Aboudia Abdoulaye Diarrassouba (Costa de Marfil), daloa 29 2011.
dear friends and friends,
Greetings from the offices of the Tricontinental Social Research Institute.
Reason seems to have been gradually abolished by the language of the bombs. While the weapons systems become more and more “intelligent”, the repertoire of diplomatic instruments used by the states of the Global Northern becomes increasingly rough. American and European diplomats have resumed the old colonial habit of speaking strong and abruptly. Sermonean to lxs Nativxs about what they should or should not do, while they do what they please. If the native peoples do not agree, the ancient colonial rulers simply threaten to cut their hands or bombard their homes.
When the International Criminal Court tried to open a file for investigate The atrocities committed by the United States in Afghanistan, Washington replied revoking the visas of fiscal lxs and threatening to sanction their families. Recently, the US government sanctioned To the UN Special Rapporteur, Francesca Albanese, for his report on corporate complicity in Israeli genocide against the Palestinian people. This behavior, typical of the mafia, reflects the historical attitude of the colonial rulers, marking a return to the time when the West sent their guns to threaten our countries to trade in their terms, rather of doing so in the foot of equality. This behavior,during the colonial period,was called “diplomacy of the guns.” Today we have an updated version: Nuclear missile diplomacy.
The Summit of the North Atlantic Treaty (NATO) of 2025, made in The Hague, offers another example of this diplomacy of nuclear missiles. He dialog Final was the shortest that has occurred at an NATO meeting, with just five points, two of which were about money. The hague Declaration had only 425 words, in contrast to the 5,419 words (44 paragraphs) of the Washington statement issued at the 2024 summit. This time there was no detailed analysis of this or that threat, nor an extensive evaluation of war in Ukraine orobserve these figures without feeling the uselessness of promoting a peace agenda between peoples and diplomacy between states. There is so much to solve and yet it becomes so little, within this limited framework, to address these problems.
[image of Htein Lin (Myanmar), *Loudspeaker* 2021]
The NATO Member States accepted without objection the mandate of US President Donald Trump to increase military expenditure to 5 % of his GDP. Due to their various neoliberal debt restrictions,they will have to cut social spending to finance the production and purchase of weapons.Germany, which has the highest GDP in Europe, remains in serious social problems: for example, 21.1 % of its population Face risk of poverty or social exclusion. The German government, led by Chancellor friedrich Merz, has promised to allocate 650,000 million euros in the next five years to military spending to reach the 5 % goal in 2035, a figure that even the Financial Times qualifies of “amazing.” To achieve this promise, Germany will need to raise about 144,000 million euros per year, mainly through budgetary reallocations.That is, austerity and more loans, that is, debt, (the tax increase is unlikely, even in the regressive form of the value added tax on consumption).
Simply put, what Europe and the united States have adopted is the path of austerity and war. That is his promise to the world for the next few years.meanwhile, at the 17th BRICS Summit in Rio de Janeiro (Brazil), BRICS+countries, which now include Indonesia, opted for a different vision. His declaration He advocated programs “for the benefit of our peoples through the promotion of peace, a more representative and fair international order, a revitalized and renovated multilateral system, sus## The Enduring Choice: Progress Through Peace
From the earliest days of humanity, etched into the very stone of our existence alongside our deepest aspirations, lies a essential question: will we choose the path of destruction or the path of growth? This isn’t merely a philosophical debate; it’s a critical decision shaping our present and future. The specter of conflict, symbolized by the tools of war, offers a false promise of triumph, yet ultimately delivers only loss and hinders the pursuit of a better world.
The core issue is stark: genuine and lasting peace cannot be built upon a foundation of weaponry, nor can true advancement flourish amidst violence. It is indeed a binary choice, demanding active participation from each of us. Indifference and silence are not neutral positions; they actively contribute to a cycle of aggression, fueling further conflict and impeding progress.
Consider the global impact of armed conflict today. According to the United Nations,armed conflicts displaced a record 79.5 million people in 2023 [[3]]. These figures represent not just statistics, but shattered lives, lost opportunities, and diverted resources that could be invested in education, healthcare, and sustainable development. Rather of building schools and hospitals, nations are compelled to allocate vast sums to military spending – resources that could or else uplift communities and foster innovation.
Though, collective action offers a powerful option. When individuals raise their voices, demanding peaceful resolutions and prioritizing development, they contribute to a groundswell of change. just as a single drop of water contributes to a mighty river, each act of advocacy, each expression of hope, strengthens the movement towards a future where children can laugh and play without the shadow of fear. This isn’t a naive dream,but a pragmatic necessity for a sustainable and equitable world. The choice is ours, and the time to choose peace and progress is now.