The U.S. administration at the UN has officially announced that it has abandoned the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. In their statement, US representatives considered the agenda as a "soft global governance programme" that threatens the sovereignty of the United States and is incompatible with "the rights and interests of citizens". This decision has sparked a wide global discussion, especially in the context of the increasing tensions between global initiatives and national interests.
Agenda 2030: Goals that rise controversy
The 2030 Agenda, adopted by the United Nations in 2015, is simply a 15-year programme aimed at achieving 17 Sustainable improvement Goals (SDGs). Although these objectives have been formulated in a neutral way, in practice they advance left-wing liberal programmes to be implemented worldwide. The Agenda sets out policy orientations in key areas specified as climate, wellness or education that the UN associate States are required to adapt.
The PCh24.pl portal points out that not only the way these objectives are achieved – frequently through the influence of global organisations, global financial institutions and advisory-expert bodies – but besides the nature of them. Critics accuse Agenda 2030 of an authoritarian and anti-freedom nature that may lead to a simplification in the sovereignty of states.
Unethical demands? Controversy around Agenda 2030 targets
One of the most controversial aspects of Agenda 2030 is the nonsubjective 5, which involves global access to "sexual and reproductive wellness protection and the exercise of reproductive rights". These terms, although sound neutral, in practice cover issues specified as contraception, abortion, in vitro, sterilization or surrogateation. nonsubjective 3 provides for the inclusion of "reproductive health" in national strategies and programmes.
As the portal PCh24.pl reminds, these postulates conflict not only with the moral discipline of the Church, but besides with the Constitution of the Polish Republic. In Poland, as in another countries with strong Christian traditions, the introduction of specified solutions raises large controversy and social opposition.
USA opposed to global governance
Donald Trump's administration has long criticised Agenda 2030, recognising it as a tool for "soft global governance". Previously, the United States withdrew from climate policies based on decarbonisation, wellness policies consistent with WHO standards and programmes promoting sex ideology. Now, giving up on the goals of Agenda 2030, the US is opposed to the very essence of the proposed changes.
Representatives of the American administration stress that decisions on key policy areas should be made at national level alternatively than within global organisations, where the voice of citizens and democratic leaders is frequently overlooked.
What happens to Agenda 2030?
The resignation of the US from the 2030 Agenda is an crucial signal for another countries that may begin to question the sense of implementing global programmes imposed by global organisations. In a time of increasing geopolitical tensions and the conflict for national sovereignty, the future of Agenda 2030 is at stake.
Will another countries follow the U.S.? Will the UN be able to convince associate States to prosecute the SDGs further? These questions will be answered in the coming years.
Tags: Agenda 2030, Sustainable improvement Goals, USA, UN, national sovereignty, reproductive health, climate policy, global governance, Donald Trump, PCh24.pl
Read more:
US resigns from the implementation of Agenda 2030
