>>179481, >>179482, >>179483, >>179484, >>179485, >>179486, >>179487, >>179488, >>179489, >>179490, >>179491, >>179492, >>179493, >>179494
This realization didn't stop them from funding those NGOs. They continued pouring public money into the region despite knowing that strongmen would divert large portions of it. That is how U.S. taxpayers end up financing the Taliban: all in the name of "democracy."
So what follows if you believe the Middle East must be democratized but you can't achieve it within its borders?
You change the borders.
The surge in mass migration after the Arab Spring’s collapse is not a coincidence. The think-tank world began a new chorus... "migration is democratizing." Importing populations from the region became the next iteration of the same project.
Here's, step-by-step, how it happened - keep in mind that United States finances many of those NGOs mentioned:
🔹 2010: First Global Forum on Migration and Development (GFMD) convenes. The forum is a “voluntary, non-binding consultative” bringing together representatives of more than 150 countries plus NGOs “for frank and productive conversations and sharing of best practices for improving the impact of migration on development.”
🔹 2010: Open Society Foundations launches International Migration Initiative. Open Society Foundation and MacArthur Foundation at this point are described as “the only private foundations willing to invest in shaping migration discussions at the global level.”
🔹 2011-2012: Landmark European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) rulings. All 46 Council of Europe member states are bound to ECHR obligations.
- In M.S.S. v. Belgium & Greece, ECHR “ruled that a state always has the responsibility to verify the conditions, treatment and legal safeguards to which an asylum seeker will be subjected if he is transferred, even when that transfer is from one EU member state to another,” making inter-state transfers significantly more difficult.“
- In Hirsi Jamaa v. Italy, ECHR bans collective expulsion of migrants "without any examination of each individual situation.”
🔹 2012: EU and International Organization for Migration (IOM) establish a strategic framework. The framework is described as being built “on a shared interest in bringing the benefits of well managed international migration to migrants and society.” The framework “also serves as a basis for exchange, development and structuring of the relationship between the EU and IOM.”
(Note: the International Republican Institute gives large grants to IOM. Mass migration is indeed an Uniparty effort.)
🔹 2013: UN adopts declaration of high-level dialogue on international migration and development. The resolution calls on member states to “[r]ecognize that international migration is a multidimensional reality of major relevance for the development of countries of origin, transit and destination, and in this regard recognize that international migration is a cross-cutting phenomenon that should be addressed in a coherent, comprehensive and balanced manner, integrating development with due regard for social, economic and environmental dimensions and respecting human rights.”
🔹 2014: U.S. establishes Central American Minors (CAM) Program. The U.S. government creates a legal pathway for eligible children in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras to apply for refugee or parole status from within their home countries, rather than making the dangerous journey north.
🔹 2015: UN adopts 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The resolution establishes 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and 100+ targets. Target 10.7 commits states to “‘facilitate orderly, safe, regular, and responsible migration and mobility of people, including through the implementation of planned and well-managed migration policies.”