Controversial and currently unworkable, Agenda 2030

At this point, who isn't aware of the existence of something called "Agenda 2030"? It sounds familiar, of course, but for people generally focused on their day-to-day lives, the matter might seem somewhat distant. However, whether it's because those who promoted the document, more like a declaration of intentions, or because of those who dislike the initiative, "2030" continues to generate controversies that are endlessly discussed in the media, online platforms, and throughout the world. It might seem like a "good guys versus bad guys" movie – the good being the proponents of the agenda, and the bad being those against it. To go beyond simplifications, it's useful to place this "new initiative" within the context of previous ones:

a) Istanbul Declaration and Programme of Action, which includes "Accelerated Action for Small Island Developing States," the Vienna Programme of Action for the Landlocked Developing Countries for the Decade 2014-2024, and the African Union's Agenda 2063 and the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) program.

b) Addis Ababa Action Agenda of the Third International Conference on Financing for Development, approved by the General Assembly on July 27, 2015 (Resolution 69/313).

As evident, there are several "Agendas." It's also important to mention the limited progress that many initiatives adopted by global organizations have made in solving various crises over the last 103 years. Looking back to the creation of the League of Nations, an international organization with the goal of "establishing the foundation for peace and the reorganization of international relations after the end of World War I," one can't help but wonder if anyone could disagree. However, the events of the last 100 years of "international cooperation" lead to the conclusion that they started within the framework of one of the greatest mistakes made by global power elites at the end of World War I: the Treaty of Versailles. In fact, the League of Nations proved powerless in preventing the greatest human disaster up to that point: World War II and its dire consequences.

Still amidst the smoldering ruins and the stench of so many millions of deaths, the United Nations (UN) was created in October 1945, only to see its noble endeavors undermined within a few months, as the "Cold War" emerged between the power blocs created by the ruling elites: NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) on one side and the Warsaw Pact on the other. In this climate of confrontation, including nuclear threats, the world has lived and continues to live in a constant state of geopolitical, military, and economic tension. Referring to the numerous so-called "regional" conflicts, including genocides, one can conclude that amid this environment, the readings of the "Agendas" seem insignificant or even ethereal.

Among the admirable goals of Agenda 2030, adopted on September 25, 2015, are: ending global poverty, eradicating hunger and achieving food security; ensuring a healthy life and quality education; achieving gender equality; ensuring access to water and energy; promoting sustained economic growth; taking urgent action against climate change; promoting peace and facilitating access to justice. While it might seem impossible to dissent from achieving these accomplishments, as they would be milestones for humanity, there are still many people who oppose the agenda, believing it to conceal hidden interests and be part of a conspiracy against humanity.

Whether it's because the vast majority of media and public and private institutions support the initiative, or due to those opposing it, the truth remains that, eight years after its publication, the path toward achieving these goals has not yet begun. Proclaiming is one thing, but achieving what's announced requires practical actions. It's evident that the current course of action isn't sufficient. Moreover, those who manipulate the world order aren't interested in the task. They seem more focused on arms escalation, the overexploitation of energy sources, massive deforestation, and control over food chains, with little regard for "security" or the well-being of populations.

Slavery remains widespread globally, enforced through dictatorial controls in numerous countries. All the while, the accumulation of surplus value persists and even multiplies. And while this accumulation should clearly be reinvested to be shared by all nations, and is necessary to achieve the objectives of 2030, which Agenda 2030 are we talking about?

Representatives of countries at the UN sing siren songs that don't deceive a population well aware that each of the 2030 objectives represents a direct attack on the interests of the world's powerful guardians, the rulers of the "world order." An order that isn't just political-military but fundamentally economic. And if the realities to be improved are products of this "world order," what Agenda are we referring to? The poverty, hunger, compulsory "education," gender and class inequalities, private appropriation of water, energy, minerals, forest masses... are all produced by the capitalist production system that underpins this "world order." A system that has allowed and encouraged the accumulation of wealth and power in fewer and fewer hands.

It's unclear whether there are global public institutions in the next seven years capable of reigning in the massive corporations, power elites, and leaders of powerful countries – ultimately, the accumulators of global surplus value.

Manufacturing Consent: The Border Fiasco and the “Smart Wall”

The United Nations claims that the purpose of Sustainable Development Goal 16 (SDG16) is to promote peaceful and inclusive societies and to provide access to justice for all. Hiding behind the rhetoric is the real objective: to strengthen and consolidate the power and authority of the “global governance regime” and to exploit threats—both real and imagined—in order to advance regime hegemony.