalist, ideological agenda for international development at odds with our America First foreign policy.”

The statement also specifically cited UNESCO’s decision to admit the State of Palestine as a Member State as problematic, contrary to US policy and fuelling the United Nations’ “anti-Israel rhetoric”.

Ms. Azoulay in her statement denied these claims that UNESCO is “anti-Israel,” highlighting the organization’s work in Holocaust education and combating antisemitism.

“UNESCO is the only United Nations agency responsible for these issues, and its work has been unanimously acclaimed by major specialized organizations,” she said, including American organizations such as the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, DC.

Diversifying funding in preparation

Ms. Azoulay stressed that this announcement was anticipated, and the organization has prepared accordingly, highlighting major structural reforms in recent years, including the diversification of funding sources.  

“The decreasing trend in the financial contribution of the US has been offset,” she explained. Despite the US now representing eight per cent of the organization’s budget, UNESCO’s budget has steadily increased thanks to donations from member states and private contributors, the latter of which have doubled since 2018.

“Today, the Organization is better protected in financial terms,” she said.

Continuing US partnerships

“UNESCO’s purpose is to welcome all the nations of the world, and the United States of America is and will always be welcome,” Ms. Azoulay emphasised.

The organization will continue to work with its US partners in the private, academic and non-profit sectors, and it will pursue discussions with the US Government. 

Source link

Ukraine Defeat: Putin sacks top general after appointing him 16 days ago

Posted on by
Reply

Russian President Vladimir Putin is reported to have sacked Lieutenant General Roman Berdnikov, a top-ranking general just 16 days after appointing him following his crushing defeat in eastern Ukraine, media reports said.

The Russian President is thought to have relieved Lieutenant General Roman Berdnikov of his duties over the failure of Kremlin troops to keep hold of vast swathes of Ukrainian territory over the last few days, Daily Mail reported.

A counter-offensive by Ukrainian forces has seen troops push to within 30 miles of the border, amid reports that ‘panicked’ Russian troops have been abandoning tanks, weapons and supplies.

There have been claims from some sources that Russian soldiers have “literally ran from their positions”, even leaving behind their clothes as they ran away from the advancing Ukrainian army in the Kharkiv oblast in the north-east of the country, Daily Mail reported.

It came as Ukrainian soldiers surge into the east of the country in an effort that has seen them take more than 1,000 square miles of territory in a matter of days, in a period of time that could prove to be a turning point in the war.

The move came after a sustained Ukrainian’s disinformation campaign’ about a counter-offensive in the south, which succeeded in diverting Russian troops in that direction and leaving the north east vulnerable to attack, Daily Mail reported.

The main advance in the area began six days ago and has forced Moscow to withdraw its troops to prevent them being surrounded. Kremlin troops were reportedly running away without even attempting to fight back.

Appointed 16 days ago

According to the Main Directorate of Intelligence of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine, Lt General Berdnikov was appointed as commander of the Western Armed Forces on August 26.

However, it seems his time in charge was short lived, with Ukrainian intelligence saying he has been sacked by Putin due to the rout in Kharkiv.  This came after unconfirmed reports back in June that he had been killed during fighting in the Donbas region of Ukraine.

As Russian troops desperately scrambled to get clear from oncoming forces in recent days, one Ukrainian unit said the chain of command had been broken and Kremlin troops were running away without even attempting to fight back, Daily Mail reported. (IANS)

World Court ICJ orders Russia to stop war immediately; Is it binding?

Posted on by
Reply

The International Court of Justice (ICJ), the highest judicial body in the world, on Wednesday ordered Russia to suspend its military operations in Ukraine, though its orders are not mandatory for defying member nations.

In a vote of 13-2, the decision was to ask the Russian Federation to quickly suspend military operations it started on February 24. “The Russian Federation shall immediately suspend the military operations that it commenced on Feb 24, 2022 in the territory of Ukraine,” the judges said as quoted by Reuters.

Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy praised the outcome at the world court and said, “Ukraine gained a complete victory in its case against Russia at the ICJ. The ICJ ordered to immediately stop the invasion. The order is binding under international law. Russia must comply immediately. Ignoring the order will isolate Russia even further”.

On 26 February, Ukraine filed an application against Russia concerning “a dispute” on the interpretation, application and fulfilment of the Genocide Convention. Ukraine contended that having falsely claimed acts of genocide against the people of the Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts, Russia declared and implemented a “special military operation” to prevent and punish the purported acts.

The ICJ asked Russia to immediately suspend its attacks and cease all military operations as they were based on Moscow’s stated purpose of preventing or punishing Ukraine for committing genocide.

The Court also noted that Russia had decided not to participate in oral proceedings and later, presented a document setting out its position that in this case, the Court lacks jurisdiction and requested it to “refrain from indicating provisional measures and to remove the case from its list.”

Meeting conditions

In delivering the ruling, President of the Court Joan Donoghue of the United States, outlined that the necessary conditions were met to give the ICJ the authority to indicate provisional measures, namely that the rights asserted by Ukraine are plausible and the condition of urgency was met in that acts causing irreparable prejudice can “occur at any moment.”

“Indeed, any military operation, in particular one on the scale carried out by the Russian Federation on the territory of Ukraine, inevitably causes loss of life, mental and bodily harm, and damage to property and to the environment,” said the ICJ President.

On behalf of the world court, she continued, “the civilian population affected by the present conflict is extremely vulnerable,” adding that Russia’s aggression has resulted in “numerous civilian deaths and injuries…significant material damage, including the destruction of buildings and infrastructure”.

“Attacks are ongoing and are creating increasingly difficult living conditions for the civilian population. Many persons have no access to the most basic foodstuffs, potable water, electricity, essential medicines or heating. A very large number of people are attempting to flee from the most affected cities under extremely insecure conditions,” she explained.

The judges were unanimous in their order that both parties refrain from any action that might “aggravate or extend the dispute…or make it more difficult to resolve.”