Trump to pull US out of UNESCO over DEI policies, pro-Palestinian, pro-China tilt
Trump ordered a 90-day review of America's presence in UNESCO back in February, with special emphasis on probing any 'anti-Semitism or anti-Israel sentiment within the organization.'
Upon conducting the review, administration officials took issue with UNESCO's Diversity, Equity and Inclusion policies as well as its pro-Palestinian and pro-China bias, a White House official told The Post.
Advertisement
5 President Trump will pull the US out of UNESCO again due to their anti-Israel and pro-China stances.
AFP via Getty Images
'President Trump has decided to withdraw the United States from UNESCO – which supports woke, divisive cultural and social causes that are totally out-of-step with the commonsense policies that Americans voted for in November,' White House deputy spokesperson Anna Kelly said.
'This President will always put America First and ensure our country's membership in all international organizations aligns with our national interests.'
Advertisement
Among the faults cited are UNESCO's publication of an 'anti-racism toolkit' in 2023 and their 2024 'Transforming MEN'talities' initiative, the former of which called on member states to adopt 'anti-racist' policies and compete in a 'race to the top' to be the foremost social justice advocate, answering questions about the history of racism in their jurisdictions and then working to ensure equity.
5 A view of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) headquarters on July 10, 2025 in Paris, France.
VCG via Getty Images
The 'MEN'talities' initiative published a report highlighting the organization's work in India aimed at reshaping how 'men think about gender issues' — especially 'harmful gender norms.'
The gender program also published a video game report last year that looked into how games could 'promote gender equality.'
Advertisement
'It is not only about controlling the negative impacts, but also relying on video games to address socio-cultural stereotypes and encourage positive, antidiscriminatory behaviors,' Assistant-Director General for the Social and Human Sciences Gabriela Ramos said at the time.
5 Aerial view of the UNESCO headquarters in Paris.
VCG via Getty Images
Meanwhile, UNESCO used its Executive Board to force through anti-Israel and anti-Jewish actions, including designating Jewish holy sites as 'Palestinian World Heritage' sites, the White House official said.
UNESCO frequently uses language stating that Palestine is 'occupied' by Israel and condemns the Jewish state's war on Hamas, without criticizing the terror group's brutal reign over Gaza.
Advertisement
In addition, Beijing is the second largest funder of UNESCO, with Chinese nationals like deputy director-general Xing Qu in key leadership positions.
5 'This President will always put America First and ensure our country's membership in all international organizations aligns with our national interests,' Anna Kelly said.
Gripas Yuri/ABACA/Shutterstock
'China has leveraged its influence over UNESCO to advance global standards that are favorable to Beijing's interests,' the official said.
The Chinese Communist Party has particularly been criticized for using its influence in UNESCO to downplay the role of minorities like Uyghur Muslims in the nation's history.
Trump initially ordered the US out of UNESCO in 2017, then as now citing anti-Israel bias.
5 Former President Joe Biden ordered the US to rejoin UNESCO in 2023 with the promise of repaying over $600 million in membership dues.
VCG via Getty Images
The US first withdrew from the UN organization in 1983 under former President Ronald Reagan, saying at the time that the organization 'has extraneously politicized virtually every subject it deals with. It has exhibited hostility toward a free society, especially a free market and a free press, and it has demonstrated unrestrained budgetary expansion.'
Advertisement
Former President Joe Biden made the US rejoin UNESCO in 2023, arguing an American presence was needed to counter China's growing hold on the organization.
The Biden administration also vowed to pay back more than $600 million in dues incurred since the US stopped contributing in 2011 due to the inclusion of Palestine as a member.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
6 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's FCC chair plays coy on Fox News when asked if president involved in Colbert's cancellation
Days after both he and Donald Trump gloated that CBS had canceled Stephen Colbert's late-night show, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr wouldn't give a direct answer when asked on Fox News whether the president played a part in The Late Show's demise. Carr's ambiguity regarding whether Trump was directly involved in the decision to end a long-running program hosted by an outspoken critic of the president comes amid CBS parent company Paramount's pending merger with Skydance Media, which the FCC chief is responsible for approving. Trump's hand-picked top media regulator also took the opportunity on Thursday to say that it's 'entirely possible' that ABC's The View could be in the administration's 'crosshairs' after the White House called View host Joy Behar an 'irrelevant loser' while suggesting 'her show is next to be pulled off air.' Interviewing Carr on Thursday morning's broadcast of America's Newsroom, Fox News anchor Bill Hemmer stated that CBS was still reeling from the fallout from the sudden announcement that Colbert's show will come to an end next year. Hemmer also noted that CBS morning anchor Tony Dokoupil recently broke from his network colleagues – who believe the decision was politically motivated – and defended his corporate bosses. At the same time, Hemmer kicked off the interview with Carr by saying he wanted to get something 'out of the way,' and that was whether Trump had 'anything to do with the cancellation of Stephen Colbert's show.' The Trump official, however, played coy with his response. 'What is important to keep in mind is when President Trump ran for election, he ran right at these legacy broadcast media outfits and the New York and Hollywood elites that are behind it, and he smashed the facade that they are gatekeepers that control what Americans can think and what Americans can say,' Carr responded. 'Once you do that, you have exposed a business model of a lot of these outfits as being nothing more than a partisan circus. So I think there are a lot of consequences that are flowing from President Trump deciding, I won't play by the rules of politicians in the past and let these legacy outfits dictate the narrative and terms of the debate,' he continued. 'He is succeeding.' Carr then went on to suggest that even if Trump hadn't played a direct role in the cancellation of Colbert's show, the president's ongoing war with the legacy media was the key factor in the decision. 'Look at what is happening. NPR has been defunded, PBS has been defunded, Colbert is getting canceled,' the chairman boasted. 'You've got anchors and news media personalities losing jobs downstream of President Trump's decision to stand up. He stood up for the American people. The American people don't trust the legacy gatekeepers anymore.' Hemmer, meanwhile, pointed out that he had asked Carr 'a very direct question,' but 'did not hear a yes or a no in your answer.' Instead, as the Fox anchor noted, he 'heard a maybe.' Carr's non-committal response comes two days after Skydance's general counsel sent him a pair of letters confirming that New Paramount will eliminate all diversity, equity and inclusivity (DEI) policies and hire an ombudsman to review 'complaints of bias' at CBS News once the merger is complete. Additionally, Carr also met with Skydance CEO David Ellison days before it was announced that Colbert was leaving and The Late Show franchise would come to an end. At the meeting, according to regulatory filings, Ellison asked Carr to 'promptly grant' Paramount's request to transfer over its broadcast licenses while promising CBS would be 'unbiased' under the new corporate leadership. The Ellison meeting also took place shortly after Paramount agreed to pay Trump $16 million to settle his 'meritless' lawsuit over a 60 Minutes interview with Kamala Harris, leading Democratic lawmakers and free press groups to threaten lawsuits and criminal investigations into whether Paramount violated anti-bribery laws with the settlement. Colbert himself has called the payoff a 'big fat bribe' in order to help push the merger through, and he has since cast doubt that his show's cancellation was based on a 'purely financial decision,' as Paramount insisted in its announcement. CBS staffers agree with this sentiment. 'Many of us think this was part and parcel of the Trump shakedown settlement,' one network staffer told The Independent. Besides celebrating the Late Show's cancellation, Trump has also repeatedly claimed that he reached a side deal with Skydance as part of the settlement, asserting that Ellison has promised him as much as $20 million in pro-Trump advertisements and PSAs on CBS programming once the merger is complete. Paramount has denied knowledge of any secret behind-the-scenes arrangement with the incoming owner. Elsewhere in the Fox News interview, Hemmer read the White House's recent threatening message to The View, wondering if this meant that the ABC daytime talk show – which is well-known for its anti-Trump stance – is 'now in the crosshairs of this administration.' Carr, who is seen as a MAGA 'attack dog' and loyal foot soldier in Trump's onslaught against the mainstream media, suggested he could soon be taking aim at the show. 'Look, it's entirely possible that there's issues over there,' he replied. 'Stepping back, this broader dynamic [that] once President Trump has exposed these media gatekeepers and smashed this facade, there are a lot of consequences. I think the consequences of that aren't quite finished.' Asked where this could end, Carr said that 'we need a course correction' and it's 'time for America's' legacy broadcasters to return to promoting the public interest.' He then applauded Skydance for committing to eradicating diversity hiring initiatives and hiring an ombudsman before, adding that 'that's where we have to go.'Notably, Carr's remarks about The View come months after he opened an investigation into ABC and its parent company Disney – which paid Trump $16 million last year to settle a defamation suit – over its DEI policies, claiming that the corporation may have violated the FCC's equal employment opportunity regulations. And earlier this year, it was reported that Disney chief Bob Iger explicitly asked The View's hosts to tone down its anti-Trump rhetoric and pull back on political segments.
Yahoo
6 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Labour ex-leader Jeremy Corbyn says he's starting a new left-wing UK party
LONDON (AP) — Labour Party ex-leader Jeremy Corbyn said Thursday that he's forming a new left-leaning U.K. political party to advocate "mass redistribution of wealth and power' and take on his former colleagues at the ballot box. The new formation has a website — — but doesn't have a name yet. 'It's your party,' Corbyn said. 'We're going to decide (a name) when we've had all the responses, and so far the response rate has been massive.' Corbyn said that he hoped the new party would have its inaugural conference in the fall. Corbyn, 76, led Labour to election defeats in 2017 and 2019, but the veteran socialist campaigner remains popular with many grassroots supporters. and the new party has the potential to further fragment British politics. The long-dominant Labour and Conservative parties now have challengers on both left and right, including the environmentalist Green Party and hard-right Reform UK. Plans for a new party emerged earlier this month when lawmaker Zarah Sultana, who has been suspended from Labour for voting against the government, said that she would 'co-lead the founding of a new party' with Corbyn. At the time, Corbyn didn't confirm the news. On Thursday, he denied the party launch had been messy, saying the process was "democratic, it's grassroots and it's open." A longtime supporter of Palestinians and a critic of Israel, Corbyn was suspended from Labour in 2020 after Britain's equalities watchdog found anti-Jewish prejudice had been allowed to spread within Labour while he was leader. He was suspended after failing to fully accept the findings¸ claiming opponents had exaggerated the scale of antisemitism in Labour for 'political reasons.' Corbyn was reelected to Parliament last year as an independent. Prime Minister Keir Starmer succeeded Corbyn as Labour leader in 2020 and dragged the party back toward the political center ground. He dropped Corbyn's opposition to Britain's nuclear weapons, strongly backed sending weapons to Ukraine and stressed the party's commitment to balancing the books. Starmer won a landslide election victory a year ago, but has struggled to maintain unity among Labour lawmakers as the government struggles to get a sluggish economy growing and invest in overstretched public services. He has been forced into a series of U-turns by his own lawmakers, including one on welfare reform that left his authority severely dented. Jill Lawless, The Associated Press
Forbes
8 minutes ago
- Forbes
The GENIUS Act, Reading Between The Lines
Illustration Representing the GENIUS Act, First US Legislative Bill All of the crypto-sphere is atwitter with the implications of the final passage of the 'Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act'' or the ''GENIUS Act''. I went through the text of the act that was signed into law last week. Contrary to what the boosters of the bill believe, the implications for related digital assets and the economy are very mixed at best. As the first legislation to directly address one form of crypto-assets, the act is seminal. Of course, my own compatriots at the various blockchain companies and organizations are ecstatic over the act. It is best to temper your enthusiasm due to the details in the bill. First, the act focuses on payment stablecoins, and for other purposes. 'For other purposes' could cover an unspecified number of purposes. The constitution of the Stablecoin Review Board and research into non-payment Stablecoins (the bulk of currently issued Stablecoin total value), into interoperability, into novel methods for detecting Anti-Money Laundering violations, and into the effects of foreign issued Stablecoins could be some of these 'other purposes.' Definitions Continued This act clarifies the definition of a Digital Asset Service Provider. The definition explicitly excludes wallet providers, blockchain protocol vendors, DeFi protocols etc. The removal of confusion that surrounded earlier enforcement actions which made all such activities suspect is a huge relief for such actors. Whew! Exchanges are still in purview. Payment stablecoins must obey the law. Freezing, burning, seizure and blocking transfer must be enforceable by a 'lawful order'. These cannot be implemented by ERC-20 based stablecoins. This is of course anathema to the free souls of the decentralized universe. This is in the act, any non-compliance with a lawful order results in huge daily fines and imprisonment. Also to folks that say, technology does not matter, business use cases over technology seem unaware of the fact that basic capabilities baked into the technical underpinnings are needed BEFORE any business use cases can come to fruition. Look at what the ERC-20 standard and free implementations unleashed on the world. Payment stablecoin issuers have to be regulated by either a Federal Agency, primarily the OCC or other regulators on the Federal level. There is another tier for State Level Payment Stablecoins which are meant to be regulated by state regulators. The state level issuers limit is $10B and federal issuers are limited to $50B. There are some provisions in the bill for the migration of State Regulated stablecoin issuers to federally regulated issuers. Other details including breaches of these limits are punted to a Stablecoin Review Board, making for an open-ended set of rules. The act constantly invokes the Review Board and the Treasury Secretary who is the leader of the Stablecoin Review Board giving them tremendous leeway for rule setting. Neither USDT nor USDC qualify as US payment stablecoins yet according to this act. USDT because Tether is based offshore, USDC does not have a bank charter yet. However, a safe harbor provision may get Circle off the hook while their charter is pending. As soon as USDC is approved by the OCC, they will be instantly not in compliance to the act, as USDC is more than $50 Billion in issuance. As we can see, current stablecoins are not usually used for payments. Where Are Payment Stablecoins? Payment stablecoins means a digital asset that is designed to be used as a means of payment or settlement; and the issuer is obligated to convert, redeem, or repurchase for a fixed amount of monetary value. It also represents that the issuer will maintain, or create the reasonable expectation that it will maintain a stable value. In other words, the payment stablecoin has to be used for payment and has to be stable with respect to a currency. Such a stablecoin is NOT a fiat currency, nor a bank deposit, nor a tokenized stablecoin of a bank deposit such as JP Morgan's Kinexsys. It is not clear that the current use of USDT and USDC falls within the term 'payment stablecoins'. Such payment uses cannot be distinguished from their most frequent use, to hold stable USD instead of volatile home currencies or to use as a stable parking place and an anchor in swap based AMMs and other daily arbitrage trading of volatile crypto-currencies. Stable USD may be a misnomer as USD has fallen in value in the last few months against a basket of currencies. Stability Of Stablecoins Any stablecoin whose basic function is stability with respect to a single fiat currency can only be assured by holding liquid reserves denominated in that fiat. For USD based stablecoins the act explicitly enjoins this to be cash, treasuries maturing in 93 days or less and repos as well as reverse repos based on these instruments. The act also warns against concentration risk. Significant portions of these reserves cannot be in one single institution. We have already seen this scenario play out during the collapse of SVB, which custodied more than $3B of Circle's assets. Only a last minute expansion by the FDIC of the limit to 'unlimited' saved Circle and many other startups. A Stablecoin functions as one of the representations of fiat money that it is based on. In the United States that would be the United Stated Dollar. The other forms available to retail participants are bank deposits and bank notes. Par price, that is the price between the different representations ties all these forms into the singleness of money. Par is 1:1, that is one dollar of bank deposits is equal to one dollar of currency. Stablecoins must follow this. Professor Mehrling has discussed this in a money view of stablecoins. There is no discussion of par in the act. The reserves which are a touch point between stablecoins and traditional markets is where the risk of contagion can start. The restricted redemption of Money Market Funds by BNP Paribas (my previous employer) in 2007 foreshadowed the 2008 financial crisis. A run on a stablecoin issuer could initiate a rapid sell-off in the reserves, including short duration treasury bills. A negative feedback loop on this sort of act can cascade into multiple assets as treasuries are the basis of fixed income and credit markets. We have seen that only bazookas with tremendous firepower through the buying backstop of an institution like the Fed can stem this blood-letting. These are reasonable scenarios to assess the risk of any stablecoin issuer. Additionally stablecoins are not protected by the FDIC, which can cause the panic to spread through retail investors in a very short period of time, maybe even minutes. The Fed will have to ride to the rescue to prevent the larger financial system from collapsing. How Do Issuers Make Money? No big issuers of Stablecoins currently pay interest. Most of the money made by the issuers is based on the yield difference between issuing a zero interest stablecoin and the reserves that they hold. This is the classic example of other people's money making money for your enterprise. In the case of Tether, this payout is in the billions and makes the most money per employee of any enterprise, except for shadowy enterprises such as drug dealing or other illicit activities. If we had negative interest rates on Treasuries or other qualified digital assets, this source of yield farming by the issuers will dry up. Issuers will have to increase their fees, they might also slide into loss-making enterprises. The 48 pages of the act deals with the seniority of Stablecoin claims, guidelines on custody, commingling of assets and other ideas from traditional finance. The Genius Of The Act It is to convince the crypto-universe that it is beneficial to them while advancing traditional institutions for issuing, custodying and exchanging stablecoins. Traditional banking or non-banking institutions who already have bank charters, scale and know-how for customer on-boarding, AML and KYC are the winners. It is to allow a form of private money to come into being and shut out the issuance of CBDCs. It is to remain relatively mum on par price which is only implied. It is to convince the world that the velocity of money unleashed by the near instant settlement at low cost will not have monetary policy implications.
