Bulletins and News Discussion from March 25th to March 31st, 2024 - Friendship Ended With Taiwan, Now China Is My New Best Friend - COTW: Honduras
Bulletins and News Discussion from March 25th to March 31st, 2024 - Friendship Ended With Taiwan, Now China Is My New Best Friend - COTW: Honduras
Image is from this Reuters article.
This week marks the one year anniversary of Honduras ceasing to recognize Taiwan and instead only recognizing China. Over that time period, China and Honduras have gone through several rounds of negotiating a free trade agreement, with trade expanding. Additionally, they have just signed a $275 million cooperation agreement, providing education infrastructure for Honduras.
The other major news piece relevant to Honduras is the battle against Prospera, a US-based crypto libertarian firm that sought to buy a private island in order to create an ancap paradise, in which Bitcoin would be legal tender. In 2022, Honduras killed the island's special status that made the deal possible, and so Prospera is seeking $11 billion in compensation.
The COTW (Country of the Week) label is designed to spur discussion and debate about a specific country every week in order to help the community gain greater understanding of the domestic situation of often-understudied nations. If you've wanted to talk about the country or share your experiences, but have never found a relevant place to do so, now is your chance! However, don't worry - this is still a general news megathread where you can post about ongoing events from any country.
The Country of the Week is Honduras! Feel free to chime in with books, essays, longform articles, even stories and anecdotes or rants. More detail here.
Please check out the HexAtlas!
The bulletins site is here!
The RSS feed is here.
Last week's thread is here.
Israel-Palestine Conflict
Sources on the fighting in Palestine against Israel. In general, CW for footage of battles, explosions, dead people, and so on:
UNRWA daily-ish reports on Israel's destruction and siege of Gaza and the West Bank.
English-language Palestinian Marxist-Leninist twitter account. Alt here.
English-language twitter account that collates news (and has automated posting when the person running it goes to sleep).
Arab-language twitter account with videos and images of fighting.
English-language (with some Arab retweets) Twitter account based in Lebanon. - Telegram is @IbnRiad.
English-language Palestinian Twitter account which reports on news from the Resistance Axis. - Telegram is @EyesOnSouth.
English-language Twitter account in the same group as the previous two. - Telegram here.
English-language PalestineResist telegram channel.
More telegram channels here for those interested.
Various sources that are covering the Ukraine conflict are also covering the one in Palestine, like Rybar.
Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Examples of Ukrainian Nazis and fascists
Examples of racism/euro-centrism during the Russia-Ukraine conflict
Sources:
Defense Politics Asia's youtube channel and their map. Their youtube channel has substantially diminished in quality but the map is still useful.
Moon of Alabama, which tends to have interesting analysis. Avoid the comment section.
Understanding War and the Saker: reactionary sources that have occasional insights on the war.
Alexander Mercouris, who does daily videos on the conflict. While he is a reactionary and surrounds himself with likeminded people, his daily update videos are relatively brainworm-free and good if you don't want to follow Russian telegram channels to get news. He also co-hosts The Duran, which is more explicitly conservative, racist, sexist, transphobic, anti-communist, etc when guests are invited on, but is just about tolerable when it's just the two of them if you want a little more analysis.
On the ground: Patrick Lancaster, an independent and very good journalist reporting in the warzone on the separatists' side.
Unedited videos of Russian/Ukrainian press conferences and speeches.
Pro-Russian Telegram Channels:
Again, CW for anti-LGBT and racist, sexist, etc speech, as well as combat footage.
https://t.me/aleksandr_skif ~ DPR's former Defense Minister and Colonel in the DPR's forces. Russian language.
https://t.me/Slavyangrad ~ A few different pro-Russian people gather frequent content for this channel (~100 posts per day), some socialist, but all socially reactionary. If you can only tolerate using one Russian telegram channel, I would recommend this one.
https://t.me/s/levigodman ~ Does daily update posts.
https://t.me/patricklancasternewstoday ~ Patrick Lancaster's telegram channel.
https://t.me/gonzowarr ~ A big Russian commentator.
https://t.me/rybar ~ One of, if not the, biggest Russian telegram channels focussing on the war out there. Actually quite balanced, maybe even pessimistic about Russia. Produces interesting and useful maps.
https://t.me/epoddubny ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/boris_rozhin ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/mod_russia_en ~ Russian Ministry of Defense. Does daily, if rather bland updates on the number of Ukrainians killed, etc. The figures appear to be approximately accurate; if you want, reduce all numbers by 25% as a 'propaganda tax', if you don't believe them. Does not cover everything, for obvious reasons, and virtually never details Russian losses.
https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses ~ Pro-Russian, documents abuses that Ukraine commits.
Pro-Ukraine Telegram Channels:
Almost every Western media outlet.
https://discord.gg/projectowl ~ Pro-Ukrainian OSINT Discord.
https://t.me/ice_inii ~ Alleged Ukrainian account with a rather cynical take on the entire thing.
You're viewing a single thread.
Includes an analysis that say 99% of Israel's arms come from
and 
(1% from 
). Calls for sanctions and an arms embargo.EDIT: It should be noted that Ben Norton is wrong in this video about the resolution being binding, though. UNSC resolutions can be binding, but this one was not. Which should be no shock to anyone: the U.S. would have vetoed it if it had been a binding resolution.
UNSC resolutions are prima facie binding unless stated otherwise. It's a opt-out circumstance. Article 25 of the UN Charter simply states: "The Members of the United Nations agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council in accordance with the present Charter." See this post for the legal explanation: https://verfassungsblog.de/why-todays-un-security-council-resolution-demanding-an-immediate-ceasefire-is-legally-binding/
The US claim that the resolution is "non-binding" is simply the expression of a cynical disdain for the real international legal order under the UN Charter prevailing for once over the interests of its "rules-based order."
The US position is simply trying to eat its cake and have it too: they want to escape the international notoriety of imposing yet another veto, thereby forcing them to abstain, and yet "narratively veto" the resolution by claiming it's actually "non-binding" and thus as worthless in promulgation as it would have been if it was actually vetoed by the US.
It depends on which section of the U.N. charter the resolution was adopted under. Anyway, this one was not.
This press release from the U.N. itself implies that:
The United States’s representative said that while her delegation did not agree with everything in the resolution — and therefore was unable to vote in favour — it supports “some of the critical objectives in this non-binding resolution” and that the Council must make clear that the release of all hostages accompany any ceasefire.
...
The representative of Yemen, speaking on behalf of the Arab Group, stated: “We should consider this resolution as a first step, leading to a binding resolution that stipulates the immediate ceasefire in the Gaza Strip to compel Israel to immediately and without any preconditions cease the war.”
Is the U.N. publishing propaganda that lies about its own rules?
Anyway, this one was not.
Oh you get to decide that, huh? Ma faute, didn't realize I was talking to the UN General Secretary here.
Reread your own citation. The press release is quoting the US ambassador who claims it is "non-binding." The UN press office is allowed to publish partisan and deceitful material so long as it is attributed and not in the UN's own voice.
The Arab group statement in no way insinuates the current resolution is "non-binding." It is comparing the resolution to an ideal resolution not based on prisoner exchanges or time-limited, as the current resolution only demands a ceasefire until after Ramadan.
China has additionally stated that the UNSC resolution is binding. https://www.palestinechronicle.com/un-resolution-in-gaza-is-binding-china-challenges-us-at-security-council/
the resolution was binding
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2024/03/at-the-un-it-is-a-rogue-us-against-the-rest-of-the-world.html
This press release from the U.N. itself strongly implies it was non-binding:
The United States’s representative said that while her delegation did not agree with everything in the resolution — and therefore was unable to vote in favour — it supports “some of the critical objectives in this non-binding resolution” and that the Council must make clear that the release of all hostages accompany any ceasefire.
...
The representative of Yemen, speaking on behalf of the Arab Group, stated: “We should consider this resolution as a first step, leading to a binding resolution that stipulates the immediate ceasefire in the Gaza Strip to compel Israel to immediately and without any preconditions cease the war.”
Is the U.N. publishing propaganda that lies about its own rules?