Global Cocoa Deficit Deeper Than Expected, US Stockpiles Hit 2009 Lows
Following a massive price surge in cocoa prices in New York earlier this year, where prices topped nearly $12,000 per ton before bottoming out in the low $7,000s and resulting in what technical analysts say is a triangle pattern, prices are expected to stay rangebound as compression indicates a major move nears.
Bloomberg cites new data from the International Cocoa Organization that says demand will exceed production by 462,000 metric tons. That’s about 5.2% more than the ICCO’s May forecast of a 439,000-ton deficit. This is a muchlarger shortage than the initial outlook published in February.
In the Friday report, ICCO wrote that global cocoa supplies remain depressed due to “adverse weather conditions, aged trees, pests and diseases that affected production in major cocoa areas during the season under review.”
Global cocoa production this season is 4.33 million tons, 2.9% below ICCO’s previous forecast. Grinding estimates are expected to be 2.1% lower, at 4.75 million tons.
Bloomberg noted, “New York futures are up around 80% this year as poor harvests in West Africa curbed supplies, though prices have pared back from record highs. The region’s cocoa industry is still grappling with lasting issues like crop disease, and new trees take at least three years to reach fruit-bearing maturity. That’s constraining how quickly production can ramp up to ease the shortage.”
New York bean prices are locked in a triangle formation of compressing price action, indicating that a big move might be on the horizon.
New data from ICE exchange-monitored warehouses shows US cocoa stockpiles have slumped to the lowest levels since early 2009.
Meanwhile, candy companies such as Hershey have been pushing higher cocoa costs to customers. The PA-based company has already slashed its sales and earnings outlook for the year as shoppers have decreased purchases of higher-priced chocolates and candies. In other words, demand destruction has emerged.
Let’s not forget that oil trader Pierre Andurand remains bullish on the view that the stocks-to-grinding ratio for the world at the end of the year will be at its lowest ever “and potentially run out of inventories late in the year.”
Since the 2000 presidential election, the left has worked to undermine the legitimacy of the Electoral College, labeling it a relic of slavery. No doubt, if Donald Trump returns to the White House while again losing the popular vote, these attacks will be renewed with fervor. In fact, it has already begun as commentators denounce the undemocratic nature of the system. Just last month, the New York Times published a piece trashing the Constitution and asserting that the Electoral College’s only purpose was to protect slavery. These critiques are based on misconceptions and hostility toward the very structure of our Constitution.
The History
Our method of electing the president came about through compromise. The framers agreed upon a system that ensured the states had a say in choosing the president. The Constitution gives each state a share of electors, and the states decide for themselves how to select those electors.
At the time of the constitutional convention, popular elections would have favored the North because the North’s population of free persons would have outstripped the South’s. This dynamic is why the South pushed for a system that proportioned the electoral vote based on population, including slaves.
But nothing in the Electoral College system inherently favored slavery. You could have had an Electoral College system that did not count slaves as part of the population for the purpose of distributing electors. Thus, it was the counting of slaves in proportioning electors via the infamous two-thirds clause that protected slavery.
In fact, even if slavery had never existed, the states would never have agreed to a method of electing the president that stripped them of having a say in the matter. Protecting state sovereignty and ensuring less populous states had influence were key features of the compromise. Therefore, slavery may have been one of several reasons for the compromise, but it certainly was not the reason.
The Merits
The way state delegations elect the chief executive may have been the product of compromise, but that does not detract from the merits of the system, which include geographic representation and respect for state sovereignty. This is true even if you believe the Electoral College is a part of slavery’s legacy.
In a national election, in a country as large and diverse as ours, representation based on geographic segments of the population is far superior to the mob rule of a purely popular vote. We are not a monolithic society. Life and perspectives vary based on location. This is especially true when you consider the differences between state governments, which attract different types of people.
America is an enormous nation, and a system based solely on the popular vote would allow densely populated cities to dominate. This dynamic is particularly problematic when one considers that urban populations often want to impose their culture and policy preferences on others, whereas rural populations generally want to be left alone. Just think about how Democrats want virtually everything to be regulated nationally by the feds.
But regardless of this left-versus-right paradigm, it is simply better to give the different geographic elements of the nation and the states a voice on national matters to somewhat lessen the ability of the majority to steamroll political minorities.
Furthermore, as much as the left would love to abolish the states, there is no United States without the states themselves. Our federalist system allows for better representation of different segments of our population and, therefore, allows for better governance. The states, as separate sovereigns, must have a say in who becomes president.
The Electoral College also affects the politics of presidential campaigns. Candidates are forced to consider the respective views held in different states, particularly of those voters in the less partisan swing states. This political circumstance has a way of diffusing power and lessening the focus on densely populated cities, allowing for perspectives outside of the urban thought bubble to participate.
Another popular attack on the Electoral College is that it is undemocratic. But American government was never meant to be based on democracy. Rather, democracy was meant to be a component, albeit an important one, of our constitutional republic. The protection of liberty and the rights of individuals are far more important than the ability of the majority to impose their will.
Moreover, the president is not even supposed to be a representative of the people in our constitutional system. That is what the House of Representatives is for. Thus, the argument against the Electoral College is an argument not just against our Constitution’s federalist principles but against the Constitution’s separation of powers as well.
Our Electoral College system might not be perfect, but it is far better than an election by direct popular vote, which disregards our federalist principles.
Alex Xenos is an attorney and a Young Voices contributor. His writing has appeared in the Boston Herald, The American Spectator, DC Journal, and NH Journal, among other publications. Follow him on X @AMXenos.
Diamond Prices Crash To Multi-Decade Lows As Art, Wine, & Rolex Markets Sour
The downturn in the diamond market is nothing short of breathtaking. Prices are in free fall as cash-strapped consumers have been shunning luxury goods, grappling with failed Bidenomics that unleashed an inflation storm and resulted in high interest rates. Compounding the issue, the rising demand for lab-grown diamonds has pressured the prices of natural stones.
According to Bloomberg data, citing the Diamond Standard Index, diamond prices have plunged to the lowest on record, with data going back to early 2002. The index has lost 45% of its value since March 2022.
Since diamonds are a consumer-driven market, the fierce bear market in prices signals that the industry is in trouble, as well as signals that low/mid-tier consumers are in trouble. In less than a week, Dollar General and Dollar Tree, with tens of thousands of stores nationwide, have warned that their core customer bases are under pressure. These discount retailers offer a unique glimpse into consumer sentiment that is not manipulated by government statisticians at the BLS.
De Beers, the world’s largest diamond producer by value, recorded its worst year in two decades earlier this summer. Its parent company, Anglo American, recently announced plans to divest and spin off its 85% stake in the diamond subsidiary.
CEO Duncan Wanblad acknowledged the challenges De Beers has faced. In May, he said, “It is sitting at the bottom of a cycle. That cycle is more macroeconomic than fundamental.”
The diamond and luxury goods industry was a major beneficiary of the helicopter money the US government dished out during the Covid era. However, as soon as pandemic savings dried up and the Biden-Harris team ignited an inflation storm through failed Bidenomics, consumers had to quickly dial back spending on diamonds, Rolexes, handbags, and Gucci loafers.
There has also been downward pressure from Gen Z’s distaste for marriage. Some millennials are too broke to afford natural stones and have gravitated to lab-grown diamonds. In recent years, the rapid growth of artificial stones has pressured natural stone prices.
In addition to a collapse in diamond prices, the Bloomberg Subdial Watch Index, which tracks prices for the 50 most-traded watches by value on the secondary market, has sunk nearly 18% in 24 months.
Looking at wine prices on the London International Vintners Exchange, the Live-ex Fine Wine 50 index has plunged below Covid lows, with a 5-year return of around 8.4%.
Let’s not forget that classic automobiles, such as Packard Roadsters and Ford Thunderbirds, or mainly classics before the 1960s, are not selling well at auctions. Baby boomers overpaid for these vehicles, while GenXers and millennials instead seek cars from the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s, such as 911 Turbos. So much for the old folks trying to dump their 1930s Packards at auction bought a decade or two ago. The market is no longer there.
Overall, this note offers a view into consumer health. Low—and mid-tier households are certainly feeling recession-like pressures. Next up, a pullback in spending from higher income households?
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul said on Sept. 4 that Chinese consul general Huang Ping is no longer holding his position after her request to the U.S. State Department that he be ousted. The State Department said the diplomat left because he reached the end of a regularly scheduled rotation.
On Sept. 3, a former top-level aide to Hochul was charged with spying for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
Hochul said she reached out to the White House and U.S. Secretary of State after the arrest and indictment of Linda Sun. She asked that the Chinese consul general be removed from his position immediately.
U.S. State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller said Hochul spoke to Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell on Sept. 4. Miller said the consul general was not expelled but rather reached the end of a regularly scheduled rotation. When it comes to the status of employees at these missions, the department reaches out to the foreign country, he said.
“I have conveyed my desire to have the counsel general from the People’s Republic of China and the New York mission expelled, and I’ve been informed that the counsel general is no longer in the New York mission,” Hochul said at the press conference.
She said her request was meant to send a message.
“I believe that the Chinese government with their behavior in doing this and working with Linda Sun is not acceptable,” Hochul said. “It’s a statement by us, that we’re not tolerating this, and anybody who represented that government needs to move on. That was what we made clear.”
Sun was charged with acting on behalf of the CCP, visa fraud, alien smuggling, and conspiracy to commit money laundering. Her husband and codefendant, Christopher Hu, was charged with conspiracy to commit money laundering, bank fraud, and misuse of means of identification.
Sun was dismissed from Hochul’s office in March 2023 for alleged misconduct, and the governor’s office is cooperating with the investigation.
Hochul said on Sept. 4 that Sun’s arrest showed that governments at all levels “certainly” should be more vigilant.
“This is an individual who started way before my time, was put in the position of liaison to the Asian community and global trade issues,” Hochul said.
Sun held state government roles from 2012 to 2023 and allegedly forged Hochul’s signature on invitations that would allow Chinese officials to illegally enter the United States and meet with government officials. She also allegedly used her position to block Taiwanese representatives from meeting government officials and edit then-Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s statements to remove references to Taiwan as a country.
According to the indictment, Sun found ways to allow CCP officials to gain access to New York state leaders during the COVID-19 pandemic, at one time even calling an official on her phone during a private conference call between multiple state departments, warning the CCP official, “Keep your phone muted.” The official wrote to Sun that the call had been “very useful.”
The indictment also alleges that Sun received millions of dollars in return for her work for the CCP and never declared her role as a foreign agent or the benefits she received. Sun and Hu pleaded not guilty during their initial court appearance in Brooklyn on Sept. 3 and will be released on bond.
Hochul said at a separate event on Sept. 4 that Sun had no access to security or government documents “so there was a limit to it,” but Sun used her position to promote CCP views in official proclamations while “diminishing any involvement” with Taiwan.
She said Sun had also been able to use her position to obtain visas for CCP officials, and that her office had alerted law enforcement to some “evidence that didn’t look right.”
“To think that any foreign agent, any foreign government to infiltrate a government organization like the state of New York has to be addressed,” she said.
Illegal Weed Growing Operation Found In House Owned By Oakland Police Officer
A illegal weed growing operation was found – of all places – in a home owned by an Oakland police officer this spring.
State Department of Cannabis Control officers discovered about $1 million worth of illegal marijuana in a Bay Area neighborhood in Antioch. One of the three raided houses was owned by Oakland Police Officer Samson Liu, 38, who was placed on administrative leave on April 30.
The Oakland Police Department, citing an ongoing investigation, did not disclose the officer’s name, but CNN identified him. Records show Liu bought a 2,800-square-foot house in Antioch in 2020 for $608,000.
The department said it “is aware of the allegations made against one of our members and is cooperating with outside law enforcement agencies on the case”, according to the LA Times.
The LA Times report says that the raid underscores the scale of illegal marijuana operations in California and the involvement of Chinese organized crime since legalization in 2016, according to the cannabis control agency.
Law enforcement described these operations as sophisticated and linked to “Chinese criminal syndicates” but provided no further details due to ongoing investigations.
A Los Angeles Times investigation recently revealed that contraband pesticide use has spread across California’s cannabis farms, both illegal and licensed, over the past three years.
These toxic substances were found in at least six counties, including Siskiyou County, where half of 25 illegal farms raided in July 2023 had pesticides present, causing three officers to need medical treatment after exposure, according to the report.
Ahead of our full non-farm payrolls preview article due out later tonight, we have excerpted from a report by Goldman futures trader Lindsay Matcham, which breaks down the bank’s top client questions going into tomorrow’s jobs print.
While there is more in the full report (available to pro subs in the usual place) below we analyze the following 6 most pertinent questions:
Why Is There So Much Focus On The Number?
What Is Being Priced Across Assets Going Into The Number?
What Does Goldman Expect Tomorrow?
What’s The Macro Landscape Going Into The Number?
What Is Recessionary Data?
How Does The Market React To Inline/Beat or A Miss?
So without further ado…
1. Why Is There So Much Focus On The Number?
Inflation Rear View Mirror With All Eyes On Jobs
Lots of focus on tomorrow’s NFP because the macro picture facing us is one where it feels as though the inflation battle has been won with 5yr USD inflation swap forwards sitting at 2.35% and US 10 year breakevens sitting at 2.05%, with all the focus now on jobs.
As discussed previously we are now in a “bad news is bad news and good news is good news” regime; the market wants strong jobs numbers to confirm the FED haven’t had a misstep.
The market is incredibly jittery on a potential hard landing outcome given how long financial conditions have remained so tight.
This is illustrative of the US2S10s inverting yesterday after 27 months which is also putting macros on edge, with the triggering of the Sahm rule also not helping. Add to this the lofty levels indexes find themselves at once more, and the positioning and leverage that is in the system.
Therefore, there will be a sigh of relief from the market tomorrow if the jobs numbers beat, because good jobs no longer equate to a move higher in inflation. Good jobs numbers now equate to Powell instigating a soft landing, and one strong jobs number can’t derail his Jackson Hole dovishness and willingness to cut.
Global inflation expectations have moved lower; UK vs EUR vs US below:
2. What Is Being Priced Across Assets Going Into The Number?
Recessionary Pricing From Bond Markets
Post JOLTS yesterday we are now pricing 4.47x cuts between now and December; that is roughly 112bps. In 2008 cuts of 50 +25 +25 were made = 100bps.
1 year OIS rates are currently pricing around 235bps of cuts over the next year; in a recession the Fed cuts 200-250 bps in the first 12m. Markets are undecided on whether Powell will go 25bps or 50 bps; 100% chance of a 25-bs cut with a 44% chance he goes 50bps.
1 year OIS rates:
Equity & Credit Markets Pricing Low Odds Of A Recession
Equities have sold off a little and the cost of SPX protection has spiked but both are pricing low odds of a recession currently. Credit markets are also not that bothered with CDX HY spreads still below 350, albeit having spiked a little. Market starts to take notice when CDX HY credit spreads move beyond 350.
3. What Does Goldman Expect Tomorrow?
The data points to watch tomorrow are non-farms and the unemployment rate at 8:30am:
Nonfarm payroll employment, August (GS +155k, consensus +165k, last +114k)
Unemployment rate, August (GS 4.2%, consensus 4.2%, last 4.3%)
Goldman sees a slight miss which could result in short term risk off before a recovery once the markets digests the fact that a 155k print is not recessionary – more below.
4. What’s The Macro Landscape Going Into The Number?
Currently A Bullish Risk Asset Environment With Short Term Risks
Going in to the numbers tomorrow its important to remember we are in a central bank easing, inflation moving lower and growth decelerating but not recessionary environment for now (ISM services just came inline). This is bullish risk assets in the medium to long term but in particular for US growth, the 60/40 portfolio, treasuries and gold.
JOLTS is moving lower but its not in recessionary territory:
5. What Is Recessionary Data?
NFP prints need to start moving into the 0-85k range before the market starts seriously worrying about a recession, and jobless numbers need to move up into the 400k range. Regardless of slight beats and misses tomorrow keep that in mind with regards to risk asset pricing and opportunities that arise. Important to note that recent unemployment rate increases do not signal recessions according to Goldman. Non-farms started to print sub 100k then into the 0-50k territory in 2007 before the financial crisis hit:
6. How Does The Market React To Inline/Beat or A Miss?
Inline or Beat = Risk On
In Matcham’s opinion, an inline or beat in NFPs and it is equities higher, bonds lower/yields higher, USDJPY higher, and gold lower in the short term (medium/long term gold still moving higher).
An inline number means Powell is steering the market into a soft landing with inflation in the rear view mirror, and it’s going to take more than one strong jobs numbers before the market starts questioning the FED put and Powell’s 25 + 25 + 25 Jackson hole talk.
A beat and the yield curve bear steepens with cyclicals and commodities outperforming and the USD doing OK. Bull steepening resumes once the dust settles.
US 10 Year yields vs USDJPY:
Slight Miss = Risk Off With Opportunities / Large Miss = USD + Cash
The market feels very twitchy to a slight miss; so its equities and yields lower, gold sharply higher, USDJPY lower with the yield curve bull steepening. In this scenario take a step back and think about what an actual recessionary jobs number is and what opportunities that lay ahead as a result.
Goes without saying that a large miss into the sub 100k territory and its risk off with a bid to the USD, cash and gold, and the yield curve bull steepening aggressively with cyclicals and commodities bearing the brunt of the sell off.
Unemployment
A 25bps cut occurs in any scenario given how tight conditions are and how dovish Powell has been. An unemployment print higher than the last print of 4.3%, and Powell delivers 50bps in September.
The Sahm rule just got triggered, it has never failed to predict a recession and has the market on edge about jobs:
Meta Oversight Board Says ‘River To The Sea’ Not Inherently Hate Speech
In a development that will be cheered by those who promote open discourse on social media platforms and condemned by ardent supporters of the State of Israel, Meta’s independent Oversight Board for Instagram and Facebook on Wednesday ruled that the controversial slogan “from the river to the sea” is not inherently hate speech in the context of the Israel-Palestine conflict, and should therefore not be subjected to automatic deletion.
“The majority of the Board notes the phrase has multiple meanings and is used by people in various ways and with different intentions,” the board wrote. A minority argued that, since the slogan appears in the 2017 Hamas charter, Meta should automatically consider it to be the “glorification of a designated entity…unless there are clear signs to the contrary.”
True to its approach that parallels court procedures, the board’s decision came in a ruling that spanned a whopping 32 pages. The board’s review centered on three cases that arose in November 2023 — a month after the stunning, violent Hamas invasion of southern Gaza that led to the deaths of at least 1,189 people at the hands of both Hamas militants and Israel’s own military. In each Facebook situation at issue, a user included the phrase in a post or comment, and other users reported them to the platform for allegedly violating its rules.
In its long form, the slogan is “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.” Referring to the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, it’s been used for decades by a variety of people advocating for a change to the political order in the land that is currently controlled by the State of Israel — which includes not only Israel proper but also the West Bank and Gaza. Notably, a similar phrase has appeared in the platform of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud Party, declaring “between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.”
Many proponents of the State of Israel say the phrase is inherently a call for violence, ethnic cleansing and/or genocide. However, some who call for a new order — among them, prominent Jews like long-time Israel proponent-turned-critic Peter Beinert — entertain the possibility of a peaceful, one-state solution with equal rights and privileges granted to all 7.5 million Jews and 7.5 million Palestinians who live between the river and and the sea, along with Christians and other minorities.
The Anti-Defamation League rejects the Meta oversight board’s assertion that the slogan can be used innocently. In a tweet-thread condemning the ruling, the ADL wrote:
However, the 22-member Oversight board — after deliberations that included the review of 2,412 public comments from around the world — ruled that the slogan shouldn’t be construed as inherently malevolent, writing:
“The Board finds there is no indication that the comment or the two posts broke Meta’s Hate Speech rules because they do not attack Jewish or Israeli people with calls for violence or exclusion, nor do they attack a concept or institution associated with a protected characteristic that could lead to imminent violence. Instead, the three pieces of content contain contextual signals of solidarity with Palestinians.”
One of the scrutinized posts portrayed “a generated image of floating watermelon slices that form the words from the phrase, alongside ‘Palestine will be free’,” the board wrote. (Because of similarities between the colors of watermelons and those of the Palestinian flag, watermelons have become a pro-Palestinian symbol.) In reviewing the post at the time, Meta concluded the usage couldn’t be construed as a call for violence, or an explicit endorsement of Hamas. The oversight board validated that conclusion.
“From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.”
Sen. Marsha Blackburn just accused Rep. Rashida Tlaib of calling for genocide for invoking this chant—But is it a slogan inherently demanding mass murder as so many claim?
Another post with the phrase condemned the “senseless slaughter” of Palestinians by “Zionist Israeli occupiers.” The third encouraged people to “speak up,” using hashtags #ceasefire, #freepalestine and #DefundIsrael, along with heart emojis in Palestinian-flag colors. The board’s ruling allowing all three posts to remain on the platform will also license other Facebook and Instagram users to use the slogan, provided there’s no context that otherwise violates Meta policy — such as calls for violence or removing people from a territorial area.
In November, Elon Musk— who purchased Twitter with a stated goal of promoting open discourse — declared the slogan inherently genocidal and said those who use it would face suspension. In a possible sign he may have subsequently decided context should be considered, the phrase can still be widely found on X.
As I said earlier this week, “decolonization”, “from the river to the sea” and similar euphemisms necessarily imply genocide.
Clear calls for extreme violence are against our terms of service and will result in suspension. https://t.co/1fCFo5Lezb
The Meta oversight board’s ruling may prevent posts from being deleted and users suspended, but it can’t guarantee people in some parts of the world won’t face government prosecution for merely saying the phrase. For example, in a heavy-handed attempt to eradicate the slogan, Germany threatens those who dare utter or write “from the river to the sea” with up to three years in prison.
After a Palestinian-American woman in Germany posted “Pursue your passion & you’ll end up enjoying life … From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free!!”, she and her husband were subjected to a 6 am police raid by 11 cops who seized her iPad. More than three months later, they still have her iPad and she’s still uneasy and uncertain what if any punishment awaits her.
U.S. President Joe Biden on Thursday unveiled $7.3 billion investment in clean and affordable electricity for American rural communities as the president looks to help his Vice President and Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris to win voters in rural battleground states.
President Biden’s announcement, made in Wisconsin, pledges the multi-billion investment which will be funded by the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).
The investment announced today is the largest investment in rural electrification since the New Deal and is part of President Biden’s Investing in America agenda, the White House said.
The President is set to announce the first round of rural electric cooperatives selected and the first award for the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Empowering Rural America (New ERA) program, funded through the Inflation Reduction Act.
On Thursday, USDA announced that 16 rural electric cooperatives are being selected to receive up to $7.3 billion in clean energy financing that will deliver clean, more affordable, and more resilient electricity to approximately 5 million rural co-op members representing 20% of rural households, farms, businesses, and schools. These 16 cooperatives will benefit rural residents across 23 states, including Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Texas, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.
Under the New ERA program, electric cooperatives will build or purchase over 10 gigawatts (GW) of clean energy.
National Rural Electric Cooperative Association CEO Jim Matheson commented on the new program that “The New ERA program showcases what is possible when the government prioritizes voluntary, flexible decision-making and allows electric co-ops to take a tailored approach to respond to local needs.”
The program “is a transformative opportunity for electric cooperatives,” Matheson added.
The announcement of funding for rural cooperatives could boost Harris’s chances to snatch battleground states from Republican candidate Donald Trump, who has been criticizing Democrats for the higher energy costs Americans have faced in the past two years.
Netanyahu Humiliates White House: ‘There’s No Gaza Deal In The Making… It’s Not Close’
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday issued a bombshell of a statement which constitutes a glaring contradiction of the White House narrative on how things are going with Hamas negotiations toward a ceasefire deal. “There’s not a deal in the making,”he told Fox News. “Unfortunately, it’s not close.” He said this during a morning Fox News live interview segment.
The remarks are the firmest and most unequivocal Netanyahu has ever been regarding what are clearly failed and perhaps even dead international efforts to achieve a truce in Gaza.
For days and weeks now, a series of White House statements have claimed the Biden administration is spearheading efforts to achieve a peace deal and hostage swap, and Blinken and Kirby have used a variety of metaphors including being at “the goal line” while repeatedly claiming there’s been a comprehensive deal on the table that’s ‘close’.
However, only within the last couple days has President Biden’s rhetoric changed. On the one hand the administration has blamed Hamas for rejecting the deal, and other other Biden has begun saying that Netanyahu is “not doing enough” to achieve peace.
But the fresh Netanyahu interview confirms what many observers have suspected all along – that there’s no viable deal to speak of currently, and really there never was a deal ‘on the table’ or at ‘the goal line’ at all. According to Fox:
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday morning dismissed reports that negotiators were close to agreeing a cease-fire deal.
“It’s exactly inaccurate,” Netanyahu told “Fox & Friends” co-host Brian Kilmeade during an interview. “There’s a story, a narrative out there that there’s a deal out there … that’s just a false narrative.”
Ironically the White House itself has been the biggest purveyor of this false narrative. This proves highly embarrassing to the US administration and the prime minister’s fresh remarks are sure to exacerbate already growing US-Israel tensions.
To emphasize this, Fox writes “He [Bibi] denied reports – by CNN and others – that the US Administration believes that an agreement is 90% completed.”
But ultimately, Netanyahu still laid blame on Hamas for there being no deal. He said to Fox that the group “don’t agree to anything. Not to the Philadelphi Corridor, not to the keys of exchanging hostages for jailed terrorists, not to anything. So that’s just a false narrative.”
Mass Israeli protests in the wake of the recent recovery of six dead hostages have demanded Netanyahu’s removal from office. The hostage victims’ families also claim he has thwarted a truce deal for the release of the hostages at every turn, instead choosing to prioritize the military operation against Gaza militants.
Netanyahu on Fox & Friends:
“There’s not a deal in the making, unfortunately.. It’s not close…
“I’m not interested in my political future. I’m interested in my country’s future..
“I have red lines. They were set before this massacre .. but they’ve become redder…” pic.twitter.com/ClpASHbhJb
CNN too observes of the development Thursday that the Israeli leader “was as clear as he has ever been about how he views a ceasefire and hostage agreement with Hamas.”
As many have predicted, it looks like the Gaza war is set to continue for at least months, and possibly years to come – especially given there’s no potential even temporary ceasefire on the horizon.
Two former leaders of major South Asian countries have reportedly accused the United States of covert regime change operations to topple their governments. One of the leaders, former Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan, languishes in prison, on a perverse conviction that proves Khan’s assertion. The other leader, former Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheik Hasina, fled to India following a violent coup in her country. Their grave accusations against the U.S., as reported in the world media, should be investigated by the UN, since if true, the U.S. actions would constitute a fundamental threat to world peace and to regional stability in South Asia. The two cases seem to be very similar. The very strong evidence of the U.S. role in toppling the government of Imran Khan raises the likelihood that something similar may have occurred in Bangladesh.
In the case of Pakistan, Donald Lu, Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia and Central Asia, met with Asad Majeed Khan, Pakistan’s Ambassador to the U.S., on March 7, 2022. Ambassador Khan immediately wrote back to his capital, conveying Lu’s warning that PM Khan threatened U.S.-Pakistan relations because of Khan’s “aggressively neutral position” regarding Russia and Ukraine.
The Ambassador’s March 7 note (technically a diplomatic cypher) quoted Assistant Secretary Lu as follows: “I think if the no-confidence vote against the Prime Minister succeeds, all will be forgiven in Washington because the Russia visit is being looked at as a decision by the Prime Minister. Otherwise, I think it will be tough going ahead.” The very next day, members of the parliament took procedural steps to oust PM Khan.
On March 27, PM Khan brandished the cypher, and told his followers and the public that the U.S. was out to bring him down. On April 10, PM Khan was thrown out of office as the parliament acceded to the U.S. threat.
We know this in detail because of Ambassador Khan’s cypher, exposed by PM Khan and brilliantly documented by Ryan Grim of The Intercept, including the text of the cypher. Absurdly and tragically, PM Khan languishes in prison in part over espionage charges, linked to his revealing the cypher.
The U.S. appears to have played a similar role in the recent violent coup in Bangladesh. PM Hasina was ostensibly toppled by student unrest, and fled to India when the Bangladeshi military refused to prevent the protestors from storming the government offices. Yet there may well be much more to the story than meets the eye.
According to press reports in India, PM Hasina is claiming that the U.S. brought her down. Specifically, she says that the U.S. removed her from power because she refused to grant the U.S. military facilities in a region that is considered strategic for the U.S. in its “Indo-Pacific Strategy” to contain China. While these are second-hand accounts by the Indian media, they track closely several speeches and statements that Hasina has made over the past two years.
On May 17, 2024, the same Assistant Secretary Liu who played a lead role in toppling PM Khan, visited Dhaka to discuss the US Indo-Pacific Strategy among other topics. Days later, Sheikh Hasina reportedly summoned the leaders of the 14 parties of her alliance to make the startling claim that a “country of white-skinned people” was trying to bring her down, ostensibly telling the leaders that she refused to compromise her nation’s sovereignty. Like Imran Khan, PM Hasina had been pursuing a foreign policy of neutrality, including constructive relations not only with the U.S. but also with China and Russia, much to the deep consternation of the U.S. government.
To add credence to Hasina’s charges, Bangladesh had delayed signing two military agreements that the U.S. had pushed very hard since 2022, indeed by none other than the former Under-Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, the neocon hardliner with her own storied history of U.S. regime-change operations. One of the draft agreements, the General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA), would bind Bangladesh to closer military-to-military cooperation with Washington. The Government of PM Hasina was clearly not enthusiastic to sign it.
The U.S. is by far the world’s leading practitioner of regime-change operations, yet the U.S. flatly denies its role in covert regime change operations even when caught red-handed, as with Nuland’s infamous intercepted phone call in late January 2014 planning the U.S.-led regime change operation in Ukraine. It is useless to appeal to the U.S. Congress, and still less the executive branch, to investigate the claims by PM Khan and PM Hasina. Whatever the truth of the matter, they will deny and lie as necessary.
This is where the UN should step in. Covert regime change operations are blatantly illegal under international law (notably the Doctrine of Non-Intervention, as expressed for example in UN General Assembly Resolution 2625, 1970), and constitute perhaps the greatest threat to world peace, as they profoundly destabilize nations, and often lead to wars and other civil disorders. The UN should investigate and expose covert regime change operations, both in the interests of reversing them, and preventing them in the future.
The UN Security Council is of course specifically charged under Article 24 of the UN Charter with “primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security.” When evidence arises that a government has been toppled through the intervention or complicity of a foreign government, the UN Security Council should investigate the claims.
In the cases of Pakistan and Bangladesh, the UN Security Council should seek the direct testimony of PM Khan and PM Hasina in order to evaluate the evidence that the U.S. played a role in the overthrow of the governments of these two leaders. Each, of course, should be protected by the UN for giving their testimony, so as to protect them from any retribution that could follow their honest presentation of the facts. Their testimony can be taken by video conference, if necessary, given the tragic ongoing incarceration of PM Khan.
The U.S. might well exercise its veto in the UN Security Council to prevent such a investigation. In that case, the UN General Assembly can take up the matter, under UN Resolution A/RES/76/, which allows the UN General Assembly to consider an issue blocked by veto in the UN Security Council. The issues at stake could then be assessed by the entire membership of the UN. The veracity of the U.S. involvement in the recent regime changes in Pakistan and Bangladesh could then be objectively analyzed and judged on the evidence, rather than on mere assertions and denials.
The U.S. engaged in at least 64 covert regime change operations during 1947-1989, according to documented research by Lindsey O’Rourke, political science professor at Boston Collage, and several more that were overt (e.g. by U.S.-led war). It continues to engage in regime-change operations with shocking frequency to this day, toppling governments in all parts of the world. It is wishful thinking that the U.S. will abide by international law on its own, but it is not wishful thinking for the world community, long suffering from U.S. regime change operations, to demand their end at the United Nations.
