Diplomacy
Brazil does not support Venezuela’s entry to the BRICS
In the Russian city of Kazan, the annual summit of the BRICS countries took place, the sixteenth since its founding, in 2006. It was attended by 36 States, 22 presidents, including the Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro Moros, and six international organizations, between them the United Nations, represented by its Secretary General, Antonio Guterres.
President of Venezuela, Nicolás Maduro, traveled to Kazan accompanied by Foreign Minister Iván Gil, Vice President Delcy Rodríguez, and other officials such as the Minister of Communication, Freddy Ñáñez.
The Venezuelan president praised the emergence of a bloc of emerging countries such as the BRICS, which in his opinion, “has become the epicenter of the new world, the pluripolar world, the world of the future.” Likewise, Maduro invited the BRICS countries to develop a UN reform plan.
The BRICS are a very enriching space for dialogue, said Maduro, “a permanent search to build a new international order; A new era has emerged, new superpowers and countries to which we aspire to have our independence respected, I came from the modesty of Venezuela to propose several ideas:
– The BRICS emerged at a time when there was a change of era, with the emergence of new superpowers.
– Establish an economic agenda with bolder and more practical solutions and steps for international trade, we need a new global monetary system.
– It is urgent to refund the United Nations System, #UN, which is dying with every bomb that falls on the Arab and Muslim peoples due to fascism; It cannot be that the Court of Justice only serves for Communiqués, but there are no actions against massacres.
Commander Chávez told us: “the time has come for a new, pluripolar, multicentric world,” which is why I assure you that the BRICS can count on Venezuela and the Bolivarian force for our historical project,” said president Maduro.
The President of Venezuela also participated in the first plenary session of the summit of the Outreach/BRICS Plus formats, in which he proposed a new global financial system and insisted on the need to advance in the consolidation of the BRICS Bank.
According to press statements by President Maduro, the Venezuelan delegation participated in more than 200 meetings, in which meetings with other state leaders stand out, such as the President of Russia, Vladimir Putin; the President of the Palestinian Autonomous Government, Mahmoud Abbas; the President of Belarus, Aleksandr Lukashenko; the Prime Minister of Ethiopia, Abiy Ahmed Ali; the President of Türkiye, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan; the President of Bolivia, Luis Arce and the President of Iran, Masoud Pezeshkian, among others.

“Our countries, #Iran and #Venezuela, have always maintained this unbreakable unity, we continue to give a message to the world with giant steps to consolidate the construction of the #MultipolarWorld. We are a unitary bloc that is moving towards a geopolitics without colonialism or hegemony!”
In these meetings, positive assessments emerged about the Venezuelan president. Vladimir Putin of Russia recognized Venezuela as “one of Russia’s old and reliable partners in Latin America and the world in general,” Belarusian President Lukashenko expressed his admiration for Maduro’s leadership and his confidence in the ability of Venezuela to obtain victories at the international level, this last specific quality is required by the members of the Brics for the election of new members.
The alliance that initially included Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa has expanded this year to include Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia. Since then, it has been known as “BRICS+”. Although the entry of new members into the organization was not part of the agenda, President Vladimir Putin, in September 2024, stated that thirty-four (34) States They wanted cooperation “in various forms,” including some from the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS former republics of the Soviet Union), Africa, South America and Southeast Asia. Among these states is Venezuela, which participated in the summit. as a guest, like the other countries that do not make up the bloc.
Once the small-format meeting concluded, the BRIC member countries met with the invited countries.
Final declaration XVI BRICS summit
The BRICS Summit concluded its meeting with a declaration containing 134 points, of which the following stand out:
-
Reform of the United Nations (UN). The countries of the BRICS group reaffirmed their commitment to the comprehensive reform of the UN.
-
Encourage the use of national currencies.
-
They reaffirmed their commitment to deepening economic cooperation to achieve a lasting, sustainable, balanced and inclusive recovery in this area, in search of an improvement in the global economy.
-
Create a new investment platform, which allows the existing institutional infrastructure of the New BRICS Development Bank (NBD) to be used more effectively to increase the flow of investments in the BRICS countries and the mechanisms of the Global South.
-
Express concern about sanctions and their negative impact on the economy and global trade.
-
Promote the entry of Palestine into the UN, based on the concept of the coexistence of two States, based on international law.
-
Promote a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip and “urgently and without preconditions release all hostages and detainees on both sides, (…) and ensure unrestricted, sustainable and large-scale delivery of humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip “, it was specified in the document.
-
Reaffirmation of commitment to the conflicts in the Middle East and North Africa, based on the ideal that peace and security in these regions must be achieved and maintained in accordance with and with full respect for international law and the Charter of the United Nations.
-
Guarantee mediation in the Ukrainian conflict, in search of a peaceful solution through dialogue and diplomacy.
-
Strengthen the non-proliferation and disarmament regime, recognizing its role in maintaining global stability.
-
Prevent the deployment of weapons in space and the threat or use of force against targets located in space.
No new members and Brazil’s veto
The XVI BRICS Summit has also marked the path that new applicants to enter the bloc must follow. The BRICS leaders have decided to only grant the status of “partners” and not “members” to those countries that meet certain criteria; In addition, these new members will not have the right to vote, only the members will have it. In the BRICS there is no right to veto, but it is necessary to reach a consensus among all the founding members.
It is important to note that at this XVI BRICS Summit the incorporation of new members to the bloc was not discussed and that the final declaration of the meeting does not reflect a list of new countries to join the BRICS. However, from the bilateral meetings and press conferences, especially from the statements of the Russian president, it was learned that the Brazilian government was opposed to Venezuela being included in a list of possible future partners at this time. of the block.
The Member States (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) and the current Partner States (Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia) have already agreed on a first list of possible new partner countries, to start the path towards enlargement. “We have agreed with the partners that in the first phase, taking into account a possible enlargement, we will follow the path of agreeing on a list of partner countries. Such a list has already been agreed upon,” Putin said.
After the negotiations at this summit, and the support expressed by the member states with the right to vote, the following countries have been left with the possibility of becoming “BRICS partners”, after meeting the bloc’s expansion criteria: Algeria, Belarus , Bolivia, Cuba, Kazakhstan, Indonesia, Malaysia, Nigeria, Thailand, Turkey, Uganda, Uzbekistan and Vietnam. Afghanistan, Nicaragua and Venezuela would not have had the support of Brazil to join the list of candidates.
Controversy over Brazil’s position
Putin was in charge of explaining that Lula had been responsible for Venezuela not being on the list of possible new partners of BRICS. Putin said that although he thinks differently from Lula because he does recognize Maduro as the legitimate president of Venezuela, the decisions of the BRICS are made by consensus, so he wants Venezuela and Brazil to be able to resolve their differences.
Among the antecedents that led to Brazil’s current position, we find the request of the Brazilian Foreign Ministry to the Venezuelan government to grant safe conduct to the six (6) Venezuelan opponents who confined themselves to the residence of the Argentine Embassy in Caracas. Let us remember that Argentinian president Javier Milei, after breaking relations with Venezuela, left the custody of the Argentine diplomatic residence in charge of Lula, but Venezuelan government withdrew that possibility when assassination plans against President Maduro and Vice President Delcy Rodríguez, devised by the coup plotters, were discovered.
Also, the statements of Prosecutor Tarek William Saab in which he accused the leaders of Chile and Brazil of being functional agents of the CIA, continued to forge a climate of tension and low-intensity conflict that damaged the already fragile bilateral relationship between Caracas and Brasilia. This despite the fact that our Foreign Ministry distanced itself from the Attorney General’s statements.
However, the most important fact that triggered Brazil’s position remains that, in a clear act of interference in the internal affairs of Venezuela, Lula has maintained that he will not recognize any winner of the Venezuelan presidential elections of July 28, until the government of Venezuela or the opposition shows the electoral minutes. This interventionist position by Lula is proof that mutual trust has been lost and that the relationship between Venezuela and Brazil is going through its worst moment.
Faced with Brazil’s de facto veto, Venezuelan Foreign Ministry, Yván Gil, has issued a statement highlighting the importance of Venezuela for the BRICS and the Global South, while at the same time exposing Lula’s questioned actions.
Despite this bilateral impasse between Caracas and Brasilia, the incorporation of Venezuela into the BRICS must be seen as a long-term objective, as a process that will require a different diplomacy and further strengthen alliances. Venezuela’s entry into the BRICS is not a utopia; sooner rather than later, it will be a reality.
Diplomacy
South Korea pulls part of embassy staff from Ukraine amid POW dispute
The South Korean government has decided to withdraw part of its embassy staff from Ukraine.
According to the Yonhap news agency, Foreign Ministry spokesman Park Doo-sun cited the Kyiv administration’s failure to take “positive steps” in the dispute that began with the leak of information concerning the handover of North Korean prisoners of war as the justification for the move.
The spokesman also listed the ongoing threat of air strikes, which complicates the safety of diplomats, among the reasons.
Following the withdrawal of part of the personnel, essential diplomatic contacts will continue under the leadership of the charge d’affaires ad interim to Ukraine. All consular staff tasked with protecting South Korean citizens will remain in Ukraine.
Prior to this move, the Seoul administration decided on 8 October to withdraw its ambassador. The Foreign Ministry stated at the time that it was ready to continue consultations with Kyiv to resolve the emerging issues constructively.
Tensions between the two countries began with a speech delivered by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the United Nations General Assembly in September.
Zelenskyy announced that two captured soldiers from the North Korean army had been handed over to South Korea.
South Korean President Lee Jae-myung, meanwhile, accused Kyiv of breaching a confidentiality agreement.
Lee said the disclosure of this information endangered the prisoners’ families and stability on the Korean Peninsula.
Seoul expects a public apology
Dmytro Lytvyn, an adviser to the Ukrainian president, denied the existence of a confidentiality agreement.
The South Korean Foreign Ministry summoned Ukrainian Charge d’Affaires Andriy Veshkin on 28 September and issued a note of protest against Lytvyn’s remarks.
President Lee Jae-myung warned in a statement on 2 October that they would take additional measures against Kyiv if Ukrainian authorities did not acknowledge the agreement and make a public apology. Lee stated that Ukraine itself had initially requested that the transfer of the prisoners be kept confidential.
Ukrainian Foreign Ministry spokesman Heorhii Tykhyi said the dispute stemmed from differing interpretations of the confidentiality regime.
Tykhyi noted that Seoul, based on its constitution which recognises the entire Korean Peninsula as its own territory, requested that the prisoners be handed over “like its own citizens”.
Describing the handover as a “gesture of goodwill”, Tykhyi stated that they were conducting closed-door negotiations to resolve differences of opinion.
Ambassador Park Ki-chang returned to Seoul on 10 October. According to a report by The Korea Times newspaper citing the ministry, recalling the ambassador served as a diplomatic protest against the leak of information regarding the prisoners.
The newspaper wrote that South Korea had last taken a similar step in 2008 by withdrawing its ambassador to Japan.
Moscow warned foreign diplomats
On 3 October, the Russian Foreign Ministry reiterated its warning to foreign nationals, including diplomatic mission staff, against remaining in Ukraine.
The ministry recalled its advice to leave Kyiv, citing ongoing strikes against military targets.
The ministry noted that those who failed to heed the warnings would bear responsibility for the potential consequences.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said in a statement on 24 September that they had no information regarding Kyiv handing over two North Korean prisoners of war to Seoul.
Peskov, noting that prisoner matters fall under the authority of the Defence Ministry and intelligence services, said, “Contacts through the special services are continuing.”
Diplomacy
Ex-BND head Hanning tied to former Mossad chief amid spy inquiry
August Hanning, who led Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND) between 1998 and 2005, was arrested on 6 October on allegations that he obtained roughly 2,000 classified agency documents and used them during contacts with intelligence officers from a foreign state.
Accused of high treason and espionage on behalf of a foreign intelligence agency, the former spy chief is alleged to have procured the documents from former BND employee Manfred D.
Prosecutors stated that the leaked records included internal briefing notes presented to senior German officials, though the Berlin government has not yet publicly disclosed which country received the classified data.
According to an exclusive report by Jake Green for The Cradle, seized email exchanges revealed extensive ties between the arrested Hanning and former Mossad director Danny Yatom.
The correspondence shows that the two former intelligence directors built an ongoing network of contacts following their public service, combining commercial ventures, efforts to secure political influence, and intelligence links.
This dynamic has triggered debate that using personal connections and official access for private gain has left Germany’s intelligence apparatus vulnerable.
Intelligence notes for 10,000 euros and campaign proposals
According to the reviewed emails, Hanning told Yatom in a 2018 message that he could prepare an “overall assessment based on information obtained from senior German officials and intelligence agencies” concerning an unidentified candidate.
The former BND head committed to completing the report by 13 July in exchange for 10,000 euros.
Contacts between the two men subsequently expanded to cover domestic political processes in Germany. Ahead of the September 2021 federal election, Yatom asked Hanning to approach leading candidates.
Describing CIY Global as a “political campaign company”, the former Mossad chief noted that he aimed to introduce its capabilities to German politicians, and he mentioned his intention in the same exchange to transfer documents concerning a cybersecurity firm.
Cybersecurity partnership and surveillance operations across Europe
The partnership between Yatom and Hanning reached beyond political lobbying initiatives into the cybersecurity sector.
Hanning reportedly served as a consultant for World Health Energy Holdings, a cybersecurity company linked to Yatom.
Firms of this type, established or managed by former intelligence personnel, provide commercial platforms on the international market for Israeli-origin surveillance, cyber intelligence, and political influence capabilities.
The operational presence of private Israeli-based surveillance technologies across Europe has recently entered judicial records through scandals in Poland, Spain, and Greece.
Polish prosecutors announced on 12 October that data collected under the previous government via Pegasus spyware against political opponents had been transferred out of the country, adding that manufacturer NSO Group maintained access to the technical infrastructure.
In Spain, the 2022 CatalanGate investigation established that at least 65 people, including politicians, lawyers, and civil society representatives, were targeted using Pegasus or Candiru software, with Citizen Lab researchers publishing strong evidence linking the operation to Spanish authorities.
In Greece, the surveillance operation targeting journalist Thanasis Koukakis and Member of the European Parliament Nikos Androulakis was determined to have used Predator software, linked to Intellexa, a company founded by former Israeli intelligence officer Tal Dilian.
In the German espionage investigation, the traffic between Hanning and Yatom involving paid reporting, contacts with electoral candidates, and commercial partnerships does not yet provide conclusive legal evidence regarding the final destination of the roughly 2,000 classified documents.
Nevertheless, the disclosed correspondence gives German investigators a concrete line of inquiry to assess whether classified state secrets reached commercial networks tied to Israeli intelligence.
Diplomacy
Trump dismisses US envoy to Greece Kimberly Guilfoyle
US President Donald Trump has dismissed Kimberly Guilfoyle, the US ambassador in Athens, following serious press reports concerning her conduct.
White House Press Secretary Katie Zacharia told reporters during her first briefing that Guilfoyle had been asked to resign.
“She was doing a good job, but we didn’t like what we read in the press,” Trump said. “She was not a member of my family. I think she dated my son a long time ago.”
In a social media post, Guilfoyle stated: “These claims are unfounded, and I will resolutely defend my name, reputation, and integrity.” She added that she was particularly proud of the embassy’s work.
According to Kathimerini, her removal came as no surprise in Washington. Days of successive disclosures and vigorous exploitation of the matter by Democrats had been inflicting political damage on the White House ahead of the sensitive midterm elections.
The US State Department was instructed not to comment, with crisis management transferred entirely to the White House.
Reports indicate that most of the president’s team swiftly favoured Guilfoyle’s dismissal, while Secretary of State Marco Rubio was reportedly uneasy with the demonstratively warm public welcome she had staged for him.
Democrats on the House Foreign Affairs Committee have called for an investigation.
“Her resignation does not absolve her of responsibility,” the lawmakers wrote, adding: “While American families struggled to make ends meet, she used her position as a Trump administration official to enrich herself.”
Chargé d’Affaires Josh Huck will assume ambassadorial duties until a successor is chosen.
Meanwhile, Guilfoyle’s departure is expected to cause delays in agreements between Greece and the US.
These include the so-called “Rubio package”, comprising approximately $4 billion in arms deals finalised only days before the secretary of state’s arrival.
Several procedural steps still remain before the contracts can be signed.
In Athens, opposition parties are demanding answers. Dimitris Mantzos of PASOK called for a detailed briefing on the agreements reached during Rubio’s visit.
-
Europe2 weeks agoBerlin Left Party backs Israel’s right to exist for coalition pact
-
America2 weeks agoHow will Brazil’s presidential runoff work?
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoThe West is preparing for war not with Russia, but with its own people, French analyst Georges Kuzmanovic insists
-
Russia2 weeks ago71 EU lawmakers demand closure of Russian Houses in 15 member states
-
Europe2 weeks agoMI6 investigates potential leaks after former BND chief is detained
-
Russia2 weeks agoUS and Russian figures discuss American stake in Nord Stream lines
-
Russia2 weeks agoDrone strike shuts down Yandex data centre in Russia’s Ryazan region
-
America2 weeks agoTrump weighs presidential memorandum to cut surging US diesel prices
