Corruption at the UN

//Corruption at the UN

Corruption at the UN

World globalists are attempting to use the UN as a weapon to promote anti-life / anti- family policies world-wide.  These globalists, consisting mainly of the Western countries, believe that the UN can be used to curb world population, and spread Western values in the developing countries. They also believe that the legalization of homosexuality and abortion should be a pre-condition for granting foreign aid to developing countries. These Western countries consist of the European Union, Canada, the Nordic countries and some Latin American countries.

The various UN agencies, the UN General Secretary, currently Antonio Guterres from Portugal, and UN bureaucrats are all in full support of the West’s anti-life / anti-family agenda.  The reason for this is that almost all of the UN’s financial support comes from these Western nations. The majority of the other UN members do not pay their UN financial assessments.  As a result, the UN carries out the demands of these Western countries, which are keeping the institution afloat.

The campaign by the Western countries to change UN policies began in 1992 at the UN Conference on Environment and Development, held in Rio de Janeiro.  The Secretary of that conference was Canadian, Maurice Strong, a multi-millionaire socialist who used capitalism to enrich himself, but insisted, ironically, that the environment must have priority over industrialisation.   At this Environment Conference, Strong had the idea of inviting radical feminists to participate in order to weld environmentalism with feminism to strengthen the environmental agenda.  Accordingly, Strong invited the New York-based feminist organization, Women’s Environment and Development Organization (WEDO), headed by radical feminist Bella Abzug, to participate. Throughout the following years, Abzug and her followers have had a strong influence at the UN.  Fortunately, their efforts have been blocked by knowledgeable, experienced pro-life Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO’s), which work with the pro-life Asian, African, Middle Eastern and Eastern European countries to resist pressure to undertake these harmful policies.

This pro-life resistance has resulted in intense frustration for the influential Western countries. Their lack of progress at the UN has led them to implement counter strategies to circumvent the pro-life / pro-family efforts.  The first counter strategy was developed at a private meeting held in Glen Cove, New York in December 1996. This meeting was attended by representatives from all the UN agencies, such as UNICEF (United Nations Children’s Fund), WHO (World Health Organization), Division for the Advancement of Women (DAW), and UNFPD (United Nations Population Fund), among others.  Also in attendance were the heads of all the UN committees which monitor the UN Human Rights Treaties.  These committees have the responsibility of monitoring the signatories of UN Human Rights Treaties to determine whether they are complying fully with their treaty obligations.  Each country must submit a report to the monitoring committees every five years, outlining their compliance with the treaties. Their reports are carefully reviewed by the “experts” on the monitoring committees, who then make “recommendations” to these countries.

This meeting at Glen Cove, New York, called the “Round Table on Human Rights”, decided that the UN monitoring committees would henceforth “reinterpret” the provisions in treaties by pretending that they included the concepts aligned to their anti-life / anti-family ideology.   That is, they decided that these committees would interpret the treaties in such a way that feminist and anti-family policies would trump the actual written provisions of the treaties.  It was believed that the resulting recommendations by the committees would establish universal norms which would create new international law to which countries must conform. The treaty monitoring committees accordingly began at once to interpret the treaties to include left-wing “progressive” concepts, such as homosexual rights, legalized prostitution, transgendered rights, abortion rights, etc.

Even though the decisions of these committees are not legally binding, their recommendations have, unfortunately, successfully changed the laws in some countries, such as Colombia, as well as other UN member countries. Feminist NGOs in these countries argue that the laws must be changed in order to comply with UN directives. This, of course is not true. The feminist NGOs’ arguments are repeated by unscrupulous left-wing politicians in their countries, arguing also that the monitoring committee’s recommendations are binding.

To ensure that there is no deviation from the West’s agenda, the UN Human Rights office, headed by radical feminist Michelle Bachelet (former president of Chile), regulates the monitoring committee bodies which rely on the office for technical and logistical support. Her agency also drafts recommendations for the committees in response to the UN members’ reports. In fact, Bachelet’s office, in some instances, even drafts some countries’ own reports.  Further, her agency also trains lawyers in member UN countries to argue that the monitoring committee’s recommendations are binding, which, of course, they are not. For example,  the UN Human Rights office in Tanzania works closely with the New York based feminist pro-abortion organization, The Centre for Reproductive Rights, to train lawyers and judges to advance abortion rights in that East African country.

In short, the UN has been tragically corrupted to carry out, without deviation, the West’s anti-life / anti- family agenda.

President Trump at the UN

During the years of struggle to oppose these dangerous policies at the UN, pro-life / pro-family efforts have been constantly undermined by the powerful U.S. delegations under Democratic Presidents, Clinton and Obama. However, the election of Donald Trump as U.S. President in 2016, has dramatically changed the playing field on social issues at the UN.  For example, in the past three years Mr. Trump has refused to fund the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) because of its partnership with the Chinese government whose family planning policies involve the use of coercive abortion and involuntary sterilizations.  The withdrawal of funds from UNFPA amount to $32.5 million each year, and this has curtailed some of that agency’s unpleasant efforts to promote population control in the developing world.  In the past two years, Mr. Trump’s delegation has also stopped resolutions before the ruling UN Security Council, which included references to abortion.

Further, in September 2019 the United States delivered a statement to the UN General Assembly asserting “there is absolutely no international right to abortion”.  This statement was made on behalf of 19 other countries, which represented more than 1.3 billion people.  The statement also asserted that “the family is the foundational institution of society and thus should be supported and strengthened”, and that “support for sex education must appreciate the protective role of the family and must not condone harmful sexual risks for young people.”

Nairobi Summit

This determination by pro-life countries and NGO’s to reject the Western countries’ control of the direction of the UN led, in November 2019, the UNFPA, with Norway and Denmark, to organize a Summit in Nairobi, Kenya, to definitively establish anti-life policies.  This Summit was supported by, among others, international Planned Parenthood, the Gates Foundation, “Women Deliver” and “She Decides”. These organizations were established to raise funds to promote abortion in third world countries after U.S. President Trump cut off U.S. funds used for these purposes. This Summit was organized in secret, and only select (pro-abortion) countries were invited to attend.  All pro-life organizations were refused registration.  The Summit was supported by only a few pro-abortion UN member states – notably Canada, Iceland, Finland, Ireland, Australia and Italy. No actual negotiations were carried out as its official statement of goals on abortion, LGBT “rights” and radical sex-ed globally, had been previously drafted and presented to the conference to be rubber stamped only, ignoring the fact that one of the basic premises in the operation of the UN is that it must work by consensus.

Pro-Life Response to the Summit

The American delegation and ten other nations issued a stinging rebuke of the Nairobi Summit, correctly declaring that any document the Summit issued was illegitimate. The statement also denounced how small countries were being “intimidated and browbeaten into changing either their laws or their cultural and religious norms that protect the unborn and the family” by a few rogue nations at the UN.  Further, since the Nairobi Summit statement had not been agreed on by consensus at the UN General Assembly, it did not have standing as an official UN document, and its final recommendations were not to be considered reliable and/or valid.

At the same time the Nairobi Summit was being held, about 200 pro-life leaders from around the world, the majority from Africa, held a parallel conference in Nairobi. The Nairobi Summit had about 6000 attendees in comparison.  However, the leader at the parallel conference stated, “We were few because of funding.  It is not easy for people to leave their source of livelihood to come and listen to the discussions. We have very little material means compared to the other conference.  But we have government officials, young people, civil society and religious people from all over the word, and it takes just a few people to change the world.”

The official declaration from this parallel conference stated that the UN must: respect sovereignty and religious and cultural values, protect and strengthen the family, respect the rights of parents, and end abortion.

The struggle at the UN between the opposing ideologies is constant and oppressive.  The battle is between the wealthy, dominating countries of the West, (including obnoxious Canada) and those countries that respect human life and dignity.

This struggle will determine which ideology will end up controlling the destiny of the world.

2020-01-23T21:34:06+00:00January 23rd, 2020|Categories: Current Newsletter Articles|Tags: , , |