"In the next four years, we will build a bridge to the year 2000."
- Clinton's televised speech -- Nov. 5, 1996
THIS ARTICLE APPEARED IN THE APRIL 1996 ISSUE OF THE MEDIA BYPASS MAGAZINE. SUBSCRIPTIONS OF MEDIA BYPASS CAN BE OBTAINED BY CALLING
1-800-4-BYPASS
EDITOR'S NOTE: The following is an edited version of a speech given during the C.U.R.E. '96 convention in Wichita, Kan. by Henry Lamb, executive vice president of the Environmental Conservation Organization based in Hollow Rock, Tenn.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
SPEECH BY HENRY LAMB
For most of my adult life, theories have circulated about the United Nations conspiring to take over the world. I'm happy to report today, that all the conspiracy theroies can finally be laid to rest. The U.N.-funded Commission on Global Governance has completed its three- year study, and has now announced publicly its plans to implement global governance by the year 2000. There is virtually no danger of, nor need for, an invasion by black helicoptors; the current administration is GIVING AWAY NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY as fast as it can, by FULLY SUPPORTING the global agenda.
The U.N. plan calls for a World Conference on Global Governance in
1998 for the purpose of submitting to the world the necessary treaties and agreements for ratification and implementation by the year 2000. This 410-page report is entiled, "OUR GLOBAL NEIGHBORHOOD." It was published by Oxford University Press and is available for $14.95.
The Commission's 28 members were carefully selected by West German Chancellor Willy Brandt in the early 1990's, and include some of the world's most influential people. Two are especially important: Co-Chairman Shirdath Ramphal, former president of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and Maurice Strong, former head of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and secretary- general of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
(UNCED), held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. It was the IUCN and the World Resources Institute (remember those names), that produced the documents that were adopted at Rio in 1992.
The report says that global governance "does not imply world government or world federalisim," and then for the next 400 pages describes in detail a new system of global governance. I have concluded that the difference between global governance and world government is about the same as the difference between date-rape and rape. The only difference is that one begins with seduction; both end in violence. Global Governance, would be a catastrophic act of violence, resulting in the loss of national sovereignty, property rights, individusal freedom, and all hope of achieving personal prosperity.
The Commission's recommendations rest upon the assumption that the world is now ready to accept a new "global civic ethic" based upon "a set of core values that can unite people of all cultural, political, religious, or philosophical bacgrounds." These new values, also refered to as the new "earth ethic," specifically excludes national sovereignty and private property rights. In fact, the report says:
"The impulse to possess turf is a powerful one for all species; yet it is one the people must overcome... Although states are soverign, they are not free individually to do whatever they want." Strong, in his essay entitled, "A Journey Down a Generation," said, "it is simply not feasible for sovereignty to be exercised unilaterally by individual nation-states, however powerful. It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the imperatives of global environmental cooperation." The new earth ethic ignores the fundamental values on which America was founded, and promotes instead, a form of global socialism call the new earth ethic.
The cornerstone of the new system of governance is the concept of "justice and equity." The Commission believes the world is ready to accept the proposition that there can be no justice without equity. The report says: "Although people are born into widely unequal economic and social circumstances, great disparities in their conditions or life chances are an affront to the human sence of justice." The Commission intends for the United Nations to correct the injustices in the world by taking wealth from the rich and giving it to the poor.
To achieve this massive redistribution of wealth, and take virtual control of all the world's recources, a number of specific structural changes are proposed for the United Nations system. The United Nations is not a single gigantic monolith; it is a gigantic bureaucratic empire consisting of more than 126 individual organizations and agencies already in place, spread around the world. The Commission's recommendation would conslidate the power of the United Nations into the hands of a very few individuals:
The U.N. Trusteeship Council would be restructured to consist of no more than 23 individuals appointed from accredited NGOs (non-government organizations) such as the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, and thw World Resources Institute. These NGOs are already accredited by the U.N. By international treaty, this reorganized Council would assume "trusteeship" of the global commons.
Listen to what constitutes the global commons as defined in the report: "The atmosphere, outer space, the oceans, and the related environment and life support systems that contribute to the support of human life." This definition embraces virtually all biodiversity on Earth and places it under control of the U.N. Trusteeship council. Before you conclude that such a measure is preposterous and impossible, realize that it is already nearly accomplished. All existing environmental treaties, and there are nearly 300 of them, are already administered by the U.N. This recommendation would place them under the authouity of the Trusteeship Council, along with everything else that is not already covered. The Conventions on Climate Change, Biodiversity, Ozone Depleting Substances, Desertification, Endangered Species, Wetlands and World Heritage Sites, already give the U.N. extensive authority over the global commons. This stemp simply consolidates enforcement authority into the hands of 23 selected environmental groups which have been accredited by the U.N..
To address "justice and equity" issues, the Commission calls for the creation of a new Economic Security Council. This Council too would consist of no more than 23 individuals. Its function would be to consolidate all international financial, industrial, and trade activities under its authority. That means the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the Global Environment Facility, as well as the World Trade Organization, and the vast operation of the U.N. Development Program would all operate according to policies established by this
23-member Council. Chief among the responsiblities of this Council is to establish independent funding mechanisims for the United Nations system.
The report specifically denounces the idea of "global taxation," but then proceeds to describe dozens of mechanisims to collect money for the U.N. The favorite scheme was advanced by Nobel Prize winner James Tobin, which would collect .05 percent from all international financial transactions. This tax would produce $1.5 trillion per year which is 150 times more than the total current U.N. expenditures.
Other recommendations include a U.N. license for multinational corporations' parking fees for satellites, royalties from airlines and steamship lines, and from fees for energy and other resources, and a host of other money-producing mechanisims. Butros Butros-Ghali has been in the news rcenty complaining about the largest U.N. deficit in history because the United States has not paid its fair share. This public pressure is a ploy to pave the way for global taxation.
Gustave Speth, a member of Clinton's transition team and now head of the U.N. Development Progam, has publicly endorsed the global taxation plan.
The Economic Security Council would be used to enforce environmental treaties by initiating trade sanctions and levying fines or withholding funding to nations deemed to be in noncompliance with treaty provisions. This is the U.N. body which would collect the wealth from developed nation and redistribute it to developing nations.
Furthermore, the commision would beef-up the existing Security Council and expand its membership from 15 to 23. A STANDING U.N. ARMY is recommended, with complete and adequate support and mobilization forces. The "rapid deployment" force would be used to respond immediatly to hot spots around the would while more conventional peace-keeping forces are assembled. The U.N. Secretary-Generals' power would be expanded to include the role of "COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF." Under the new earth ethic, the Security Council would have an expanded mission: "the security of the people." Security is defined to include economic, social, and environmental security. The commission's report says: "All people, no less than all states, have the right to secure existence."
And for the first time, the U.N. would expand its authority and assume responsibility to act in behalf of people WITHIN the borders of sovereign states with or without the request or permission of the state. The Commission says: "It is necessary to assert...the rights and interests of the international community in situations within individual states in which the security of people is violated..."
The commission recommends removal of the veto power of the five permanent members of the Security Council, and within 10 years, a review of the "permanent" status of all members. This recommendation, combined with the independent funding, would reduce the power of the United States at the United Nations to a level equal to that of any other nation. There is no guarantee that the United States would even be a member of either of these powerful Councils.
Another new structure to be created by the Commission on Global Governance is the International Court of Criminal Justice. The Commission's recommendations would make the decisions of the existing International Court of Justice binding on all nations, but the new criminal court would go much further. It "should have an independent prosecutor or a panel of prosecutors...[whose] responsibility would be to investigate an alleged crime..l[and] act independently and not seek or receive instructions from any government or other source". The report says further; "The very essence of global governance is the capacity of the international community to ensure compliance with the rules of society." [In other words, the United Nations could prosecute INDIVIDUALS.--JS]
Still another new structure is the "Petitions Council," consisting of five to seven members of "civil society." Their function would be to screen petitions of non-compliance from accredited NGOs in nation states. The Petitions Council would then recommend enforcement or compliance actions to be taken by the appropriate U.N. body. "Civil society." defined as the accredited NGOs management and administrative activities are described in considerable detail in the "Global Biodiversity Assessment," another recently published U.N. document. NGOs are expected to dominate Bioregional Councils and Management Boards, and perform management functions in Biosphere Reserves and the Convention on Biological Diversity. National NGOs will have a direct route through the Petitions Council to U.N. enforcement mechanisims, bypassing local and national governments.
Still another recommended structure is an "Assembly of the People" which ultimately would be elected directly by civil society. Its function would be to support the U.N. General Assembly by providing proposed resolutions directly from accredited environmental organizations.
These are a few of the highlights of how the world is to be governed by a revitalized and restructured United Nations system. Many of the recommendations published in this report have been underway for several years. The now published time line for full implementation suggest that U.N. strategists are confident that the world is ready to accept global governance.
In the past, the United States has been the primary obstacle to global governance. Now, however, under the current administration, the United States is a major promoter of global governance. Vice President AL GORE has called for a GLOBAL REORGANIZATION to save the environment in his book, "Earth in the Balance," and has personally promoted every environmental treaty. Presidential appointees include Strobe Talbott, Deputy Secretary of State, who wrote in Time magazine in
1992 that "nationhood as we know it will be obsolete; and all states will recognize a SINGLE GLOBAL AUTHORITY...'citzen of the world' will have assumed real meaning."
If there is NO CHANGE in the administration, the United States can be expected to help facilitate the 1998 WORLD CONFERENCE ON GLOBAL GOVERNANCE and then lobby Congress to RATIFY and IMPLEMENT the treaties and agreements necessary to make GLOBAL GOVERNANCE a REALITY.
Unless there is a dramatic change in Washington in November, it won't matter very much who follows Clinton, or whether or not we even have an election in the year 2000. Global governance will likely be a reality, and as Strobe Talbott says, we will all be "CITIZENS OF THE WORLD."
Posts
