Saturday, April 19, 2025

Polaris of Enlightenment

Ad:

Argentina’s BRICS rejection: A gamble amid economic turmoil

Published 29 November 2023
– By Sukanya Saha

In the labyrinth of Argentina’s economic woes, President Javier Milei’s recent rejection of BRICS membership adds a new layer of complexity to the nation’s uphill battle against inflation, dwindling foreign reserves, and a looming debt crisis.

Argentina’s economic narrative reads like a tale of multiple currencies and a precarious financial tightrope. With inflation rates soaring well above 140 per cent, and an official exchange rate at odds with the elusive “blue dollar,” Argentina’s economic landscape is a patchwork of uncertainty.

The recent decision to pay international debts in Chinese yuan, leveraging a standing swap line with China, reflects the urgency and creativity required to navigate this financial maze.

As Argentina grapples with a severe shortage of foreign exchange, exacerbated by drought conditions and a poor harvest, the rejection of BRICS+ membership raises eyebrows. The BRICS alliance, with its economic prowess and diverse resources, could potentially offer Argentina a lifeline to weather the storm.

One of the primary advantages of BRICS+ membership lies in the access to a diverse array of markets and resources. For a nation like Argentina, grappling with inflation and a shortage of foreign exchange reserves, the benefits of aligning with a coalition of emerging economic giants are hard to ignore. These nations collectively represent a vast consumer market and a rich tapestry of industries, offering Argentina the prospect of new trade avenues and investment opportunities.

President Milei’s libertarian ideals emphasise a minimalistic approach to government intervention, but the rejection of BRICS+ raises questions about the administration’s commitment to fostering economic growth. In an era where economic interdependence is the norm, opting for isolation might hinder Argentina’s ability to attract foreign investment and forge mutually beneficial partnerships.

It’s also crucial to consider the geopolitical chessboard. In rejecting BRICS+, Argentina may find itself sidelined in discussions that shape the rules of the global economic game. As this alliance solidifies its influence, decisions made within its confines could impact trade agreements, currency valuations, and economic policies worldwide. By refusing a seat at this table, Argentina may inadvertently forfeit a voice in shaping the rules that govern its economic destiny.

However, President Milei’s administration appears to be steering towards economic autonomy, even as the nation faces the pressing need for external support.

The urgent need for Argentina is crystal clear: reduce inflation. Yet, the path to achieving this goal is riddled with challenges. The central bank, burdened with short-term, peso-denominated treasury bills and a precarious interest income scenario, must navigate the balance between controlling inflation and preventing a currency freefall.

The question of debt is paramount. Argentina’s outstanding international bonds, valued at a mere 30 cents on the dollar, signal an impending restructuring. While the global market might not be shocked by Argentina’s restructuring, the country’s $45 billion debt to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) underscores the critical importance of a realistic repayment plan.

Argentina’s actions and policies resonate far beyond its borders, influencing the IMF’s lending approach and potentially setting legal precedents in sovereign debt enforcement.

The real-world experiment lies in the hands of the Argentine president. If Milei’s proposal to dollarise the economy becomes reality, it could redefine the understanding of a country’s debt carrying capacity. Dollarisation may offer a semblance of stability, but the risk of a deep default looms large, turning all domestic debts into a claim on Argentina’s non-existent dollar reserves.

In rejecting BRICS+, Argentina appears to be charting its own course. Whether this bold move proves to be a masterstroke or a miscalculation remains to be seen. As the world watches, Argentina stands at the intersection of economic uncertainty and the quest for autonomy, navigating uncharted waters with the hopes of finding a solution that will reshape its destiny.

Sukanya Saha is a contributing editor at The Nordic Times. Based in New Delhi, she is an accomplished journalist who has previously worked with several major Indian media outlets such as NDTV, India Today, IANS, and Jagran English. Currently, she is associated with Hindustan Times. In 2022, she topped the BRICS International Journalism Programme from India. Committed to understanding the complex dynamics that shape our world, Sukanya's passions range from world politics to science and space exploration.

TNT is truly independent!

We don’t have a billionaire owner, and our unique reader-funded model keeps us free from political or corporate influence. This means we can fearlessly report the facts and shine a light on the misdeeds of those in power.

Consider a donation to keep our independent journalism running…

US shuts down Biden’s censorship agency

Donald Trump's USA

Published yesterday 9:57
– By Editorial Staff
Members of the Trump administration have long expressed concerns about how freedom of expression is being restricted and curtailed in various ways.

The United States has now officially shut down an agency that, according to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, was used by the Biden administration to systematically censor US citizens with uncomfortable views.

The Global Engagement Center (GEC) was established in 2016 within the US Department of State, with a mission to “recognize, understand, expose, and counter foreign state and non-state propaganda and disinformation”.

In December, the center was renamed Counter Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference (R/FIMI), but on Wednesday, Marco Rubio announced that it had been permanently shut down.

– Under the previous administration, this office, which cost taxpayers more than $50 million per year, spent millions of dollars to actively silence and censor the voices of Americans they were supposed to be serving, Rubio said.

– This is antithetical to the very principles we should be upholding and inconceivable it was taking place in America.

In an interview published Wednesday with conservative activist Mike Benz, Rubio explained that the GEC was initially intended as a tool to combat extremist propaganda from groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS, but that the operation later began “going after individual American voices”.

– We ended government-sponsored censorship in the United States through the State Department, he declared.

“Worst offender in US government censorship”

Rubio added that the Biden administration had supported groups that “literally tagging and labeling voices in American politics – Ben Shapiro, The Federalist, others – tagging them as foreign agents”.

The GEC had an annual budget of $61 million and employed about 120 people. In December, Republican members of Congress refused to provide continued funding for the unit.

President Donald Trump and his supporters have long accused Democrats of using government institutions to silence conservative views online. In 2023, tech billionaire Elon Musk also criticized the GEC, calling it “worst offender in US government censorship & media manipulation” and “a threat to our democracy”.

Journalist Matt Taibbi also accused the center of trying to suppress discussions on COVID-19 under the pretext of fighting “Russian personas and proxies”.

Already last year, a group of Republican members of Congress harshly criticized the GEC in a letter to then Secretary of State Antony Blinken. The letter accused the Center of bias in favor of “American progressives” and of trying to silence opinions that were “deemed politically inconvenient or disagreeable”.

Reports: The White House demands UK abolish hate speech laws

Published 17 April 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Donald Trump's administration is reportedly very concerned about the repression of dissent in the UK.

According to reports in The Independent, Donald Trump’s administration is demanding that the United Kingdom abolish the law on incitement to racial hatred as a condition for the conclusion of a new trade agreement between the two countries.

The demand, which is linked to Vice President JD Vance’s view of freedom of expression as fundamental to democracy, has reportedly met with resistance from the UK government.

An anonymous source close to the US administration told The Independent that Trump is “obsessed by the fall of Western civilisation” and that the president is deeply concerned that free speech is being undermined in the UK.

The source claims that the White House wants the Labour government to withdraw hate speech laws, including those targeting LGBTQ groups or various ethnic minorities, in order for a deal to be reached.

– No free speech, no deal. It is as simple as that, the source told the newspaper.

Britons arrested for social media posts

Vance, who is leading the negotiations from the US side, has previously expressed optimism about a new agreement:

– I think there’s a good chance that, yes, we’ll come to a great agreement that’s in the best interest of both countries, he said in an interview with UnHerd.

The UK authorities’ crackdown on ‘opinion criminals’ has long been seen as a major problem by people close to Trump.

The president’s adviser, Elon Musk, has been one of the most vocal critics and has repeatedly highlighted the fact that British authorities arrest people for posts they make on social media.

During Keir Starmer’s first visit to the White House, Vance also warned that freedom of expression was under attack, pointing to how US tech companies are being forced into unacceptable censorship by new European laws introduced under the pretext of protecting citizens from “cyber hate”.

An elite afraid of its own people

The Nordic Times has previously reported how Vance during the security conference in Munich also attacked the European establishment politicians.

– I look to Brussels, where EU commissars warn citizens that they intend to shut down social media during times of civil unrest the moment they spot what they’ve judged to be, quote, “hateful content”

Mr. Vance also touched on Sweden’s verdict against the murdered Iraqi Quran burner Salwan Momika’s colleague who was convicted of participating in the actions.

– As the judge in his case chillingly noted, Sweden’s laws to supposedly protect free expression do not, in fact, grant, and I’m quoting, ‘a free pass to do or say anything without risking offending the group that holds that belief’.

UK Supreme Court: Womanhood is something one is born into

The LGBT lobby

Published 17 April 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Many British women consider the court's decision a great victory.

The UK Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that the term “woman” in the country’s equality legislation refers to biological sex and nothing else.

The ruling rejects the Scottish Government’s interpretation, which included trans women in the definition and quotas for biological men who have “changed sex” as women in the workplace.

A panel of five judges, led by Justice Patrick Hodge, ruled that the words “woman” and “sex” in the Equality Act refer to a biological woman and biological sex.

The ruling means, among other things, that transgender people should not be counted as women for the purposes of the Equality Act’s quotas although the court was careful to emphasize that they should continue to be protected from discrimination on the basis of their gender identity.

The case stems from a 2018 Scottish law requiring public authorities in Scotland to have at least 50% women on their boards. According to the Scottish Government’s interpretation, trans women were included in this quota. However, the women’s rights group For Women Scotland (FWS) disputed this, arguing that the definition of woman cannot be extended beyond biological sex.

“Refers to reality –  not to paperwork”

An early court ruling in 2022 was appealed to the Supreme Court, which has now agreed with FWS.

Maya Forstater of the group Sex Matters considers the ruling a “great victory”:

– The court has given us the right answer: the protected characteristic of sex – male and female – refers to reality, not to paperwork, she says.

FWS director Trina Budge previously warned that a broader interpretation of gender risks filling quotas with “50% men, and 50% men with certificates”, which would undermine the purpose of the law.

Supported by J.K. Rowling

The group also highlighted that transgender access to women’s toilets, women’s prisons and women’s wards in hospitals can have very negative consequences and create insecurity.

FWS lawyer Aidan O’Neill argued during the trial that gender must be understood in law as a “expression of one’s bodily reality. It is an immutable biological state”.

For Women Scotland has received support from well-known author J.K. Rowling, who has reportedly donated hundreds of thousands of pounds to the group. Rowling has long argued in the past that it is unreasonable for trans women’s rights to be at the expense of biological women.

However, not everyone is applauding the ruling on the contrary, the human rights organization Amnesty International is highly critical and claims that transgender people now risk having their human rights violated.

US tightens visa controls – social media to be scrutinized

Published 16 April 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Anyone who has expressed support for any of Israel's enemies is expected to be denied entry to the United States.

The U.S. will begin denying visas based on the content of applicants’ social media – including posts, shares, and messages that express support for what are considered anti-Semitic messages, for example.

The country’s immigration agency, USCIS, will begin reviewing social media for all immigrants applying for lawful permanent residence, work authorization, visas, as well as foreign students and people affiliated with educational institutions.

What will be looked for are, for example, posts or messages supporting groups labeled terrorist in the United States, such as Hamas, Hezbollah in Lebanon or the Houthi movement in Yemen. Anti-Semitic messages are also included and will constitute “negative factors” when deciding on a visa or residence permit.

– There is no room in the United States for the rest of the world’s terrorist sympathizers, and we are under no obligation to admit them or let them stay here, said Tricia McLaughlin, Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs at DHS, in a press release.

The proposal has raised concerns among immigration and free speech advocates because it could also affect people already in the country legally not just those applying for entry. Critics also point out that it is unclear how “anti-Semitism”, for example, should be defined, and there is concern that virtually all criticism of Israel will be rejected.

According to AP News, social media monitoring by immigration authorities has been going on for over a decade, starting under the Obama administration and expanding during Donald Trump’s first term.

Our independent journalism needs your support!
We appreciate all of your donations to keep us alive and running.

Our independent journalism needs your support!
Consider a donation.

You can donate any amount of your choosing, one-time payment or even monthly.
We appreciate all of your donations to keep us alive and running.

Dont miss another article!

Sign up for our newsletter today!

Take part of uncensored news – free from industry interests and political correctness from the Polaris of Enlightenment – every week.