UNITED
NATIONS,
November 16 --
When the G20
summit ended
and after
Australia's Tony
Abbott mouthed
support for
the fight
against
climate
change, Obama
took the stage
in Brisbane.
He was asked
about Ukraine
and said that
it is
impermissible
to finance
proxies to
break up
countries
which have
mechanisms for
democratic
elections.
It is a phrase
that needs
unpacking.
Obama did not
say countries
should not
interfere,
militarily, in
other
countries. If
a country is
not a
democracy,
apparently,
one can
intervene, as
long as it is
not to stoke
separatism.
Are those the
new rules?
The
US "train and
equip mission"
on Syria came
to mind. Those
are proxies,
but are they
allowed under
Obama's new
rules? On
Syria Obama
said that eventually
there will
have to be a
political
solution
including
Syria's
neighbors like
Turkey and
Iran, and
"Assad's
patron,"
Russia.
Abbott, like
the UK's
Cameron after
him, spoke for
his home
audience. And
to Obama, the
pre-selected
questions
beginning with
Reuters were
about
Keystone,
health care,
immigration
and executive
orders. It's a
long way to
fly for this.
In Brisbane
for the G20,
US President
Barack Obama
announced a $3
billion
commitment to
the Green
climate fund,
to applause at
the University
of Queenland.
He did not
mention
Australia's
anti-immigrant
policies or
Manus Island.
Obama claimed
that the US
never puts its
principles in
the back seat,
referring to
China -- with
no mention of
Saudi Arabia
or its
neighbors
Bahrain and
Qatar. He
praised
Myanmar,
saying he
spoke there
about how
journalism can
be
responsible,
without
mentioned Aung
Naing, killed
in custody.
Back in
Beijing on
November 10,
US President Barack
Obama is
promoting the
"Transpacific
Partnership,"
which would
among other
things export
pro-corporate
(and
pro-censorship)
laws like the
US Digital
Millennium
Copyright Act.
After telling
the media to
hurry up and
get out of the
room, "we have
some work to
do," a
statement
emerged on
November 10,
that
"We,
the Leaders of
Australia,
Brunei
Darussalam,
Canada, Chile,
Japan,
Malaysia,
Mexico, New
Zealand, Peru,
Singapore,
United States,
and Vietnam,
welcome the
significant
progress in
recent months,
as reported to
us by our
Ministers,
that sets the
stage to bring
these landmark
Trans-Pacific
Partnership
(TPP)
negotiations
to
conclusion."
But if the TPP
is so good,
why would an
organization
like the Electronic
Frontier
Foundation be
sounding the
alarm? And
why and how
can the UN
be promoting
and praising
this TPP?
The
UN has a joint
agency with
the World
Trade
Organization,
and on March
6, 2014, at
the UN the
director of
the joint
agency the
International
Trade Centre
Arancha
Gonzalez,
formerly of
the WTO, spoke
at the UN and
praised the
pending Trans
Pacific
Partnership.
Inner
City Press
when able
asked Gonzalez
to explain
working on the
TPP as a UN
project, given
the range of
groups opposed
to the TPP,
including for
example the
Electronic
Frontier
Foundation. Click
here.
As the
Free UN
Coalition for
Access is
pursuing, TPP
would
essentially
globalize the
US Digital
Millennium
Copyright Act,
which can be
used for
censorship --
not only has
used by
Reuters UN
bureau chief
to ban from
Google's
Search an
anti-Press
complaint he
filed with the
UN, but more
recently to
take-down
videos of
protests. Click here.
Gonzalez
gave
a lengthy
answer, that
trade deals
are up to
member state,
but added that
the ICT works
so that rules
are consistent
and not
fragmented.
To some this
sounds like
"race to the
bottom."
Since
the press
conference was
billed as
concerning the
Commission on
the Status of
Women, Inner
City Press
asked Gonzalez
which
countries ban
women from
having bank
accounts.
Saudi Arabia
came to mind,
but Gonzalez
cited Asia and
sub-Saharan
Africa. We
hope to have
more on this
issue.
Back on March
4 another UN
agency UN
HABITAT
unveiled "The
City We Need"
booklet on
Tuesday at the
UN, in advance
of an event at
the nearby
Ford
Foundation.