Peter Myers Digest: Zoltan Pozsar: Dusk of the Petrodollar, Dawn of the Petroyuan

(1) Zoltan Pozsar: Dusk of the Petrodollar, Dawn of the Petroyuan

(2) Globalists plot to vest permanent power in WHO, via International

Health Regulations (IHR)

(3) Dr. Astrid stuckel Berger: the WHO, the UN and its Plan for a global

coup d’état

(1) Zoltan Pozsar: Dusk of the Petrodollar, Dawn of the Petroyuan

https://plus2.credit-suisse.com/shorturlpdf.html?v=5h1o-YP34-V&t=-6f9o9gxfcir9ldit6fbbldzzx

War and Commodity Encumbrance

Zoltan Pozsar

A recurring theme in my dispatches this year has been that in a moment

when the world is going from unipolar to multipolar, the actions of

heads of state are far more important than the actions of central banks.

That is because heads of state lead, their actions affect inflation, and

central banks merely follow by hiking rates to “clean up”. Central banks

will be behind the curve in this game, and if investors read only the

speeches of central bankers but not statesmen, they will be even more

behind the curve. The multipolar world order is being built not by G7

heads of state but by the “G7 of the East” (the BRICS heads of state),

which is a G5 really but because of “BRICSpansion”, I took the liberty

to round up.

The special relationship between China and Russia has a financial agenda

to it, and what President Xi and President Putin say about the future of

money – that is, the future they envision – matters for the future of

the U.S. dollar and liquidity in the U.S. Treasury market. Their actions

are forging something new:

Bretton Woods III is slowly taking shape, and in light of developments

to date, my motto for Bretton Woods III – “our commodity, your problem”

– remains apt.

President Xi’s visit with Saudi and GCC leaders marks the birth of the

petroyuan and a leap in China’s growing encumbrance of OPEC+’s oil and

gas reserves: with the China-GCC Summit, China can claim to have built a

“special relationship” not only with the “+” sign in OPEC+ (Russia), but

with Iran and all of OPEC+…

President Xi’s visit was the very first China-Arab States Summit in

history, and echoes FDR’s meeting with King Abdul Aziz Ibn Saud on

Valentine’s Day 1945 aboard an American cruiser, the USS Quincy. Fixed

income investors should care

– not just because the invoicing of oil in renminbi will hurt the

dollar’s might, but also because commodity encumbrance means more

inflation for the West.

–

Here are the key parts from President Xi’s speech at the China-GCC

Summit (all emphasis with orange underlines are mine): “In the next

three to five years, China is ready to work with GCC countries in the

following priority areas: first, setting up a new paradigm of

all-dimensional energy cooperation, where China will continue to import

large quantities of crude oil on a long-term basis from GCC countries,

and purchase more LNG. We will strengthen our cooperation in the

upstream sector, engineering services, as well as [downstream] storage,

transportation, and refinery. The Shanghai Petroleum and Natural Gas

Exchange platform will be fully utilized for RMB settlement in oil and

gas trade, […] and we could start currency swap cooperation and

advance the m-CBDC Bridge project.

Let’s dissect President Xi’s comments bit by bit, and color them with

other pieces of information as we go along. First, what is the

“duration” of this theme?

It’s pretty short: in the words of President Xi, “the next three to five

years”. In market terms, that means that five-year forward five-year

inflation breakevens should be discounting a world in which oil and gas

is invoiced not only in dollars but also renminbi, and in which some oil

and gas is not available for the West at low prices (and in dollars)

because they have been encumbered by the East.

But it does not appear that breakeven expectations reflect anything like

that…

My sense is that the market is starting to realize that the world is

going from unipolar to multipolar politically, but the market has yet to

make the leap that in the emerging multipolar world order,

cross-currency bases will be smaller, commodity bases will be greater,

and inflation rates in the West will be higher…

Inflation traders should be paranoid, not complacent. As Andy Grove

said, “only the paranoid survive”, but when I asked a small group of

inflation traders over dinner in London this summer about how the market

(they) comes up with five-year forward five-year breakevens, I did not

sense any degree of paranoia in their answer: “there is no top-down or

bottom-up work that we do to come up with our estimates; we take central

banks’ inflation targets as a given and the rest is liquidity”.

Inflation breakevens do not seem to price any geopolitical risk.

Second, “paradigm” in “a new paradigm of all-dimensional energy

cooperation” is a symbolic word. The meeting between FDR and King Abdul

Aziz Ibn Saud was a new paradigm too: the U.S.’s security guarantees for

the kingdom for access to affordable oil supplies. Over time, the

paradigm boiled down to this:

the U.S. imported oil and paid for it with U.S. dollars, which Saudi

Arabia spent on Treasuries and arms and recycled the leftovers as

deposits in U.S. banks. (In the wake of the OPEC shocks of the 1970s,

that recycling of petrodollars led to the Latin American debt crisis in

the 1980s.) The old paradigm worked…

…until it didn’t:

the U.S. is now less reliant on oil from the Middle East owing to the

shale revolution, while China is the largest importer of oil; security

relations are in flux (see here): Saudi holdings of U.S. Treasuries and

bank deposits are down as the kingdom went from funding the U.S.

government and banks to owning equity in firms; and the Saudi crown

prince said recently that the kingdom could reduce its investments in

the U.S. (see here). Similar patterns hold in other GCC countries.

The “new paradigm” between China, Saudi Arabia, and GCC countries is

fundamentally different from the one struck aboard USS Ouincy. Naturally

so, as China is now dealing with a rich Middle East, whereas FDR was

dealing with a Middle East that had just started to develop. With

wealth, power and priorities shift:

back then, “liquidity and security” were more important for an emerging

region; today, “equity and respect” are more importantforwhat has become

an eminent region.

That is what China offered: “all-dimensional energy cooperation” means

not just taking oil for cash and arms but investing in the region in the

“downstream sector” and leveraging the regional know-how for cooperation

in the “upstream sectors” -“upstream” could potentially mean the joint

exploration of oil in the South China Sea.

Furthermore, Xi’s “all-dimensional energy cooperation” also means

working in cooperation on the “localized production of new energy

equipment” (see here).

Put differently, “oil for development” (plants and jobs) crowded out

“oil for arms” – the Belt and Road Initiative met Saudi Arabia’s Vision

2030 in a big win-win…

Third, the “newparadigm” will not be funded with U.S. dollars:

President Xi noted that “the Shanghai Petroleum and Natural […] will

be fully utilized for RMB settlement in oil and gas trade”. President

Xi’s comments that “China will continue to import large quantities of

crude oil on a long-term basis from GCC countries, and purchase more

LNG” underscores the gravity of the underlined quote: combined, the two

basically say that China, already the largest buyer of oil and gas from

GCC countries, will buy even more in the future, and wants to pay for

all of it in renminbi over the next three to five years.

Again, think of the timing of this statement in a diplomatic sense:

President Xi communicated his message on “renminbi invoicing” not during

the first day of his visit – when he met only the Saudi leadership – but

during the second day of his visit – when he met the leadership of all

the GCC countries – to in part signal … GCC oil flowing East +

renminbi invoicing = the dawn of the petroyuan.

Good morning!

Given the scope of priority areas in which China plans to work with GCC

countries -the sale of clean energy infrastructure, big data and cloud

computing centers, 5G and 6G projects, and cooperation in smart

manufacturing and space exploration as per Xi’s speech – there will be

many avenues through which GCC countries will be able to decumulate the

renminbi they earn from selling oil and gas to China.

And if, perish the thought, any GCC country were to accumulate some

surplus cash in “non-convertible” renminbi, just as President Xi’s plane

was landing in Riyadh, the PBoC revealed that during 2022, it had

re-started gold purchases with gusto.

Why do China’s gold purchases matter in the context of renminbi settlement?

Because at the 2018 BRICS Summit, China launched a renminbi-denominated

oil futures contract on the Shanghai International Energy Exchange, and

since 2016 and 2017, the renminbi has been convertible to gold on the

Shanghai and Hong Kong Gold Exchanges, respectively. Not a bad deal,

this renminbi…

Paraphrasing Forrest Gump, “you can spend it on solar panels, wind

turbines, data centers, telecommunications equipment, or space projects

to create jobs, or you can just recycle it at some bank or just convert

it to good old gold bars. Money is as money does, and convertibility to

gold beats convertibility to dollars”.

President Xi’s “three- to five-year horizon” means that by 2025, the GCC

may be paid in renminbi for all of the oil and gas that they will be

shipping east to China.

Fourth, “plumbing” references in Xi’s speech add further gravity to the

above…

When was the last time you heard a head of state talk about swap lines

and central bank digital currencies (CBDC)? And not just any CBDC, but a

specific one: “the m-CBDC Bridge project”.

The m-CBDC Bridge project, or as the BIS likes to refer to it, Project

mBridge. is a masterclass in plumbing: undertaken by the PBoC. the Bank

of Thailand, the HKMA, and the Central Bank of the United Arab Emirates,

the project enables real-time, peer-to-peer, cross-border, and foreign

exchange transactions using CBDCs, and does so without involving the

U.S. dollar or the network of Western correspondent banks that the U.S.

dollar system runs on. Pretty interesting, no?

In a very Uncle Sam-like fashion (see here!. China wants more of the

GCC’s oil, wants to pay for it with renminbi, and wants the GCC to

accept e-renminbi on the m-CBDC Bridge platform, so don’t hesitate –

join the mBridge fast train…

And finally, President Xi’s reference to starting “currency swap

cooperation”, reminded me of using swap lines as analogues of the

Lend-Lease agreement whereby the U.S. lent dollars to Britain to buy

arms to fight Germany during WWII:

now we fight climate change and if you don’t earn renminbi to build

NEOM. no problem at all, we can swap your local currency for my local

currency whereby I lend you some renminbi and then you can buy the stuff

you need, and when you will start selling me oil for renminbi, you can

pay off the swap lines. All I care about is that you don’t pay for

imports from me in U.S. dollars, because I have enough U.S. dollars

already and I don’t want to add to my sanctions risk.

The “m-CBDC Bridge project” offers further leads down the monetary

rabbit hole:

I didn’t understand “why” when I first read about Russia requesting oil

payments from India in United Arab Emirates dirhams, but now I do:

dirhams “appeal” to Russia because the Central Bank of the UAE is a

member of m-CBDC Bridge, and so dirhams can be sold for renminbi using

central bank digital currencies and thus away from the Western banking

system. This does not necessarily have to go through the m-CBDC Bridge

project per se, but the existence of it implies that some CBDCs are

already interlinked to facilitate interstate payments “off the Western

system”. Then, perhaps inspired by Russia’s payment request, on December

6th, Bloomberg ran a story about India and the UAE working on a

rupee-dirham payment mechanism to bypass the U.S. dollar in bilateral

trade, a mechanism that will include payments for oil and gas purchases

from the UAE.

Do take a step back and consider… that since the beginning of this

year, 2022, Russia has been selling oil to China for renminbi, and to

India for UAE dirhams; India and the UAE are working on settling oil and

gas trades in dirhams by 2023; and China is asking the GCC to “fully”

utilize Shanghai’s exchanges to settle all oil and gas sales to China in

renminbi by 2025. That’s dusk for the petrodollar…

… and dawn for the petroyuan. Now on to the topic of commodity

encumbrance.

In money and banking, the word “encumbrance” is typically used in the

context of transactions involving collateral: if collateral is pledged

to a specific trade, it’s referred to as “encumbered”, which means it

can’t be used to do other trades. If encumbrance becomes extreme,

collateral gets scarce, which typically shows up as interest rates on

scarce pieces of collateral trading deeply below OIS rates…

Under Bretton Woods III, a system in which commodities are collateral,

encumbrance means that commodities can get scarce in certain parts of

the world – and that scarcity shows up as inflation “printing” far

inflation targets…

To see what encumbrance means in the context of the oil and gas markets

today, let’s start with the geographic scope of OPEC+, that is, OPEC

plus Russia: the original founding members of OPEC were the Islamic

Republic of Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Venezuela in 1960,

which were later joined by Qatar (1961), Indonesia (1962), Libya (1962),

the United Arab Emirates (1967), Algeria (1969), Nigeria (1971), Ecuador

(1973), Gabon (1975), Angola (2007), Equatorial Guinea (2017), and Congo

(2018). Russia joined OPEC in 2016 – a union that forged OPEC+. Think of

OPEC+ as follows: Russia, Iran, the GCC, Latin American producers, North

African producers, West African producers, and Indonesia. I left out

Iraq, where ISIS is complicating the overall picture, but the rest of

the groupings show how China is starting to dominate OPEC+:

First, Russia and China have their famous special relationship, and

since the outbreak of hostilities in Ukraine, China has been paying for

Russian oil in renminbi at a steep discount. As President Putin

remarked. “China drives a hard bargain”.

Second, Iran and China have also had a special relationship since March

27, 2021 – the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership – a 25-year “deal”

under which China committed to invest $400 billion into Iran’s economy

in exchange for a steady supply of Iranian oil at a steep discount. The

deal included $280 billion toward developing downstream petrochemical

sectors (refining and plastics) and $120 billion toward Iran’s

transportation and manufacturing infrastructure. Specifically, under the

agreement, “China will be able to buy any and all Iranian oil, gas, and

petrochemical products at a minimum guaranteed discount of 12 percent to

the six-month rolling mean price of comparable benchmark products, plus

another 6 to 8 percent on top for risk-adiusted compensation” (see

here). This means that Iran is selling its oil to China at about the

same price as Russia, or maybe in reverse, as the Iran deal predates the

post-Ukraine prices for Russia!

Third, Venezuela has been accepting payments for oil in renminbi since

2019 (see here) and has also been selling oil to China at steep

discounts (see here).

Fourth, Xi’s GCC “pitch” was similar to the Comprehensive Strategic

Partnership with Iran – investments in downstream petrochemical

projects, manufacturing, and infrastructure – plus some higher

value-added projects for Saudi Arabia to aid Riyadh’s Silicon Valley

aspirations. Because the GCC aren’t sanctioned, China didn’t ask for any

steep discounts, but it did ask for renminbi settlement.

Let’s stop here for a moment. Russia, Iran, and Venezuela account for

about 40 percent of the world’s proven oil reserves, and each of them

are currently selling oil to China for renminbi at a steep discount. The

GCC countries account for 40 percent of proven oil reserves as well –

Saudi Arabia has a half of that, and the other GCC countries the other

half – and are being courted by China to accept renminbi for their oil

in exchange for transformative investments – the “newparadigm” we

discussed above. To underscore, the U.S. has sanctioned half of OPEC

with 40 percent of the world’s oil reserves and lost them to China,

while China is courting the other half of OPEC with an offer that’s hard

to refuse…

The remaining 20 percent of proven oil reserves are in North and West

Africa and Indonesia. Geopolitically, North Africa is dominated by

Russia at present (see here). West Africa by China, and Indonesia has

its own agenda (see below).

Commodity encumbrance here means that over the next “three to five

years”, China will not only pay for more oil in renminbi (crowding out

the U.S. dollar), but new investments in downstream petrochemical

industries in Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the GCC more broadly mean that in

the future, much more value-added will be captured locally at the

expense of industries in the West. Think of this as a “farm-to-table”

model: I used to sell my chicken and vegetables to you, and you sold

soup for a markup in your five-star restaurant, but from now on, I’ll

make the soup myself and you’ll get to import it in a can – my oil, my

jobs, your spend, “our commodity, vour problem. “Our commodity, our

emancipation”.

Commodity encumbrance has had its first major casualty in Europe

already: BASF’s decision to permanently downsize its operations at its

main plant in Ludwigshafen and instead shift its chemical operations to

China was motivated by the fact that China is securing energy at

discounts, not markups like Europe.

Collateral encumbrance means encumbrance from the perspective of someone

pledging collateral to a dealer. Dealers in turn rehypothecate pledged

collateral.

Commodity rehypothecation will work the same way: heavily discounted oil

and locally produced chemicals invoiced in renminbi mean encumbrance by

the East, and the marginal re-export of oil and chemicals also for

renminbi to the West means commodity rehypothecation for a profit, i.e.,

an “East-to-West” spread…

We are starting to see examples of commodity rehypothecation already:

China became a big exporter of Russian LNG to Europe, and India a big

exporter of Russian oil and refined products such as diesel to Europe

(see here and here).

We should expect more “rehypothecation” in the future across more

products and invoiced not just in euros and dollars, but also renminbi,

dirhams, and rupees.

But commodity encumbrance has a darker, “institutional” aspect to it too…

What I described above is a de facto state of affairs, in which Russia,

Iran, and Venezuela have effectively pledged their resources to the

BRICS and BeltandRoad “cause”, and China is courting the GCC to do the

same under a “new paradigm”.

But there is also a de jure version of the commodity encumbrance theme,

and here is where a recent speech by President Putin comes in. On June

22, 2022, at the BRICS Business Forum – a WEF-like meeting of the “G7 of

the East” – President Putin noted that “the creation of an international

reserve currency based on a basket of currencies of our countries is

being worked on” (see here).

This “reserve currency project” took off after China failed to reform

the SDR, and its antecedents were chronicled in a recent book by Zoe Liu

and Mihaela Papa: Can the BRICS De-Dollarize the Global Financial System

(see here). The book was funded by the Rising Power Alliances Project at

the Fletcher School of Tufts University, which in turn was funded by the

U.S. Department of Defense.

It would seem to me that if the DoD has a keen interest in the topic of

de-dollarization, market participants should have one as well, and

should also add commodity encumbrance to the list. Now back to Putin’s

“BRICS coin” idea…

When a G7 rates strategist or trader starts looking at the “G7 of the

East”, he or she will realize that institutions and people are

different, but they do exist.

Regarding the development of an “international reserve currency” a la

the SDR, Sergei Glazyev has been in charge. Since 2019, Glazyev has been

serving as minister in charge of integration and macroeconomics of the

EEC, that is, the Eurasian Economic Commission. He strikes me as someone

similar to Liu He. who President Xi introduced to a former U.S. national

security advisor saying: “This is Liu Fie. Fie is very important to me”.

Given his recent progress report on “BRICS coin”, Sergei Glazyev seems

to be very important to President Putin.

Regarding “institutionalized commodity encumbrance”, the comments I

could find about the “BRICS coin” project from Glazyev revolve around

the methodology to determine the weight of each participating currency

in the “coin”. Specifically:

“should [a nation] reserve a portion of [its] natural resources for the

backing of the new economic system, [its] respective weight in the

currency basket of the new monetary unit would increase accordingly,

providing that nation with larger currency reserves and credit capacity.

In addition, bilateral swap lines with trading partner countries would

provide them with adequate financing for co-investments and trade

financing” (see here). Hm. Swap lines again to facilitate trade and

investments, and a de jure vision for commodity encumbrance in exchange

for boosting a country’s “credit line” in an alternative economic system.

It seems to me that “new paradigms” come in pairs…

Attention needs to be paid to the goings-on of the global East and

South, especially given that this year Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Iran

have all started their application to the BRICS (see here). Furthermore,

following this year’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) Summit in

Samarkand, the SCO

– “the NATO of the East” – granted dialogue partner status to “half the GCC”

–

– Saudi Arabia and Qatar – and started procedures to admit Iran as a

member…

–

In Riyadh, President Xi referred to “a garden of civilizations” in the

context of the Belt and Road Initiative (see here). Unless they involve

Adam, Eve, and a snake, gardens typically refer to a happy and peaceful

place. Now consider that if Russia and Iran get along, China and Iran

get along, Russia and Saudi Arabia get along, and China and Saudi Arabia

get along, then the foreign ministers of Saudi Arabia and Iran engaging

in what the FT called “friendly talks” last week (see here) means more

momentum for Belt and Road, BRICS+, and “BRICS coin”.

Indeed, for the Belt and Road Initiative to work, the region has to be a

peaceful “garden of civilizations”, and for “the enemy of my enemy is my

friend” to work, a Great Power needs to befriend the enemy of a rival

Great Power. But that strategy is increasingly hard to implement in the

Middle Eastern “region” of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI): the great

powers of the Eurasian landmass – China and Russia – are bound by a

“special relationship”, and each of them have good a relationship with

each of the great powers of the Middle East, and all of them have much

to gain from building a new economic and monetary system.

The China-GCC Summit is one thing, and China’s strategic partnership

with Iran is another, but both Saudi Arabia and Iran applying to pillar

institutions of the multipolar world order – BRICS+ and the SCO – at the

same exact time, plus the idea of “BRICS coin” as a commodity-weighted

neutral reserve asset that encourages members to pledge their

commodities to the BRICS “cause”, should have G7 bond investors

concerned, because these trends may keep inflation from slowing and

interest rates from falling for the rest of this decade.

Finally, the de facto and de jure commodity encumbrance themes described

above have an even graver inflationary undertone if you consider the

following:

over the past decade, all growth in global oil production came from U.S.

shale and other non-conventional sources such as Canadian tar sands. We

know from official comments following President Biden’s visit to Saudi

Arabia that the kingdom is currently “pumping” at capacity and will be

able to boost output by only one million barrels per day by 2025 and

then “no more”. In light of that, consider that production from shale

fields has peaked and recall some recent comments from the largest shale

operator in the U.S. that more drilling would harm the shale industry

(see here). It appears to me that unless the U.S. nationalizes shale oil

fields and starts to drill for oil itself to boost production, over the

next three to five years, we’re looking at an inelastic supply of oil

and gas…

.. .and of that inelastic supply:

(1) China will get a bigger share at a discount, invoiced in renminbi.

(2)

(3) China will export more downstream products at a wider margin, and…

(4)

(5) China will lure more firms like BASF with discounted energy bills.

(6)

(7) Iran, with Chinese capital, will do more downstream exports too, and…

(8)

(9) GCC countries, with Chinese capital, ditto, most likely for renminbi.

(10)

The “new paradigm”, as I see it, comes with a theme of “emancipation”:

both sanctioned and non-sanctioned members of OPEC, with Chinese

capital, are going to adopt the “farm-to-table” model in which they will

not just sell oil but will also refine more of it and process more of it

into high value-added petrochemical products. Given supply constraints

over “the next three to five years”. this will likely be at the expense

of refiners and petrochemical firms in the West, and also growth in the

West. All this means much less domestic production and more inflation as

steadily price-inflating alternatives are imported from the East.

And this is not just about oil and gas…

Earlier this year, President Widodo of Indonesia (an OPEC member since

1962) called for an OPEC-style cartel for battery metals for EVs.

Resource nationalism is in the air, but markets don’t seem to price it

as a potential driver of inflation.

Considerthat shortly after President Widodo floated his ideaon October

30, 2022, on November 15, 2022, the G7 gave lndonesia $20 billion to

move away from coal (see here). Then, on December 14, 2022, the G7 gave

Vietnam $15 billion too (see here) to do the same. Great Powers are

spending a lot to keep commodities and friend-shoring locations in their

orbit at affordable prices. One would suspect these “outlays” are a part

of the G7’s $600 billion earmarked to counter China’s Belt and Road

Initiative (see here). Here is the point: major amounts of money are

being mobilized to cut off big, fat tail risks to inflation, and to

re-emphasize…

…five-year forward five-year breakeven inflation expectations do not

price geopolitical risk. I also believe that most inflation traders may

not appreciate that the future path of inflation in the West is being

“bought” in $15 to $20 billion “clips” one commodity and one region at a

time – commodity encumbrance is a real risk.

Commodity encumbrance cuts in the other direction too…

Consider that on November 3, 2022, Canada ordered three Chinese firms to

exit lithium mining (see here). In simple terms, commodity encumbrance

means…

…a total war for the control of commodities.

President Xi’s “next three to five years” of implementing the “new

paradigm” and the risks of resource nationalism and “BRICS coin” means

this for G7 rates:

when you look at the yield curve and think about the five-year section

and then the forward five-year section, by the time the forward

five-year section starts, President Xi may have accomplished his “next

three- to five-year” goal of paying for China’s oil and gas imports

exclusively in renminbi and may have advanced commodity encumbrance by

developing downstream petrochemical industries in the Middle East

“region” of Belt and Road and also the rollout of “BRICS coin”.

I don’t think five-year forward five-year rates are pricing the future

correctly: breakevens appear to be blind to geopolitical risks and the

likelihood of the above.

If the above scenario won’t come to pass, it will be due to a big,

global fight…

But a fight like that takes time to conclude, and in its wake, forward

five-years should still be different. Or maybe not, if yield curve

control funds reconstruction, but under that scenario, bond investors

will be subject to financial repression…

Five-year forward five-year breakeven inflation expectations now make

little sense. For two generations of investors, geopolitics did not

matter. This time is different: it’s time to get real and it’s time to

start pricing the secular end of “lowflation”…

Recognize two things: first, that inflation has been driven by

non-linear shocks (a pandemic; stimulus; supply chain issues involving

laptops, chips, and cars; post-pandemic labor shortages; and then the

war in Ukraine), and second, that inflation forecasts treat geopolitics

in the reaiview mirror. Don’t be too DSGE…

…think about inflation with geopolitics, resource nationalism, and

“BRICS coin” in mind as the next set of non-linear shocks that will keep

inflation above target, forcing central banks to hike interest rates

above 5% and keep them high as they…

…”clean up” the inflation mess caused by Great Power conflict.

This year was just the beginning. Next year sets the stage for BRICS and

the BRI: in April. China will host the fourth Belt and Road Forum (the

WEF of the East). Following forums in 2017 and 2019, but not 2021 due to

Covid, the coming forum will be hosted by a China that, while in

lockdown, forged a bond with all of OPEC+.

(2) Globalists plot to vest permanent power in WHO, via International

Health Regulations (IHR)

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2022/12/26/bill-gates-global-takeover-is-official.aspx

https://www.1news.info/health-news/bill-gates-global-takeover-is-official-1315334

Bill Gates Global Takeover Is Official

Published: December 26, 2022 in Health News by 1news.info.

The WHO is actually a specialized agency within the United Nations. It

was initially established in 1948 to “further international cooperation

for improved public health conditions,” but we can now see that the

long-term goal of the WHO is to serve as a foundation or hub for a one

world government under the auspice of coordinating and ensuring global

biosecurity.

This becomes self-evident when you review the proposed amendments1 to

the existing International Health Regulations (IHR) and the new pandemic

treaty, which Nass and Corbett review in the featured video.

I also provided details about the treaty in “What You Need to Know About

the WHO Pandemic Treaty.” Below, I will primarily focus on the proposed

amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR).

Health Regulation Amendments Will Legalize Tyranny

In a December 16, 2022, Substack article,2 James Roguski also reviewed

how a temporary crisis (the COVID-19 pandemic) — which, by the way, is

long since over — is being used by the WHO to seize permanent power.

The WHO’s ‘recommendations’ are legally binding by all member states,

and supersede all national and state laws, including the U.S. Constitution.

Here’s a quick overview of some of the most dangerous and egregious IHR

amendments they intend to implement, and what it will mean for you and

I. For additional details, see the three references listed here:3,4,5

Eliminating the concepts of respect for human dignity, human rights and

fundamental freedoms — The first principle in Article 3 of the original

IHR states that health regulations shall be implemented “with full

respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons.”

The proposed amendment to this Article will strike “with full respect

for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons.” Now,

health regulations will be based on “principles of equity, inclusivity

and coherence” only.

What does that mean? Think “You must wear a mask/social

distance/isolate/get jabbed to protect others,” even if you’re not sick,

or for whatever reason don’t want to do any of those things.

Autonomy over your body will be eliminated. You’ll have no right to make

personal health decisions. Even if you suspect you might die from the

intervention, you have to comply because it’s all about what’s “best”

for the collective.

Individuals won’t matter. Human dignity will not be taken into

consideration. Human rights will not be taken into consideration, and

neither will the concept that human beings have fundamental freedoms

that cannot be infringed.

Another amendment is that public health measures will no longer be aimed

at achieving “the appropriate level of health protection.” Instead, the

new objective will be to attain the “highest achievable level of health

protection” without any consideration of proportionality. It’s easy to

see how this amendment will be used as justification for the removal of

individual rights and freedoms.

Dictatorial powers will be given to the director-general of the WHO —

The director-general will have sole power to declare the beginning and

end of a public health emergency of international concern (PHEI), and

the sole power to dictate responses (including travel restrictions, mask

mandates, lockdowns, business closures and vaccine requirements), and

the allocation of resources to that PHEI, including funding and what

drugs are to be manufactured and used.

These dictates will override and overrule any and all national laws

within member states, including the U.S. Constitution.

The obligations under the amended IHR are legally binding, and any

member nation that refuses the director-general’s recommendations can be

punished through a variety of mechanisms, including economic sanctions

and embargoes. Note that the term “recommendation” is defined as

“legally binding,” which means they’re actually dictates, not suggestions.

Dictatorial powers will be given to unelected regional directors of the

WHO — Similarly, appointed (not elected) regional directors will have

the power to determine what constitutes a public health emergency of

regional concern (PHERC), and their decisions will also overrule all

other laws and Constitutional rights.

Eliminating privacy rights — One of the amendments (page 25) authorizes

the disclosure of private and personal data, including genomic data,

“where essential for the purposes of assessing and managing a public

health risk,” i.e., contact tracing and related efforts.

Expanding censorship — The WHO will “strengthen capacities to … counter

misinformation and disinformation” at the global level. In other words,

censorship of information will be expanded. The WHO will dictate what

“truth” is, and since its decisions are legally binding, countries must

enforce compliance.

Mandating vaccine passports and digital IDs globally — The IHR

amendments will also give the WHO the power to mandate the use of

“health certificates,”6 i.e., vaccine passports. The vaccine passport,

in turn, will operate as your digital identification, which will be tied

to every aspect of your life, including your bank accounts and social

credit score.

In short, it will usher in a surveillance and forced compliance system.

The G20 also recently declared that digital vaccine passports

standardized by the WHO will be part of international pandemic

prevention and response moving forward.

The Trail of Corruption

Ever since its founding in 1948, the WHO has been infiltrated by

industry. From Big Tobacco to the nuclear industry and pharmaceuticals,

industry has historically dictated the WHO’s global agenda and continues

to do so in the present day, putting profits and power ahead of public

health.7

In April 2020, then-President Donald Trump suspended U.S. funding to the

WHO,8 but then directed the U.S. funding for WHO to GAVI, which is a

Gates controlled charity that likely just sent the funds to WHO.

President Joe Biden restored U.S. funding once he took office.9

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation even before Trump pulled funding was

still the WHO’s No.1 funder, as Gates contributes via multiple avenues,

including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the vaccine alliance

GAVI, the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE), UNICEF and Rotary

International.

Gates contributes such a large portion — currently about $1 billion of

the WHO’s $4.84 billion biennial budget10 — that Politico in 2017 wrote

a highly-critical article11 about his undue financial influence over the

WHO’s operations, which Politico said was causing the agency to spend:

“… a disproportionate amount of its resources on projects with the

measurable outcomes Gates prefers … Some health advocates fear that

because the Gates Foundation’s money comes from investments in big

business, it could serve as a Trojan horse for corporate interests to

undermine WHO’s role in setting standards and shaping health policies.”

Indeed, as noted by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in his book “Vax-Unvax,”12

“The sheer magnitude of his foundation’s financial contributions has

made Bill Gates an unofficial — albeit unelected — leader of the WHO.”

And, in that role, Gates is able to ensure that the decisions the WHO

makes end up profiting his own interests and those of his Big Pharma

partners.

A ‘One World’ Health Plan

In October 2022, the WHO announced a new initiative called One Health

Joint Plan of Action. The plan was launched by the Quadripartite, which

is made up of:

Beyond the amendments to the IHR, this initiative will also expand the

WHO’s powers. The One Health Joint Plan of Action combines multiple

globalist organizations and synchronizes their plans, while at the same

time combining their resources and power to create a centralized global

superpower.

Decentralized health care and pandemic planning make sense, as both

medicine and government work best when individualized and locally

oriented. As it stands, however, the opposite global agenda is being

implemented.

While the Pandemic Treaty and the IHR amendments expand and centralize

power over human health with the WHO, the One Health Joint Plan expands

the WHO’s power to also address “critical health threats” to animals,

plants and the environment.

When you add that together with the planned elimination of human rights,

you can see how the One Health Joint Plan can be used to enforce climate

lockdowns, for example, or travel restrictions to protect wildlife or

the environment. To learn more about this plan, see my previous article,

“WHO Assembles Superpowers With ‘One Health Plan.'”

Jeremy Farrar Selected To Be WHO’s Chief Scientist

December 13, 2022, the WHO announced that Sir Jeremy Farrar, head of the

Wellcome Trust, has been chosen as its new chief scientist.13 The

announcement came mere days after the publication of Dr. Anthony Fauci’s

deposition transcript,14 which showed he and Farrar colluded to suppress

discussion about SARS-CoV-2 origin. …

Agenda 21 is based on the ideology of “communitarianism,” which argues

that “an individual’s rights should be balanced against rights of the

community.” Community, however, in the mind of the globalists, is made

up of NGOs, corporations and government, which are to dictate what

happens around the world. The people are not really part of the equation.

So, the communitarianist philosophy of Agenda 21 and the IHR amendment

that removes human rights and freedoms come together like two pieces of

a puzzle. The WHO’s biosecurity powers can then be used to pave the way

for the more freedom-robbing aspects of Agenda 21.

(3) Dr. Astrid stuckel Berger: the WHO, the UN and its Plan for a global

coup d’état

https://www.kla.tv/AstridStuckelberger/24562

Astrid stuckel Berger

Friday, 23. December 2022

18. AZK – Dr. Astrid stuckel Berger, “The WHO, the UN and its Plan for a

global coup d’état against our freedoms”

As a longtime WHO collaborator Dr. Astrid stuckel Berger has witnessed

first-hand how the top health authority, the world works. The grievances

in the WHO became internationally well-known Whistleblower. In her talk,

she describes how she taught at the WHO, that, in the event of a

pandemic, the human rights respected, no panic, stoked, and in any case

a Lockdown should be imposed. However, as in the case of Corona the

exact opposite occurred, have you understood, that there is a

dictatorship was in preparation. You will hear your exciting

revelations. [read more]

Introduction by Ivo Sasek

And I say, the last speaker, she is a charming and highly competent

Whistleblower. And I’ll tell you the WHO and the United Nations have to

fear every reason to be this Lady now, not because she is dressed as a

Tiger, but because they will Express themselves fearlessly to the topic

you will talk about – and listen well to the title, there is already so

much in it: “The WHO, the UN and its Plan for a global coup d’état

against our freedom”. We welcome with great thanks and admiration for

this brave woman, woman doctor, Astrid stuckel Berger. Thank you that

you are there, we see a brief summary of your resume. Please be nice.

Dr. Astrid Stuckel Berger

Private lecturer and a PH-service [explanation: a doctoral degree in

English-speaking countries] Dr. Astrid stuckel Berger has developed over

the years into an internationally recognized expert on global public

health and health policy issues. She has more than 25 years of

experience as a researcher and trainer in the field of public health at

the medical faculty of the University of Geneva and as a Professor at

universities in Switzerland and abroad. In addition to WHO she is

co-founder and current President of the Geneva International Network on

Ageing (GINA), as well as former Chairman of various NGO committees at

the United Nations, where she represents since 2002, an academic, an

American NGO. Within the United Nations, she worked three years, and in

particular with the WHO, to schools, to the Minister of health and

epidemiological centers of the regional offices in the implementation of

the new international health regulations, and in dealing with

emergencies of international importance, such as pandemics. She was

appointed rate as an independent expert in the ethics Committee of the

WHO on the ethical compliance of international research proposals. Over

the years she also worked as a consultant for the WHO in several areas,

such as: Mental health, healthy aging and the social determinants of

health [explanation: the Economic and social conditions that influence

the health status] active. On the European level, it is in addition to

the implementation of research projects as an EU expert for health and

Innovation for seniors, active, and in particular of the ethical and

legal aspects. She was awarded by the Secretary-General of the United

Nations for their achievements during the International year of older

persons 1999. She is the author of a dozen books and more than 180

scientific papers and Reports for the UN, the EU or of the governments,

of which 40 reports and health policy papers for the United Nations and

the WHO.

Lecture by Dr. Astrid stuckel Berger: “The WHO, the UN and its Plan for

a global coup d’état against our freedoms”:

I greet you warmly in the world.

I want to thank Ivo Sasek, and his Team to bring all these people from

all these countries here.

It’s like quantum media the world has the feeling to be here, and we

have the feeling of being in the world, so the technology should be used

in a good way.

I would like to tell you first, we are really in a historical, biblical,

apocalyptic time. What I’m about to present to you, is dramatic, but it

is also necessary.

It is a Great is not Reset, but a great awakening.

The human consciousness is in need of this. This has not always been

here, this is new. This global System enables us to see how tyranny is

to grow global. I would like to take on Mr Pfaff reference, because in

American history (specification of the Live-Translation: history of the

UN) has impressed me something: the General Roméo A. Dallaire was

witness to the genocide in Rwanda. There was nothing he could do, he

wanted to stop it. He has called on the UN Secretary-General. The

genocide has taken place before his eyes, even though he was actually

there for peace and security. I may personally meet and we have a Panel,

a discussion platform, a round of established peace between the

generations. He (Dallaire) told me something that has stayed with me

always, he said: “I know that there is a God, because I shook in Rwanda,

the devil’s Hand. I saw him, smelled him and I have touched him. I know

that the devil exists and therefore I know that there is a God.“

So this is an example of a model of someone in a war situation is but I

would like to make the Good, and so it is today. André Malraux, a French

writer has said, we are in a spiritual century or not. And I would say

the bottom line is, we have already won. And we must remain in this high

vibration and stop. I’ll show you a Plan, but stay in the high vibration.

We now live under a tyranny of the WHO and the UN.

I have to say one thing at the very beginning.

The States are not States. The States are already registered as a

company, been to several places around the world, including European States.

Switzerland has been listed as a Confederation, for example, in 1993 in

Brussels and also in 2014….so you begin to understand. I’m going to

give you a General overview of this crisis, the COVID-19 is called,

where we are, 3 years later, still under the state of Emergency, so on a

national and on an international level. And this is completely

unjustified. You’ll still see people with a mask, with disinfectant gel

for hands, with Plastic dividers in the Restaurants. And it is all about

the regulations, health regulations, the WHO, the have been installed,

for example, in the Swiss epidemics act, but also in all other health

care legislation in the world. Click here to see a graphic that is quite

extensive, and you will see that step by step, year after year, always

something to be done. The American and Israeli expert Aaron Antonovsky

is specialized to analyze coherence [explanation: relationships], as a

key element for the mental health. And I’m trying to draw this sense of

consistency, a little bit for you.

In the first Phase, the fear was created and propagated, in which a

Virus is inflated and the people were afraid that you will die from it.

The media have increased the Drama, really, and it has been shown the

photos, for example, it has been shown in the hospitals, coffins, to

make people scared.

Professor Ioannidis, one of the Top epidemiologists in the world, from

Stanford University, has shown that there were 2020, more Dead than in

other years and published for the first time with the WHO and also at

other Places.

Further evidence [explanation: a Systematic evidence of the benefit of a

diagnosis, or therapy] is that the COVID Virus mutates rapidly, so that

it actually disappears in a couple of months back.

I have to compare in 2002, an article written by SARS-CoV 1 and SARS-CoV

2 together. And this Coronavirus mutates so quickly that it has only

reached 24 countries, and after 8 months it was gone again. There were

no pandemic, only about 700 and some Dead. It was impossible for a

vaccine because the Virus mutates again and again.

You really have stoked fear that the people are ready to do anything

just so that this Virus drops you in the head.

And by the way, the Virus was isolated also never. According to the

postulates of Koch, and also to the what, the WHO prescribes to

international regulations, would have to be isolated the Virus.

There are four criteria:

To isolate, characterize, very important, the causality [explanation:

the relationship between cause and effect] to investigate.

If it has found the Virus, it is injected in animals and observed

whether it developed the same symptoms again and again. The man has not

made. And what was also criticized ultimately, it was never done a study

on the Transmission.

So you could say that The PCR Test is a complete lie. Kary B. Mullis,

the inventor of the PCR Tests, has said that you can’t use for

diagnosis. He is a Nobel laureate. The CDC, the health authority in the

United States, has said (in 2020) also: the use of the PCR test is very

limited. You can investigate so that no bacteria or viruses. This is not

suitable for the diagnosis. To search only for something Specific;

therefore, only for the Research. And the WHO has said.

So we have the tyranny of the year 2020.

And in 2021, we have a huge global study with the open sky (field

experiment). This is not a clinical study. This is impossible. This is

not ethical. In the ethics, you must do this on a very limited number of

spaces, specifically, for example, with 80 people.

I myself was in the ethics Committee of the WHO and I can tell you,

there is absolutely nothing Ethical about this approach, with COVID, and

it would not be safe to come through this way. The first is a

pharmaceutical company can’t make yourself study when it is itself

involved in this. And, above all, when it was sold after the funds. And

in ethics, it is also so that you have to pay, if there are side

effects. This company does not. And you will also be liable for the

damage caused. And, as you can see it in Red, you really have a

conscious, enlightened wants to have the decision-making, as it has wife

Beate workers said this Morning. And you must have signed it, because it

is afterwards a legal document. And furthermore, there is no privacy.

Because everyone says Yes, if he is vaccinated or not.

And you can’t be traveling without vaccinated to, in this case, the

private data. This is unacceptable and against international law.

In the name of that you have to take care of all, that was now in the

first Phase, the fear-inciting and after the injection of an

experimental substance to persons weak as children. Actually, you don’t

have to be inoculated older people, because the antibody. I’ve done

research about it, and as you can see, it is even bad for you.

So the second Phase is then the total control. You can see already, that

you exercise with this vaccination already control. And between 2022 and

2024 happen now several things at the same time, coming from the WHO and

the UN

> the digitization of the world

> the QR-Code anywhere and

> this continuous Narrative [explanation: the repetitive narrative] of

the Virus. …

And now we go on to this global Plan of how it will be implemented, how

the process is. There are two key documents. The international health

regulations, which are available in multiple languages, where you

describe how to manage a pandemic at international and national level.

Always in the name of security. The Second is the Constitution of the

WHO. The was made in 1948, finished, and seven times changed. You have

to look closely. And the article 19 to 22 are the door, the Opening for

the complete dictatorship. The Global, in cooperation with the UN.

Because the article 57 of the UN Charter on this together. And they are

currently working on a document that I’m about to show you. You want to

call it the “Treaty” (Treaty/agreement) or Convention for the pandemics.

The Name is CA+. I think this means “Convention agreement”

[explanation/Translation: agreement to the Convention]. This is the

third Version that I’m about to show you. So let’s look at the one by

the other and look after also works like the System.

First, the international health regulations in 1969, it had made since

the first Version and in order to regulate the travel of people between

countries. And in 2002, after SarsCov1 it has created a much more

comprehensive second Version, which came into force in 2005 and is used

for today. And as I have taught, we have made actually, first, that each

state is its own answer. And that also respects the human rights, the

protection of the passengers, for example and that makes a Lockdown that

relates to the company or the airlines. It was actually more, to protect

exactly this. That’s why I immediately understood that there is a

dictatorship in preparation.

One thing you need to know, because that will be important for the

future: That the Constitution of the WHO may decide to in articles 19 –

22, especially 21, a set of rules with two-thirds of the votes of all

present in the WHO, which is immediately valid. As well as this

international health regulations, if a special international Situation,

and this act is urgent. And that’s why you always keep this state of

emergency. …

This global vaccination schedule is in the connection, or even driven by

GAVI, the vaccine Alliance of Bill Gates. He has, of course, yet another

organization, you will be led by Bill Gates, it is: Bill & Melinda Gates

Foundation. So, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, who is also a Bill

Gates, the name was previously: Bill & Melinda Gates Institute for

population reduction. The father of Bill Gates was of the Fabian

society, which is responsible for the depopulation. You can research it.

And the mother was in the area of reproductive and sexual health. You

see a business plan, and now they have speeded up the Whole thing with

vaccines, therapies and diagnostics. The company’s plan, the state is

prank against humanity.

From a political point of view, the WHO Constitution is the second most

important document that you should know. In this document …

What can we do? So we need to know that nowhere in the texts of the UN

or the WHO, is, that one can escape. We can say, like Trump simply: “We

will not have to pay more.” Because our state will pay heads with our

tax money, without asking us, must we not say to our States: “We want

you to represent us and our tax used the funds to Finance this. Why do

you have such company in our name created?“

The second way is from the System to withdraw. Click here to see the

United Nations System.

It is not easy to make an international court of justice, because the

two international courts for civil law and criminal law and the

Nuremberg Tribunal, the organs they are associated with these UN-at the

very top. And with five countries (the UN security Council) to decide

the still on everything. The WHO is an Agency, but it is everywhere, the

portal of Entry. You can find this illustration in German, in French,

English. If you enter as the “United Nations System PDF” then you can

find it all.

https://www.un.org/depts/german/orgastruktur/vn-organigramm_oktober2011.pdf

https://www.un.org/depts/german/orgastruktur/dpi2470rev5-german.pdf

So, we need to go back, in a different Dimension. We need to understand

that this is very long so. The UN was created by the masons from France,

Ireland and Scotland, but also with the United States and other forces

We know that the world Bank and the international monetary Fund, are

also part of this global network. And the BIS (Bank for International

settlements) in Basel is the Bank of all banks.

We know that you don’t censor that you want to our Well-being, that the

lies are always there. And as Andreas Thiel has already said, we need to

come back to the base, to the life. In order to live, the means are

quite simple, we choose. All of this to Happen to move us out of this

System, from the Matrix to withdraw. What has been said Ivo, is also a

bit of a departure from the Vatican System, from that of Roman law.

von Dr. Astrid Stuckelberger

Quellen/Links:

Astrid Stuckelberger