Venezuela, Antonio Guterres and the Nature of Great Powers

The United States removed Venezuela’s socialist dictator Nicolás Maduro from power and transported him to the United States to await trial. There, the deposed tyrant will be charged, among other things, with narco-terrorism and the possession of machine guns and other weapons of destruction against the United States.

In Venezuela, power was transferred to Vice President Delcy Rodríguez, and there are reportedly no longer any American soldiers in the country. Hopefully, the country’s new leader understands the situation and moves swiftly to arrange honest elections.

In those elections, whoever the majority of the Venezuelan people express their support for should win. And whether that is last year’s Nobel Prize winner María Corina Machado or someone else, may that person receive American support in restoring the country to democratic governance, rebuilding its economy on market-based principles, and orienting its foreign policy toward Western democracies instead of China.

Under Maduro, however, Venezuela has accumulated many serious problems. These include an economic collapse over the course of the 21st century, increased drug-related crime, and now—after the operation just carried out—possible claims by Trump on the country’s oil reserves. For Venezuelans, it is therefore crucial to find solutions to all of these issues that are effective and that enjoy public support.

* * *

In this context, it is worth noting the incomprehensible reaction of UN Secretary-General António Guterres to the events. Instead of expressing satisfaction at the fall of a dictator, he saw fit to be deeply concerned about the U.S. strike on Venezuela, because it does not respect international law.

Did this creep placed at the head of the world organization really imagine that Maduro’s regime did?

The silver lining is that the UN has no real means to influence the Venezuelan case, nor does there appear to be support in Western countries for Guterres’s absurd “concern” or for Maduro’s regime. And even if there were, Donald Trump would hardly care about it any more than about the shit-flies tormenting cattle on American ranches.

All in all, the future of Venezuelans looks—despite Guterres—reasonably bright, at least compared to a few days ago. Of course, dismantling the misery caused by a long-standing socialist dictatorship will take time, but with determined effort the people can get what they deserve.

For now, however, we do not know what that will mean. And so we can only wait to see what the Venezuelans themselves want—once the Trump administration first restores to them the right to decide on their own affairs.

* * *

Finally, it should be noted that some have viewed the transfer of power in Venezuela as some kind of grand conspiracy in which the United States, China, and Russia seek to divide the world among themselves. 

I do admit that in this case certain features of such a scenario can be discerned, but there is nothing fundamentally new about it. Great powers have always sought to maximize their influence—sometimes more openly and sometimes more covertly, but always using the means they have considered most effective at the time.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Elections in Venezuela Do Not Offer Reason for Optimism
Does China prove the superiority of market economy?
Lessons from Venezuela

The original blogpost in Finnish:
Maduron kausi loppu, eikä sen perään jäänyt haikailemaan kuin YK:n Antonio Guterrez

The Cost of the East Jerusalem Attack for Palestinians — and Its Echo Worldwide

Two Palestinian militants apparently thought that the Palestinians’ position in the Holy Land would improve if they started shooting on a road heavily used by Jews. So they put their plan into action, managing to kill at least six people and wound several others. And of course, they themselves supposedly got to enjoy the company of 72 virgins—assuming, that is, that there’s any truth to their beliefs.

Next, we are left to see what follows from this attack. Will the everyday life of ordinary Palestinians in the West Bank improve, or perhaps turn quite the opposite way?

Even more interesting, however, will be to observe how European media report on the future living conditions of the people in the West Bank—conditions that Israel’s army will undoubtedly alter in one way or another. And more interesting still will be to see how UN Secretary-General António Guterres comments on what has happened now, and again later when we can see the consequences.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Abu Obaida’s Death Brings Palestine One Step Closer to Peace
Will Gaza Get a Ceasefire, or Will Hamas Hold On to Its Terrorist Capabilities?
United Nations, corruption and terrorism

Finland Decides to Withdraw from the Ottawa Treaty — But What Business Is It of Guterres?

Parliament decided today by a clear majority that Finland will withdraw from the Ottawa Treaty, allowing its Defence Forces to once again utilize anti-personnel mines in their operations. The vote result was 157 in favor and 18 against.

Thus ended the risky decision taken in 2011 by Finland’s Social Democratic President Tarja Halonen and the National Coalition Party’s Prime Minister Jyrki Katainen. At that time, the only parties voting against the treaty in Parliament were the Finns Party and a small number of Centre Party representatives.

Today, those who voted against the withdrawal agreement — effectively voting in favor of Putin — included ten members of the Left Alliance parliamentary group (1), seven members of the Greens (2), and one representative of the Swedish People's Party (3). These individuals are widely regarded in Finland as errand boys and girls for Putin.

All other members present supported the reintroduction of anti-personnel mines as a means of defense, to ensure that Russia remains on the eastern side of the approximately 1,300-kilometer border between the two countries. Many recognized the urgency of this need already in 2014, when Putin’s "little green men" occupied Crimea and parts of Eastern Ukraine. For those slower to grasp the situation, the reality became clear in 2022, when the Russian army invaded Ukraine.

* * *

In this context, I cannot help but express my astonishment at UN Secretary-General António Guterres, who took it upon himself to interfere in Finnish decision-making by strongly advocating for Finland to remain in the treaty. The reasons for this are anyone’s guess, as it would seem quite strange if the head of the United Nations were somehow under the influence of the Russian dictator.

Of course, it’s also possible that Guterres was simply unaware of how Finland uses anti-personnel mines and feared they would pose a danger to civilians. However, this fear is unfounded, because — unlike in developing countries — Finnish mines are not scattered randomly in the terrain.

Instead, the Finnish army lays minefields only when there is a clearly identified threat, and even then, their locations are recorded both on paper and in electronic systems. This ensures that minefields can be dismantled immediately when no longer needed — and therefore do not pose a threat to civilian lives or health.

1. Timo Furuholm, Veronika Honkasalo. Mai Kivelä, Anna Kontula, Minja Koskela, Pia Lohikoski, Laura Meriluoto, Aino-Kaisa Pekonen, Hanna Sarkkinen and Johannes Yrttiaho)
2. Fatim Diarra, Tiina Elo, Bella Forsgrén, Inka Hopsu, Saara Hyrkkö, Jenni Pitko and Oras Tynkkynen
   
3. Eva Biaudét

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
António Guterres, You Won’t Stop Russia – But Mines Might
Putin's Threat Bolsters European Border States' Defense Against Russia
Will Finland Withdraw from the Ottawa Treaty?

António Guterres, You Won’t Stop Russia – But Mines Might

UN Secretary-General António Guterres made an appeal to countries planning to withdraw from the Ottawa Treaty and reintroduce anti-personnel landmines. Among these countries, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, and Finland are neighbors of Russia.

Their departure from the treaty is justified precisely by this geographical fact — and by the fact that Russia is an aggressive and imperialist great power that has invaded the territory of several of its neighbors. There is no doubt that its current regime might also decide to test the security guarantees NATO has given to these countries — once it is done with Ukraine.

That is why it is fair to ask Mr. Guterres how he intends to prevent Russia’s intentions, should it decide to attack, for example, my own homeland. And whether, in such a situation, he would take responsibility for the Finnish lives that would have been saved by effective mining.

I do not expect an answer from the UN Secretary-General, but I remind him that Finland once sought help — in vain — from the UN’s predecessor, the League of Nations, before the Winter War that began in 1939. No help came then, and I do not believe Guterres would be able to provide any in the 2020s either, should Russia’s Putin choose to repeat Stalin’s move and order his army to seize Helsinki and strip Finland of its independence.

For this reason, I believe the UN Secretary-General would do well to keep quiet about the affairs of Eastern Europe, and instead focus on achieving a just peace in Ukraine, resolving the conflict between Jews and Arabs in Palestine, and ensuring that Iran does not continue its nuclear weapons program after its war with Israel comes to an end.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Putin's Threat Bolsters European Border States' Defense Against Russia
Highlights of the BRICS Meeting in Kazan, Russia
United Nations, corruption and terrorism

Highlights of the BRICS Meeting in Kazan, Russia

BRICS is an intergovernmental organization comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, and the United Arab Emirates. It is a geopolitical bloc, with governments meeting annually at formal summits to coordinate multilateral policies.

This year's meeting in Kazan, Russia, has brought up some interesting developments, which I would like to present to you, my esteemed reader.

The Portuguese UN Secretary-General, António Guterres, attended a summit hosted by Vladimir Putin, a man who did not participate in the previous BRICS meeting to avoid being arrested under an international arrest warrant. I wonder whether the UN Secretary-General is unaware of the political implications of this or if he knowingly chooses to support the Russian dictator.

In any case, I do not believe his visit enhances the respect for the UN among people in Western countries. However, I am certain his popularity will rise in some other parts of the world.

President Vladimir Putin presented a symbolic BRICS currency proposal. However, the head of Russia's Central Bank, Elvira Nabiullina, was not in favor of the idea.

I can’t help but wonder how long it will take before Nabiullina's body is found under a window somewhere in Russia. That seems to be the fate of Russians who disagree with Mr. Putin.

Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro declared that “Venezuela is part of this BRICS family. We apply the principles of BRICS with historical conviction. The time has come for a balanced world, which is multipolar and multicentric. BRICS can count on Venezuela and on the full revolutionary strength of our historical project.”

Given the collapse of the Venezuelan currency - the Bolivar - it is clear that anything would be an improvement in terms of stability. On the other hand, Venezuela's inclusion could have a highly negative effect on any new currency. It will be interesting to see if, for example, China would be willing to join a currency shared with Venezuela.

Finally, it is worth noting a prime example of a kind of transparent dishonesty heard at the meeting. It was said by Putin, who, without batting an eye and without acknowledging his own guilt, rambled on that "unfortunately, there are many armed conflicts on our planet, including at Russia's borders. It is truly unfortunate that there is this armed conflict in Ukraine."

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Resisting Putin’s Foolish Dreams
Does China prove the superiority of market economy?
Lessons from Venezuela

United Nations, corruption and terrorism

In Finland, a new president will be elected tomorrow, Sunday. One of the candidates, Sari Essayah of the Christian Democrats, stated in the final election debate that UN organizations are corrupt.

This statement shouldn't have caused much attention, as the corruption within the UN is considered a public secret – known to anyone who follows international affairs even remotely. However, addressing it more forcefully would lead to a crisis for the entire organization, so it is allowed to persist.

The presidential candidate's perspective emerged in the context of discussing development cooperation through the UN and the influence it provides in the third world. Finland is reducing the financial flows it contributes to this, which has sparked opposition, especially among those whose income and lifestyle depend on this activity.

In this regard, it was unpleasant to discover that deep-seated corruption is not the UN's only significant problem. This realization comes as it has been revealed that some of the organization's employees have even participated in terrorist activities and subsequently been dismissed from their positions.

I am referring, of course, to the news that UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres is horrified by the accusations, and there is now an urgent and comprehensive independent audit of UNRWA to verify its credibility. Having followed the actions of the UN for decades, I am not surprised by this development, and I have no doubt about the validity of the accusations.

However, it is good that the issue has now come to light, as it provides hope for change within the organization. Such change, though, requires the major funding states – namely the USA and other Western countries – to act decisively in this matter. If this happens, there may be renewed hope that the UN will one day become a useful organization.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Christmas gift to the Holy Land
Defense Minister Prabowo Subianto aligned Indonesia on the wrong side of world history
Most useless organisations of our time