I’m undeterred in my pursuit of justice against Israeli soldiers despite threats: Lawyer

By Alireza Akbari | Press TV | January 6, 2025
Maira Pinheiro, a Brazilian lawyer and human rights advocate, says she is undeterred in her pursuit of justice against Israeli soldiers vacationing in Brazil, despite receiving vile threats.
Hailing from São Paulo, Pinheiro represents the Hind Rajab Foundation, an NGO named after a six-year-old Palestinian girl who was tragically killed in Gaza City last January.
Pinheiro was engaged to represent the Brussels-headquartered foundation as a legal counsel in pursuing charges against Yuval Vagdani, accused of heinous war crimes against Palestinians in Gaza.
Vagdani has been accused of serious war crimes in the ongoing genocidal war on Gaza.
Speaking to the Press TV website, the Brazil-based lawyer said the suspect participated in the “controlled demolition of multiple residential buildings, posed for smiling pictures, recorded videos of himself rigging houses with explosives and documented the explosion and consequently the unlawful mass destruction of civilian property.”
Pinheiro said the foundation’s investigation team had located several Palestinian families whose homes were destroyed. One family formally appointed her as their legal representative by signing a power of attorney.
The lawyer noted that she worked on documenting the digital evidence obtained through open-source intelligence investigation while preserving the chain of custody according to Brazilian law and rigorously geolocating all the mentioned places.
However, following a Brazilian court’s directive for law enforcement to investigate Vagdani, Israeli army radio confirmed that Israeli regime authorities facilitated his escape, brazenly obstructing justice and shielding him from accountability.
The Hind Rajab Foundation also corroborated this “smuggling” operation, highlighting Israel’s blatant disregard for international law and its attempt to undermine justice on South American soil.
“There are also indications that evidence is being destroyed. This is not only a scandal but an affront to Brazil’s sovereignty and rule of law. Israel has employed similar tactics before,” the foundation said in a statement, calling on Brazilian authorities to fulfill their responsibilities, protect their judicial processes, and ensure justice prevails.
“As of now, I’ve been made aware through public domain information that the suspect managed to evade Brazil and the Brazilian authorities with the aid of Israeli diplomacy,” Pinheiro stated.
Meanwhile, the Brazilian lawyer has been threatened and intimidated after taking up the case, with many threats made on Instagram purportedly by pro-Zionist lobbies.
Speaking to the Press TV website, Pinheiro said she remains unfazed by such threats.
“What motivated me to act is the fact that there’s an ongoing genocide being perpetrated against the Palestinian people. Of course, I’m afraid of what Israel and its defenders can do, but no risk I undergo comes even close to what the people of Gaza are experiencing, and my main commitment is to them.”
The Brazilian lawyer and activist described the threats to her and her daughter as “horrible.”
“The worst part is people exploiting my daughter’s image, an innocent child that has nothing to do with the work I do,” she told the Press TV website.
“There’s also a very clear misogynistic aspect to those threats and attacks, as a profound lack of respect to me as a woman exercising her profession.”
In response to these threats, Pinheiro documented hundreds of attacks and forwarded them, along with URLs, to the Brazilian authorities for necessary action.
“In Brazil, it is a crime under Article 344 of the Penal Code to threaten someone with the intent to interfere in a judicial process,” Pinheiro stated.
“It is very clear that these people intend to intimidate me to make me step away from my work. I do not intend to give them what they want and will keep on doing the same things and taking the same stances,” she hastened to add.
The Brussels-based foundation also strongly condemned the threats in a statement on Sunday.
“The #HindRajabFoundation strongly condemns the vile and cowardly attacks targeting our lawyer in Brazil, Ms. Maira Pinheiro,” wrote the foundation on X.
It added that Pinheiro’s involvement in the case against the Israeli soldier resulted in “serious threats, including threats to her life, doxxing, sexist slurs, and even threats directed toward her daughter.”
The foundation further noted that Pinheiro was simply carrying out her professional duty as part of the legal process and called for solidarity with her, particularly from the São Paulo Bar Association and the broader legal community.
“We urge everyone to stand united in support of those who courageously pursue justice despite attempts to derail accountability. Justice will prevail,” it stated.
Pinheiro, speaking to the Press TV website, said she has been following up on other cases that have not yet been formally presented to the Brazilian justice system.
According to reports, four Israeli soldiers are currently being investigated and interrogated in South Africa, Sri Lanka, Brazil, and France on charges of committing war crimes.
The Israeli daily, the Times of Israel, reported on Monday that 12 complaints have been filed against Israeli soldiers abroad over war crimes in Gaza, adding that nine of the cases have yielded arrests.
In October 2024, the Hind Rajab Foundation filed a formal complaint with the International Criminal Court (ICC) against 1,000 Israeli soldiers for perpetrating war crimes against Palestinians in Gaza.
The complaint targeted soldiers across all ranks, from high-ranking generals and air marshals to low-ranking personnel for direct involvement in genocidal war crimes in the besieged Palestinian strip.
The case was bolstered by over 8,000 pieces of evidence, including videos, audio recordings, forensic reports, and social media documentation, meticulously detailing the soldiers’ war crimes.
Meanwhile, the Brazilian lawyer also referenced her 2024 visit to occupied Palestine and her participation in the International Law Summer School by the organization Al Haq, emphasizing her commitment to the struggle for justice and the liberation of Palestine.
“I had the privilege of visiting Al Aqsa Mosque and experiencing its sacred beauty and profound meaning, and while I was there, all I could think of were the dear friends from Gaza I had the privilege to meet during this struggle, and how unfair it was that I could be there while they couldn’t. I made a commitment there to the struggle for justice and liberation of Palestine.”
She also expressed hope that “getting to know a bit of her story” would inspire people to “commit to the fight for justice and for the end of this genocide.”
The Brazilian lawyer also expressed her love and admiration for Hind, saying she means the world to her, as she saw her daughter in the 6-year-old Palestinian girl’s plea for help.
Pinheiro said her heart shattered into pieces when she learned from now-martyred journalist Ismail Al Ghoul that Hind had been murdered along with her family and the two healthcare workers who tried to rescue her.
“Hind’s voice will forever echo in my memory as a tragic representation of the suffering of the children of Gaza,” she said, recalling the tragic event when the Palestinian girl was murdered.
Brazilian journalist fined, ordered to delete posts over criticizing Israeli war in Gaza
Press TV – November 2, 2024
A Brazilian court has ordered renowned journalist Breno Altman, who has frequently denounced Israel’s genocidal war against Palestinians in the besieged Gaza Strip, to pay a fine and delete a number of his posts on social media platforms.
Judge Paulo Bernardi Baccarat of the Court of Justice of São Paulo said on Thursday that the founder of the independent news portal Opera Mundi should pay a fine of 20,000 Brazilian reals ($3,407) in compensation for collective moral damages, and remove five posts deemed anti-Semitic.
This is yet another lawsuit against Altman, who is facing several cases in São Paulo courts due to his critical stance regarding the Tel Aviv regime’s devastating and bloody onslaught against Gaza.
In this case, the judge considered a request for censorship and compensation filed by the Brazilian Israelite Confederation (CONIB), which is the central organization of the Brazilian Jewish community.
CONIB asked for 80 thousand reals in compensation, the demonetization of Altman’s profile on social media and the payment of a minimum wage to each Israeli in Brazil.
The pro-Israeli lobby group said Altman should be banned from publishing posts about the Gaza conflict, alleging that his conduct exceeded the limits of freedom of expression, and claimed the journalist could incite hatred towards Jews and Israel with his posts.
Baccarat, however, concluded that there was no reason to pay compensation or remove most of the posts, considering that they were not anti-Semitic but rather political comments.
In other posts, however, he purportedly found racist content, such as the use of the term “rats” in reference to the Israeli military offensives against Palestinian Hamas resistance fighters.
The judge considered the reference to be racist, given that the term “rat” has a historical anti-Semitic association. The request for individual compensation for each Israeli in Brazil, however, was dismissed by the judge.
The journalist’s defense, represented by attorneys Pedro Serrano and Anderson Medeiros, said they will appeal the decision.
The objective, according to them, is to “demonstrate the absolute legality of all posts, supported by constitutional rights that ensure freedom of expression and freedom of thought.”
Back in August, Altman was sentenced to three months in prison for insulting Brazilian economist and former Director of International Affairs of the Central Bank of Brazil, Alexandre Schwartsman, and President of the pro-Israel organization StandWithUs Brazil, André Lajst.
The case also involved social media posts about Israel’s atrocious military campaign in Gaza. The sentence was commuted to a fine.
The Russia-China grains corridor will completely displace the US, Canada, Australia, and France
Inside China Business | August 31, 2024
Russia and China are developing a transnational grains corridor, connecting Russia’s enormous agricultural production to export markets in China, South Asia, and the Middle East. When complete, Russian production and shipments on this network will exceed 8 million tons per year. China is the world’s largest importer of wheat and grains, and in 2023 imported over 6 million tons of wheat from the United States, Canada, Australia, and France.
Large distribution hubs are being completed in China’s Northern and Central provinces, which will further transport Russian food exports within China, and on to other Asian countries.
The proposed BRICS grains exchange enjoys wide support across the bloc, and will accelerate the decoupling of Global South markets from the Western banking and trading systems, to the detriment of farmers in North America and Europe.
Resources and links:
The Sino-Russian Land Grain Corridor and China’s Quest for Food Security https://asiasociety.org/policy-instit…
BRICS countries back grain exchange idea, Russia says https://gulfbusiness.com/brics-countr…
Russia, China agree to build new grain hub on border https://www.world-grain.com/articles/…
Visual Capitalist, Visualizing the world’s largest consumer markets in 2030 https://www.visualcapitalist.com/the-…
U.S. Dominance in Corn Exports on the Wane Due to Brazilian Competition https://farmdocdaily.illinois.edu/202…
The New Land Grain Corridor, website and infographics https://www.nlgc.ru/en/
Closing scene, Chinese rural area outside Guilin, Guangxi province
Elon Musk and Brazil: The conflict is more complex than it seems
By Raphael Machado | Strategic Culture Foundation | September 19, 2024
The suspension of services of X (formerly Twitter) in Brazil, as well as the threat of an $8,000 fine for anyone using a VPN to continue using the social network, has made global headlines. Although there had been previous reports of friction between X and the Brazilian political-legal system, the news of the suspension surprised many people, in Brazil and abroad.
For foreigners, especially those who consider themselves “anti-imperialist”, it is very difficult to construct a consistent interpretation of this conflict between Musk and Brazil because of the expectations critics of unipolarity have developed regarding Brazil under Lula’s return.
These are the same people who were shocked by Brazil’s hostility toward Nicolás Maduro and a series of other inconsistent positions taken by the Brazilian government on the international stage.
But while investigating how committed the current Brazilian government is to the idea of a multipolar order is relevant, the fact is that Lula has only marginal involvement in the suspension of X in Brazil.
First of all, how is this issue being framed by both sides of the dispute? Generally, the issue of “X” in Brazil is being treated as a conflict between “respect for the law” versus “freedom of expression.” It is difficult to take this framing seriously for a number of reasons.
X, under Elon Musk, has consistently censored or reduced the reach of pro-Palestinian accounts since Musk’s visit to Israel. If X is not like Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, or the newer BlueSky, it clearly cannot be seen as a bastion of free speech.
On the other side, however, the situation is also a bit more complex than simply the duty of X to comply with Brazilian laws. Elon Musk has indeed raised some concerning points regarding Judge Alexandre de Moraes, who made decisions contrary to Brazilian internet norms and tried to force X to comply with them.
Even setting aside these decisions about social media account censorship, the handling of the X case itself has drawn criticism in Brazil.
The root of this conflict is the fact that Moraes has been leading a criminal inquiry for over five years, now known as the “fake news inquiry,” where he goes beyond the usual role of a passive and impartial judge and actively investigates and judges cases of “disinformation” that allegedly threaten “democracy” and Brazil’s electoral process. The rhetoric is very reminiscent of Orwellian narratives produced in Washington and Brussels.
As the political-legal establishment and its international partners are quite satisfied with the Brazilian government’s current stance on most issues, the main targets of these investigations are figures linked to the opposition.
Thus, in the context of this inquiry, Judge Moraes has ordered the suspension of social media accounts of those under investigation. Such decisions are legally questionable under Brazilian law. First, because the inquiry has far exceeded a reasonable time frame for conclusion and doesn’t appear to have a clear objective. Second, because suspending social media accounts of individuals without a conviction, in an inquiry that seems “endless,” is inappropriate. Third, because the Brazilian Internet Civil Framework, the country’s legislation on internet-related obligations for companies, stipulates that a social media account can only be blocked for specific violations of norms – and Judge Moraes, in his orders to X, never specified the reasons for the suspensions.
These are some of the main arguments, including those raised by Elon Musk, to challenge these judicial decisions.
The situation worsened when Moraes allegedly threatened X’s office employees in Brazil with imprisonment if they failed to comply with his decisions. Amidst this confusion, the Judiciary claims that X’s representative in Brazil has been evading court summonses. On the other hand, there are indications that Moraes’ staff sent the summons to the wrong email address when attempting to notify X.
Nonetheless, these threats explain why X decided to shut down its office in Brazil. Immediately afterward, Moraes ordered X to appoint a new legal representative in Brazil, which is mandatory for companies operating in the country.
Since X did not establish a new representation in Brazil, Moraes ordered the company’s suspension.
The situation would seem more reasonable if Moraes hadn’t also imposed a daily fine of $8,000 on any Brazilians using VPNs to continue accessing the social network. Needless to say, the order was immediately disobeyed by most Brazilian X users, and the Brazilian Bar Association filed an appeal to annul the fine.
The problem with the fine is that it casts doubt on the claim that this is merely a natural consequence of X not having legal representation in the country in accordance with the law. Why, then, impose fines on ordinary users who are not part of the inquiry and were not even notified of the decision (which, again, is unconstitutional under Brazilian law)?
Next, Moraes ordered the blocking of Starlink’s accounts, a company with different shareholders, to collect the fine imposed on X – once again, a decision that violates Brazil’s entire legal framework.
However, the issue transcends the legal debate and refers back to the fact that X is a space successfully used by sectors of Brazilian politics that oppose the “Juristocracy,” as well as the influence of foreign NGOs in Brazil and the current government.
Platforms like Meta, for example, are absolutely controlled by the U.S. Deep State and impose draconian restrictions on anyone who deviates from globalist ideological orthodoxy. Moreover, this may seem incomprehensible and unbelievable to our partners in other BRICS countries, but Brazil does not have an anti-Atlanticist, counter-hegemonic mass media. The Brazilian mass media belongs to an oligopoly that is deeply tied to U.S. media conglomerates.
In this sense, spaces like X represent an “oasis” used by both the right-wing opposition and the anti-imperialist left.
To understand what Moraes and other judges think of this, one only needs to recall a statement he made a few weeks ago: “At the turn of the century, there were no social networks; and we were happier,” said to loud applause from representatives of Brazil’s major TV networks and newspapers.
Naturally – we insist – Elon Musk is not exactly a victim here. He is far from it. For example, it is also true that his Tesla lost contracts to Chinese rivals in Brazil in recent years, which greatly irritated him. It is also true that he believes he can gain greater business penetration in the Brazilian market if Bolsonaro returns to power – and he openly uses his large presence on X to occasionally boost posts from opponents of the Lula government.
Therefore, the case transcends the superficial duality presented as “sovereignty vs. freedom of expression,” and is more accurately an expression of a dispute between different sectors of the Brazilian elite, both with international ties (let us remember that Moraes was part of the international scheme of Operation Car Wash, whose objective was to destroy Brazilian companies, imprison Lula, and overthrow Dilma Rousseff under the guidance of the U.S. Department of Justice), and both clearly hostile to the project of a new multipolar order.
G20 Embraces Digital ID Dream While Critics Warn of Surveillance Nightmare
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | September 19, 2024
The G20 organization, currently chaired by Brazil and recently holding a ministerial meeting there, is wasting no time falling in line with all the key policies advanced by many governments, and globalist elites.
After promising to do its bit in the “war on disinformation” (to the delight of the host, Brazil, whose present government is accused of censorship), G20 member countries “pledged allegiance” to the digital ID and the overall scheme that incorporates it – namely, the digital public infrastructure (DPI).
DPI already counts the UN, the EU, the World Economic Forum (WEF), and the Gates Foundation as policy backers and vocal promoters. Now G20 ministers with digital economy portfolios have issued a joint declaration to express their “commitment” to both DPI and “combating disinformation”, and there is also inevitably the talk of “AI.”
On the digital ID/DPI front, the ministers speak of “inclusive” DPI, and the same attribute is attached to AI. The declaration “acknowledges” the importance of things like innovation and competition in a digital economy, among other things, at the same time “reaffirming” the importance of digital transformation based on DPI.
Boilerplate remarks are made about transparency and protection of privacy and personal data – but these are the major concerns cited by opponents of this type of scheme, along with the overall fear that they facilitate new, more dangerous forms of mass surveillance through centralization of personal information and tracking of people’s activities.
Referring to digital ID as “a basic DPI,” the declaration further speaks of the Sustainable Development Goals (a UN agenda) and one of its targets to be achieved by 2030 by using digital ID (as a tool of “inclusion”) to provide “legal identity for all.”
Interestingly enough, free speech repression is not the only controversial policy where Brazil seems keen to lead the way; so is DPI, and the digital ID.
During the G20 meeting, Brazil promoted its DPI-related activities, including digital IDs based on biometrics. This policy is explained with buzzwords such as economic growth, sustainable development, and also, “easier access to financial services and government resources, particularly for underbanked populations.”
Brazil’s High Court Freezes Starlink Assets Over Musk’s X Censorship Refusal
By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | August 29, 2024
Brazil’s Supreme Court has escalated the country’s retaliation against Elon Musk by freezing the financial assets of Starlink Holding, a subsidiary of Musk’s. This action is in response to another Musk company, X, which has refused to censor posts and designate a legal representative in Brazil.
This decision was part of a broader action taken by the controversial Justice Alexandre Moraes of the Supreme Court, who targeted an economic entity led by Musk. According to Brazilian media, on August 18, Moraes mandated the freezing of all financial assets of Starlink within Brazil to secure the payment of penalties levied against X by Brazilian courts.
Justice Moraes’ decision stems from the ongoing dispute involving X’s operations in Brazil. The company, under Musk’s direction, had recently shut down its Brazilian office on August 17, citing disagreements with the Supreme Court’s fines and content censorship mandates. This closure followed the court’s demand, made the day before, for X to appoint a legal representative to address these issues formally.
The lack of a legal representative prompted Justice Moraes to issue an ultimatum to the social network, giving them 24 hours to comply under threat of service suspension in Brazil. The urgency and consequences of these legal actions were communicated via a post on the Supreme Court’s X profile, directly responding to X’s announcement about the office closure to protect employees and the withdrawal of their representative.
Aside from X, Musk’s Starlink operates within Brazil, providing satellite internet services, particularly in the Northern region. The leadership of Starlink in Brazil has been informed and summoned to respond to the financial obligations imposed on X by the Brazilian judiciary.
Starlink, the satellite internet service by SpaceX, is particularly significant in Brazil for enhancing connectivity in remote and underserved regions, such as the vast Amazon rainforest where traditional broadband is impractical. This technology provides reliable internet access, supporting educational resources, digital commerce, and connectivity during natural disasters, which are frequent in regions prone to floods and landslides.
Additionally, improved internet access aids environmental monitoring efforts in the Amazon, facilitating better resource deployment against illegal activities such as deforestation and wildlife trafficking.
A multilateralist, but not a multipolarist: Lula shows his true face
By creating tensions with Venezuela and Nicaragua, Lula creates serious geopolitical problems in South America

By Lucas Leiroz | Strategic Culture Foundation | August 21, 2024
Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has been the target of several recent controversies across the South American geopolitical scene. Contrary to the expectations of some naive leftists, Lula’s government is not acting according to a non-aligned guideline, but cooperating with Western powers in several aspects, mainly with regard to opposition to counter-hegemonic governments in Latin America.
To this day, Lula has not recognized the victory of Nicolás Maduro – the legitimate and democratically elected president of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. This irresponsible attitude was easily expected from a political leader on the Brazilian right wing – like the previous president, Jair Messias Bolsonaro –, but it is something really surprising for the “left”, which historically has good relations with illiberal countries.
The Brazilian president’s international affairs advisor, former foreign minister Celso Amorim, explained that there is “no evidence” that the Venezuelan elections took place in a non-fraudulent manner. One of the “solutions” he proposed was even redoing the elections, which sounds absolutely ridiculous. Another possibility was for Maduro to form a joint government with the defeated opposition, which does not make any sense from a rational point of view.
In the same sense, Brazil and Nicaragua mutually cut diplomatic relations, expelling each other’s ambassadors. As a result, relations between Brazil and the two main counter-hegemonic countries in the Americas are deeply shaken. It is not known what Lula will do after the end of Maduro’s current term, as failure to recognize the recent victory could lead to a break in relations.
In practice, Brazil is functioning as an auxiliary to U.S. interests in South America, using the rhetoric of “democratic zeal” as an interventionist excuse to guarantee foreign interests in the region. Many supporters of President Lula are disappointed with these acts, but this was truly expected by the most qualified analysts.
Lula was never a “pro-multipolar” leader. The entire foreign policy of Lula and the Workers’ Party is based on a multilateralist worldview centered on the UN. Since the 2000s, Lula has been a leader encouraging dialogue between emerging nations, but at the same time he advocates a global consensus through the UN and other international organizations as regulators of relations between States – completely ignoring that these organizations are strongly biased and linked to a liberal ideology propagated from the western U.S.-EU axis.
In the 2000s, Lula’s stance was contesting and somehow “outsider”, as he dialogued with revisionist nations of the liberal order. However, Lula was never paradigmatic in his foreign policy and never proposed any radical project for real change in the structures of the global order. American hegemony was never challenged by Lula, but “mitigated”. His idea basically consisted of making the world economically more “equitable” and relations between States more “humane”. Western values, such as “democracy (in the Western understanding)” and liberalism, were never a problem for Lula.
In this sense, what seemed like something “dissident” in the 2000s today sounds like something conservative and insufficient. Today, emerging nations are much more organized and are capable of contesting American hegemony in an actually profound way. Mere multilateralism is insufficient, as there is a need to take a step towards real Multipolarity – which consists of reconfiguring the global power structure and not simply increasing multilateral dialogue and economic cooperation.
So, the same Lula who was an “outsider” in the 2000s is now showing himself to be a advocate for the “consensus”. Lula condemned the Russian operation in Ukraine – despite correctly refusing to participate in the sanctions –, which can be considered his first big mistake since the election. Lula later called Hamas’ Operation Al Aqsa Storm a “terrorist attack.” Despite taking a firm stance when criticizing Israel for the massacre in Gaza, Lula avoided going deeper into this issue, remaining inert in the face of the defense cooperation that exists between Brazil and the Zionist regime. Now, by destabilizing relations with counter-hegemonic countries in South America, Lula takes the definitive step so that there is no longer any doubt: his government is not aligned with the multipolar transition.
Lula continues to be a typical multilateralist leftist of the 2000s. Economic cooperation and multilateralism, for him, must be respected as long as the Western model of liberal democracy continues to be hegemonic. Unfortunately, with this type of stance, Brazil loses the opportunity to become one of the main players in the multipolar geopolitical transition process.
Major Latin American Powers, Hungary Block US-EU Push to Isolate Venezuela’s Maduro
By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 04.08.2024
Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro was reelected to a third term in office in a showdown with united opposition candidate Edmundo Gonzalez last Sunday, taking 52% of the vote to Gonzalez’ 43%. The US and its allies decried the results, recognized the opposition leader and demanded negotiations for a “peaceful transition of power.”
Efforts by Washington and Brussels to diplomatically isolate President Nicolas Maduro have failed spectacularly after important members of the Organization of American States (OAS) and the European Union rejected efforts to condemn the Venezuelan election results.
In the OAS, major Latin American countries Brazil, Mexico and Colombia abstained from a resolution tabled Wednesday demanding that Caracas release detailed vote tallies and take other steps, including measures to ensure the security of the opposition. The three nations were joined in abstaining from the resolution or being absent from the vote by Barbados, Belize, Bolivia, Grenada, Honduras, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, Antigua and Barbuda, the Bahamas, Dominica, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, and Trinidad and Tobago. With 11 OAS members abstaining and five members absent, the resolution failed to attain the required majority to pass.
Permanent Council chairman Ronald Sanders said a consensus could not be reached over a “controversial phrase,” without elaborating.
Across the Atlantic, Hungary blocked a similar proposed joint statement on behalf of the EU’s 27 member countries on purported “numerous flaws and irregularities” in Venezuela’s elections, forcing EU foreign policy czar Josep Borrell to independently issue a statement in the EU’s name.
Hungary’s intransigence is expected to complicate efforts by Brussels to use unanimity among the bloc to justify the leveling of potential new sanctions against Venezuela. Budapest did not explain its motivation for vetoing the EU resolution.
US Secretary of State congratulated Gonzalez for “winning” last Sunday’s vote, with Russia, China, Belarus, Serbia, Iran, Turkiye, Syria, Azerbaijan, North Korea, Vietnam, Madagascar, Namibia, Bolivia, Cuba, Nicaragua and others recognizing the results and congratulating President Maduro for his victory.
China and Brazil Offer Their Own Peace Plan as Western ‘Ukraine Summit’ Fumbles
By Svetlana Ekimenko – Sputnik – 25.05.2024
Moscow was not invited to participate in the “peace conference” that Switzerland will host on June 15-16. Russian officials have noted that it was conceived as another effort to “push through the unworkable ‘peace formula’ that ignores Russian interests.” Furthermore, any negotiating process on Ukraine without Russia’s involvement is “meaningless.”
The upcoming gathering dubbed a Ukraine “peace summit” in Switzerland is being undercut on all sides.
Brazil and China announced a rival initiative on Friday, further demoting Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s conference aimed at pushing through his unworkable “peace formula.”
The two countries support an international peace conference “held at a proper time that is recognized by both Russia and Ukraine, with equal participation of all parties as well as fair discussion of all peace plans,” they said in a statement.
The joint document was signed by Celso Amorim, special adviser to Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, and Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, and stated:
- Dialogue and negotiation are the only viable solution to the Ukraine crisis.
- Conditions should be created for resumption of direct dialogue, with de-escalation until a comprehensive ceasefire is in effect.
- An international peace conference should be held with participation of both Russia and Ukraine.
- Attacks on civilians and civilian facilities must be avoided.
- Targeting nuclear power plants and other peaceful nuclear facilities must be opposed.
- Use of weapons of mass destruction, particularly nuclear weapons and chemical and biological weapons, must be opposed.
- All possible efforts must be made to prevent nuclear proliferation and avoid nuclear crisis.
- The world should not be divided “into isolated political or economic groups,” the two countries stated.
The initiative from Brazil and China came after their presidents refused to attend the Ukraine “peace summit” set for June 15 to 16. The event in Lucerne is plagued by major no-shows. Joe Biden’s attention has been diverted to more pressing issues such as rubbing elbows with Hollywood celebs at his fundraiser.
Besides the leaders of Brazil and China, South Africa has also refused to attend the event. Moscow has dismissed the conference, to which it was not invited, as “meaningless.” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that the conference is clearly not result-oriented, as it is impossible to have effective talks on Ukraine without Russia’s participation.
As far as the upcoming talks in Switzerland are concerned, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin suggested that they constitute an effort by the Kiev regime’s patrons to confer legitimacy on Zelensky now that his legal term as president has expired.
Putin emphasized at Friday’s press conference that Russia remains ready to resume peace negotiations with Ukraine, including based on the draft agreements inked during talks in Belarus and Turkiye in the spring of 2022, but accounting for the current realities on the ground.
Regarding Zelensky’s 10-point peace plan, it is nothing but an ultimatum to Russia, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov noted on Wednesday as he chaired a meeting of BRICS sherpas and sous-sherpas in Moscow. He added that the US was imposing Zelensky’s formula on everyone, inviting countries of the Global South to its platforms, such as the upcoming Lucerne meeting.
Russia’s top diplomat also revealed that the Ukrainian president “hysterically” demanded that other nations back his proposed “peace formula” ahead of the gathering.
Could Ukraine resort to terrorism against Russian and pro-Russian targets around the world?

By Raphael Machado | Strategic Culture Foundation | May 5, 2024
On April 26th, it was reported that the Russian embassy in Brazil had received a phone call informing of a bomb presence on the premises. The Military Police of the Federal District was activated and headed to the location to conduct searches.
After several hours of searching, no explosive device was found within or around the embassy. Nevertheless, even if the “alert” was false, the case warrants a deeper investigation, along with reflections on the risks surrounding Russians and “friends of Russia” abroad, given the current geopolitical climate.
In this specific case, despite no explosive device being found, it falls under Brazilian legislation on terrorism, as our laws also encompass the threat of an attack (and mere insinuation constitutes a threat). Hence, “terrorism” is established, regardless of the presence of an actual device at the embassy.
However, it would be imprudent to consider the matter “closed” for several reasons.
Firstly, attention is drawn to the degeneration of the Ukrainian state into a terrorist institutional apparatus, with its security services having been involved in numerous terrorist attacks inside and outside Ukraine.
Ukraine’s degeneration into normalizing terrorism as a state practice accompanies its inability to confront Russia through regular warfare methods. It is predicted that the degradation of the Ukrainian armed forces will be accompanied by a proportional increase in terrorism usage by its security apparatus. Everyone remembers the terrorist attacks that killed Daria Dugina, Vladlen Tatarsky, and the Crocus City Hall attack. Threats to various Russian public figures are constant.
But it is necessary to question whether Ukrainian terrorism (but not only Ukrainian) could extend beyond the Russian-Ukrainian borders and overflow into other nations. Consider, for example, the waves of Russophobia immediately stirred up after the start of the Russian special military operation.
This wave of Russophobia saw not only the cancellation of artistic and academic presentations linked to the Russian World but also physical attacks on some individuals in various countries. Needless to enumerate cases, it suffices to point out that even in Brazil, there were acts of vandalism against Russian Orthodox churches.
To this adds the presence of dozens of Brazilian mercenaries in Ukraine, fighting for Atlanticism. Some of these mercenaries are neo-Nazis, others are neoconservatives, many others are merely useful idiots deceived by unscrupulous influencers on social media. Recently, one of these mercenaries already returned to Brazil, named João Bercle (who, however, according to field information, was never on the front line), stated that Ukraine would “go after” Russians and “defenders of Russia” worldwide, insinuating the possibility of violence fomented, financed, and/or orchestrated from Kiev.
Furthermore, journalist Lucas Leiroz demonstrated in a thread on X that Brazilian President Lula was listed as a “target” on the infamous Myrotvorets website, an authentic “death list” indicating supposed “enemies of Ukraine” to be targeted through terrorist attacks or kidnappings. Many other foreign citizens have also been included on this list.
Well, personalizing the reflection, the author writing this article has indeed received death threats through anonymous accounts on the internet, including threats containing personal information and photos of family members.
Returning, therefore, to the bomb threat at the Russian embassy in Brazil, it is crucial to seriously consider the possibilities, paying attention to future risks.
In any case of such a threat, one must always consider the possibility of it being a troll or a madman or, in general, a person with no specific ideological or collective connections. But the fact that we are in such a geopolitically turbulent period forces us to also insist on other possibilities.
If the origin of the threat is not a troll, then the first suspicion could only fall on Ukrainian security services, such as the SBU and the SZRU, whose involvement in the aforementioned terrorist attacks is at least suspected.
It is notorious that the SBU operates in Brazil, infiltrating the Ukrainian-Brazilian community, which is relatively large, albeit discreet. Years ago, this author learned from a primary source that relatives of Brazilians who fought for the Donbass in Ukraine between 2014-2016 received death threats, with the primary suspicion at the time falling on the SBU.
In this sense, it is evident that the SBU would be the main suspect. And that directly or indirectly.
Indirectly, it is necessary to consider, first of all, Brazilian neo-Nazi groups, most of which have links with analogous organizations in Ukraine and even with the security sectors of that country, such as members of the Misanthropic Division Brazil, especially since some of these Brazilian neo-Nazis fought for the Ukrainian side in the past or went there for training, as reported by the Brazilian mainstream media several times.
The instrumentalization of members of these groups for terrorist attacks against Russian or pro-Russian targets in Brazil would not be particularly difficult. They would require little persuasion and encouragement.
Naturally, if we are still thinking about native Brazilians who could be instrumentalized for this type of terrorism, it would be necessary to observe those who have indeed been engaged in spreading widespread Russophobia and who see Russia as the embodiment of evil.
In this regard, the ferment of neoconservatism and ultraliberalism, proliferated over the last few years in Brazil, with its tendencies toward conspiracy theories, coupled with various behavioral disorders and the possibility of conscious or unconscious cooptation by some intelligence service, opens up the possibility of something in this direction.
Of course, in many of the suspected Ukrainian terrorist actions, some degree of contribution from Western intelligence agencies is suspected.
In this sense, and even considering threats to the President of Brazil, it would be essential to strengthen the counterintelligence work of Brazilian security agencies, as well as to monitor possible connections between neo-Nazi groups or extremist factions of neoconservatism with Ukraine or other intelligence services of NATO countries.
