American troops are being

conscripted into a

o 74470 19455 2
Volume 9, Number 24
NEJltTAMERlCAN November 29, 1993

FEATURES

FRONT PAGE . 5
JFK's 32-year-old plan to turn our military power over
to the UN is still official U.S. government policy

WORLD GOVERNMENT· 9, 11
The UN concept of law is completely incompatible
with the U.S. concept as seen in the Constitution

Through an ongoing stream of treaties and agree-

ments , the UN attempts to assert its jurisdiction over
every inch of Planet Earth

NEW WORLD ARMY· 15

Plans to make the United Nations the supreme
world power are moving forward at an alarming pace
Introducing the New World Army (page 15)
U.S. MILITARY· 27,29, 31, 33
Mr. Clinton is more interested in a politically correct
military than with an effective fighting force

Clinton Adm inistration policy would have more U.S.
troops wearing UN blue
For more than seven decades , the CFR has
exercised formidable influence over the institutions
of public policy , including the military
American servicemen have faithfully answered the
call to arms for over 200 years
NA TIONAL POLICE . 35
America is moving , ever so gradually, towa rd a
police state , including possibly even the posting of
UN troops within our borde rs
IN LIGHT OF THE PAST· 41, 43
UN "peacekeepers" who went to Katanga committed
numerous atrocit ies against unarmed civilians
Betrayed by their leaders , Ame ricans were forced to
accept stalemate in Korea and defeat in Vietnam

LETTERS OF THE REPUBLIC . 47, 49

A review of U.S. military history reveals a dramatic
shift in the object of warfare beginn ing with WWI

The events of the past year confirm the accuracy of

William Jasper's expose of the UN, Global Tyranny

GET US OUT! . 52
The only way to derail the plans to make the UN
all-powerful is for the U.S. to withdraw

The UN "peace" force straddles the planet (page 20)

Cover: Defense Dept. photo of U.S. soldiers


he purpose of the our military is to
T defend America and her citizen s. It
is not to police the world, either uni-
laterally or as part of a multilateral or inter-
national police force. Nor is it to prop up or
topple other governments. When the Found-
ing Fathers specified that a purpo se of the
new Constitu tion was to "provide for the
common defen se," they were referring , not
to far-away lands, but to their own .
John Quincy Adams , who was not a del-
egate to the con sti tutio nal convention of
1787 but who nonetheless became the sixth
President of the United States, expressed
this sensible policy thus: "America goes not
abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She
is the well-wis her to the freedom and inde-
pendence of all. She is the champion and
vindica tor only of her own."
Why then are American troops in Somalia
and other powder kegs or potential powder
kegs throughout the world ? Why have some
of our servicemen already been conscripted
into a New World Army under the formal
comm and of the United Nations , with the
prospect of much larger conscriptions loom-
ing on the horizon? In short , why has the
wise policy of the Founders been abandoned
and even scoffed at as "isolationist"?
The Grand Design
In the opening article in this issue (page
5), John F. McManus sheds light on all of
these quest ions in the form of a survey of a
32-year-old State Department document en-
titled Freedom From War: The United
States Program fo r General and Complete
Disarmament in a Peacef ul World. As Mr.
McManus exp lains, the progra m outlined in
that document was then, and contin ues to be
today, the officia l policy of the U.S. govern -
ment. That program call s for arming the
United Nations , while simultaneously dis-
arming the United States and other countrie s
of the world , so that no nation would have
the strength to challenge the UN "peace-
keepin g" force .
The dangers posed by the completion of
this blueprint would be difficult to exagger-
ate. In a world effectively controlled by the
UN , neither the U.S. nor other countries
would be able to determine their own des-
tiny, since the UN would have the guns. The
UN would become a bona fide world gov-
ernment, and the United States of Amer ica
as we know it would cease to exist. The UN
Charter , not the U.S . Constitut ion , would
become the law of the land.
In fact, the consequences of implementing
THE NEW AMERICAN / NO VEMBER 29, 1993
Publisher
John F. McManus
Editor
the blueprint originally outlined in Freedom Gary Benoit
From War are so horrendous that few Ameri-
cans are able to imagine that their leaders
would be capable of such treachery. For this
Managing Editor
David W. Bohon
rea son , we have photographically repro- Senior Editor
duced the State Department document and William F. Jasper
inserted it between pages six and seven of Washington Editor
this issue. We invite all to read it and judge William P. Hoar
for themselves its sovereignty-destroying
provis ions. Contributors
Bob Adelmann
When you do so, please keep in mind that
Hilaire du Berrier
this program expresses the grand design be- Samuel L. Blumenfeld
hind U.S. foreign policy . Foreign policy de- Jam es J. Drummey
cisions that appear not to make any sense Joseph Farah
take on new mean ing whe n the Freedom G. Edwa rd Griffin
From War program is kept in mind. Power- William Norm an Grigg
ful Insiders have long sought to supplant Jane H. Ingraham
Mark D. Isaacs
nationhood with a socialistic world govern -
Roger Koopman
ment they euphemistically refer to as a "new Robert W. Lee
world order, " and Freedom From War is but Neland D. Nobel
one minute part of the voluminous evidence Charles E. Rice
demonstrating that con spirac y. Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
Fr. James Thornton
Step by Step Art Director
In the remainder of the issue, our author s Scott J. Alberts
look in detail at how, step by step, the Free-
dom From War blueprint is being imple- Typesetting
mented . For example , William Norman Steven J. DuBord
Grigg warns that the U.S. is gradually sur- Advertising/Circulation
rendering its sovereignty through treaties Julie DuFrane, Mgr.
(page II ). William F. Jasper, the author of Deborah Paltzer
Global Tyranny, examines the rapidly grow-
Research
ing New World Army (page 15). William P.
Thomas R. Eddlem, Dir.
Hoar in back-to -back article s analyze s how Blythe Weber
the U.S. military is being subverted even as
it is being entangled with the UN (pages 27
and 29). And Robert W. Lee shows how our
omino us slide toward a global police state is
coupled with the ce ntra lizat ion of polic e
NsvAMERlCAN
powers at home (page 35). Printed in the U.S.A.
Finally, on the last page of this issue, Mr. (ISSN 0885-6540)
Jasper makes the point that the only way to THE New AMERICAN is published biweekly by
derai l this power grab is to get the U.S. out The Review Of The News Incorporated, 770
Westhill Boulevard, Appleton , WI 54914 .
of the UN and the UN out of the U.S. We Phone: (414) 749·3784. Rates are $39 per
agree, and we urge our reader s to use this is- year (Hawaii and Canada, add $9; foreign,
sue as a weapon to bring that day closer. • add $27) or $22 for six months (Hawaii and
Canada, add $4.50; foreign, add $13.50). Air
- G AR Y Bsxorr
mail rates on request. Single copies: $2.50,
plus $2.00 postage and handling for up to
eight copies. Over eight copies, add 15% of
Extra Copies Available dollar total. Copyright © 1993 by The Review
Of The News Incorporated. Second Class
Postage paid at Appleton, WI and additional
Add it io na l co p ie s of "T he Ne w mailing offices. Postmaster: Send any ad-
dress changes to THE NewAMERICAN, P.O. Box
Wo rld Arm y" issu e of THE NEW
8040, Appleton, WI 54913.
AMERICAN are available at 10 cop ies
16- and 35-mm microfilm, 105·mm microfiche,
for $12 .50; 25 cop ies for $22.50; or
and article and issue photocopies of this pub-
100 cop ies for $75 .00. Orde r from: lication are available from University Micro-
THE NEW AMERICAN , P.O. Box 8040 , films, Inc., 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor,
Appleton , WI 54913. MI 48106. Phone: (800) 521-0600.
3
 FRONT PAGE John F. McManus

Marching Toward Global Tyranny

Official gove rnment policy is endang ering our hard-won sovereignty
hen they first

W
nal. We as k th at yo u
hear about the study thi s gov ern ment
di sarmament document and judge its
program our nation has sovereignty -des tro ying
be en implementing for provisions for yourself.)
over 30 years, many Man y Americ ans have
Americans are incredu- been persuaded that fur-
lous that officials in the nishing the United Na-
hi ghest offices of our tions with enough power
government would com- to enforce "peace" would
mit such a blatant act of benefit mankind and lead
treason. Yet, such a plan ultimately to an end of
exists and is unfolding at all war. But were the UN
an alarming pace . It calls to become all-powerful,
for the United States to who in turn would pre-
disarm itself and simulta- vent it from establishing
neously build the military it s o wn brand of tyr -
capability of the UN. anny? If the UN were
po wer ful enou gh to en-
Treasonous Plan force peace , would it not
It all be gan on Sep- also be powerful enough
tember 25, 1961 when to enforce its will ?
Presid ent John F. Ken - America ' s nation al
ned y journeyed to UN sovereignty must be pre-
headquarters in Ne w served. Our nation must
York City to present not cede its military (and
Fr eed om From Wa r: therefore it s indepen-
The United States Pro- den ce ) to any supra na-
gram fo r Gen eral and tional organization. While
Compl ete Disarmament there should alway s be a
in a Peaceful World as healthy concern about
official U.S. policy . Pro- the possibility of war, the
duced by the State De- ways to avoid it are to: 1)
partment led by Dean be strong enough to dis-
Rusk (a member of the courage an attack ; 2) stay
Council on Foreign Re- out of the affairs of other
lation s) with the willing nations; and 3) keep free
acquiescence of the De- of entangling alliances .
fense Department led by Kennedy signed Freedom From War and Blueprint for the Peace Sadly , our government' s
Robert S. McN am ar a Race. Bo th called for ceding U.S. milita ry strength to the UN policies reflect the oppo-
(CFR) , the document site.
(also known as "Department of State elimination of weapons , but about plac-
Publication 7277") called for three stages ing all military power into the hands of A New Document
of disarmament leading to the transfer of one global agency. Implementation of The 1961 Freedom From War docu-
national forces - including those of the Freedo m From War would take away ment established a whole series of dis-
United States - to the UN, and the es- the ability of nation s to defend them- arma me nt ste ps as U.S . policy . On
tablishment of a UN Peace Force as the selves - the esse nce of sove reignty - pages 18 and 19 of this document you
world's unchallengeable military power. and empower the UN with the military will find the follo wing :
Disarmament enthusiasts have long muscle to rule the world. (The copy of
called upon world leaders to scra p all Freedom From War attached between In St ag e III progressi ve con-
weapon s and eliminate the potential for pages six and seven of this magazine is a trolled disarmam ent .. . would pro-
war. But this program is not about the photographic reproduction of the origi- . ceed to a point where no state

THE NEW AMERICA N / NOVEMBER 29 , 1993 5

 A "UN-Controlled World" Means Global Government \\
n February 1961, seven months before President John F.
I Kennedy released the Freedom From War disarmament
program to the public, his State Department, led by Secre-
tary of State Dean Rusk (CFR), hired the private Institute for
Defense Analyses to prepare a study showing how disarmament
could be employed to lead to world government. On March 10,
1962, the Institute delivered Study Memorandum No.7, A
World Effectively Controlled by the United Nations, written by
Lincoln P. Bloomfield (CFR).
Dr. Bloomfield had himself recently served with the State
Department's disarmament staff, and while writing his impor-
tant work was serving as an associate professor of political sci-
ence and director of the Arms Control Project at the Center for
International Studies, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
This Bloomfield/lDA report is especially significant because
the author is uncharacteristically candid, eschewing the usual
euphemisms, code words , and double-talk found in typical
"world order" pronouncements meant for public consumption.
The author believed he was addressing fellow internationalists
in a classified memorandum that would never be made avail-
able for public scrutiny. So he felt he could speak plainly.
In the document's opening passage, Bloomfield writes:
A world effectively controlled by the United Nations is
one in which "world government" would come about
through the establishment of supranational institutions,
characterized by mandatory universal membership and
some ability to employ physical force. Effective control
would thus entail a preponderance of political power in the
hands of a supranational organization .... [T]he present UN
Charter could theoretically be revised in order to erect such
an organization equal to the task envisaged, thereby codi-
fying a radical rearrangement of power in the world.
Features of the Global Model
The principal features of Bloomfield's global model include:
"(1) powers sufficient to monitor and enforce disarmament,
settle disputes, and keep the peace - including taxing powers
.. . (2) an international force , balanced appropriately among
ground, sea, air, and space elements, consisting of 500,000 men,
recruited individually, wearing a UN uniform, and controlling
a nuclear force composed of 50-100 mixed land-based mobile
and undersea-based missiles, averaging one megaton per
weapon; (3) governmental powers distributed among three
branches .. . (4) compulsory jurisdiction of the International
Court ...."
To be absolutely certain that there would be no confusion or
misunderstanding about his meaning, Bloomfield carefully de-
fined the terms used in his title:
"World" means that the system is global, with no excep-
tions to its fiat: universal membership. "Effectively con-
trolled" connotes ... a relative monopoly of physical force
at the center of the system, and thus a preponderance of
political power in the hands of a supranational organiza-
tion.... "The United Nations" is not necessarily precisely
the organization as it now exists.... Finally, to avoid end-
less euphemism and evasive verbiage, the contemplated
6 THE NEW AMERICAN / NOVEMBER 29, 1993
regime will occasionally be referred to unblushingly as a
"world government" [emphasis added].
If government is "force" - as George Washington so simply
and accurately defined it - then world government is "world
force." Which means that Bloomfield and those who commis-
sioned his report and agreed with its overall recommendations
wanted to create a global entity with a monopoly of force - a
political, even military power undisputedly superior to any
single nation-state or any possible alliance of national or re-
gional forces. It is as simple as that.
"The appropriate degree of relative force," the Bloomfield!
IDA study concluded, "would ... involve total disarmament
down to police and internal security levels for the constituent
units, as against a significant conventional capability at the cen-
ter backed by a marginally significant nuclear capability."
Again and again as the following excerpts demonstrate, the
study drives its essential points home:
• "National disarmament is a condition sine qua non for ef-
fective UN control.... [W]ithout it, effective UN control is not
possible."
• "The essential point is the transfer of the most vital element
of sovereign power from the states to a supranational govern-
ment."
• "The overwhelming central fact would still be the loss of
control of their military power by individual nations."
Accelerating the Process
Professor Bloomfield recognized that there would be little
chance of realistically advancing toward world government in
the short run through normal "consensus." He suggested facili-
tating and accelerating the movement in that direction through
use of "a grave crisis or war" or "a series of sudden, nasty, and
traumatic shocks." Throughout the report we see restatements
of this diabolical advocacy for creating or manipulating "cri-
ses" in order to advance globalist objectives:
The other condition which puts the possibility within a
more foreseeable time span, is a crisis, a war, or a brink-
of-war situation so grave or commonly menacing that
deeply-rooted attitudes and practices are sufficiently
shaken to open the possibility of a revolution in world po-
litical arrangements.
Are such cynical and sinister manipulations involved today
in the "crisis management" that is taking us closer to "a world
effectively controlled by the United Nations?" The Bloomfield/
IDA "crisis" theme can be found running through many of the
proposals by policy elites today. In the Trilateral Commission's
Triangle Paper No. 43, Keeping the Peace in the Post-Cold War
Era, for instance, the authors warn that "there will be intense
debates in all our countries as to what our responsibilities for
global collective security are and how we should fulfill them."
And, they note, "it will be difficult to persuade the
decisionmakers to expend the resources and put their armed
forces at risk until a crisis has become acute" (emphasis
added). •
- WILLIAM F. JASPER
 would have the military power to War? Indeed they are ! They are some- internationalist mindset. Not surpris -
challenge the progressively strength- times doing so in concert with other na- ingly, therefore, President Clinton has
ened U.N . Peace Force .... tions, and sometimes acting unilater ally. continu ed to follow the plan on his own.
States would retain only tho se The Nuclear Test Ban Treaty is part of On May 4, 1993, U.S . sovereignty was
fo rc es, non-nuclear arma me nts, this disarm ament plan; the treat y ban- further diluted and UN clout was en-
and establishments requi red for the ning the use of outer space for defen se han ced when Mr. Clinton permitted
purpose of maintainin g internal or- is part of it; the Nucle ar Non-Prolifera- Am eric an fo rces in Somali a to be
der; they would also support and tion Treaty is part of it; and the Inter - placed under the command of a UN of-
provid e ag ree d manp ower fo r a mediate Nuclear Forces Treaty, signed fice r from Turkey named Ce vik Bir.
U.N. Peace Force. by President Reagan and former Soviet This marked the first time in U.S. his-
leader Gorb achev, is also part of it. tor y that our nati on ' s co mba t troops
After reading this passage, many con- But Freedom From War makes clear were led in the field by anyone but an
cerned Ameri cans immediately set out that the disarmament of nations will not Am eri can. * Two weeks prior to thi s
to obtain additional copies of Freedom occur in a vacuum, but with the simul- tran sfer , Administr ation officials an-
From War in order to alert others. But taneou s strengthening of the United Na- nounced that some U.S. unit s in Ger-
the docum ent was quickly declared "out tion s. The document decl ares, "States many attached to NATO (a UN regional
of print" by the State Department. Hav- shall ag ree up on s tre ngthening the alli ance) would be placed under the
ing obtained a copy, the command of German
John Birch Societ y has officers.
reproduced it and di s- The Freedom From War document
tributed ten s of thou - Team Players
sands over the years. makes clear that the disarmament For director of the Cen-
Th e document wa s tral Intelligence Agency,
of nations will not occur in a Mr. Clinton selected R.
superseded in April 1962
by the more comprehen- vacuum, but with the simultaneous Jame s Woolsey, a fellow
sive Bl uep rint fo r th e Rhodes Scholar and CFR
Peace Race: Outline of strengthening of the United Nations. member. Just prior to ac-
Basic Provisions of a cepting this appointment,
Treaty on General and Wool se y led a study
Complete Disarmam ent in a Peacef ul structure, authority, and operation of the group for the UN Association of the U.S.
World. But while the title and text was United Nation s...." It calls for a "U.N. that recommended supply ing the UN
changed, there was no change from the Peace Force [to be] established and pro- with thr ee distinct ca tego ries of U.S.
intent of the original plan. In complete gressively strengthened." troop s. Thi s, of course, squares nicely
accord with Freedom From War, Blue- While repe atedl y cha mpioning the with the overall plan to disarm the U.S.
print spells out its overa ll goal in the need for a "new world order" and mak- while strengthening the UN.
third of its three stages : ing plans to send U.S. troops into Iraq In August 1993, reports in both the
under the UN' s auspices, President Bush, Wa shingt on Post and the New York
The Parties to the Treaty would a former memb er of both the CFR and Times claimed that Mr. Clinton wanted
progre ssively strengthen the United the Trilateral Commission , said that he to transfer several units of the U.S. mili-
Nation s Peace Force established in was doing so in part to bring about a tary to UN commanders. Backed by
Stage II unti l it had sufficient "reinvigorated United Nation s." He told personnel from the Defense Department
armed force s and armaments so a press conference on January 9, 1991 (led by CFR member Les Aspin), the
that no state could challenge it. that the "new world order .. . is only go- State Department (led by CFR member
ing to be enhanced if this newl y acti- Wa rren Chri stopher), the National Se-
When questioned 20 years later about vated peacekeepin g function of th e curity Council (led by CFR member W.
the commitment of the United States to United Nation s proves to be effective." Anthony Lake), and the President ' s UN
the Blu eprint, A. Rich ard Rich stein , Practicing what he was preaching about staff (led by CFR member Madeleine
general counsel of the U.S. Arms Con- a reinvigorated UN, Mr. Bush went first Albri ght), Mr. Clinton indicated his
trol and Disarm ament Age ncy, stated to the UN, not to the U.S. Congress, for willi ngness to sign Pre sidential Deci-
that "the United State s has never for- the authority to go to war. Before he left sion Directive 13 committing our nation
mally withdrawn this proposal." On Oc- office in Janu ary 1993, he suggested to support UN peacekeeping operations
tober 28, 1993, historian William Nary that the world organ ization might use "politically, militarily, and financially."
of the Arms Control and Disarmament Fort Dix, New Jersey for a training fa- It all fits. As one editorialist referred
Agenc y confirmed again that "the pro- cility for the UN Peace Force . His ef- to the three stages of thi s subversive
posal has never been withdrawn," add- forts coincided precisely with numerou s plan, "One, two, three , and America is
ing that "s ome of its steps have been steps in the final stages of this overall out!" •
implemented." plan .
While Mr. Bush' s 1992 presidential * While Ame rica n personnel fought under the UN
flag in Korea, and Americans served under the au-
Subverting Sovereignty defeat remo ved him from the scene, he thority of the UN during the 1991 war against Iraq,
Are our leaders actually implem ent- was replaced by a CFR and Trilateral all were led in the field by Amer ican commanders.
ing the plan outlined in Freedom From Commission member who has the same Not so in Somalia.

THF NFW AMERICAN / NO VEMBER 29 . 1993 7

 WORLD GOVERNMENT
Two Versions of the Rule of Law
To destroy arms ... is not enough.
We must create even as we destroy
- creating worldwide law and law
enforcement as we outlaw world-
wide war and weapons.
- President John F. Kennedy
P
resident Kennedy made the above
remark during a speech he gave
at the United Nations on Septem-
ber 25th, 1961, the same day he deliv-
ered the disarmament program known
as Freedom From War to the world
body. In this alarming statement, Ken-
nedy indicated his under standing that
law is nothing unless it is backed by
force . In calling for "worldwide law and
law enforcement" at the United Nations,
he threw his support behind disarming
his own nation - which he was sworn
to protect - and creating international
law admini stered and enforced by the
United Nations.
Of course, some American s sincerely
believe that the United Nations should
enforce a system of international law.
They may go so far as to argue that the
countries of the UN should form a bona
fide world government, ju st as the origi-
nal 13 states of our own country once
came together to form a national gov-
ernment. What these misguided idealists
overlook is that the UN concept of law
is completely incompatible with the
U.S. concept.
T he American System
The underlying premise of the Ameri-
can system is the thunderous assertion
in the Declaration of Independence that
"men . . . are endowed by their Creator
with certain unalienable Rights." Be-
cause of thi s divine endowment men
have the power to form a government in
order "to secure these Rights."
According to our Foundin g Fathers,
government's sole purpose is to protect
the God-given rights of the individual.
It is not to distribute the wealth or regu-
late the conduct of law -abiding citi-
zenry . Through the Con stitution the
Founding Fathers created a government
based on the self-evident truths enunci-
ated in the Declaration of Independenc e.
The Con stitution limited the govern-
THE NEW AMERICAN / NOVEMBER 29 , 1993
ment, not the people . Hence, the under-
lying relationship between the govern -
ment and the rights of every individual
is clearly stated in the first five words
of the First Amendment, "Congress
shall make no law...."
According to the American way,
rights to speak, publish, practice reli-
gion, keep and bear arm s, etc ., tran -
scend any power of government, and
government shall have nothing to say
about them . Their mention in the Bill of
Rights is merely to remind government
that it may not infringe upon them.
UN Turns It Upside Down
At th e United Nations , there ha s
never been any acknowledgment of God
as the sourc e of men 's rights. From
whom then, according to the UN, do
men obtain their rights? This question is
never answered by the world body . Its
documents either pre sume that rights
exi st of themselves or that they are
granted by government - such as the
UN governm ent. But if government is
the source of men' s rights , then it is
government's prerogative to qual ify,
limit, or even abolish rights. How could
it be otherwise ? Whatever government
grants, government can take away.
The UN Charter states that the pur-
pose of the organization is to "reaffirm
faith in fundamental human rights."
There is no mention of the Creator as
the source of these rights, as is clearly
stated in the Declaration of Indepen-
dence . Therefore, the whole philosophy
of government at the UN can be ex-
pected to differ from that of the United
States. And it surely does.
In 1966, the UN proclaimed its Inter-
national Covenants on Human Rights.
One of the three covenants appearin g in
this document is the UN's Internati onal
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
a measure that the U.S. Senate repeat-
edly refused to ratify until April 1992.*
In Article 18 of this document, we read:
Everyone shall have the right to
freedom of thought, conscience and
religion ....
Freedom to manife st one' s reli-
gion or beliefs may be subject only
to such limitations as are pre-
scribed by law and are necessary....
In other words, freedom of thought,
conscience, and religion can be subor-
dinated to UN-decreed limitations . The
world body actually claims the right to
enact laws that cancel freedom of reli-
gion and other basic rights. When we
recall the First Amendment' s insistence
that "Congress shall make no law" re-
garding such rights, the differences be-
tween the UN and American systems
become strikingly obvious .
In several additional articles, the UN
Covenant repeats this same pattern. Ar-
ticle 19 establishes the "right to freedom
of expression . .. subject to certain re-
strictions." Article 21 states that no re-
striction s may be placed on the "right of
peaceful assembly .. . other than those
imposed in conformity with the law."
Article 22 proclaim s that no limitations
may be placed on the "right to freedom
of association . .. other than those which
are prescribed by law."
The UN ignores God's existence and
establi shes the framework for a world
government wherein power to grant and
suspend rights is assumed. On the other
hand , the United States acknowledges
God as the source of men 's rights and
prohibits the federal government from
enacting any law regarding them. The
UN turns the American system of law
completely upside down.
The creation of UN-directed interna-
tionallaw has been the goal of a host of
organi zation s and individuals over
many years - from the World Federal-
ists Association to the Carnegie Endow-
ment for Internation al Peace to virtually
every pacifist or peace-advocacy group
ever formed. It has also been the long-
time goal of the Communi st Party USA.
But independence-minded Americans
remain totally opposed to any UN-di-
* This Covenant was ratified in the name of 250 mil-
lion Americans on April 2, 1992 by as few as five
senators: George Mitchell of Maine (CFR), Clai-
borne Pell of Rhode Island (CFR), Daniel Patrick
M oynihan of New York (CFR) , Al Gore of Ten-
nessee, and Ted Stevens of Alaska. In doing so,
these five (no others have admitted being present)
ignored the constitutional requirement that "a ma-
jority" be present "to do business."
9
rected rule of law. They are, neverthe- slave s of them, and if the use of the resenting the U.S. at the UN's founding
less, completely in favor of the rule of law ballot box has failed, then there is no re- either were or would become memb ers
codified in the U.S. Constitution and the course to limit govern ment and gover- of the world -government-promoti ng
con stitutions of the several state s. nor s except through the use of force. Council on Foreign Relations. Among
But the disarmament program to which these were John Foster Dulles, John J.
Disarmament and Law our nation has been committed for three McCloy, Nelson A. Rockefeller, Adlai
While proclaiming our nation' s com- decades would cancel the right of any- Stevenson, Charles Yost, Harold Stassen,
mitment to "general and complete dis- one but the UN to possess arms. and Edw ard R. Stettinius.
armament," President Kennedy stated, At the founding conference, it was se-
"We must create . . . worldwide law and The UN and Tyranny cretly decided that the Undersecretary
law enforcement." He knew that law The United Nation s is not a good idea for Political and Security Council Af-
without force to back it up is meaning- gone bad. It was rotten from the begin- fairs, the over seer of all UN military ac-
less. But hi s disarmament proposal, ning. If Ameri cans had little apprecia- tivit y, would always be named by the
which our nation has been implement- tion of the potential for tyranny in the Soviet Union . Since the UN ' s founding,
ing for the past three decades , includes organization, communists and their so- this arrangement has been ho nored
disarmament for all nations but not for without exception.
the UN. "Freedom From War includes The UN has always turned to liberty-
the follow ing requirement: despising socialists for its key officials.
All of the fo llowi ng men who have
The manufacture of arma ments served the organizatio n as sec re tary -
wo uld be prohibit ed except for ge neral have been socialis ts: Trygve
those agreed types and quantities to Lie, Dag Hammarskjold, U Th ant, Kurt
be used by the U.N. Peace Force Waldheim, Perez de Cuellar, and Boutros
and those required to mai ntain in- Boutro s-Ghali. Socialism and Ameri-
ternal order. All other armaments cani sm are totally incompatible, while
would be destroyed or converted to socialism and communism have alway s
peaceful purposes. been ideological brot hers .
Should America allow itself to be-
In the American system, a rule of law come s ubs erv ient to the UN , there
is establi shed to govern the government. would of necessity be a cancellation of
As with any type of law , it is valueless the Declaration of Independence and the
if it cannot be backed up by force. U.S . Constitution. The freedoms taken
Where then in the American sys tem for granted by Americans would no
should this force properly reside ? Cer - longer exist - except at the pleasure of
tai nly not with the government itself. the all-powerful UN. With total power,
Nor sho uld it be present in the nation ' s backed up by its excl usive possession of
military, the proper func tion of which is military force , the UN would rule the
to protect the nation from forei gn Hiss was exposed as secret communist planet. And if history is any guide, the
threats . Nor wi th any federally con- unchallengeab le force it possessed
tro lle d poli ce force - whic h sho uld cia list brethren surely knew what the would be used to crea te a world tyranny.
never be allowe d to exist. world body could accomplish. Th is, then, is what disarmam ent of
Th e proper repository of the force The UN was created at a gathering at- our nation is all about. And this is what
necessary to co ntrol gove rnment reside s tended by the representatives of many the " worl dwide ru le of law" wo uld
in the people themse lves. If those who nat io ns in San Franci sco in 1945 . A mea n. Americans who serve in the U.S.
wield power are to be restrained from U.S. State Department officer named milit ary must become aware of policies
infringing on the rights of the people Alger Hiss served as secretary-general that would have them serve a new glo-
who created government, the people of the founding conference. His s was bal master. And all Americans must be-
themselves - acting alone or through a later shown to have been a secret com- come aware that the UN itself and the
militia derived from their numbers - muni st , more loyal to Am erica' s en- gradual but insidious tran sfer of our
must do the restraining. They must, in emies than to the nati on of his birth . nation ' s military to it con stitute immi-
other words , retain their right to "keep Along with Hiss, man y other contribu- nent threats to their own liberty and the
and bear arm s." It is no exaggeration tors to the planning for the UN were indep endence of this nation .
that the right to keep and bear arm s is a also later found to be communists.* If this nation is to survive as a free
right that insure s all others. Cancel that In addition , over 40 individuals rep- and sovereign entity, all UN disarma-
right and all other right s will be placed ment programs must be repudiated.
* The com munists from the U.S. who helped create And, because the UN itself is a threat to
in jeopardy. the UN included Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White,
You will look in vain in UN docu- Virgi ni us Coe . Noe l Fie ld, La ure nce Du ggan. everything America stands for, our na-
ments for any affirmation of the right of Henry Juli an Wadl eigh , John Carter Vince nt, tion must withdraw from it - and see
David Weintraub, Nathan Gre gory Sil vermaster, to it that whatever then remains of it
the people to be armed. If citizen s find Ha rold Gl asser, Vic to r Perl o, Irvin g Kapl an ,
it necessary to op pose a government Solomon Adler, Abraham Geo rge Silverm an, Wil-
leaves our shores . •
that is usurping their rights and maki ng liam K. Ullman, and William H. Taylor. - JOHNF. McM ANUS

10 THE NE W AMERICAN / NOVEMBER 29, 1993

 WORLD GOVERNMENT

Entangling Treaties
T
hro ugh treaties, covenants, con- law analyst at the Heritage Foundation, pressed reservations about the
ventions, and other agreements, observes that the covenant has little if document's potential effect upon rights
the United Nations attempts to anything to do with the rights of indi- protected by the Constitution. The
assert jurisdiction over all human rela- viduals, but a lot to do with enriching "rights" guaranteed in the covenant are
tionships and literally every inch of the the power of government: qualified out of existence in the interest
planet. Furthermore, globalists believe of preserving the government's preroga-
that they po sse ss sweeping, unspecified Clinton' s proposal to ratify this tive s. Thus Article 18 of the document,
residual powers. This was illu strated by treaty ignores centuries of We stern which supposedly protects freedom of
a comment made during an October intellectual and economic history, conscience, allows that "Freedo m to
13th speech by National Security Advisor while at the same time embracing manifest one's religion or beliefs may
Anthony Lake (CFR). In be subject only to such
remarks offered to the limitations as are pre-
Overseas Development scribed by law and are
Council (a foundation- necessary ...." In short,
funded, CFR-aligned the state is forbidden to
"think tank") , Lake ob- persecute religion - un-
served: "In peacekeeping less the state decides that
and other efforts at con- such persecution is legal.
flict resolution , we are
literally making ca se law Jurisdiction Over
every day ." The New Fa m ily Life
World Army is thus a Two more unratified
law unto itself, creating UN agreements would
its own rules and extend- extend the body's juris-
ing its jurisdiction to diction into the homes of
serve the UN 's whims. individual Americans.
The UN Convention on
Planetary Police the Elimination of All
The UN's treaty juris- Forms of Discrimination
diction may soon expand Against Women, signed
to the United States, as Enforcement of UN dictates would fall to th e New World Army by President Carter in
the Clinton Administra- 1980, enjoys the promi-
tion is expected to pursue ratification of the theorie s of Karl Marx and nent support of the Clinton Administra-
two covenants dealing with economic Vladimir Lenin. Their ideas are en - tion. A 1980 " memorandum of law"
and political "rights," two conventions shrined in the Soviet Constitution outlining the probable effects of the
dealing with the "rights" of women and of 1936, written at the behest of convention was prepared by then-Secre-
children, and a treaty that would give Josef Stalin. It contained many of tary of State Edmund Muskie (CFR) .
the UN plenary jurisdiction over the the rights in the International Cov- According to Muskie, Article One of the
world's oceans. enant, including the right to hous- document would bring personal rela-
The UN Convention on Economic, ing, education, medical care, a job, tion ships between the sexes (including
Social and Cultural Rights, which was and leisure time. This cynical family relationships) under UN scru-
pa ssed by the General A ssembly in document identified right s that tiny. Article Five instructs ratifying na-
1966, was signed by President Jimmy were never meant to be granted. tion s to "modify the social and cultural
Carter in 1977, but never ratified. The For decades, though, it gave Soviet patterns of conduct of men and women."
Clinton Administration has announced totalitarian governments the cover The other measure that would em-
its intention to seek Senate ratification that justified their accumulation of power the UN to intervene in family life
of the document. During last June's UN power and property. is the UN Convention on the Rights of
"World Conference on Human Rights" the Child, which was signed by Presi-
in Vienna, Secretary of State Warren The UN Covenant on Civil and Politi- dent George Bu sh in 1990 but as yet re-
Christopher described the covenant as cal Rights, which was also signed by mains unratified . This convention
" a solemn commitment to be enforced." Jimmy Carter in 1977, was ratified by a mandates UN supervision of the care,
Presumably enforcement of that cov- Senate voice vote on April 2, 1992 . Thi s education, and upbringing of children.
enant would fall within the police power was done in spite of the fact that both The document's preamble demands that
of the New World Army. the Bush Administration and the sena- children be "brought up in the spirit of
Andrew J. Colwin, an international tors who supported the UN covenant ex- the ideas proclaimed in the Charter of

THE NEW AMERICAN / NOVEMBER 29, 1993 11

the United Nations, " an injunction
which , of necessity , will be violated by
those American parents who seek to in-
still in their children the Judeo-Christian
values that are America's patrimony.
Law of the Sea Treaty
An agreement giving the United Na-
tions jurisdiction over the oceans may
be ratified by the Senate early next year.
The UN Convention on the Law of the
Sea (UNCLOS) consists of 320 articles
and nine annexes that, according to the
August 28th New York Times, are in-
tended to govern "virtually every aspect
of human activity on, over and under the
ocean."
Aaron Danzig, for mer chairman of
the Law of the Sea Committee of the
World Peace Thro ug h Law Center,
notes that UNCLOS "was prompted in
part by the discovery that vast riches of
manganese, cobalt, nickel and copper
lie in the seabed. It was thought that the
profit from mining these resources
could be used to improve the lot of un-
derdeveloped countries." Accordingly,
the treaty would designate the materia l
wealth of the seas "the common heri-
tage of mankind ."
Fifty-six countries have already rati-
fied the treaty ; four more need to ratify
it in order for it to go into effect.
UNCLOS would provide for a major
project in wealth redistribution: Section
II of the document would create a
world collective called the "Enterprise"
through which companies involved in
seabed mining would be compelled to
share both profits and technology with
"developing" nations.
It is expected that the Clinton Admin-
istration will push for Senate ratification
of the measure in early 1994. Adminis -
tration officials quoted in the New York
Times insist that a "universally-recog -
nized treaty that balances the needs of
all nations would be in the best interests
of the United States , especially from a
military perspective."
It should not be forgotten that
America is an island nation, and access
to the sea lanes is a vital consideration
in both commerce and military activi-
ties. The Times notes that Rear Admiral
William L. Schachte Jr., the Defense
Department representative for ocean
policy, believes that the "treaty's provi-
sions upholding the right to conduct
high-seas military maneuvers and free-
dom of passage thro ugh strategic sea
12
routes are vital to United States security.
Moreover, he and other experts say the
treaty is itself a readily recognizable
symbol of international order." How-
ever, the "freedom of passage " suppos-
edly guaranteed by UNCLOS would be
allowed only in those circumstances
that comport with the UN 's priorities.
American security is not enhanced
through arrangements that make our
military decisions contingent upon the
approval of a foreign entity .
Aside from UNCLOS's strategic sig-
nificance regarding control of the world's
waterways, the agreement would pro -
vide the UN with an independent source
of revenue to finance military activities .
In an evaluation of UNCLOS published
in 1973, Louisiana Congressman John
Rarick wrote:
If the UN gains control of the
high seas, and thus an independent
source of inexhaustible income free
from taxation of its mem bers, it
would move from the position of a
mere "international organization"
to that of an independent sover-
eign, answerable to no nation.
Adoption of the Seabed Treaty
would [give the UN] undisputed
control of territory, and command
of sufficient wealth to finance its
one-world activities. With millions
of dollars coming into its treasury
every year from the sale of mineral
rights or oil leases on the seabed,
the UN would be able to finance,
equip, and maintain an interna-
tional police force necessary to en-
force whatever restrictions it
decides to place on the oceans
around our shores .
"Sustainable Development"
According to U.S. Ambassador to the
United Nations Madeleine Albright
(CFR), "This Administration believes
that environmental threats must be
treated as seriously as any other threats
to our security. " President Clinton
touched upon the same theme in his
September 27th speech before the UN,
when he announced his intention to
"work far more ambitiously to fulfill
our obligations as custodians of the
planet, to improve the quality of life for
our citizens and the quality of our air
and water and the earth itself." It is
therefo re reasonable to expect that UN
"peacekeeping" operations will involve
enforcement of global environmen tal
agreeme nts.
In November 1992, the UN created
the Sustainable Development Commis-
sion, which, in the words of the New
York Times , "will regularly scrutinize
the environmental records of all nations,
hearing evidence from both govern-
ments and private groups like Green -
peace and Friends of the Earth." The
commission's "main task is to monitor
how countries carry out Agenda 21" -
the bloated blueprint for global eco-so-
cialism. In his October 13th speech to
the Overseas Development Council,
Anthony Lake explained that the Admin-
istration's policy regarding UN "peace-
making" will "build upon the promising
work of the UN's Com mittee on Sus-
tai nable Devel opmen t.. .." Lake also
predicted that the Administration's en-
tire foreign policy will be based "on the
princip le of democratic sustainable de-
velopment." In order for a country's in-
stitutions to meet with the approval of
the new world order, Lake con tends,
those institutions must be "bo th politi-
cally and environmentally sustainable."
UN agreements intended to promote
"sustainable development" have already
wielded decisive influence in the affairs
of one sovereign nation . When the resi-
dents of the Australian state of Tasmania
decided in 1985 to build a hydroelectric
dam, environmental activists filed a
court challenge. This challenge was up-
held by the country 's supreme court,
which cited a UN convention that des-
ignated the dam site a "worl d heritage
area."
Tasmania' s anti-sodomy law has also
been challenged by UN-a llied activists .
A homosexual activist in Tasmania has
asked the UN to invali date the state's
sodomy law. The December 27, 1992
San Francisco Examiner reported, "A
U.N. ruling could oblige the national
government to use its powers under the
Australian Constitution to override
Tasmania's state law." Similar rulings
could conceivably be pursued by
American homosexual activists to in-
validate the remaining state and local
anti-homosexuality laws in our own
country .
Global "Harmonization"
During last June 's UN World Confer-
ence on Human Rights in Vienna, great
emphasis was placed upon the "univer-
sali ty and indivisibility of human
THE NEW AMERICAN / NOVEMBER 29, 1993
rights." Governments throughout the come the supreme law of the land. They norant of the dangers inherent in the
world were called upon to "harmonize" are indeed more supreme than ordinary treaty-making power, and they clearl y
their dome stic laws with UN dictate s - laws, for congre ssional laws are invalid taught that treatie s could not be used to
a process that is well under way in the if they do not conform to the Constitu- subvert constitutionally protected liber-
United State s. In an April 1st speech to tion, whereas treaty laws can override ties. According to Thomas Jefferson ,
the Town Hall of California in Los An- the Constitution" (emphasis added ). "s urely the Pre sident and the Senate
geles, U.S . Ambass ador to the UN Dulles' assumption was revisited in cannot do by treaty what the whole gov-
Madeleine Albright declared, "The UN the 1990 CFR publication, The United ernm ent is interdicted from doing in any
agenda bears a striking resemblance to Nations Reborn: Confl ict Control in the way." Jefferson taught that the treaty-
America' s agenda." That agend a, ac- Post-Cold Wa r Wo rld . In that book making power conferred by the Consti-
cording to Albright, require s a complete George L. Sherry cr iticized some of the tution is not "boundless." "If it is," he
revision of governing principles: "The mode st (and in adequate) measures declared, "w e have no Con stitution."
President has .. . called for a New Cov- taken by the Reagan Admini stration to Alexander Hamilton agreed: "The only
enant with the American people . I be- withdraw Americ an funding from UN con stitutional exception to the power of
lieve we should extend his vision and agencies. According to Sherry, such ac- makin g treaties is, that it shall not
call for a New Covenant change the Constitution....
among nations ...." On natural principles, a
Globali sts believe that treaty , which should
the fo unding of the manifestly betray or sac-
United Nations inaugu- rifice primary interests
rated the "new covenant of the state, would be
among nations," with all null. " A similar under-
nation s now beholden to standing guided the 1836
the dictates of the world Supreme Court deci sion
body . In 1950, President in New Orleans v. U.S.,
Harry S Truman asserted , which held that " Con-
"There is now no longer gress cannot , by legisla-
any real difference be- tion, enlarg e the federal
tween domestic and for- jurisdiction, nor can it be
eign affairs." Pre sident enlarged under the treaty-
Eisenhower echoed this making power" (emphasis
notion, insisting , "For us added).
indeed there are no Shortly after the Sen-
longer ' foreign affairs' ate ratified the UN treaty,
and ' foreig n policy .' Senator John Bricker (R-
Since such affairs belong OH) proposed an amend-
to and affect the entire UN proponents see the General Assembly as world parliament ment specify ing that no
world , th ey are essen- treaty could be used to
tially local affairs for every nation, in- tions were " illegal" because "the UN deny rights protected under the Con sti-
cluding our own." Char ter is the law of the land...." tution . As a presidential candidate ,
In a 1972 California Law Review ar- If the UN Charter is the world's con- Dwight Eisenhower endorsed the Bricker
ticle given prominent citation in the an- stitution, then the General Assembly is Amendment. However, upon being
notated U.S. Code, Bernhard Schluter of the world 's legislature . A statement elected, Eisenhower announc ed his op-
the European Commission of Hum an made last December 23rd by UN Gen- position to the measure, thereby killing
Rights wrote that "failure to implement eral Assembl y President Stoyan Gane v it.
the [UN] Charter with legislation does illustrates that the body is taking that In a 1975 CFR publication entitled
not mean that the Charter has no legal conceit quite seriously: On the Creation of a Just World Order,
effect upon dome stic law . .. the Chart er Princeton professor Richard A. Falk
can still influence judicial determination The General Assembl y is facing (CFR) outlined the new world order' s
of public policy and interpretation of the an historical challenge: to truly be- long-term strategy. According to Falk,
human right s provision of the nation al come a func tional world parlia- the 1970s was a period of "conscious-
law." ment on the basi s of the United ness-rai sin g," the 1980s witn essed a
Nation s Charter. ... The countries of stage of "mobilization," and the 1990s
Law of the Land? th e world ha ve assi gned to the are to be the decade of "transforma-
Some notable officials have asserted United Nations the heavy respon si- tion ." Unless ass ertive measures are
that the UN Charter doe s not mer el y bilities of maintaining international taken by constitutionalists, this decade
supplement the Con stitution, but sup- peace and security, as well as of will see the con summation of that pro-
plant s it outright. In 1952, John Foster addressing a wide range of global , cess: the creation of a world wide police
Dulles (CFR ), who later ascended to the regional , and local problems. state administered by an all-powerful
position of secretary of state, declared, United Nation s military . •
"U nder the Co nstitution, treaties be- The American Founders were not ig- WILLIAM NORMAN GRIGG

13
 THE NEW WORLD ARMY

The UN Takes Command

he UN Army is

T on the march,
its ranks swell-
ing day by day. From
Angola to Yugoslavia,
and from El Salv ador
to Leb anon , Georgia,
and Kashmir it s sol-
diers are girdling the
planet. Important world
ch anges are afoot. In
an article entitled "Em-
powering the United
Nations," in the Winter
1992/93 issue of For-
eign Affairs, United Na-
tions Secretary-General
Boutro s Boutro s-Ghali
declared: "A new chap-
ter in the history of the
United Nation s has be-
gun. With newfound
appeal the world orga-
nization is being uti-
lized with greater fre-
qu enc y and grow ing
American soldiers (r) are taki ng thei r place in the ranks of t he expand ing UN " peace" force
urgency." Th e secr e-
tary-general noted : "In the first half of "the heart of the American Establi sh- " purpose of prom oting disarm am ent
1992 the number of U.N. soldiers and ment." Journalist Richard Rovere called and submergence of U.S. sove reignty
police officers increased four fold ; by it "a sort of Presidium for that part of and national independence into an all-
the end of the yea r the y will exceed the Establishment that guides our des- powerful one-world government." More-
50,000." By October 1993 UN forces tiny as a nation." over, he charged, "this lust to surrender
had nearl y doubled again , to over And For eign Aff airs is one of the the sovereignty and independence of the
90,000 , and by the start of 1994 may main transmission belt s for the CFR ' s United States is pervasive throughout
number well over 100,000. Like a blue propaganda line. "By followin g the evo- most of the membership.... The major-
blob imitating the expansive creature of lution of this propagand a in the most ity visualize the utopian submergence of
science fiction fame, the blue-helmeted pr estigious scho larly j ournal in the the United States as a subsidiary admin-
UN army seems intent on engulfing the world, Foreign Affairs, anyone can de- istrative unit of a global government."
globe. termine years in adva nce what the fu- These are not the rantin gs of some
ture defen se and foreign policies of the bedlamite, but serious charges by a man
Insider Influence United States will be," Admiral Chester of considerable distinction who enjoyed
It is significant not only that Boutro s- Ward observed nearl y two decades ago. the ben efit of an insi de look at the
Ghali ' s article appeared in Foreign Af- "If a certain proposition is repeated of- American Establishment. His warnings
fa irs, but in this particul ar issue of the ten enough in that j ournal," he contin- and others like them seem prophet ic to-
journal, which was dedicated, according ued, "then the U.S . Admini stration in day as the UN army grows, while the
to the cover, to "Advice for President power - be it Republican or Demo- U.S. military shrinks and plays the role
Clinton." When Foreign Affairs offers cratic - begins to act as if that proposi- of glo ba l janissary en for cing UN
"a dvice" to the White House, histor y tion or assumption were an established dictates.
shows the occupant of the Oval Office fact."
usually pays heed. Foreign Affa irs is the Admiral Ward was speaking from ex- "Empowering" the UN
house organ of the Council on Foreign perience. A fo rmer Jud ge Advocate As set forth more than 30 years ago
Relations (CFR), the private club once General of the U.S. Navy, Ward was in th e Kennedy St ate Department ' s
described by Harvard historian Arthur him self a memb er of the CFR for 16 CFR-c rafted program known as Free-
Schlesinger (who was him self a CFR years . That experience led him to con- dom From War (see article on page 5),
member) as a "front organization" for clude that the group was formed for the the plan of the global-minded Insiders

THE NEW AMERICAN / NO VEMBER 29, 1993 15

calls for implementation of a three-stage
program for the gradual transfer of U.S.
arms to the United Nations. So that ulti-
mately, as Freedom From War states,
"no state would have the military power
to challenge the progressively strength-
ened U.N. Peace Force ."
The Clinton Administration is duti-
fully following and implementing the
"advice" so kindly offered by the CFR.
Which should surprise no one. Starting
with the President himself, virtually ev-
ery top member of the Clinton Admin-
istration is a member of the CFR. Many
are also members of the CFR's sister
organization, the Trilateral Commis-
sion . Cand idate Clinton demonstrated
that he was on the one -world wave-
length during the 1992 campaign when
he endorsed Secre tary-General Boutros-
Ghali' s program for UN empowerment,
An Agenda for Peace.
Iss ued by the secretary-general in
June 1992 at the behest of the UN Secu-
rity Council, An Agenda for Peace sig-
naled an audacio us new grab for power
on the part of the world organization.
The Boutros-Ghali report notes that, in
the past, "United Nations operations in
areas of crisis have generally been es-
tablished after conflict has occurred."
But now, the "time has come to plan for
circumstances warranting preventive
deployment."
As Boutros-Ghali sees it, "The time
of absolute and exclusive sovereignty ...
has passed," and the time has come for
"a United Nations capable of maintain-
ing international peace and security, of
securing justice and human rights and of
promoti ng ... 'social progress and better
standards of life in larger freedom .' "
According to Bou tros-Gh ali, "T he
sources of conflict and war are perva-
sive and deep .... To reach them will re-
quire our utmost effort ... to promote
sustainable economic and social deve l-
opment.... " Because of this, "the efforts
of the Organization to build peace, sta-
bility and security must encompass mat-
ters beyond military threats in order to
break the fetters of strife and warfare
that have characterized the past." Under
the new UN definitions of "peacekeep-
ing," virtually any circumstance or con-
dition in any part of the world might
conceivably constitute a "risk for stabil-
ity" or a "threat" to peace, and therefore
justify UN intervention.
Of course, says the UN leader, these
new responsibilities "will require ... spe-
16
cial agreements ... whereby Member
States undertake to make armed forces,
assistance and facilities available to the
Security Council ... not only on an ad
hoc basis but on a permanent basis"
(emphasis added).
Americans should have been shocked
and outraged then , when President
Bush, in his address to the United Na-
tions General Assembly on September
21, 1992, announced: "I welcome the
secretary-general 's call for a new
agenda to strengthen the United Na-
tions' ability to prevent, contain, and re-
solve conflict across the globe ...." Mr.
Boutros-Ghali's Agenda for Peace
signaled a new power grab by the UN
Bush pledged to work with the UN "to
best employ our considerable lift, logis-
tics, communications, and intelligence
capa bilities," and stated: "The United
States is prepared to make available our
bases and facilities for multinational
training and field exercises. One such
base, nearby, with facilities is Fort Dix."
Presidential Directive
Bill Clinton is continuing the same
agenda . On August 5th, the Washington
Post broke the story that President
Clinton was preparing to issue a presi-
dential directive that would mark a radi-
cal departure in official U.S. foreign and
military policy. The Post reported that
Mr. Clinton 's proposed Presidential De-
cision Directive 13 "endorses the United
Nations as ersatz world policeman and
commits Washington to support multi-
national peacemaking and peacekeeping
operations 'po litically, militarily and fi-
nancially.'" The Post noted that "the
presidential directive endorses a broad
new definition of what constitutes a
'threat to international peace and secu-
rity,' setting the stage for forcible U.N.
intervention when a country undergoes
'sudden and unexpected interruption of
established democracy or gross viola-
tion of human rights .' "
Quite clearly, the UN 's Agenda for
Peace was being implemented by presi-
dential directive. The press leak of the
directive confirmed what was obviously
already official policy. Having already
turned over severa l thousan d American
troops to UN command in Somalia, de-
ployed U.S. forces as UN peacekeepers
in Bosnia and Macedonia, an d sup-
ported UN calls for new missions in
Rwanda, Georgia, Liberia, and Haiti,
the Clinton Administration appeared
willing to give the UN carte blanche.
However, members of Congress on
both sides of the aisle were beginning to
balk at Mr. Clinton's enthusiastic "multi-
lateralism." They were receiving a steady
assau lt of angry mail and phone calls
demanding that American troops be
withdrawn from Somalia and that U.S.
forces stay out of the Yugoslavia mael-
strom. By the time the President was
scheduled to give his speech at the
United Nations on September 27th, he
was facing such serious defections in
his own party in Congress that he was
forced into some rhetorical back-pedal-
ing. In his speech Mr . Clinton gently
rapped the UN's knuckles and chided it
for trying to "become engaged in every
one of the world's co nflicts." "If the
American people are to say yes to UN
peacekeeping," said the President, "the
United Nations must know when to say
no."
The performance was roundly praised
in the CFR-dominated major media as
an indication of the President' s chas-
tened realism in dealing with the UN. It
was pure political theater to placate the
restless natives. Less than a week later,
on October 3rd, came the tragic death s
of 18 American Rangers in Somalia and
the sight of the bodies of American sol-
diers being desecrated by mobs in the
streets of Mogadishu.
Tho se images drove home to many
Americans the grim reality of UN
"peacemaking," "peacekeeping," and
"nation-building." Again President
THE NEW AMERICAN / NOVEMBER 29 , 1993
 Bill Clinton's Un-American Directive
he first report of President Clinton's plan to implement
T a radical new policy directive concerning U.S.
involvement in UN military operations appeared in an
August 5th story by the Washington Post's Barton Gellman.
The Post article reported that "President Clinton's top national
security advisers have agreed to support the 'rapid expansion'
of United Nations peace enforcement operations around the
world." The major emphasis of the directive known as PDD-13,
Gellman reported, "is boosting the size and professionalism of
the U.N. headquarters staff." In addition, the story said "the
presidential directive endorses a broad new definition of what
constitutes a 'threat to international peace and security,' setting
the stage for forcible Ll.N, intervention when a country under-
goes 'sudden and unexpected interruption of established democ-
racy or gross violation of human rights.' "
Forced Modification
As radical as this new policy directive is reported to be, it
apparently started out with even more extreme proposals. Many
of these were removed or modified because of strong opposi-
tion from military leaders in the Pentagon and mounting criti-
cism in Congress of the President's UN policies. This growing
opposition, no doubt, is a major reason why the directive was
not issued in September as anticipated. On Septermber 13th, the
House of Representatives rejected two of the Administration's
proposals believed to have emanated from PDD-B. By a vote
of 211 to 199 it defeated an amendment to the defense budget
that would have established a $30 million Defense Response
Fund, a special account that would pay start-up costs for up to
five new UN military operations. And by a vote of 210 to 199,
the House rejected another amendment for $10 million to es-
tablish a military command, control, and communications cen-
ter at the UN.
President Clinton, however, was not ready to drop the idea.
In his United Nations speech of September 27th, he declared,
"The United Nations must also have the technical means to run
a modem world-class peacekeeping operation. We support the
creation of a genuine UN peacekeeping headquarters with a
planning staff, with access to timely intelligence, with a logis-
tics unit that can be deployed on a moment's notice, and a mod-
em operations center with global communications."
After the fiasco of the UN-U.S. military operation in Soma-
lia on October 3rd, members of Congress began openly attack-
ing the President's directive, which had still not been officially
released. On October 5th, Senator Trent Lott (R-MS) charged,
"The Clinton Administration appears dedicated to sending the
U.S. military into the dangerous seas of multilateral peacekeep-
ing in an effort to elevate the status of the United Nations into
the guardian arbiter of the new world order."
"Key to this new vision of the world," said the senator, "is
creation of a new world army whose singular purpose is to en-
force the whims of the arcane United Nations Security Council.
The Administration's effort to create a new vision for the U.S.
military is embodied, I fear, in a new Presidential Decision Di-
rective, called PDD-13. Under PDD-13, the United States be-
comes the trainer and bill-payer of an effort to create a military
command structure for the Secretary-General of the United
Nations."
THE NEW AMERICAN / NOVEMBER 29, 1993
Senator Lott also pointed out that "the Clinton Administra-
tion's point-man on crafting the U.S. military role in this new
world is Dr. Morton Halperin, the nominee for the position of
the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Peacekeeping and De-
mocracy. Mr. Halperin is widely recognized to be the architect
ofPDD-13. Mr. Halperin is awaiting confmnation and I propose
that Mr. Halperin become the catalyst which begins the debate
regarding the Clinton effort to multinationalizethe U.S. military."
On October 7th Senator Strom Thurmond (R-SC) joined the
attack, declaring, "Morton Halperin is dangerous to national
defense! He is a man of extremely poor judgment - the kind
of poor judgment that can get Americans killed." Said
Thurmond, "Mr. Halperin's ideas and advice are already at
work in the Pentagon, although he has not been confirmed. I
see his handiwork in the Somalia disaster. We cannot and
should not confirm this man. Morton Halperin's judgment may
already be costing American lives. His nomination should be
withdrawn."
Behind the Scenes
Clinton foreign policy vis-a-vis the UN reflects the advice of-
fered to him last fall in Policymaking for a New Era, a special
"memorandum to the president-elect from a bipartisan commis-
sion co-sponsored by the Carnegie Endowment for International
Peace [CEIP] and the Institute for International Economics
[lIE]." The memorandum was published in the Winter 1992/93
issue of Foreign Affairs , and stated: "This commission believes
that greater American support for both U.N. peacekeeping and
peacemaking efforts is a national security objective in which
policy and reorganizational effort should move forward
together."
After acknowledging President Bush's initiatives to increase
U.S. support for UN peacekeeping, the commission went on to
comment, "But the U.N. Secretary-General has made a series
of even more ambitious proposals to which the United States
needs to formulate a response." The commission was referring,
of course , to Boutros -Ghali's "Empowering the United Na-
tions" article in the same issue of Foreign Affairs.
Some of the commission's proposals included:
o "[M]ove the funding for the U.S. contribution to the U.N.
peacekeeping efforts from the State budget to Defense."
o "[E]stablish a major military command, headed by a three-
or four-star officer, to support U.N. military operations and, if
necessary, U.S. participation in them.
o "[D]esignate one or two U.S.-based brigades for support of
U.N. operations."
Members of the CEIP-IIE commission now in the Clinton
'A dministration include U.S. Ambassador to the UN Madeleine
Albright (CFR), Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board Chairman
Admiral William J. Crowe (CFR), Assistant Secretary of De-
fense designee Morton Halperin (CFR), Under Secretary of
State Peter Tarnoff (past president of the CFR), and Assistant
Secretary of State Winston Lord (past president of the CFR).
Secretary of State Warren Christopher is a former vice chair-
man of the CFR, and along with Albright and National Security
Advisor Anthony Lake (CFR) is reportedly the primary driving
force behind PDD-13 and the move to "empower" the UN. •
-W.F.J.
17
Clinton we nt on television and ass ure d
Americans that U.S. invol vem ent in UN
ope rations wo uld be strictly limited and
that U.S . forces would be out of Som a-
lia soo n - by March 3 1, 1994 at the lat-
es t. It was not a co nvi nci ng act to
anyo ne who was fami liar with what the
Admi nistra tion already had underway.
Some Specif ics on PDD-13
Commenting on the speech in a co l-
umn for the Christian Science Monito r
for Oct ob er 14 th , Represen tative Ji m
Lightfoot (R-IA) wro te:
U nfortu na te ly, th e president ' s
actions do not match hi s speech.
For month s , hi s team ha s been
preparing Presid enti al Decision Di-
rective (P D D)- 13 and it s ann ex
Pre sident ial Re view Document
(PRD) - 13. These two documents
are the heart of a dan gerous and ex-
pen sive ad m i nis tra tio n pl an to
streng the n the UN .
Amo ng the man y prop osal s in-
cl ude d in PDD -1 3 are : p laci ng
U nite d St at es troo ps un d e r U N
command; shar ing cl assified intel-
ligence with the UN; repealing the
law that limits the amount of troops
the U.S. can commit to peacekeep-
in g operations without co ngres-
sio na l approva l; and bypassing
co ngressional approval for UN op-
erat ions by establishing an account
for peacekeeping an d peacemaking
operation s.
D e spit e C linto n ' s admonitio n
that the UN must lea rn to say no to
new peacekeepi ng operatio ns, the
US voted for and promoted qu es-
tionable new op er ati on s over the
la st th re e month s in Lib eria ,
Rwanda, and Haiti. In Au gu st, the
US vo ted to se nd an 88- man UN
observe r force to a war-torn area of
the for me r Soviet Geor gia. In fac t,
the admi nis tratio n is now wo rking
with the French on a possibl e sec-
ond UN peacekeeping operation in
Rw anda.
Becau se of the Somalia fiasco, the
Clinton plans to implement his UN di-
recti ve we re dealt a severe setbac k. And
as Lightfoot noted in his Octob er 14th
co lumn, "So far, the administration has
refused to provide PDD-1 3 or PRD-13
to Con gress, altho ug h the y have been
leak ed to the press." Con gress responded
with a flu rr y of propo sal s to nip the
President' s internationa l adventur ism in
the bud.
With most of the Establ ishm ent me-
di a parr oting the Pre sid ent' s theme that
an y congressional attempts to " tie hi s
hands" would intrude on his constitu-
tional power s to conduct foreign policy,
Mr. Clinton succeeded in beating back
the se rio us att e m p ts to reign in hi s
abu se s. On e of tho se att e m p ts, an
amendment by Senator Je sse Helm s
(R-NC) to put strict conditions on any
U .S . depl oyment to Haiti, was voted

Preserving Sovereignty: T
ot all of our congressmen have pended for the Armed Forces of the

N jumped on Bill Clinton's United

Nations bandwagon. Below appear
two different actions by both senators and
representatives who have chosen to take a
stand to preserve and protect our national
sovereignty.
Helms' Amendment on Haiti
On October 20th Senator Jesse Helms (R-
NC) offered the following amendment to
the Department of Defense Appropriations
Act of 1994:
None of the funds appropriated or oth-
erwise made available by this Act may be
obligated or expended for the Armed
Forces of the United States to conduct op-
erations in Haiti unless (1) operations of Senator Jesse Helms
the Armed Forces of the United States in
Haiti are specifically authorized in a law enacted in advance
of the operations, or (2) the President certifies in writing to
Congress that United States citizens in Haiti are in imminent
danger and that a temporary deployment of the Armed
Forces of the United States is necessary in order to protect
and evacuate United States citizens in Haiti. In the event of
a certification under clause (2) of the preceding sentence,
funds referred to in that sentence may be obligated and ex-
United States to conduct operations in
Haiti only to the extent necessary for the
Armed Forces to provide the protection
and complete the evacuation certified as
necessary.
The Helms amendment was defeated on
October 21st by a vote of 81 to 19. Those
senators who voted for the amendment to
curb the Clinton Administration's danger-
ous UN "multilateralism" are: Hank Brown
(CO), Larry Craig (ID), Alfonse D' Amato
(NY), Robert Dole (KS), Pete Domenici
(NM), Lauch Faircloth (NC), Charles
Grassley (IA), Mark Hatfield (OR), Jesse
Helms (NC), Dirk Kempthorne (ID), Trent
Lott (MS), Frank Murkowski (AK), Don
Nickles (OK), Larry Pressler (SD), William
Roth (DE), Robert Smith (NH), Ted Stevens
(AK), Strom Thurmond (SC), and Malcolm Wallop (WY).
Goodling's Letter to the President
On September 23rd THE NEW AMERICAN received a fax from
the offices of Representative Bill Goodling (R-PA) of a letter
from Goodling and 32 other members of the House, to President
Clinton, expressing concern over Mr. Clinton's intent to further
entangle the U.S. in UN "peacekeeping."

18 THE NEW AMERICA N / NO VEMBER 29 , 1993

down 81-19, with many of those who released with the report and widely re- dealing in deception, an art it has per-
had blustered about Mr. Clinton's inter- printed in the major press, declared: fected over nearly three decades. The
nationalism running amok ultimately far left-liberal caucus is chaired by
wimping out and voting with the presi- A survey of the 17 current U.N. Representative Constance A. Morella
dent. Congress labored mightily to bring peacekeeping operations released (R-MD), who, according to the National
forth a mousy squeak that "urged" the today finds that the U.S. role in Journal, is the most liberal Republican
President to consult with it before fur- them is surprisingly modest. Con- in the House. Vice -chairs of the cauc us
ther scattering u.s. troops hither , thither, trary to a growing perception that are Senators Joseph Biden (D-DE) and
and yon in service of the UN's new U.S. forces are becoming bogged James Jeffords (R- VT), whose voting
world order. down in a profusion of U.N . opera- records make them comfortable fellow
tions, the compilation by the Arms travelers with Morella.
Deceptive PR Control and Foreign Policy Caucus Originally founded in 1966 as Mem-
In an attempt to quell the growing found that in fact: bers of Congress for Peace Through
public outcry over U.S . casualties in So- - U.S. troops are involved in Law, the ACFPC bills itself as "a bipar-
malia, on October 14th the Congres- only seven of the 17 current U.N. tisan caucus of over 100 Senate and
sional Arms Control and Foreign Policy operations. House members who work on United
Caucus (ACFPC) released a survey - U.S. troops operating under Nations and other foreign policy is-
titled U.S. Troops in U'N. Operations, U.N. command are not invo lved in sues." The caucus' own statement of
purporting to show that U.S. involve- combat, but rather in logistical, purpose summarizes the group's aims as
ment in UN military ventures is really medical or monitoring roles; and, "greater arms limitation, the develop-
quite small and not at all worth getting - U.S. troops make up only five ment of a global economy, strengthen-
exercised over. The CFR Establishment percent of all U.N. forces around ing of the United Nations, and abo lition
media leaped to publicize this "proof' the world. of war ." The caucus is one of the most
that Americans were running scared for powerful lobbies formulating, advocat-
no reason . The ACFPC press statement As usual , however, the ACFPC is ing, and implementing legislation on
(continued on page 22)

e Congressional Honor Roll

The letter to the President reads in part: in effect be making U.N. initiatives U.S.
"It has been reported you are considering a commitments, and U.N. conflicts U.S. con-
change in the traditional policy of military flicts, while forfeiting the leadership of the
leadership as it relates to the deployment of troops on the ground ....
U.S. troops under foreign command. It is " Before making your decision on this
our understanding you have under consid - matter, we ask that you review the conse-
eration an executive directive which would quences of issuing a directive authorizing
authorize the deployment of U.S. troops un- the foreign command of American combat
der foreign command in missions reported troops , and consider the consequences re-
to involve combat. We have serious reser- garding U.S. sovereignty, U.S. commitments
vations concerning such a monumental in manpower and resources, the safety of
change in U.S. foreign and military policy. American soldiers, and the will of the popu-
"[A]n open commitment to United Nations lace you were elected to represent. We are
operations could entail peacekeeping, peace- certain the se con siderations demonstrate
making, and even nation-building. In essence, that issuing a directive ordering the deploy-
the U.S. would be offering a blank check to ment of U.S. troops under foreign command
expanded U.N. operations worldwide .... does not properly serve U.S. interests."
"This proposal appears to coincide with The letter was signed by the following
the apparent effort on the part of the U.N. Representative Bill Goodling representatives : Bill Goodling , Gerald
to redefine itself and expand its mission to Solomon , Newt Gingrich , Henry Hyde, Bill
include not simply peacekeeping, also on a more expanded scope, McCollum, Robert Walker, Jan Meyers, Cass Bellenger, Dan
but also peacemaking and the nexus of 'nation-building.' State- Burton , Donald Manzullo, Jim Ramstad, David Levy , Michael
ments by Administration officials suggest a willingnes s on the Bilrakis, Christopher Cox, Richard Baker , Bill Emerson, Robert
part of the U.S. to assist in this invigoration. We ask you to con- Dornan, Rick Santorum, Jim Lightfoot, John Boerner, Bill
sider whether the attempt of the U.N . to redefine itself is compat- Barrett, Dan Miller, Larry Combest, Stephen Buyer, Roscoe
ible with U.S. interests. The U.S. is already the primary supporter Bartlett, Randy Cunningham, Charles Taylor, James Inhofe, Mel
of U.N. peacekeeping efforts . By issuing a blank check commit- Hancock , Jim Kolbe, Jay Kim, Howard Coble, John Kyl. •
ting U.S. troops to the U.N. under foreign command , you would - W.F.J.

_ .. - • . _ . • • • • • ,.....,..,............ , ' /\, / """" ' I , A AD C D '? n 100 Q 19

 UN Blue Helmets: A Global
fthe most recently launched United Nations "peacekeep-
I ing" operations in Liberia, Rwanda, and the former
Soviet republic of Georgia illustrate the accelerating ra-
pidity with which the world organization's blue-helmeted
legions are engulfing the globe, then the ongoing UNTSO
(Middle East) and UNMOGIP (India-Pakistan) missions
that were launched more than four decades ago serve to re-
mind us of the interminable nature of some UN interven-
tions and the real danger of U.S. troops becoming mired in
never-ending foreign military ventures under UN command.
Just as alarming as the quickened pace with which the
UN is extending its far-flung empire to all comers of the
globe is the speed with which its functions are mutating and
the rate at which the size and scope of its operations are ex-
panding. While in most peacekeeping operations of the past,
UN troops were numbered in the tens and hundreds, we are
now witnessing several with troop levels in the thousands
and tens ofthousands. And the number of candidate "trouble
spots" for similar large-scale deployments is exploding. The
current major UN "peacekeeping" efforts include:
• Somalia (UNOSOM). The U.S.-led UN campaign that
began in December 1992 as Operation Restore Hope was,
ostensibly, a humanitarian mission. American forces would
be in no danger and would be out in just a few weeks, said
President Bush. More than 25,000 U.S. troops were sent to
Somalia; when the bulk of these forces were removed in
May 1993, some 3,000 were left behind under UN com-
mand. The UN resolution authorizing the operation was in-
tentionally vague, saying that the purpose of the mission was
to create a "secure environment." This vagueness left the
principals to argue over its meaning. UN Secretary-General
Boutros-Ghali insisted that meant capturing General
Mohammed Aidid and disarming the warring clans. The
Clinton Administration went along with that until forced
into retreat by public and congressional outrage over the
tragic events of October 3rd, which left 18 U.S. Rangers
dead and 77 wounded in a UN "Get Aidid" raid . Beating
back congressional challenges to his war-making authority,
Mr. Clinton ordered additional troops to Somalia, bringing
the U.S. presence to over 10,000 troops. All "except several
hundred" of these will be removed by March 31, 1994,
President Clinton promised. With more than 25,000 blue
helmets in the field,
this largest of UN mili-
tary operations will
likely be grinding on
for years - with the
involvement of hun-
dreds, if not thousands
ofU.S. troops - unless
U.S . taxpayers plug
the funding spigots.
• Yugoslavia (UNPROFOR). Blame for the tragic
slaughter that has claimed tens of thousands of lives in this
hapless region of the world belongs squarely on the shoul-
ders of the UN and the one-worlders in both the Clinton and
Bush Administrations. As Jane Ingraham pointed out in
these pages (October 4th, "New World Order on Display"),
the chaos and bloodletting was set in motion by the eco-
nomic collapse engineered by the International Monetary
Fund. The UN then guaranteed that the Serbian communist
forces of Slobodan Milosevic would be able to massacre its
opponents at will by declaring an international arms em-
bargo on the region. Since Milosevic's Serb forces hold a
virtual monopoly on the arms, the UN action has amounted
to a death sentence for thousands of Croats, Slovenes,
Montenegrans, Bosnians, and others opposed to the commu-
nist regime in Belgrade. President Bush agreed to this UN
plan for genocide and Mr. Clinton has continued that sup-
port. The UN has more than 24,000 troops in the former Yu-
goslavia. President Clinton, saying we must prevent the
spread of the violence, sent 500 U.S. troops to Macedonia
and has offered 25,000 troops to the UN - but, he says, only
under NATO command. Because of growing public resent-
ment to UN command over U.S. troops, he thinks this will
be a more acceptable arrangement. It is a trap that will drag
America into a Balkan black hole which can only benefit the
UN and the new world order Insiders promoting it.
• Cambodia (UNTAC). This mission is being heralded
as one of the UN's great peacekeeping "successes." The
UN's nearly 20,000 peacekeepers began demobilizing in Oc-
tober and were mostly gone by November 1st. However,
chances are they'll be back. Elections were held in May and
a new coalition government was installed on September 24th
with Prince Norodom Ranariddh as first prime minister and
communist Hon Sen as second prime minister. This mis-
matched marriage would surely unravel even without a third
destabilizing element: the communist Khmer Rouge. The
Khmer Rouge, which did not participate in the elections and
do not accept the outcome, still hope to restore their murder-
ous rule .
• Mozambique (ONUMOZ). Convulsed in a bloody civil
war that has claimed as many as 600,000 lives since it re-
ceived independence from Portugal in 1975, this hapless
country now hosts nearly 7,000 UN blue helmets. The
"peacekeepers" were sent ostensibly to enforce a peace ac-
cord reached in October 1992 between the Marxist
 Army Straddling the Planet
FRELIMO (Front for the Liberation of Mozambique) gov-
ernment of President Joaquim Chissano and the anti-com-
munist forces of RENAMO (Mozambique National
Resistance). But, as in Namibia and Angola, the blue forces
are p'artial toward the red, and will certainly do everything
possible to see that the Chissano regime - which has car-
ried out a systematic and savage 17-year campaign of ter-
ror, torture, and mass murder - remains in power.
• Haiti (UNMIH). After supporting the tyrannical "Papa
Doc" and "Baby Doc" Duvalier regimes with tens of mil-
lions of dollars over the past several decades, the UN is now
intent on "re storing democracy" by force, throug h imposing
a return of dep osed President Je an-Bertrand Ari stide .
Aristide, a defrocked Catholic pries t who is notorio us for
his militant Marxism and advocacy of violent terrorism , ide-
ally fits the UN definition of a "democrat." The U.S. troop
ship USS Harl an County, with about 200 American and Ca-
nadian military advisers aboard, was prevented from dock-
ing at the Haitian capital of Port au Prince by an armed mob
threatening to turn Haita into another Somalia. President
Clinton ordered the ship away from Haiti and pushed for re-
imposition of economic sanctio ns against the military re-
gime. The UN quickly complied. Military interventi on and
occupation by UN "pe acekeepers" is very likely in the im-
mediate future.
• Georgia (UNOMIG).
This " former" Soviet
state is a perfect candi-
date for vastly increased
UN involveme nt. Com-
munist butcher Eduard
Shevardnadze is the ob-
vious favorite - ove r
depo sed President Zviad
Gamsakhurdia - of the
new world order gang at
the UN and the State De-
partment. The UN presently lists only four "peacekeepers"
in Georgia, none of whom are American. But, as reported in
our September 20th issue ("Saving Butchers and Tyrants"),
the Glinton Administration secretly dispatched U.S. Special
Forces commandos earlier this year to Georgia to help prop
up Shevardnadze. Some are undoubtedly still there. The Ad-
ministration denied reports of U.S. military involvement un-
.~_ til U.S. "diplomat" Fred Woodruff, believed to be a
high-level CIA operative, was kille d in Tbilisi in a car
driven by Shevardnadze's bodyguard. Gamsakhurdia, who
was elected in June 1991 and deposed in January 1992 by
communists loyal to Shevardnadze, is leading forces that de-
feated government troops on October 17th to capture the
town of Samtredia, an important junction on the main road
connecting the capital of Tbilisi with the Black Sea . A
month earlier, seperatist forces in the Abkhazia region cap-
tured the key town of Ochamchira and forced Shevardnadze
to flee from the provincial capital of Sukhumi. Look for a
major infusion of Russian, NATO, UN, and U.S. troops in
the near future to keep Comrade Eduard in power.
• Rwanda (UNOMUR). One of the poorest and most
densely populated countries of Africa, Rwanda received
several hundred troops from the Organization of African
Unity (OAU) earlier this year to observe a truce that was
supposed to end a two-year civil war primarily between the
Tutsi and Hutu tribes. Like the ECOMOG forces in Liberia
(see below) , the OAU troops serve at the behest of the UN,
which began deploying its own peacekeepers (scheduled to
reach 2,500) in late October. However, the Tutsi-Hutu war-
fare is re-erupting and has spread across the border into
Burundi, where the two tribes also live and have periodi-
cally slaughtered each other over the past three decades.
Over half a million Burundians are estimated to have fled
into Rwanda in the past several months, adding to Rwanda's
social, political , and economic instability. The UN mission ,
reflecting the United Nation s' new, enlarged vision, has four
dimensions: military, political, humanitarian, and social-
economic.
• Liberia (UNOMIL). The UN has just over 300 advis-
ers in Liberia and about the same number on the way there.
However, a 16,000-man force known as ECOMOG (Eco-
nomic Community of West African States Monitoring
Group) is serving as a surrogate UN force to monitor the
Cotonou accords agreed to by Liberia's three main warring
factions . The ECOMOG troops, sent by the 16-nation Eco-
nomic Community of West African States (ECOW AS), is
comprised of 12,000 Nigerians and contingents from
Uganda, Tanzania, Zimbabwe, Zambia, and Egypt. UN em-
issaries are concluding negotiations for another 4,000 rein-
forcements from ECOW AS. ECOMOG is commanded by
Nigerian Major General John Shagaya, and Nigeria is pro-
viding air and naval support to the operation as well. The
operation is being carried out under UN aegis and coordi-
nated by UNOMIL commander Major General Opande of
Kenya. The U.S . is picking up most of the tab so far,
contributing $20 million. But that is barely a start. Trevor
Gordon-Somers, chairman of the UN-ECOMOG joint com-
mittee, said at a news conference on October 16th that at
least $200 million more is needed for "post-war reconstruc-
tion," even though the fighting is far from over. •
(continued from page 19)
foreign and defense issues that weaken
our country militarily and undermine
our national sovereignty.
But what are the real facts concern-
ing U.S. troops in UN operations? As is
often the case, it gets down to a matter
of definitions. If one considers as "U.S.
troop involvement" only those situa-
tions where U.S. troops are directly un-
der UN command, the ACFPC statistics
are fairly accurate. That, however, pro-
vides only a specious assessment in-
tended to dodge the larger real issues.
First , it should be noted, U.S. troops
are indeed "involved" in more than the
cited seven out of 17 UN operations,
and in far greater numbers than ACFPC,
the UN, or the Administration like to
credit. The ACFPC survey, for example,
lists only 319 UN peacekeepers in
UNIKOM (Iraq-Kuwait), and only 15
of that number as Americans. So, ac-
cording to the way the caucus and
Boutros-Ghali figure it, the mighty U.S.
is contributing a piddling five percent of
the force and should stop bellyaching.
But that does not take into account the
10,975 U.S. troops stationed on land
and afloat as support for that operation.
If we figure these forces into the equa-
tion, the U.S. accounts for more than 97
percent of the operation. And that is just
the manpower. If we add the U.S. ships
and aircraft detailed to that arena as
backup and the massive weapons and
supply stockpiles that the U.S. has pre-
positioned there in case hostilities break
out again , we see a completely different
picture - a UN mission completely un-
derwritten and provided by the United
States. Granted, these forces are not of-
ficially under UN control; but everyone
in the area knows that it is U.S. fire-
power that is the real substance of the
UN "peacekeeping" effort there. It is
American tax money that is paying for
it and it will be American blood that is
spilled if that trouble spot erupts. That
is hardly a role to be trivialized as "sur-
prisingly modest."
Similarly, the ACFPC survey lists
only 3,000 U.S. troops as being in-
volved in Somalia (UNOSOM), al-
though, parenthetically, it notes there
are 8,600 additional troops deployed
there in the U.S. Quick Reaction Force.
Without those troops and the American
air, naval, intelligence, logistics, and
communications assets - not to mention
financial contributions - UNOSOM
would fold. Yet the caucus survey puts
22
U.S. force involvement at only 11 per-
cent of the total mission.
The ACFPC report distorts percep-
tions in another important way. By
focusing only on current UN operations
it ignores the fact that U.S. military
forces did the lion's share of the dirty
work that established these missions.
UNIKOM may only number a little over
300 now, but before it could be set up
451,000 American troops had to hit the
sand in Operation Desert Storm. In So-
malia 25,500 U.S. troops in Operation
Restore Hope paved the way for
UNOSOM.
Then there is the case of Eduard Shev-
ardnadze's Georgia, where UNOMIG
lists only four peacekeepers, none of
whom are American. However, Presi-
dent Clinton secretly deployed an un-
specified number of U.S. Special Forces
to Tbilisi to protect Comrade Eduard
earlier this Spring. How many are still
there the Administration is not saying.
President Clinton also has indicated
he may commit as many as 25,000
American troops to the UNPROFOR
operation in former Yugoslavia, though
under NATO command. These are all
very significant U.S. involvements.
Contrary to ACFPC's sycophantic UN
propaganda, if Americans share "a
growing perception that U.S. forces are
becoming bogged down in a profusion
of U.N. operations," it is because they
are waking up to the stark truth .
The Regional Approach
As dramatic as the rise of the UN
military has been over the past few
months, it illustrates only a small part of
a much larger phenomenon. The orga-
nized movement to "empower" the
United Nations - politically, economi-
cally, and militarily - is proceeding on
several other equally important, though
largely ignored, fronts . Recognizing
that public opposition to the open trans-
fer of military might to the UN will be
substantial for the foreseeable future,
the globalists are employing a simulta-
neous flanking move to accomplish the
same thing in piecemeal fashion through
regional UN "subsidiaries" such as the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(NATO), the European Community
(EC), the Conference on Security and
Cooperation in Europe (CSCE), the
Group of Seven (G-7) , and the Western
European Union (WEU).
In a recent position paper entitled
Keeping the Peace in the Post-Cold
War Era: Strengthening Multilateral
Peacekeeping, the Trilateral Commis-
sion (TC) carried this strategy of essen-
tial regionalism to its elite and powerful
membership. According to the Trilateral
globalists, "military action must be seen
as part of a complex process of crisis
management and peace-making in
which a variety of instruments will be
necessary ." Says the paper, "The re-
sponses that have been developed to
deal with particular situations are them-
selves creating the precedents on which
future actions will be built. In time a
new well-ordered structure may appear,
but meanwhile we will have a less than
tidy set of arrangements which have
been put together to deal with particular
situations." The Trilateral architects sur-
vey the possibilities for exploiting the
political and military assets of NATO,
CSCE, EC, WEU, and others in manag-
ing various "crises" across the globe.
However, as useful as these "arrange-
ments" may prove, the authors are quick
to point out, all regional operations must
remain subservient to the UN . They
note: "The primacy of the United Na-
tions is made clear in the Charter by Ar-
ticle 53 which lays down that no
enforcement action - no use of mili-
tary forces without the consent of the
states concerned - shall be taken by a
regional organization without the autho-
rization of the Security Council."
Expanding NATO
NATO appears to be the chief instru-
ment through which the Insiders intend
to operate. "Building a New NATO" is
the title of a major piece on the subject
in September/October 1993 Foreign Af-
fairs, written by Ronald D. Asmus (CFR),
Richard L. Kugler, and F. Stephen Larra-
bee (CFR), all senior analysts at RAND .
According to these policy wonks, "A new
U .S .-European strategic bargain is
needed, one that extends NATO's collec-
tive defense and security arrangements
to those areas where the seeds for future
conflicts in Europe lie: the Atlantic alli-
ance's eastern and southern borders."
"The West needs a grand strategy to
reorganize itself to deal with the issues
of conflict and instability and to project
collective defense, democracy and secu-
rity into the twin arcs of crisis," say the
CFR's technocrats at RAND. And in
their estimation, "The obvious tool for
this new strategy is NATO ." What's
THE NEW AMERICAN I NOVEMBER 29, 1993
 more, the triumvirate warns, unless new
uses are found for NATO, America ns
might decide it is no longer needed and
discard it. Shuddering at "the prospect
of NATO cru mbling and the Un ited
States withd rawing from Europe ," the
trio observe that "the simple fact is that
if NATO does not address the primary
security chall enge s facin g Europe to-
day, it will become increasingly irrel-
evant. NATO must go out of area or go
out of business."
By "go out of area" the authors mean,
of course, for NATO dramatically to ex-
pand its member ship and operations.
That proce ss is already well under way.
The IS-member NATO is
presentl y crafting new
connection s with the
Conference on Security
and Cooperation in Europe
(CSCE). The 20- year-old
CSCE ' s 53 members in-
clude all NATO memb ers,
the European neutrals, the
former members of the
War saw Pact, and the IS
" republics" which have
emerged from the former
USSR.
On June 4, 1992 NATO
minist ers meeting in Oslo
announced that they were
"prepared to support, on a
cas e-by-case basis in ac- American
cordance with our ow n
procedures, peacekeeping activities un-
der the responsibility of the CSCE, in-
cluding makin g available Alliance
resource s and experti se." At the Decem-
ber 17, 1992 NATO ministers meeting
in Brussels, the organi zation agreed that
it would al so work directl y for UN
peacekeeping operations.
The leaders of the G-7 industrialized
countries have also joined the act, en-
dor sin g Boutros-Ghali ' s Agenda fo r
Peace at their July 1992 Munich Sum-
mit, and pledging to the UN "our readi-
ness to provide the political support and
resources needed to maint ain interna-
tional peace and security."
The CSCE , at its July 1992 Summit
Meetin g in Helsinki , made clear that it
was subordinating itself to the United
Na tio ns und er Art icl e 52 of the UN
Charter. It also stated that is was "pre-
pared to seek, on a case-by-case basis,
the support of international institutions,
such as EC, NATO , and WEU , as well
as other institutions and mech ani sms,
THE NEW AM ERICAN / NOVEMBER 29, 1993
including the peacekeeping mechanism sider effort s begun during the Bush Ad-
of the CIS ." The CIS , of course, is the ministrati on to speed that along are be-
Commonwealth of Independent States, ing carried forward now by the current
that congeries of supposed "democratic" Dem ocr ati c reg ime in place at 1600
regim es run by life-long communists Pennsylvania Avenue.
like Yeltsin , Kravchuk, and She vard- At a two-day meeting of NATO De-
nadze, and which is now in the proce ss fense Mini sters in Travemuende, Ger-
of merging - politically, economically, many on October 20-2 I of this year,
and militaril y - with what was once re- U.S. Defense Secretary Les Aspin (CFR)
ferred to as the "Free World ." put forward a plan dubbed "Partnerships
for Peace," which calls for gradually ex-
"Peace" Partners tending NATO membership to Comrade
This East-West "con vergence" (as the Boris and friend s. NATO Secretary-
one-worlders call it) took a great step General Man fred Woerner told German
forward in December 1991 with NATO ' s television , "We have reached a consen-
formation of the North Atlantic Coop- sus to fundamentally open the gates of
NATO." German Defense
Minister Volker Ruhe (TC)
said that the new members
could start joining the alli-
ance by the year 2000 . Of
course, the whole process
could be put on the con-
vergence "fast track " and
thereby take place much
soo ner. In fact, that ap -
pears to be the case. Even
as the NATO leaders were
meeting in Travemuende ,
Secretary of State Warren
Christopher (CFR, TC) was
winging his way to Mos-
co w and the capitals of
three other So viet repub-
forces made up the bulk of the UN Somalia fiasco lics to discuss the "partner-
ship" proposal. The operant
eration Council (NACC), an intermedi- watchword invol ved here is audacity,
ate structure for integrating the political, and if serious opposition to these Insider
economic, and milit ary systems of the move s is absent, the globalists take it as
West with those of its "former" adver- a green light to pick up the pace .
saries in the Warsaw Pact and the So- So far, oppo sition in the U.S. (from
viet Union. In a March 1992 meeting of Congress, the military , and the public)
NACC ministers in Brussels, then Sec- to this radical retooling of NAT O ap-
retar y of State Jame s Baker and other pears to be almos t nonexi stent. It is
leaders endorsed exploring a military moving rapidl y into full service for the
role for NATO in the troubled Nagorno- UN with nary a discouraging word to be
Karabakh region of (Soviet) Azerbaij an, heard . In Yugoslavia, NATO has pro-
ostensibly to stop the bloodshed be- vided airborne early warning aircraft to
tween warring Armenian and Azerbaijani monitor UN restrictions on flights over
factions. And how did Mo scow view Bosnia, and its Fifth Allied Tactical Air
this talk of invading its traditional turf ? Force based in Vicenza, Italy has been
Rus sian Forei gn Minister Andrei V. enforcing the UN "no-fly zone" and
Kosyrev welcomed the initiati ve and re- flying low-level "sorties" over Sarajevo.
minded the NACC th at " Pres ident" The mobile headquarters of its Northern
Boris Yeltsin had already publicl y de- Arm y Group provides command and
clared that NATO was no longer viewed control functions for UNPROFOR in
as an adversary by Russia. Bosnia.
In fact, Russia and the other CIS suc- The authors of the Tril ateral Com-
cessors to what only a short while ago mission ' s Keeping the Peace paper see
was unblu shingly called "the Evil Em- these and other developments as a most
pire" are eager to join NATO . And In- encouraging sign: "One could even see
23
the planning for Bosnia in the Military
Committee of NATO as an indication of
how that body could become one of the
'regional subcommittees' of the UN 's
Military Staff Committee which Article
47.4 of the Charter permits."
Made to Order
It bears mentioning that this regional
approach is not new, and that in using
NATO, EC, the CSCE , etc., to build the
UN 's power base the one-worlders are
not simply bending otherwise neutral
institutions to their own globalist de-
signs. Virtually all of these organiza-
tions and arrangements were created
exactly for that very purpose.
In April 1948, when CFR "wiseman"
Robert Lovett (then under secretary of
state) was secretly crafting the NATO
alliance, the CFR's Foreign Affairs was
preparing its elite audience for the forth-
coming product. In an article titled "Re-
gional Systems and the Future of the
U.N.," Oswaldo Aranha explained that
a "regional organization of nations,
formed to operate within the frame-
work of the United Nations, can only
strengthen that organization."
A decade later, in 1959, the CFR is-
sued an important position paper en-
titled "Study No.7, Basic Aims of U.S.
Foreign Policy," which proposed that
the U.S. seek to "build a new interna-
tional order." The steps it cited as nec-
essary to achieve this were:
1. Search for an international or-
der in which the freedom of nations
is recognized as interdependent and
in which many policies are jointly
undertaken by free world states
with differing political, economic
and social systems, and including
states labeling themselves as "so-
cialist."
2. Safeguard U.S. security
through preserving a system of bi-
lateral agreements and regional ar-
rangements.
3. Maintain and gradually in-
crease the authority of the U.N.
The CFR paper also charged policy
makers to "maintain and strengthen the
[Atlantic] Community 's security organi-
zations (NATO and OAS) and, using a
flexible approach, develop such new or-
ganizations as may be necessary for such
other purposes as economic cooperation."
In a 1960 speech and pamphlet with
24
the unequivocal title of "The Goal is
Government of All the World," CFR
member Elmo Roper reiterated the im-
portance of NATO and regionalism to
the big picture." For it becomes clear,"
he said, "that the first step toward world
government cannot be completed until
we have advanced on the four fronts:
the economic, the military, the political
and the social. " NATO was an impor-
tant part of that advance. And, he noted,
"the Atlantic Pact (NATO) need not be
our last effort toward greater unity. It can
be converted into one more sound and
important step working toward world
peace. It can be one of the most posi -
tive moves in the direction of One
World."
Two decades later, in 1980, NATO
Secretary-General Joseph Luns, a thor-
ough one-worlder, likewise commended
the utility of the regional approach, re-
marking, "The slowly but steadily ad-
vancing unity of Europe is the most
promising guarantee of our ideals of
world government."
Organized Chaos
One of the most notable explications
of this strategy was provided by CFR
luminary Richard N. Gardner in his
1974 Foreign Affairs article, "The Hard
Road to World Order." Since hopes for
"instant world government" had proved
illusory, Gardner wrote of the need to
build " the house of world order"
through " an end run around national
sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece."
This could be done, he instructed, on an
ad hoc basis with treaties and interna-
tional "arrangements" that could later
be brought within "the central institu-
tions of the U.N. system."
Said Gardner, "The hope for the fore-
seeable future lies, not in building up a
few ambitious central institutions of
universal membership and general juris-
diction as was envisaged at the end of
the last war, but rather in the much more
decentralized, disorderly and pragmatic
process of inventing or adapting institu-
tions of limited jurisdiction and selected
membership to deal with specific prob-
lems on a case-by-case basis." Gardner
(now an adviser on the UN to President
Clinton) then summed up the one-world
game plan:
In short, the "house of world or-
der" will have to be built from the
bottom up rather than the top
down . It will look like a great
"booming, buzzing confusion" ...
but an end run around national
sovereignty, eroding it piece by
piece, will accomplish much more
than the old-fashioned frontal as-
sault [emphasis added].
With the above plan in mind, the diz-
zying swirl of current events begins to
look less like a great "booming, buzzing
confusion" and more like the organized
chaos it truly is. The CFR-Trilateral
elites fully appreciate the sinister genius
of the divide-recombine-conquer "re-
gional " strategy outlined by another no-
torious one-worlder a half century ago
- Joseph Stalin. Recognizing that
populations will more readily abandon
their national loyalties to a vague re-
gionalloyalty than they will for a world
authority, the aspiring dictator instructed
in his 1912 essay, Marxism and the Na-
tional Question , that "regional au -
tonomy is an essential element in the
solution of the national problem" (em-
phasis in original) . Again and again
over the decades, Stalin and the Com-
munist Party recapitulated the necessity
of creating "regional organs" to facili-
tate the "eradication" of nationalism. In
1936, Stalin's official program of the
Communist International declared:
This world dictatorship can be
established only when the victory
of socialism has been achieved in
certain countries or groups of coun-
tries , when the newly established
proletarian republics enter into a
federative union with the already
existing proletarian republics .. .
[and] when these federations of re-
publics have finally grown into a
World Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics uniting the whole of
mankind under the hegemony of
the international proletariat orga-
nized as a state .
In that diabolical assessment Stalin
was as correct as he was evil. And if the
one-world Insiders succeed in establish-
ing their global regime under a fully
"empowered" United Nations, there can
be little hope that it would end up any
less brutal, tyrannical, and evil than the
murderous dictatorships imposed by
Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Tito,
Ceausescu, or Pol Pot. •
- WILLIAM F. JASPER
THE NE W AMERICAN / NOVEMBER 2 9, 1993
 U.S. MILITARY
Destruction From Within
f war is hell, as General Sherman
I
contended, today's "peace" under
Commander-in-Chief Bill Clinton
may well be a couple levels below that
infamous place of torment. Some of our
most elite units, placed where they did
not belong in Somalia, without an at-
tainable mission or the proper equip-
ment, have been dislodged by Third
World thugs, who in turn gave stone-
throwing hooligans in Port-au-Prince
the notion that they too could stand off
the world's foremost military power.
Even beyond that, however, the Ad-
ministration, by its actions at the base
level, is providing more than enough
proof to service personnel that its truly
important missions are in social engi-
neering. It takes a touchy-feely politi-
cian and perennial "public servant" like
Bill Clinton (who previously expressed
his "loathing" for the military) to trum-
pet for , not troops with martial esprit
and a distinctive pride in their call for
duty , honor, and country, but for a mili-
tary that "must reflect the society in
which it operates."
Thus, it has been stressed right from
the top the importance of getting more
homosexuals into uniform, more fe-
males into combat roles, and creating a
workplace void of sexual harassment but
loaded with every other fad in vogue.
Sapping Morale
When the President made a photo-op-
portunistic tour of the USS Theodore
Roosevelt last March, the executive of-
ficer of one of the strike-fighter squad-
rons aboard that nuclear-powered
carrier commented coldly, "Maybe we
can call this his military service. Three
hours is more than he had before."
And in an episode that drew much at-
tention' Lieutenant General Barry
McCaffrey, twice decorated for valor in
Vietnam, former commander of the 24th
Infantry Division during the Persian
Gulf War , and assistant to the chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was on the
White House grounds during the first
week of the new Administration, when
he said "good morning" to a young fe-
male Clinton aide . But the staffer
spurned the general by saying that she
THE NEW AMERICAN / NOVEMBER 29 . 1993
did not talk to military people. This
symbolic snub helped to get the new
White House off to a poor start with the
brass. After the story spread throughout
the Washington grapevine and was pub-
licized widely elsewhere, the President
attempted to make up with the general
by jogging with him . For the cameras of
course.
Spirit can be drained in a variety of
ways. The new Navy secretary, for ex-
ample, recently tried to can Chief of Na-
val Operations Admiral Frank Kelso for
the off-duty antics two years earlier that
has come to be known as the Tailhook
scandal. Though Defense Secretary Les
Aspin overruled that decision, it surely
won't help relations between the civil-
ian branch secretary and Kelso .
When Representative Patricia Schroe-
der (D-CO) was informed that Navy
Secretary John Dalton had been over-
ruled and that Admiral Kelso was going
to keep his job, she sneered, in an at-
tempt at vulgarity: "I think we're going
to teach the Navy one way or the other
that 'harass' is one word."
Representative of how the military is
being scorned were three episodes that
came to light in one week in October.
In the first, it was discovered that the
White House has been using the vener-
ated "Old Guard" unit (that, among
other duties, guards the Tomb of the
Unknowns) as delivery boys for press
releases on Capitol Hill. Second, a
speech code (later pulled back on the
basis that it was redundant of an exist-
ing policy) was proposed by an assistant
secretary of defense to clamp down on
military personnel from talking about
race, ethnic background, or homosexu-
ality. Said retired Colonel Robert
Maginnis, now an analyst with the Fam-
ily Research Council, "This memo will
require commanders to be political stool
pigeons for feminists and gay activists
who want to neuter the military."
And third, a Navy officer at the Pen-
tagon, reflecting the views of the Joint
Chiefs and other senior officers, was
quoted in the Washington Times as say-
ing that, adding to the problems of So-
malia and Haiti, such leaders were not
being consulted, but rather "being top-
down directed. They're paraded in for
show. They feel used." As the Times put
it: "A wave of uncertainty has swept
over the Pentagon in a way not seen
since the presidency of Jimmy Carter,
he says, when the bungled mission to
rescue Americans hostages in Tehran
came to symbolize a military establish-
ment plagued by demoralized men and
shortages of the machines of war."
Homosexuals and Women
Ignoring rampant (often fatal) dis-
eases, reduction of good order and mo-
rale, the degradation of morality, and a
host of other reasons arguing against
such action, President Clinton did at-
tempt to keep one of his campaign
pledges by forcing acceptance of open
homosexuality into the armed services.
The public, Congress, and the military
fought back strongly, provoked a delay
in the immediate lifting of the ban on
homosexuals, and forced Mr. Clinton to
settle for a policy that has been dubbed
"don't ask, don't tell, don't pursue ."
One Army team studying what might
occur with the lifting of the ban argued
that such a change would "force the
military to experiment with profound
cultural and lifestyle changes not ac-
cepted by the majority of Americans,
and illegal in much of the nation ."
Among other ramifications, according
to Army working papers, recruiting
might be hurt so badly that "the country
may be forced to consider abandoning
the all-volunteer force and returning to
conscription." Though the existing
policy was changed, the damage was
not as bad as the President 's initial
deviation would have been , and the Sen-
ate and House both backed a "compro-
mise" which the White House accepted
as being the most that could be obtained
from this Congress. Homosexual con-
duct was still to be forbidden in the
military.
But radical U.S. District Judge Terry
Hatter Jr. on September 30th issued an
order overturning the military's current
policy against homosexuals, saying it
was unconstitutional and should be
lifted nationwide. And the Administra-
tion, with give-and-take between the
27
Justice and Defense Departments, dith-
ered for weeks . Meanwhile, under Pen-
tagon orders, eight homosexual s who
had been placed on reserve status were
reinstated to duty. Some suspected that
the Clintonites were trying to get the
ban lifted by the judicial back door,
since th e legislative approach had
failed. As we write, the Justice Depart-
ment has belatedly asked the Supreme
Court to issue an emergency order to al-
low the military to carry out its policies
and block Judge Hatter's order.
In the meantime, Defense Secretary
Les Aspin announced that the Pentagon
was dropping its restrictions on female
air-combat roles and would also put
women in warships; he also ordered the
Army and Marines to justify their posi-
tions on keeping women out of certain
jobs, including combat. Again, common
sense, nature, scientific evidence, tradi-
tion, and centuries of civilized beha vior
were ignored, exchanging the require-
ments for military effectiveness for the
dubious calling s of "equal opportunity."
This flies in the face of the finding s
of the Presidential Commission on the
Assignment of Women in the Armed
Forces, which found, among other things:
• There were problems with pregna n-
cies that led to readiness difficulties
during Desert Storm (women were non-
deployable almost four times as often as
men).
• There was an unacceptable lack of
privacy between male and female per-
sonnel.
• There were significant differences
in physical abilities (requiring "gender
normin g" at the service academies, for
instance, to try to hide such disparities).
• Ther e were increased family
strains, to be exacerbated in the future
especially on enlisted women who by
and large don 't want combat assign-
ments . Any future draft , should combat
restrictions be eliminated, would per-
force be legally required to include
young American women.
The Center for Military Readiness ,
headed by Mrs. Elai ne Don nell y, a
former member of the Pentagon' s De-
fense Advisory Committee on Women
in the Services (as well as the above-
noted presidential commission ), ex-
presses matters directly: "M ilitary
women serve their country proudl y and
well . Nevertheless, the cumul ative body
of evidence suggests that the assign-
ment of women to direct combat units
28
on land, sea, or in the air would impose
unnece ssary burdens and complicating
factors that detract from readiness and
effecti veness."
Refashioning Rol es
The attempt to change Marine policy
concerning married recruits wa s ill-
handled by Marine Commandant Carl
Mundy, as he was quick to admit. Nev-
ertheless, this polic y change was gener-
ally misreported by the med ia and
quickl y quashed by the Admini stration,
regardless of its merit s, becau se bureau-
crats had not preappro ved the alteration .
David Sommers, the former sergeant
major of the Marine Corps , explain s that
the new policy would have "restricted
enlistment of married recruits next year
and prohibited enlistment of married in-
dividual s after 1995. Contrary to popu-
lar belief, the commandant did not
propo se any restrictions on marriage af-
ter the completion of training, nor did he
propose requiring young Marines to ob-
tain a commander' s permission to get
married. Durin g the first 36 month s of
service, the average young male Marine
can expect to be away from home for
about 24 month s, including training and
an 18-month overseas deployment.
Such separations early in a marriage
place tremendou s stra ins on these
youthful relationships."
But President Clinton, Defen se Sec-
retar y A spin , and Repre sentati ve
Schroeder forced a reci sion. Retired
Marine General Bern ard Trainor, point-
ing to shrinking services and the need to
be selective, commented that conditions
of serving must be rigorous: "Enlisting
married teen-agel's is not one of them .
Besides, each branch has the right to
choose its own enlistment polic ies. The
military is not Wal-Mart, The rules that
apply to civilian life just don 't fit - if
the country is to have a military worth
its salt.... Countle ss platoon leaders have
torn their hair out [since the advent of
the all-volunteer force with married jun-
ior enli sted personnel], becau se young
recruits who should have been concen-
trating on soldiering have been dis-
tracted by marriage problems."
Former Navy Secretary Jame s Webb
as ked why th e Marines sho uld be
faulted for wantin g to put funding into
troops and weapons "rather than into the
dependents and day-care centers." Rep-
resentative Pat Schroeder of the Armed
Services Committee has other things on
her agenda. With her well-ingrained bit-
terness to matters military, she ranted
about whether Commandant Mund y had
"taken leave of his senses," charged that
the Marines had "always been the least
family -friendl y," and dragged in the ob-
servation that "even the Pope allows his
Swis s Guard s to be married." Webb re-
sponded in a New York Tim es op-ed:
"How often does Ms. Schroeder think
the Swiss Guards travel thou sand s of
mile s from their wives for a year at a
time ? And since when ha ve they re-
quired the training, weapons and logis-
tics for heavy combat?"
Domestic Servant s
More often these days the military is
being misused for variou s social func-
tions . We are not here just referring to
National Guardsmen being called out
for emergency situations, a prero gative
of governors, but to combat soldiers be-
ing given such jobs as feedin g unfortu -
nates in Kurdistan and Somalia. There
have even been serious plans floated to
have active-d uty troop s work with
"ghetto" young ster s, to rebuild public
housing, and the like .
When the mayor of the District of
Columbia - where there are more po-
lice per capita than any other city in the
U.S. - recentl y asked the President to
authorize her to call out the National
Guard to reinforce her police dep art-
ment, he went along with the idea, while
pa ssing the buck to the legi slative
branch . It would be a bad and danger-
ou s precedent. Dallas Mayor Steve
Bartlett, a conservati ve, called this at-
tempt " a completely nutball idea."
Commented Bartlett: "Policemen are
trained professionals and so are military
people. But they're not trained to do the
same things . Soldiers don 't read people
their rights. The y don 't inve st igate
crimes. The y don 't collect and preserve
evidence. The Army is trained to fight
other soldiers."
Don 't expect this idea about revamp-
ing the armed services simpl y to go
away . Unfortunate ly, the way the new
"sensitive" military is headed, it may
wind up as a sort of armed Red Cross,
more worried about racial and sexual
quota s, recepti vity to homo sexuals, and
anti-harassment trainin g, than with de-
stroying the enem y. As the ca rtoon
character put it in another context, we
have met the enem y . .. and it is us. •
- WILLIAM P. H OAR
THE NEW AMERICAN / NOVEMBER 29, 1993
 U.S. MILITARY

Global Gendarmes
resident Clinton's military budget Som alia campaign began to unr avel ,

P portends even more cuts than un- and resistance developed for deplo ying
der the Bush for ec ast, but the U.S . soldiers in other UN escapades,
strategy envisioned by the current team PDD-13 was sent back to the shop for
return , of regimes such as Father Jean-
Bertrand Aristide 's in Haiti - is an ab-
surd redefinition of U.S. national interest."

points to an escalation in armed support refurbi shing. Partners w ith M osc ow

for the United Nations in its global po- The House of Representati ves even While plans for slapping Americans
licing crusade . Thi s amo unts to less stripped the Defense bud get of funds under Blue Helmets may have slowed a
defense for the U.S., even while Ameri- earmarked for a special global "peace- little, there continues to be movement
cans are paying more "protection" - in keeping" acco unt; this of course won't toward international "unity," including
terms of money and blood - to the in- stop the change outright, but it did slow transfo rming Russia and other members
cipient world gove rnment. things down a mite. Not long ago, if one of the former Warsaw Pact into "part-
Under the Clinton-A spin ners" and perhaps even
strategy, the U.S. will sup- having Americans protect
po sedl y be able to fi ght their regimes. The New
two regional wars simulta- York Tim es, in an August
neo usly, thou gh ske ptics editorial entitled " U. S.
find the revised plan issued Cavalry for So viet Bor-
in the fall very much like ders ?," reported on the
an earlier proposal that was "lively contro versy" inside
designed for U.S. troops to the Clinton Admin istration
fig ht to win in one area "over what role America
while merely hold ing off should pla y in the messy
enemy forces in a second military conflicts now ig-
region . niting the periphery of the
Current plans would re- former Soviet Union ...."
duce the U.S. Army by a The ne xt month, Sep-
full third by the end of the tember, saw an agreement
century, from the 2.1 mil- signed by Defense Secre-
li on be fore th e Persian Clinton policy would have more U.S. troops wearing UN blue tary Les Aspin and Russian
Gul f War to 1.4 milli on . De fen se Mini ster Pavel
Active divisions would drop from 14 to- suggested that there were detailed plans Grache v for greater coordination and
day to perhaps ten, with rese rve divi- to place American soldiers under the coo peration in matters of joint peace-
sions falling from eight to as few as UN flag, that person faced the risk of keepin g (including at least one opera-
five. The Navy would be shrunk from being branded a paranoid extremi st. tio n with the 27th Motorized Rifle
today ' s 443 ships and 13 carrier battle- What a fall there has been from the Division from the Volga military dis-
groups to 346 ships, with 11 carr ier days when General George Washington trict and the 3rd U.S. Infantry Division),
battlegroup s by 1999 . Marine active- instructed his regimental commanders, communications, and exchanges of of-
dut y personn el would be eased down "Put none but Americans on guard to- ficers for training. Grachev "surprised
from 182,000 to 174,000 . And the Air night." Patrick Buchanan is one com- As pin in pri vate talks," reported the
Force would slump from 16 active-duty mentator who has done his best to sound Washin gton Post, "by saying he would
fighter wings and 13 reserve wings, to the tocsin of warning, noting, for ex- like to see deplo yment of Russian and
13 wings on active duty and seven re- ample, that the "Clinton Doctrine, as de- Americ an troops together in an actual
serve fighter wings. fined in PDD-13, is a surrender of U.S. peace-keeping operation. One official
sovereignty, a betra yal of the ideas upon said that Aspin welcomed the idea en-
Dying for the UN Flag which our republic was founded. It is a thusiastically, adding that there is a real
A team headed by National Security formula for making American soldiers pro spect that Russians or Americans
Advisor Anthon y Lake (CFR) has been Hessians of an imperial army, whose in- might operate one day under the com-
working on Presidential Decision Direc- ter ventions could make America the mand of their former chief adversary."
tive 13 (PDD-13), which even the Wash- most hated nation on Earth . How many Even while this cementing of ties was
ington Post acknow ledged, "e ndorses times do we have to learn the lesson: occurring, a Clinton Administration of-
the United Nations as ersatz world po- How other nations gove rn themselves is ficial admitted that the very same Mos-
licem an and commits Washin gton to not our business. The idea of an endless cow was still pointing thou sands of
support mult ilateral peacem aking and spi lli ng of American bl ood chas ing nuclear warheads at the United States ,
peacekeeping operations ' po litica lly, would-be dictators and warlords around saying, "In terms of military capability,
militarily, and financially.' " When the the world - to guarantee the survival, or Russian nuclear forces pose a very great

TI-< ~ I\I~W AM FR/(;AN / NOVEMB ER 29 , 1993 29

threat to North America." Indeed, as re-
ported in the Washington Times for Sep-
tember 14th , Russia's "elite Strategic
Rocket Forces recently conducted a
large exercise that included a mock at-
tack on the United States, according to
U.S. defense and strategic-weapons
officials."
Many, if not most, Americans no
doubt think the U.S. has protection
against such missiles. But that is not the
case, and such protection gets further
away each time the Strategic Defense
Initiative (SDI) gets trimmed. Lieuten-
ant General Daniel Graham, U.S. Army
(Retired), former director of the De-
fense Intelligence Agency and now
head of High Frontier, observes that the
Administration's response to the ballis-
tic-missile threat has been "to spend
about $3 billion per year on SDI , but not
for the defense of the United States! In-
stead, they are pouring this money into
providing SDI defenses for Europe, the
Middle East and Japan.... The Adminis-
tration and Congress emphasize 'The-
ater Ballistic Missile Defense,' which
means that all systems would be
ground- or sea-based. They have cut out
the space-borne elements almost en-
tirely - the elements which would pro-
vide protection for the United States....
What's more, in the name of saving
money, they are eliminating the space
elements which would protect us and
our allies for less than a fifth of what it
costs to field the surface-based systems."
Aspin's Malfe a sance
The long-term "answer" to the per-
ceived threat of nuclear holacaust, in the
eyes of one-worlders, is global govern-
ment. Aspin, it should be recalled, was
one of the signers of the 1975 pre-
Bicentennial "Declaration of INTER-
dependence" that, among other outrages,
made a mockery of our Declaration of
Independence by stating: "Two centu-
ries ago our forefathers brought forth a
new nation; now we must join with oth-
ers to bring forth a new world order."
The declaration signatories - which in-
cluded current chairman of the House
Armed Services Committee Ron Del-
lums (D-CA) - affirmed "that a world
without law is a world without order,
and we call upon all nations to
strengthen and to sustain the United Na-
tions and its specialized agencies, and
other institutions of world order, and to
broaden the jurisdiction of the World
30
Court, that these may preside over a
reign of law that will not only end wars
but end as well that mindless violence
which terrorizes our society even in
times of peace."
More recently, Defense Secretary
Aspin came under fire for the bungling
in Somalia. Arkansas editorialist and
syndicated columnist Paul Greenberg
was on target when he stated, "If he
were a general, Les Aspin would make
a good candidate for a court-martial.
But the only clear statement that the
secretary made in the wake of this
[Mogadishu] folly was to say he would
not resign . Being a civilian appointee,
he doesn 't have to. He gets to stay for
more on-the-job training."
Members of Congress, as we write,
are circulating a letter to the President
calling for Aspin' s resignation, citing
among other offenses his failure to pro-
vide the needed armored reinforcements
to protect American troops in Moga-
dishu - equipment requested by the
on-the-scene commander and largely
approved up the military chain of com-
mand until it was rejected by Aspin for
political reasons. Further, the congress-
men noted that the secretary either
failed to receive or understand a Central
Intelligence Agency analysis predicting
a major military move by "warlord"
Mohammed Farah Aidid - which found
its way into the liberal Boston Globe
even before the brutal episode in which
18 Americans were killed.
As is often the case, there is more be-
hind the scenes than most see. It turns
out that the United Nations actually has
been paying warlord Aidid. Policy Ana-
lyst Margaret Hemenway of the Repub-
lican Study Committee describes the
"irony" involved - how the "U .N. was
paying protection money to Aidid, even
after the attacks on U.N. and U.S. mili-
tary targets." According to the Septem-
ber 5th London Sunday Times, she
recounts, "Aidid received more than
$100,000 a month, paid by U.N . agen-
cies in Mogadishu. The money ostensi-
bly paid for security for aid convoys,
although since December, 'the gunmen
have escorted no convoys and are kept
on the payroll only out of fear of retri-
bution. ' UNICEF was said to be paying
$40,000 per month to an Aidid lieuten-
ant. Peter Schumann, the U.N . develop-
ment program's chief in Somalia,
admitted the money was 'extortion, pure
and simply."
H alperin as Prototype
Controversy has also attached itself to
Morton Halperin (CFR), the former
mover-and-shaker within the radical
American Civil Liberties Union and the
Institute for Policy Studies, who is the
Clinton-Aspin selection to be assistant
secretary of defense for democracy and
peacekeeping. Halperin's history is re-
plete with anti-American positions
while aligning himself with Red re-
gimes - for example, saying that "ev-
ery action which the Soviet Union and
Cuba have taken in Africa has been con -
sistent with the principles of interna-
tional law." He has been vehemently
opposed to domestic-intelligence inves-
tigations. Even in his recent writings
(see Foreign Policy, summer 1993), he
barely disguises his call for the surren-
der of American sovereignty, especially
regarding troop deployments , to the
United Nations.
While Halperin 's nomination was
shaky even before the recent events, it
has developed that he had a significant
though still not fully explained role in
the disastrous U.S. Somalia policy. He
has also been especially concerned with
setting the Administration 's Haitian
policy, a scheme which includes rein-
stating as president a psychotic, de-
frocked, pro-communist cleric who is
on record favoring the brutal "neck-
lacing" of his political opponents.
After the CIA briefed senators about
Haiti's ousted president Aristide, sup-
port for the policy faltered . So the White
House forced the CIA to stop telling
Congress what it knew about Halperin's
activities abroad . Those activities in-
cluded the assistance Halperin gave to
traitor Philip Agee, whose treachery in-
cluded identifying a CIA station chief
who was then murdered.
More people in Washington are ex-
pressing doubts that Halperin can be
confirmed. That would be welcome, for
Halperin has also been one of the fore-
most plotters behind PPD-13, the direc-
tive to hand over U .S. troops to the
command of the United Nations.
Seeing Halperin get the boot surely
would be to the good. But it would be
even better to have his policies derailed.
After all, in the area of "peacekeeping"
and surrendering of national sover-
eignty, such calamitous policies are un-
fortunately also being pushed by his
superiors, Messrs . Aspin and Clinton. •
- WILLIAM P. HOAR
THE NEW AMERICAN ! NOVEMBER 29, 1993
 u.s. MILITARY
The CFR Connection
ichard Harwood, the ombuds-
R man for the Washington Post, is
untainted by conservatism. Ac-
cordingly, Harwood' s description of the
influence wielded by the Council on
Foreign Relations cannot be dismissed
as "right-wing paranoia." In the October
30th Washington Post, Harwood wrote:
"The President is a member [of the
CFR]. So is his secretary of state , the
deputy secretary of state, all five of the
undersecretaries, several of the assistant
secretaries and the department's legal
adviser. The director of Central Intelli-
gence (like all previous directors) and
the chairmen of the Foreign Intelligence
Advisory Board are members ...."
Notes Harwood , "This is not a retinue
of people who 'look like America,' as
the President once put it, but they very
definitely look like the people who, for
more than half a century , have managed
our international affairs and our mili-
tary-industrial complex ."
Anything but Harmless
For more than seven decades, the
CFR, which Harwood describes as "the
American ruling class," has exercised
formidable influence upon the institu-
tions of public policy, including the
American military. This tiny, eliti st
clique is anything but harmless . Admi-
ral Chester Ward, a former Judge Advo-
cate General in the Navy, spent 16 years
as a member of the CFR . He testifies
that the CFR was organized for the
"purpose of promoting disarmament
and submergence of u.S. sovereignty
and national independence into an all-
powerful one-world government."
The CFR elite is deeply implicated in
the disastrous American foreign policy
record of the past several decades. The
Korean War, in which American mili-
tary personnel were first placed at the
disposal of the UN, was an affair stage-
managed by prominent members of the
CFR - among them Dean Acheson,
Dean Rusk, and President Harry S
Truman. For the first time in American
history, U.S. forces were told to "die for
a tie" - to fight a limited war intended
to "contain" the enemy rather than de-
feat it.
"T' rr-: " J, 11l1 I\AArnl T'IIAI / l\ l tJ \/C /1I1Q C Q? Q
President Truman's invocation of a
UN Security Council resolution as the
legal basis for dispatching troops to
Korea established another dreadful pre-
cedent. Truman's decision had been
foreshadowed in a 1944 CFR memoran-
dum to the State Department, which as-
Aspin has embarked on an ambitious
reorganization of the Pentagon
serted that the constitutional provision
giving war-declaring power to Congress
could be superseded by treaty. Accord-
ing to the CFR, "Our participation in
[international] police action as might be
recommended by the international secu-
rity organization [that is, the UN] need
not necessarily be construed as war."
Accordingly, the Korean War was eu-
phemistically referred to as a "police
action ."
America's military effort in Vietnam
was conducted under the authority of
the South East Asia Treaty Organiza-
tion, a regional UN appendage that had
been organized by CFR member John
Foster Dulles. Dean Rusk, Henry Cabot
Lodge, and Robert S. McNamara, all
CFR stalwarts, were among the chief ar-
chitects of America's Vietnam policy,
including the scandalous "rules of en-
gagement" that prevented American
forces from obtaining victory.
1Qo.~
CFR member Walt Rostow, who
served as chairman of the State Depart-
ment's Policy Planning Council from
1961-66, also had great influence upon
the evolution of American policy in
Vietnam. In 1960, Rostow wrote: "It is
a legitimate American national objec-
tive to see removed from all nations -
including the United States - the right
to use substantial military force to pur-
sue their own interests ."
Pr ese nt Dominance
Defense Secretary Les Aspin, a long-
time CFR member, distinguished him-
self as a congressional critic of defense .
Aspin was a "whiz-kid" protege of Rob-
ert McNamara. Thus far into his term as
defense secretary , Aspin' s decisions
have perfectly reflected CFR priorities:
diminish America's capacity for inde-
pendent self-defense and prepare for the
military 's absorption into a UN New
World Army.
These facts have not been lost upon
Larry E. Joyce, a retired Army Lieuten -
ant Colonel whose son was killed in a
firefight between Army Rangers and
militiamen loyal to Somali "Warlord"
Mohammed Farrah Aidid . In an Octo-
ber 20th guest editorial in USA Today,
Joyce pointedly asked, "Why is Les
Aspin our secretary of Defense? Why is
a man who made a career of criticizing
the military put in charge of the mili-
tary? This makes as much sense as ap-
pointing an atheist to be a cardinal."
After receiving his post in the Clinton
Administration, Aspin embarked on an
ambitious reorganization of the Penta-
gon. He created a significant new posi-
tion, the assistant secretary of defense
for democracy and peacekeeping, which
will coordinate American involvement
in New World Army ventures. Nomi-
nated to fill that position is Morton
Halperin (CFR). Halperin has written
candidly about his desire to see Amer-
ica's military become an appendage of
the UN.
Lawerence Di Rita of the Heritage
Foundation wryly observes , "One must
give Mr. Aspin credit. With the country
fixated on gay soldiers, married Ma-
rines, and lewd and lascivious sailors,
31
he quietl y reinvented government, or at House is an incubator for ruinous poli- dealt with "The Army's Role in Sup-
least his small piece of it. It remain s to cies. The content of CFR discussions porting the Nation's Global Responsi-
be seen how effective his new organiza- may be appraised by reviewing the titles bilities." On Apri l 6, 1992 , Gen eral
tion will be, but it should suffice to note of some speeches delivered at the Pratt George Lee Butler, commander-in-chief
that it depends heavily on cooperation House by American military personnel. of the St rategic Air Comma nd, ad-
with the UN ." An October 27, 1987 speech by Carl E. dressed the subject of "Reorganizing
The CFR headquarters at Harold Pratt Vuono, then-chief of staff for the Army, Nuclear Forces for the New World Or-
der." On June 4, 1992, General John R.
Galvin, the Supreme Allied Commander
CFR Members of the Military/Defense Establishments
in Europe, contemplated "The Future of
NATO and Cooperation with the East."
Secretary of Defense George Bush 1976-77 CFR These three topics neatly summarize the
James V. Forrestal1947-49 CFR Adm. Stansfield Turner 1977-81 CFR CFR's military agenda: globalization of
Louis A. Johnson 1949-50 William Casey 1981-87 CFR the U.S. mi litary, disarm amen t, and
George C. Marshall 1950-51 William Webster 1987-91 CFR merger with the former Sovie t Bloc.
Robert A. Lovett 1951-53 CFR Robert Gates 1991-93 CFR The CFR maintains a variety of "fel-
Charles E. Wilson 1953-57 R. James Woolsey 1993- CFR lowship" programs intended to recruit
Neil H. McElroy 1957-59 CFR the next generation of globalists. In the
Thomas S. Gates Jr. 1959-61 CFR Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff
period 199 1-92, four military officers
Robert S. McNamara 1961-63 CFR Gen. David C. Jones, USAF 1978-82 ......CFR were enro lled in the CFR "International
Clark M. Clifford 1963-68 Gen. John W. Vessey Jr., USA 1982-85 ..CFR
Affairs Fellowship Program." The CFR
Melvin Laird 1969-73 CFR Adm. William Crowe, Jr. USN 1985-89 ..CFR
also maintains a spec ific military fel-
Elliot L. Richardson 1973 CFR Gen. Colin Powell, USA 1989-93 CFR
James R. Schlesinger 1973-75 CFR Gen. John Shalikashvili USA 1993-
lowship program to cultivate continuing
Donald Rumsfeld 1975-77 CFR institutional links with the military. The
Harold Brown 1977-81 CFR National Security Advisor 1991-92 CFR Annual Report exp lains
Caspar W. Weinberger 1981-87 CFR McGeorge Bundy 1961-66 CFR this program thus:
Frank C. Carlucci 1987-89 CFR Walt W. Rostow 1966-69 CFR
Richard B. Cheney 1989-93 CFR Henry Kissi nger 1969-75 CFR Each year the Chiefs of Staff of
Les Aspin 1993- CFR Brent Scowcroft 1975-77 CFR the Army and the Air Force, the
Zbigniew Brzezinski 1977-81 CFR Chief of Naval Operations, and the
Director of Central Intelligence Richard V. Allen 1981-82 Comm andant of the Marine Corps
Gen. WalterBedell Smith 1950-53 CFR William P. Clark 1982-83 nominate an outstandi ng offi cer
Allen W. Dulles 1953-61 CFR Robert C. McFarlane 1983-85 CFR from their respective services as a
John A. McCone 1961-65 John M. Poindexter 1985-86 can didate for a Mi litary Fell ow-
Adm . William F. Raborn Jr. 1965-66 Frank C. Carlucci 11 11986-87 CFR ship. The Council usually awards
Richard Helms 1966-73 CFR Gen. Colin Powell 1987-89 CFR two such fellowships annually. The
James R. Schlesinger 1973 CFR Brent Scowcroft 1989-93 CFR program enab les the officers se-
William E. Colby 1973-76 CFR W. Anthony Lake 1993- CFR lected to broaden their understand-
ing of foreign relations by spending
Present Civilian Leadership Who Are CFR Members a year in residence at the Council' s
Secretary of Defense Les Aspin; Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition John M. Deutch; headquarters in New York. Fellows
Undersecretary of Defense for PolicyFrank G. Wisner; Director of Arms Control and Disarma- part icipate in Coun cil program s,
ment Agency Thomas R. Graham; National Security Advisor W. Anthony Lake; Director, Cen- meet with Coun cil memb ers and
tral Intelligence Agency R. James Woolsey; Chairman, Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board staff, and pursue independent stud-
Adm . William J. Crowe. ies. The y also assis t in arra nging
Present Military Commanders Who Are CFR Members seve ral military trips for Council
Chief of Staff, U.S. Air Force Gen. Merrill A. McPeak; Commandant, U.S. Marine Corps Gen. members during the year....
Carl E. Mundy Jr.; Chief of Staff, U.S. Army Gen. Gordon Sullivan; Commander, U.S. Atlantic
Command Adm. Paul D. Miller USN; Commander, Strategic U.S. Command Gen. George L. In this fas hion, the CFR can sculpt
Butler USAF; Commander, U.S. Pacific Command Adm . Charles R. Larson USN. the thinkin g of rising military leaders.
Not surprisingly, CFR-promoted policies
Other Military and Retired Military Personnel Who Are CFR Members have inspire d disaffection within the
Lt. Gen. Frederic J. Brown, USA; Maj. Gen. Ronald R. Fogleman, USAF; Gen. Charles A. military. After all, most military person-
Gabriel USAF (Ret.); Gen. John R. Galvin, USA (Ret.); Gen. Andrew Goodpaster USA (Ret.); nel enlisted to protect the Constitution,
Maj. Jane E. Holl USA; Lt. Gen. Bradley C. Hosmer USAF; Adm. B.R. Inman USN (Ret.); Gen. not to exec ute the will of the UN. As
P. X. Kelley USMC (Ret.); General James P. McCarthy, USAF; Gen. Jack N. Meritt, USA (Ret.); long as the CFR retains its grip upon the
Lt. Gen. William Odom, USA (Ret.); Gen. Bernard W. Rogers USA (Ret.); General Jimmy D. institutions of politic al authority, disas-
Ross, USA; Cap. David .M. Snyder USAF; V. Adm. William O. Studeman, USN (Ret.); Gen. M.
ters like the Somalia misadventure will
R. Thurman USA (Ret.); Adm. Harry D. Train II USN (Ret.); Adm. C.A.H. Trost, USN (Ret.); Lt.
Gen Bernard E. Trainor, USMC; Gen. Carl E. Vuono USA; Gen. Larry D. Welch USAF; Adm.
continue, and the military will continue
Elmo R. Zumwalt, Jr. USN (Ret.). to suffer. •
- WILLIAM NORMAN G RIGG

THE NEW AMER ICAN / NOV EMB ER 29, 1993

 U.S. MILITARY
A Proud Tradition
ar has come to America many
W times in its history. In some
instances, it has been thrust
upon this nation by the aggressive ac-
tions of enemies abroad. In others it re-
sulted from failures or miscalculations
in policy. In yet others it was brought on
through the illegal actions and duplicity
of our own elected officials. Yet, it has
never been for our military personnel to
question such things. It has never been,
as in some other countries, for them to
determine policy, since they remain the
instrument of government and not the
reverse. Whatever the circumstances,
the American serviceman has answered
the call to arms for over 200 years. He
has served with a reliability, distinction,
spirit of dedication, devotion to duty,
and unflinching bravery that is the glory
of our nation and people.
World's Noblest Figures
General Douglas MacArthur put it
most eloquently in his West Point
speech of May 1962. About the Ameri-
can man-at-arms he said this:
I regard him then as I regard him
now - as one of the world's no-
blest figures, not only as one of the
finest military characters, but also
as one of the most stainless. His
name and fame are the birthright of
every American citizen. In his
youth and strength, his love and
loyalty, he gave all that mortality
can give. He needs no eulogy from
me or from any other man. He has
written his own history and written
it in red on his enemy's breast. But
when I think of his patience under
adversity, of his courage under fire,
and of his modesty in victory, I am
filled with an emotion of admira-
tion I cannot put into words .... In
twenty campaigns, on a hundred
battlefields, around a thousand
campfires, I have witnessed that
enduring fortitude, that patriotic
self-abnegation, and that invincible
determination which have carved
his status in the hearts of his people .
Politicians may blunder, statesmen
may falter, Presidents may miscalculate
and even lie - despite all, young sol-
diers, sailors, marines, and airmen have
always been there to defend the nation
and, if necessary, to give their lives that
others may live in freedom .
A distinguished Christian clergyman,
Metropolitan Philaret of New York, said
in an address to young people during the
height of the anti-Vietnam War protest
movements that "one of the clearest and
most self-denying struggles of service
to one's homeland is to die for the na-
tion. A Christian soldier is a defender of
the homeland, and clearly fulfils Christ's
precept , ' Greater love hath no man than
that he lay down his life for his
friends. ' ... The less a soldier thinks of
himself, and the more he is ready to sac-
rifice his life for others, the closer he
approaches to the martyr 's crown. "
Such sentiments, of course, are as old
as Christian civilization. General Mac-
Arthur echoed this attitude himself in
saying that "the soldier, above all other
men, is required to practice the greatest
act of religious training - sacrifice. In
battle and in the face of danger and
death, he discloses those divine at-
tributes which his Maker gave when He
created man in His own image." The
point of all of the foregoing is that it un-
derscores vividly what the American
.
armed services are, and what they have
faithfully and consistently accom-
plished for over 200 years.
Liberal Cynicism
Today, of course , this tradition is un-
der attack. Mr. Clinton once declared
the following: "I loathe the military ." If
Americans are wise, they will take him
at his word. Whatever liberals may say
in public for political purposes, pri-
vately they sneer at such things as the
spirit of self-sacrifice, love of country ,
devotion to duty, chivalry, and honor.
Contemporary liberals are confirmed
cynics. Cynicism is why leftist histori-
ans, in their treatments of American
wars, always ascribe the worst possible
motives to the participants in those
wars - primarily insatiable greed and
desire for power. Liberals cannot be-
lieve that other men have nobler, loftier
motives and aspirations than they them-
selves do.
The military tradition that is the glory
of our country has enabled our brave
men to overcome determined foes, to
storm the beaches on lonely atolls, and
to stand firm in the face of the on-
slaughts of vast hordes. That military
tradition, if President Clinton succeeds,
will be erased . •
FR. JAMES THORNTON
33
 NA nONAL POLICE

Toward a Police State

T
he phra se "police state" has an
ominous ring to those who are
not striving to impose or main-
tain one . From the days of fascist Sparta
to the Nazi Gestapo or the Soviet KGB,
the lessons of history teach that dicta-
tors and oligarc hs must centralize police
powers in order to impose their wills
and maintai n control. Often, the would-
be dictat ors themse lves incite the vio-
lence that then serves as an excuse for
centralizing police power and disarming
the citizenr y in orde r to "s olve " the
problem .
That is what Adolf Hitler did to facili-
tate his rise to power. One result , de-
scribed by liberal historian William L.
Shirer (CFR) in The Rise and Fall ofthe
Third Rei ch , was th at on "June 16,
1936, for the first time in German his-
tory, a unified police was established for
the whole of the Reich - previously the
Hitler took control of the police to consolidate his rise to power
police had been organized separately by
eac h of the states - and [Hei nrich] service of the central government [and] etc.) for biblical absolutes ("Thou shalt
Himmler was put in charge as Chief of the states," "the S.A. [Storm troopers]," not" kill, steal, etc.).
the German Police. Th is wa s tan ta- and "the SS [Blackshirts]." One recent manifestation of Ame r-
mount to putting the police in the hands Hitler realized that in order to estab - ica ' s drift toward a national police force
of the S.S. [SchutzstaJJel , or Bl ack- lish a dicta torship he had to control the is the final report of the National Perfor-
shirts], which since its suppressio n of police powers and he had to confisca te mance Review (NPR) headed by Vice
the Roehm ' revolt' in 1934 had been the guns. But he did not tell the German President Al Gore. Said to be a blueprint
rapidl y increas ing it s po wer. ... Th e people it was his intent to enslave them. for "reinventing gove rnment," this re-
Third Reich, as is inevitable in the de- By the time they realize d what had hap- port recom mend s "the designation of
velopment of all tot alit arian dictator- pened, it was to late. the Attorney General as the Director of
ships, had become a police state." Law Enforcement to coordinat e federal
Gun control also played a crucial role Reinventing Oppression law enforcement efforts." Thi s new di-
in solidifying Nazi rule , confirming that Can thi s same frightening sce na rio rectorate would operate under the super-
di ct at or ship thri ve s be st where th e ever take place in America ? There is no vis io n of a presidentiall y appointed
people are disarmed, since there is then doubt that America is moving, ever so council based at the White House and
little chance of mounting an effec tive, gradually, toward the centralization of consisting of leaders of the Departments
br oad -b ased cha lle nge to th ose in powers in Washington. Police powe rs of Justice, Treasury, State, Interior, and
power. Section II, Paragraph 3, Part 5 of are no exception. More federa l involve- Defense, the CIA, and the Office of Na-
Hitl er ' s March 18, 1938 " Weapons ment in law enforcement and more re- tional Drug Control Policy. The direc-
Law," for instance, asserted that a li- strictions on the private ownership of tor ate wo uld oversee th e FBI, Dru g
cense to manufacture guns "must not be firearms are needed, today' s opinion Enforcement Administration, and the
issued if the applicant - or if one of the mo lders cla im , in order to co unter a law enforcement arms of the Secret Ser-
persons proposed for the commercia l or growing crime wave that appears to be vice, the Bureau of Alco hol, Tobacco
techn ical management of the business out of control. But what the opinion and Firearm s (BATF), the Customs Ser-
- is a Je w." In contrast , Section IV, molders do not tell us is that this crime vi ce, the Intern al Revenue Service
Paragraph 12 provided that a "firearms wave has been exacerb ated by Supreme (IRS), and the Postal Service.
acquisition permit is not need ed by," Court decisions and other govern mental Th e scheme, which some observers
among others, "Officials of the central polices that have placed the rights of contend would actually create a national
gove rn me nt" and "the states." More- criminals ahead of the rights of victims police force for the first time in our his-
over, Paragraph 19 exempted those "to while encouraging the substitution of tory, was promptly endorsed by two of
whom a firearm is supplied for offic ial situatio n ethics ("do your own thing," the most rabidl y anti-gun members of
purposes," incl uding pe rson s " in the "it can' t be wrong if it feels so good," Congress, Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE),

THE NEW AMERICAN / NOVEMBER 29, 1993 35

chairman of the Senate Judiciary Com-
mittee, and Representative Charles
Schumer (R-NY), chairman of the House
Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and
Criminal Justice. Senator Biden told re-
porters, "It seems to me to make sense,"
while Schumer gushed that the idea is
long overdue and is "something that
should be done."
On September 23rd, Biden intro-
duced President Clinton's long-awaited
crime bill (S. 1488) in the Upper Cham-
ber, while Representative Jack Brooks
(0- TX) introduced similar legislation
(H.R. 3131) in the House. The contro-
versial Brady bill (named after former
Reagan press secretary James Brady) is
included in the House version. Senator
Biden had it removed from the Senate
bill at the behest of Handgun Control,
Inc. chair Sarah Brady (James' wife),
who prefers to have the measure consid-
ered separately following congressional
action on the crime bill. Biden made it
clear that a number of other anti-gun
measures, including a ban on certain
types of semi-automatic firearms, would
also be pursued during the present
Congress.
The Brady bill would impose a five-
business-day waiting period prior to the
purchase of a handgun. Although this
legislation is presented (erroneously) to
the public as a crime-fighting measure,
its advocates recognize it to be a crucial
step that will lead to far more draconian
gun control strictures in the future. Mrs.
Brady candidly told the New York Times
for August 15, 1993 that she views the
Brady bill as "the cornerstone of a seri-
ous gun-control policy in America" that
will eventually include more restric-
tions. "Without the first step of the
Brady bill," she asserted, "we' re never
going to get anywhere." She predicted
that passage will soften up Congress for
more gun control legislation, and that
once the Brady bill is enacted, "I think
it will become easier and easier to get
the laws we need passed."
Perhaps the singularly most ominous
provisions of the President's $6 billion
crime package are its calls for further
federalization of state and local law en-
forcement agencies. Although it would
be virtually impossible to convert a na-
tion with 40,000 independent police
forces into a police-state tyranny, such
despotism would become inevitable
should the central government gain con-
trol of those forces. The pending legis-
36
lation calls for the expenditure of $3.45
billion over six years ($200 million in
fiscal 1994 and $650 million annually in
fiscal years 1995-99) to fund 50,000 ad-
ditional police officers under a "Cops
on the Beat" community policing pro-
gram. During last year's campaign, the
President promised 100,000 new offic-
ers, and Senator Biden notes that the
other 50,000 "are contained in other
bills and other initiatives that have been
introduced and/or are already passed by
the Congress."
The Senate bill would also authorize
college scholarships to generate a Police
Corps of up to 20,000 recruits annually.
This ROTC for police (as it has been
described) was primarily developed by
New York attorney Adam Walinsky, a
onetime anti-war activist and associate
of the late U.S. Attorney General and
Senator Robert F. Kennedy (D-NY) .
The legislation would establish an Office
of the Police Corps and Law Enforce-
ment within the Justice Department to
administer the annual scholarships of up
to $7,500 per student ($30,000 over four
years). In return, recruits would be re-
quired to serve four years in a state or
local police department. Failure to com-
plete the service would obligate the stu-
dent to repay the full scholarship, but
the bill states that a participant who fails
to comply "may" (not "shall") be re-
quired to repay the scholarship money
(plus interest). Overall cost of the Police
Corp program is pegged at $100 million
for each of fiscal years 1995-96, and
open-ended for fiscal years 1997-99.
The Cops on the Beat and Police
Corps proposals would be giant steps
toward ultimate federal domination of
our nation's police departments. These
proposals are precisely opposite the
manner in which police should be hired,
trained, and controlled.
Keep Them Independent!
A key litmus test of a burgeoning po-
lice state is the extent to which law-
abiding persons begin to view the police
as adversaries rather than allies . Citi-
zens in totalitarian countries fear the po-
lice, since they know their assignment is
to keep an oppressive government in
power. In a free country , police are not
agents of the central government, but
rather servants of the local citizens who
hire them and pay their salaries. Their
sole job in a free country is to protect
the lives and property of law-abiding
citizens against the criminal element.
Under such a system, innocent persons
need not fear the police, but will instead
make it their business to cooperate with
them in whatever way they can.
In other words , the best policemen
come from the communities they serve
and have the interests of the local citi-
zenry first and foremost in mind. The
President's army of federally financed
policemen - who would have few or no
established roots in the communities
they serve, and whose loyalty would run
to the central government that pays their
salaries or financed their education -
would stand in stark contrast to that ideal.
Charles "Bud" Meeks, executive di-
rector of the National Sheriffs' Associa-
tion, recently noted the extent to which
the federal government has already in-
fringed upon local police power. "By
passing statutes in an effort to make [the
crime situation] better," he observed,
"we're getting closer to afederal police
state." He speculated that if the trend to-
ward federal involvement and financing
continues, states may shift resources
away from law enforcement in the ex-
pectation that Washington will foot the
bill , which would accelerate the shift
from state to federal policing.
The U.S. Constitution lists only one
federal crime, treason, yet in recent
years Congress has moved to make fed-
eral crimes of carjacking, vandalism of
biomedical research laboratories, de-
facement of religious property, child
pornography, and some 3,000 other of-
fenses that were once the province of
state and local municipalities. In the
wake of a brutal carjacking that resulted
in the grisly death of a Maryland
woman, the Washington Times reported
on October 22, 1992 that the FBI was
so outraged by the incident that it "has
ordered its field offices to take 'a lead-
ing role' in bringing carjacking under
control and has made a full-scale bureau
assault on the crime a national priority."
Although carjacking was not yet a fed-
eral crime, then-FBI Director William
S. Sessions, said the Times, "is promis-
ing to make it a federal case." Using this
widely publicized local crime and the
justified public outcry it generated as
the excuse, Sessions issued an order in-
volving "1,900 FBI agents assigned na-
tionwide to track violent criminals and
crime gangs," and Congress approved
legislation federalizing the crime of
carjacking.
THE NEW AMERICAN I NOVEMBER 29 , 1993
The Regulatory Oppressors thor , Dr. Martin D. Topper, the CID training with the anno uncement of a
Local law enforcement is also being "decided to re-evaluate its firearms program for police recruits at the U.S.
indirectly undermined by the unfunded policy as it reorganized to undertake its Marine Corps base in Quantico, Va."
regulatory mandates which Congress expanded responsibilities under the Pol- Officials said that the police "will bunk
has imposed on states and local commu- lution Prosecution Act." Among other at barracks on the 60,000-acre base" and
nities. For example, cities across the things, "the agency's policy for using will "attend academic classes and mili-
nation are being forced to expend hun- deadly force had to be updated." With tary drills as part of the department's
dreds of millions of dollars to meet the an increasing number of federal agents 23 -week training program." The
requirements of the 1991 Americans imposing outlandish and often blatantly Quantico program had been one of DC
With Disabilities Act alone. Los Ange- unconstitutional edicts , however, it is Mayor Sharon Pratt Kelly's top priori-
les, according to the Washington Times becoming increasingly difficult to deter- ties . The Times reported that "Mrs.
for October 15, 1993, "is struggling to mine just who the criminals are, as Ke lly, tha nki ng for mer U.S. Joint
find ways to pay for $360 million worth witness this year's Branch Davidian in- Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Colin
of modifications to sidewalks and gov- cineration in Texas. Powell [CFR] for arranging the agree-
ernment buildings," in the face of the Step by step, the federal government, ment, told the recru its she hopes they
city's already-existing $200 million through the expansion of federal crimes, will benefit from the Marines' 'strength
deficit. In Philadelphia , the price tag is through funding , and through the and expertise. ,,, Chief Thomas "said he
$260 million. And in Ohio, citizens are growth of the regulatory agencies, is en- would look at the possibility of moving
facing around $740 mil- the entire recruit train-
lion in mandated ADA ing process to Qu an-
costs. Add these enor- Step by step, the federal government, tico." For their part, the
mous costs to those im- "recruit class at Quan-
posed by OSHA, EPA, through the expansion of federal crimes, tico will run a series of
CPSC, FDA, and the obstacle courses each
rest of the alphabet-
through funding, and through the day and practice in
agency meddlers, and it growth of the regulatory agencies, is mock drills of urb an
is little wonder that in confrontations similar to
many cases, in the encroaching on local law enforcement. those now performed by
words of Larry Jones, FBI trainees."
associate legislative di- On October 22nd, af-
rector for the National Association of croaching on local law enforcement. ter weeks of talking about the move,
Counties, "local governments are hav- Syndicated columnist Samuel Franc is Mayor Kelly asked President Clinton to
ing to make choices between whether to reminds us that "over the last 30 years allow National Guard troops to patrol
increase their police force or sheriff's or so, the creeping federal incursion into the city's violent streets. The District al-
department or use additional money to law enforcement has yielded some 140 ready had authority under a federal anti-
pay for new mandates comi ng out of agencies at the federal level that have crime program to use the Guard in
Washington." such a role.... In addition, federal court limited circumstances. About two dozen
So once again we see the heavy hand rulings now govern much of what local guardsmen have assisted DC police
of Washington hamstringing states and police and courts do and how they can since 1989 at roadblocks and in admin-
local governments and thereby creating (and can't) do it, while more and more istrative and technical jobs . Mayor
the very problems which are now being federal laws give more and more police Kelly said her vision was that additional
used to justify additional federal inter- power to the feds." And what good has guardsmen would provide more of that
ference in, and control over, local law it done? "Murder, rape, burglary, armed kind of assistance. Two weeks later, the
enforcement activities. robbery, car theft , drug use and most President rejected the request, but
It is also important to note the extent other crimes vary from year to year, agreed to support legislation that would
to which the regulatory agencies them- but everyone knows the federal engulf- give the mayor authority to call out the
selves now comprise a virtual national ment of law enforcement has failed mis- National Guard on her own, as state and
police force, since many of their agents erably to control crime and make the territorial governors are allowed to do.
now face the task of cramming draco- country safe. That' s because, by its very The District' s congressional delegate,
nian edicts down the throats of an in- nature, effective law enforcement is Eleanor Hol mes Norto n (D, CFR )
creasingly restive citizenry. Among local." quickly pledged to introduce the bill.
other things, a growing number of the In Puerto Rico, the National Guard
agents are not only carrying firearms Trial Balloons has already been called out to cope with
but are being equipped with greater fire- In order to combat the growing crime the increasing murder rate. As Associ-
power. The September 1993 issue of problem, officials in the District of Co- ated Press reporter David Beard re-
Handguns magazine, for instance, de- lumbia now hope to increase the pres- ported from San Juan during the first
scribed in technical detai l the recent ence and influence of federal forces. On week of October,
transfer of the EPA's Criminal Investi- October 12th, for instance, the Wash-
gation Division (CID) agents from re- ington Times reported that Metropolitan Soldiers in camouflage carrying
volvers to Glock 19 semi-automatic Police Chief Fred Thomas had "moved M-16s check every passing car.
pistols. According to the article 's au- his department closer to militarized They stand guard alongside schools

THE NEW AMERICAN / NOVEMBER 29, 1993 37

 pockmarked with bullet holes.
They patrol nightly along lines
where workers are putting up 12-
foot walls, topped with barbed
wire.
Reminiscent of EI Salvador and
Vietnam, this military operation is
taking place on U.S. territory, bat-
tling the enemy within - drugs,
gangs and violent crime .
Hundreds of National Guards-
men and police have taken over 23
public housing projects in this U.S.
Caribbean commonwealth since
June, often in swift nighttime op-
erations complete with helicopters,
armored personnel carriers and
shouted orders to residents.
The Associated Press also reported
that Governor Pedoro Rossello "ordered
the Guard into action seeking to lower a
murder rate worse than any of the 50
states and to fulfill a law-and-order
campaign pledge. It is the first time
American military units have been
pressed into routine crime-fighting ser-
vice with police."
The AP dispatch failed to note, how-
ever, that the use of the National Guard
for "routine crime-fighting service"
constitutes another chilling way station
on the road to a police state. If the Na-
tional Guard can be deployed for this
purpose in Puerto Rico, why couldn't it
be deployed for the same purpose in
crime-infested urban areas throughout
America? Indeed, why couldn 't regular
units of the U.S. Army also be used? Fi-
nally, if the U.S. military is used to pa-
trol American streets on a routine basis,
what is to prevent an out-of-control fed-
eral government from using this mili-
tary presence as an opportunity for
supplanting the local police and putting
in place a police state?
The UN Factor
But the establishment of a national
police force controlled by Washington,
as ominous as that threat is, may not be
the biggest source of concern for cham-
pions of local law enforcement. Sugges-
tions have already been made for
deploying UN "peacekeeping" forces in
America.
For example, on May 4, 1992, while
Los Angeles was still smoldering from
the bloody riots that had just taken place
there, Michael R. McGee, an organizer
of the Black Panther Militia and a
38
former alderman on the Milwaukee City
Council, used an appearance on Larry
King Live to predict the deployment of
UN troops in America in the wake of
the "armed insurrection" that he boasted
he was "organizing." "[Y]ou've ... got
to remember," he proclaimed, "that if
the UN could go into Beirut, if they go
into Lebanon, if they go into Iraq, even-
tually the UN, I think, is going to have
to come in here, because what I'm talk-
ing about organizing is something that's
going to be called urban guerilla war-
fare. It's something that's not going to
be fought like a riot." McGee is, of
course, a revolutionary, but the question
of whether to deploy UN troops in this
country has also been raised by estab-
lishment sources .
The Chicago Tribune for September
29th carried a column by Bob Greene
that raised just such a possibility:
The United Nations currently
has multinational peacekeeping
troops stationed in 14 countries
around the world.
The precise missions vary, but
they all have one thing in common:
The international soldiers are there
to help bring tranquility and safety
to places that can't do so on their
own.
So perhaps there is one more
place where a UN multinational
force is desperately needed: The
United States.
"Preposterous?" Greene asked. "Maybe
not. Maybe it is an issue for the 184
member nations of the UN to discuss .
Sending soldiers from around the world
onto the streets of our own country? We
probably haven't come to the point
where we need such action yet, but
we're veering perilously close."
Such a step would fit perfectly with
what the new world order architects
have in mind . On July 14th of this year,
Senator Biden introduced Senate Joint
Resolution 112 urging the President to
initiate discussions leading to negotia-
tions to establish a standing United Na-
tions army . Under his proposal, United
States bases and facilities would be
made available to train UN forces, and
the President would not "be deemed to
require the authorization of Congress"
to make American troops, facilities, or
other assistance "available to the Secu-
rity Council on its call ." The fact that
Biden is the same senator who intro-
duced the President's crime bill two
months later underscores the fact that
the movement toward a national police
force and an international police force
are simply two tentacles of the same
problem.
Handwriting on the Wall
In the 1958 book World Peace Through
World Law, described by our colleague
William F. Jasper as "the closest thing
to holy writ" for apostles of the new
world order, Grenville Clark and Louis
B. Sohn (CFR) proposed a socialist
world government predicated on a re-
vised UN Charter that would include a
"world police force" with "a coercive
force of overwhelming power." This
force would be "the only military force
permitted anywhere in the world after
the process of national disarmament had
been completed." In the second edition
of the book released in 1960, Clark and
Sohn added the warning that "it must
be recognized that even with the com-
plete elimination of all [national] mili-
tary forces there would necessarily
remain substantial, although strictly
limited and lightly armed, internal po-
lice forces, and that these police forces,
supplemented by civilians armed with
sporting rifles and fowling pieces,
might conceivably constitute a serious
threat to a neighboring country in the
absence of a well-disciplined and
heavily armed world police" (emphasis
in original).
The handwriting, as they say, is on
the wall, and it could hardly be more
clear where the Pied Pipers of the new
world order intend to march us. To sum
up, the current and other recent presi-
dential administrations have working
with patient gradualism to: 1) strengthen
the United Nations militarily; 2) reduce
our national defense capability; 3) estab-
lish a national police apparatus; (4) fi-
nance local police with federal tax
dollars (and shackle them with the ac-
companying federal controls); and 5)
impose gun controls that will most af-
fect peaceful citizens .
It is time to wake up, become in-
formed about what is going on, and start
fighting back with every remaining le-
gal and moral means at our command.
And a good place to start would be to
support our local police and keep them
independent of federal control. •
- ROBERT W. LEE
THE NEW AMERICAN / NOVEMBER 29 , 1993
 IN LIGHT OF THE PAST

Peacekeepers' War in Katanga

W
ith United Nations military
missions multiplying and
expanding worldwide, and
with politicians, major media organiza-
tions , and nationally syndicated colum-
ni sts calling for the creation of a
permanent United Nations army and the
deployment of UN blue helmets to
crime-troubled U.S. streets, it is well
past time that Americans take a hard,
sober look at this UN thing called
"peacekeeping."
A good place to start is the UN's
shameful and murderous 1960-64 cam-
paign known as the United Nations Op-
erations in the Congo (or ONUC,
Operation des Nations Unies au Congo).
Until the recent large deployments of UN
forces to Cambodia and Somalia, ONUC
was "by far the largest peace-keeping
operation ever established by the United
Nations in terms of the responsibilities
UN forces comm itted numerous atrocities against Katangan civilians
it had to assume, the size of its area of
opera tion and the manpower involved" prime candidate for UN peacekeeping. Christian and an ardent anti-communist.
(The Blue Helmets: A Review of United But let us take a look at the UN's origi- But it was Tshombe's misfortune to
Nations Peacekeeping, 1985 by the nal Congo operation. The stage was al- be pro-Western, pro-free enterprise, and
UN). At its peak, ONUC involved ready set for the horrible drama that pro-constitutionally limited government
around 20,000 "peacekeepers." would soon unfold when Belgium an- at a time when the governments of both
nounced independence for the Congo on the U.S. and the USSR were supporting
Then and Now June 30, 1960. The Soviets, who had Marxist "liberators" throu ghout the
At the time of its 1960 invasion, the been agitating and organizing in the world . Nikita Khrushchev declared
UN acknowledges, the native popula- Congo for years , were ready . Their man Tshombe to be "a turncoat, a traitor to
tion of the Congo (formerly the Belgian was Patrice Lumumba, a vicious ex- the interests of the Congolese people."
Congo) enjoyed one of the highest stan- convict who was also a murderer, an al- American liberals and the rabble at the
dards of living on the continent. Today coholic, and a hash addict. With the UN dutifully echoed the hue and cry .
the country is known as Zaire, one of help of his terrori st thugs and the Soviet To our nation ' s everlasting shame, on
the poorest nations on the earth in terms and Czech "diplomats" and " techni- July 14, 1960, the U.S. joined with the
of GNP per capita, and one of the most cians" who swarmed all over the Congo, USSR in support of a UN resolution au-
miserable. Its ruler, "President for Life" Lumumba wa s "elected" premier. thorizing the world body to send troop s
Joe Mobutu Sese Seko, is one of the Peaceful independence lasted one week. to the Congo. These troops were used,
world's richest men . Since 1965 Then Lumumba unlea shed a communist not to stop the bloody reign of terror be-
Mobutu has maintained his tyrannical reign of terror against the populace, ing visited on the rest of the Congo, but
regime with terror, torture, and murder, murdering and torturing men, women , to assist Lumumba, the chief terrorist, in
while squandering the resources of his and children. his efforts to subj ugate Katanga. Within
nation on an opulent personal lifestyle. four days of the passage of that resolu-
He has been aided in this malfeasance "Seceding From Chaos" tion , thousands of UN troops were
by the UN, the Wor ld Bank, and the In- Amidst this sea of carnage and terror , flown on U.S. transports into the Congo,
ternational Monetary Fund, which have the province of Katanga remained, by where they joined in the campaign
showered Zaire with hundreds of mil- comparison, an island of peace, order, against the only island of sanity in all of
lions of dollars even as his continued and stability. Under the able leadership black Africa .
profligacy has driven the country ever of the courageou s Moi se Kapend a According to the UN ' s version of the
more hopelessly into debt. Tshombe, Katanga declared its indepen- Congo operation, as told in The Blue
Because of the economic, social , and dence from the central Congolese re- Helmets, under Security Council Reso-
political instabilities caused by these gime . " I am seceding from chaos ," lution 143, adopted July 13-14, 1960,
UN policies, Zaire is today another declared President Tshombe, a devout "United Nation s military units were not

_ .. _ .. _ . . • . . . ........... ...... .. A' I "' '-''I I,aAn c o I')(} 1()O Q

41
authorized to use force except in self
defense. They were never to take the
initiative in the use of force, but were
entitled to respond with force to an at-
tack with arms ...." And , says the same
UN whitewash, "From the outset of hos-
tilities, the United Nations military and
civilian officers did their best, in co-op-
eration with the International Commit-
tee of the Red Cross, to relieve the
distress caused to innocent civilians."
Eyewitness Accounts
Others on the scene saw it quite dif-
ferent ly. 46 AnglY Men is the title of a
scathing report issued by 46 doctors of
Elisabethville (now Lubumb ashi) in-
dicting the United Nations forces for
shocki ng atrocit ies against innoce nt ci-
vilians . This is part of their account of a
UN attack on a hospital:
The Shinkolobwe hospital is vis-
ibly marked with an enormous red
cross on the roof.... In the mater-
nity, roof, ceilings, walls, beds,
tables and chairs are riddled with
bullets .... 4 Katangan women who
had just been delivered and one
new-born child are wounded, a vis-
iting child of 4 years old is killed;
two men and one child are killed ....
The 46 physicians - Belgian, Swiss,
Hungarian, Brazilian, and Spanish -
documented the murders of Red Cross
workers Georges Olivet, Nicole Vroonen,
and Sijtse Smeding, who were shot by
UN troops while drivi ng on a mission of
mercy in the Red Cross ambulance on
Decemb er 13,1961. The gruesome con-
dition of the victims belied the UN's pro-
fessed concern for "innocent civilians":
.. . Mr. Smeding, has the skull
blown away, the horrible wound
reaches as far as the nape of the
neck and the top of the back ; Mrs.
Vroonen is riddled with a hundred-
odd pieces of shrapnel with cutting
burns in particular in the back,
the abdomen, the base of the ster-
num, the thighs; and Mr. Olivet,
wounded by forty-odd pieces of
shrapnel, with cutting bums, in par-
ticular on the skull, the nape of the '
neck and at the thighs (each show-
ing a very large wound) and on the
left forearm as well as at the wrist,
with an enormous wound blown
into them .
42
The doctors' report cites the testi -
mony of one Andre Kapenga, an em-
ployee of Mr. Guillaume Derriks, who
was present at the Derriks home when
UN troops murdered three occupants of
the home in cold blood. The UN contin-
gent, all Ethiopians, arrived at the
Derriks residence at 1:45 p.m. on De-
cember 16th. According to Mr. Ka-
penga, this is what happened:
At this moment, the old cook,
Mr. Jean Fimbo, has just brought
coffee into the drawing-room, and
Mr. Guillaume Derriks (60-year
old Belgian) and his elderly mother
(aged 87) who lives with him, are
about to drink it....
The Ethiopians climb the stairs
le ading from the garage to the
kitchen and with a burst of ma-
chine-g un fire shoot Mr. Jean
Fimbo ... enter the drawing-room
where Mr. Derriks who cries out in
English: "Not me," is shot down by
a bullet (found later in the region of
the spleen) and is finished off by a
burst which blows off half of his
face and skull.
A few seconds later , a third burst
hits Mrs. Derrik s in the right brea st
. .. and in the neck ....
46 AnglY Men documents many other
horrible atrocities by the UN "peace-
keepers": the bombing of schoo ls,
churches, and hospitals; the machine-
gunning and bayoneting of women,
children, and medical personnel; and the
detention in concentration camps of
30,000 to 40,000 Baluba tribesmen, "in
living conditions bordering on genocide
(2,000 probable deaths in less than a
half-year!) ." The report also contains
shocking photographs of many of the
victims that cannot be dismissed, the
UN's denials notwithstanding.
On December 14, 1961, UN Secre-
tary-General U Thant' s spokesman in
New York said, "It is inconceivable that
the United Nations troops could commit
atrocities against civilians." U.S . offi-
cials and much of the major media ech-
oed that refrain, suggesting that the
atrocity stories were simply Katangese
propaganda.
Members of the international press
corps were on hand, however, to wit-
ness the unprovoked UN attacks on
noncombatants. Smith Hempstone, Af-
rican correspondent for the Chicago
Daily News, gave this firsthand account
of the December 1961 UN attack on
Elisabethville, the capital of Katanga:
The U.N. jets next turned their
attention to the center of the city.
Screaming in at treetop level . ..
they blasted the post office and the
radio station, severing Katanga's
communications with the outside
world .... One came to the conclu-
sion that the U.N.'s action was in-
tended to make it more difficult for
correspondents to let the world
know. what was going on in
Katanga....
A car pulled up in front of the
Grand Hotel Leopold II where all
of us were staying. "Look at the
work of the American criminals,"
sobbed the Belgian driver. "Take a
picture and send it to Kennedy! " In
the back seat, his eyes glazed with
shock, sat a wou nded African man
cradling in his arms the body of his
ten-year-old son. The child 's face
and belly had been smashed to jelly
by mortar fragments.
In his 1962 book , Rebels, Merc enar-
ies and Dividends, Hempstone, who has
/ since served as editor of the Washin g-
ton Times and U.S. ambassador to Ken-
ya, responded to those who continued to
deny the UN' s awful handiwork. "Every
newsman there had seen civilians
shelled with his own eyes, " he wrote.
"Each of us had seen Red Cross ve-
hicles destroyed by United Nations fire.
Or were all of us lying?"
Lessons for T oda y
History has proven the liars to be the
UN "peacekeepers" and their supporters
in our government and media. If we
should be fooli sh enough to allow the
continuation of the policy of putting
U.S. armed force s at the UN's beck and
call, under the formal command of the
United Nations - and if we should ever
allow UN troops to occupy American
soil and to police American communi-
ties - we shall surely suffer a fate as
horrible as that visited upon the unfor-
tunate citizens of Katanga.
What is more, we will have deserved
it for refusing to heed the indisputable
warning s written in blood by the
"peaceful" Blue Helmets more than 30
years ago. •
- WILLIAM F. JASPER
THE NEW AMERICAN / NOVEMBER 29 , 1993
 IN LIGHT OF THE PAST

Retreat From Victory

Always in war when I visited my way to win, and to return to their homes
wounded in the hospital, I could as they left them. Governments -
look them in the eye, no matter moral ones that is - send men to fight
what their condition or how tragic for such a clearly specified goal. It is
their wounds, knowin g that our therefore unthinkable that a government
country had backed them to the would send anyone into war's hell for
hilt. But when I went to see my Ko- anything else. As General Douglas
rean wounded, I just couldn't look MacArthur said so well, "In war, there
them in the eye, knowing that they is no substitute for victory."
had been forced to fight with one
hand tied behind their backs .... I UN in Command
am convinced I was restrained in Five months prior to the outbreak of
Korea by some secret Administra- the hostilities in Korea into which our
tion policy dire ctive or strategy nation's leaders sent hundreds of thou-
about which I was not informed. sands of Americans, a Soviet General
- General Douglas MacArthur named Vasilev was serving as the chair-
man of the UN 's Military Staff Com-
mittee at UN headquarters in New York.
their posts at the UN and his place was
taken by another Soviet general named
Ivan Skliaro.
Like the Persian Gulf War or the in-
tervention in Somalia, the Korean War
was fought under the auspices of the
United Nations. During this war (called
a "police action" by President Truman),
all military orders and directives sent
from Washington and the Pentagon to
the American commanders in Korea
were first supplied to several offices at
UN headquarters, including those of the
Military Staff Committee. Before being
forwarded to Korea, these orders were
subject to approval by these persons at
the UN who actually had authority to
amend them. As might be expected,

A
nyo ne who has ever partici-
pated in war would concur On January 19, 1950, Vasilev and sev- Vasilev in North Korea received them
with Union General William eral other Rus sian officials stormed out from his Soviet comrades perhaps even
Sherman's famous dictum that "War is of their offices in protest over the seat- sooner than did our own commanders in
Hell." But saving your nation, your ing of a delegate from Nationalist China the field. It was therefore not surprising
loved ones, and your very way of life (Taiwan). It was later learned that when General Lin Piao, the commander
from an enemy who wishes to destroy Vasilev promptly proceeded to North of the Red Chinese troops who poured
all three is certainly worth putting one- Korea, where he directed the military across the Yalu bridges into Korea, was
self temporarily into such hell. This is buildup of North Korea's force s. A De- able to boast in a leaflet distributed in
why men willingly go to war , to pre- partment of Defense release dated May China, "I would never have made the at-
serve what they treasure by defeating a IS, 1954 claimed that Vasilev actually tack and risked my men and military
would-be conqueror. And defeating that gave the order for the North Koreans to reputation if I had not been assured that
enemy is what makes the sacrifice attack South Korea on June 25, 1950. Washington would restrain General
worthwhile. Once the war had begun, Vasilev's So- MacArthur from taking adequate retal-
Soldiers put themselves in harm 's viet comrades in New York returned to iatory measures against my lines of sup-
ply and communication."
The communist forces knew what our
troops were doing, or about to do , all
during the war! And they knew that, no
matter what happened, the combined
U .S. and South Korean troops would
not be allowed to triumph . General
MacArthur was correct: There was a se-
cret arrangement about which he had
never been informed. And he was not
alone in realizing the betrayal.
After the war had ended, Congress in-
vestigated. General Mark Clark told the
committee empaneled to review what
had happened: "I was not allowed to
bomb the numerous bridges across the
Yalu River over which the enemy con-
stantly poured his trucks and his muni -
tions, and his killers ." General James
Van Fleet said: "My own conviction is
that there must have been information to
the enemy from high diplomatic au-
American troops are buried under the UN flag in Korea thorities that we would not attack his

- . .- . ........ , .... ,..... ... ,,...., "' ,, / ' " I I""lI / C A AD C D 0n 1 00 Q 43


American servicemen in Vietnam were betrayed by their leaders in Washington
home bases across the Yalu." Air Force
General George Stratemeyer added :
"You get in war to win it. You do not
get in war to stand still and lose it, and
we were required to lose it. We were not
permitted to win ." And General
MacArthur then summarized: "Such a
limitation upon the utilization of avail -
able military force to repel an enemy at-
tack has no precedent, either in our own
history , or so far as I know , in the his-
tory of the world."
Proud Profession Subverted
As in all human endeavors, the con-
duct of war has to be based on sound
principles. Unfortunately, among nu-
merous attacks on the military, some of
America's leader s - in and out of uni-
form - have done their best to convert
this eminently proud profession into
something that is altogether unworthy
of praise. In what follows, we are con-
demning tho se who distorted the
military ' s purpose, not those who car-
ried the rifle s and endured the hell of
war.
As we noted above, the communist
forces of North Korea invaded South
Korea on June 25, 1950. With a meager
force and under UN oversight that he
would later learn was determined to see
him lose, General MacArthur assumed
command of the anti-communist resis-
tance to the North Korean advance.
Greatly outnumbered, and with their
backs to the sea at the southern tip of the
Korean penin sula, the combined U.S.!
44
Republic of Korea (ROK) troop s were
actually facing annihilation.
Then , in one of the greate st military
maneuvers in all history, MacArthur at-
tacked his enemy 's rear with an am-
phibious assault at Inchon, far up the
Korean penin sula . With that one bril-
liant stroke , our forces severed the sup-
ply line s of the communist forces. In
less than two months , the North Korean
army had been defeated, driven not only
out of South Korea but out of control of
North Korea as well. The allied forces
completely occupied North Korea, all
the way up to the Manchurian border.
The war had been won. *
No one denied that MacArthur had
displayed unparalleled military compe-
tence. But , for the most part, the fact
that he had defeated his adversary with
a minimum loss of life and limb on both
sides became lost in the adulation he re-
ceived.
At thi s point in the war, however,
hordes of Chinese communist troops
stormed across the Yalu River from
Manchuria, and the war began again in
earnest. MacArthur was denied permis-
sion to destroy the bridges over the river
across which poured men and supplies
* Wh y MacArthur ' s pl an s regarding the Inchon
landing were not provided to Vasilev and his North
Korean co mrades remains a mystery. Because the
war was still in its infanc y, it is possible that the
UN-lo-North Korea transmi ssion network had not
been completely established . What is certain is that
MacArthu r, who did not have it within him self to
refuse to follow military protocol, supplied his su-
periors with co mplete det ails about his plans.
destined for use against his men . He
protested to no avail and was soon re-
lieved of command by President Harry
Truman, whom the Chicago Tribune
stated at the time wasn't worthy to shine
the general's shoes.
Command of the U.S.lROK forces
was turned over to General Matthew
Ridgway. He immediately altered the
method of figh ting. In his own book,
The Korean War, Ridgway stated that
his first task on assuming MacArthur's
command was "to place reasonable re-
strictions on the Eighth [U.S . Army]
and ROK Armies' advance." Then he
drafted detailed orders to field com-
manders containing such passages as,
"Y ou will direct the efforts of your
forces toward inflicting maximum
personnel casualties and material losses
on hostile forces in Korea.... Acquisi-
tion of terrain of itself is of little or no
value ."
Classic military strategy includes the
taking and holding of terrain until so
much of it has been acquired that the
adversary is forced to sue for peace . But
this was no longer allowable strategy in
Korea. Even worse, our men were told
that killing was to be their main goal. A
morally sound military principle holds
that removing an enemy's capability to
impose his will should be the goal -
and killing him is not always necessary.
Which is precisely what MacArthur had
demonstrated with the successful land-
ing at Inchon .
Eventually the war in Korea degener-
ated to two years of fighting over rela-
tively inconsequential hills near the
38th parallel. Bitter hard-fought battles
would be waged by our troops to take a
particular objective. Then , after success
had been achieved with plenty of casu-
alties on both sides, orders from on high
would require them to abandon the ter-
rain they had just won .
From the victory that had been gained
after Inchon , our forces were required
eventually to settle for a stalemate. But
they also saw the beginnings of a
change that sought to have them aban-
don their traditional role as upholders of
the very finest moral traditions of the
military. They were ordered to become
killers, a change that would be de-
manded of them even more in Vietnam.
It was not the fault of the men in the
field. The blame has to be placed at the
feet of men such as General Ridgway, a
political type whose eventual member-
THE NE W AMERICA N / N OVEMBER 29 , 1993
ship in the Council on Foreign Relations
came as no surprise.
In Vietnam, our men were again
forced to operate under similar rules.
They were repeatedly sent out on
"search and destroy missions" and again
were regularly pressed into fighting for
an outpost or a piece of terrain which
they would win at great cost only to re-
ceive subsequent orders to abandon it.
Many- men came home from Vietnam
psychological wrecks. Is it any wonder?
Seeking out the enemy to destroy him ,
with neither the interim goal of acquir-
ing territory or the overall goal of vic-
tory to make war's horror worthwhile,
can take its toll on anyone. Year after
year , search and destroy missions were
the order of the day . As a method of
conducting war, this is barbarism.
Other Kinds of T re a c hery
Although the UN involvement in the
Vietnam War was not nearly as obvious
as it had been in Korea (where the UN
flag had been prominently displayed),
our forces went to South Vietnam under
authority stemming from our involve-
ment in the UN's SEATO (South East
Asia Treaty Organization) treaty . Secre-
tary of State Dean Rusk stated on No-
vember 26, 1966, "It is this fundamental
SEATO obligation that has from the
outset guided our action in South Viet-
nam." Earlier, on September 15, 1965,
the State Department announced: "The
Government of the United States has in-
formed the Security Council promptly
and fully of all our major activities in
Vietnam."
In addition to the way they were
forced to fight , the men in Vietnam
were betrayed in other ways by their
leaders . On July 23, 1966, during a
speech at Fort Campbell, Kentucky, the
home of one of the divisions in Viet-
nam, President Lyndon Johnson stated:
Our fighting men have turned
the tide of battle [and as they] make
a military conquest impo ssible for
the communist forces in the field,
our diplomats are probing for a
way to make an honorable peace
desirable to the communist leaders
in Hanoi.
Desirable to the communist leaders in
Hanoi! Is that what Americans were dy-
ing for? The men in uniform who heard
that statement must have known at that
TI-I~ f\/f=W AAAf=RIr.AN / NnVEMBER 29. 1993
point that their comrades under arms in
faraway Vietnam were not receiving the
full backing of this nation's leaders.
Many who heard it, of course, would
soon find themselves in Vietnam. But
they would not be allowed to win.
Then, in his State of the Union mes-
sage on January 10, 1967, Mr. Johnson
said there would be "more cost, more
loss, more agony" in Vietnam. At the
same time, he outlined a broad program
of trade, credits, cultural exchanges,
consular agreements, and other open-
ings to the communist leaders in Poland,
Hungary, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia,
Yugoslavia, and the Soviet Union .
These were the nations that were sup-
plying North Vietnam with the where-
withal to kill Americans.
Widespread awareness about U.S. aid
and trade with communists during this
period (it grew in size and strategic im-
portance in succeeding years) led the
Richmond (Virginia) News Leader to
declare in an editorial published on No-
vember 2, 1966: "Every communist bul-
let that tears into American flesh in
Vietnam bears the brand of LBJ."
The men knew they were not being
permitted to win. But none knew how
detailed were the rules of engagement
under which they were forced to fight.
In March 1985, after employing all the
clout he could generate, Senator Barry
Goldwater was able to have the actual
rules of engagement declassified by the
Defense Department. He hurriedly
placed them in the Congressional
Record (March 6, 14, and 18, 1985) .
Here are some of the restrictions placed
on U.S . pilots:
• SAM missile sites could not be
bombed while they were under con-
struction, but only after they became op-
erational.
• Pilots were not permitted to attack
a communist MiG sitting on the runway.
The only time it could be attacked was
after it was in the air , had been identi-
fied , and had shown hostile intentions.
• Military truck depots located just
over 200 yards from a road could not be
attacked and trucks that drove off the
road were safe from bombing.
• If a South Vietnamese forward air
controller was not in an aircraft, it was
forbidden to bomb enemy troops during
a firefight even though the communist
forces were clearly visible and were be-
ing pointed at by an officer on the
ground.
On the ground the rules of engage-
ment were : Don't shoot until shot at;
don't chase the enemy across borders or
into his privileged sanctuaries; don't hit
him where it will really hurt ; and don't
win . There could hardly have been a
greater betrayal of brave combat forces
in all history.
Change of Tune
Beginning with the Korean War, top-
ranking military leaders who spoke
about the no-win policies forced on
them began to find themselves forcibly
retired. Douglas MacArthur was the
first to go . During the war in Vietnam,
more top-ranking military leaders who
protested the restrictions placed on them
were sent home. Marine General Will-
iam Walt was expected by many mili-
tary leaders to be named commandant
of the Marine Corps. His outspokenness
about the way the troops were being
treated caused him to be passed over
and retired.
As the years have passed, political
types in uniform have been promoted to
the top positions in each branch of the
services. Only a few years ago, the
name of each member of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff could be found on the
rolls of the Council on Foreign Rela-
tions. Retired General Colin Powell is
not the first Joints Chiefs chairman to
hold membership in the CFR.
The change in the military from top
brass who are pure military men to
those who are politically correct ex-
plains why there has been so little pro-
test about the current use of America's
military in humanitarian, nation-build-
ing, UN-promoting, and other missions
which they should never have been
forced to undertake. America's service
personnel are still the best in the world .
But they exist to protect the vital inter-
ests of the United States and nothing
more . They are not the Red Cross; they
are not the UN's globocops; they are not
the Peace Corps; and they are not any
President's plaything to use in whatever
manner he wishes.
Reinstituting the military's sole mis-
sion of defending the United States is
vitally important. Military personnel
cannot do this of themselves, however.
What they need, and what our nation
needs, is a rising tide of public aware-
ness about deep treachery at the top of
our government. •
- JOHN F. McMANUS
45
 LETTERS OF THE REPUBLIC
Changing the Object of War
Decisive Battles of the U.S .A., by
] .F .C. Fuller, New York: Da Capo
Press, 1993, 416 pages, paperback ,
$14 .95.
ecisive Battle s of the U.S.A. is
D the tenth in a series of reprints
of the most notable work s of a
man whom many regard as the greatest
military historian of our age , British
Major-General l.F.C. Fuller. Penning
the volume, as the author himself re-
marks, "under gunfire and the crash of
bursting bombs" of the 1941 air-war
between Britain and Germany, Fuller
wrote this work specifically for an Ameri-
can audience as a tribute to the heroism
and fighting spirit of our armed services.
Fuller arranges this work in a style
that will be familiar to those who have
read his Decisive Battles: Their Influ-
ence Upon History and Civilisation and
his three-volume A Military Histo ry of
the West ern World. Focusing on spe-
cific battles and describing them in
great detail, he links each war or battle
to the next with a concise historical syn-
opsis that describes important events
during intervening periods. This creates
a continuous historical narrative -
laced with Fuller's characteristically
pungent judgments and brilliant analy -
ses - and places eac h battle in its ap-
propriate historical setting. The author
observe s that he cons iders this pract ice
essential to a proper understanding of
the individual battles since the activities
of war "must be related to the cycles of
peacefulness out of which each conflict
arises and into which it sink s." If we fail
to grasp the cycles and rhythms that
mark alternating epi sodes of peace and
war, our chances of avoiding conflict in
the future , or of fighting successfull y
should conflict be unavoidable, are sub-
stantially diminished, Fuller asserts .
Clash of Arms
Decisive Battles of the U.S.A. con-
tain s the particulars of 23 famous
American battle s, grouped in 11 chap-
ters, with, as we have said, an historical
synopsis preceding each . The author de-
votes three chapters to the War of
American Independence; one to the War
THE NE W AMERICA N / NOVEMBER 29. 1993
of 1812; one to the Mexican-American
War; four to the War between the
States ; one to the Spanish-American
War; and, finally, one to the First World
War. Since this book appeared just as
the United States was entering World
War II, before any significant battles in-
volving our country had yet occurred,
that horrendous clash of arms is not rep-
Fuller warned against intervent ionism
rese nted here . For Fu ller' s assessment
of the greatest of all human conflicts,
one must look to his separate volume,
The Second World War
Fuller begins the present work with
an aptly chosen quotation from our first
President and the Father of our country,
George Washington, citing this quote in
the hope that among readers it will "in
some small way lead them to appreciate
the wisdom of Washington' s words,
spoken so long ago ." The statement by
Washington, from his addre ss to Con -
gre ss of December 3, 1793, encapsu-
lates, in part, the splendid sag acity
which is the hallmark of this great man :
"There is a rank due to these United
States among nations, which will be
withheld, if not absolutely lost, by the
reputation of weakness. If we desire to
avoid insult, we must be able to repel it;
if we desire to secure peace , one of the
most powerful instruments of our rising
prosperity, it must be known that we are
at all time s ready for war."
Wa shington is, of course, referring to
the maintenance of armed forces, on
land and at sea, for the sole purpose of
defending American soil and interests,
as is clear from the remainder of the
speech . The idea of engaging in "hu-
manitarian" expeditions or moralistic
crusades for purposes other than those
of upholding of our own vital natio nal
interests, or of binding our nation within
the sticky webs of foreign alliances ,
was, as we know, utterly contrary to
Washington's outlook. Thus, none of
the interventionist presidents of recent
decades may draw comfort from , or find
justification for their activities in,
Washington ' s speeches - one of the
rea sons that this man is largely ignored
by politicians today. Washington saw fit
to reiterate his views three years later in
his famed Farewell Address, and, by
and large, his counsel remained the
foundation of our foreign policy for
over a century.
Consider again the military engage-
ments General Fuller sur veys in hi s
book : our first two great wars, those of
1775-81 and 1812-14, established and
secured our national indepe nde nce from
Grea t Britain ; war with Mexico gave us
the great Southwest, room for expan-
s ion; the War Bet wee n the States,
though tragic, assured the preservation
of the Union; and war with Spain el-
evated the United States to the status of
a wor ld power.
"More Perfect Peace"
Historians may justly debate the pru-
dence of various policies that brought
about some of the conflicts just noted .
They may argue too about the nature of
the often unexpected legacies wrought
by these wars. Nevertheless, it cannot
be disputed that all of the aforemen-
tioned wars directly involved American
intere sts. Moreover, each of them gave
way eventually to what was arguably a
more perfect pea ce.
The phrase, "more perfect peace," is
one of Fuller's favorite themes and is
me ntioned in several of his books. It
47
comes from a speech delivered by Gen-
eral Sherman in 1865, in which that
fierce and gritty warrior held that "the
legitimate object of war is a more per-
fect peace." Fuller insists that, at least
in this one affirmation, Sherman is cor-
rect, his concept comprising the only
standard by which one may measure
whether or not a war has truly been
won, or, on the contrary, whether vic-
tory is Pyrrhic. At any rate, moderation
and America's own vital interests con-
tinued to delimit American foreign
policy through the end of the 19th cen-
tury and, consequently, each of her wars
bestowed the blessings of greater secu-
rity and a more perfect peace .
However, though it fashioned us into
a great power, the Spanish-American
War " left the United States in a di-
lemma," Fuller holds. The dilemma,
briefly put, was whether or not to con-
tinue following Washington's dictum to
remain strong while avoiding entan-
gling ourselves in foreign alliances and
in the affairs of other nations, or to al-
low ourselves to be drawn, as the author
says, "towards bellicose Europe." For
almost two more decades, America
continued its judicious attitude and re-
flicts, except when acting as a respected
and trusted mediator - for example
when Theodore Roosevelt helped to end
the Russo-Japanese War in 1905. Sadly,
the Spanish-American War was to be
the last fought by Americans in accor-
dance with older, wiser notions.
Down a Dark Road
On April 6, 1917, the U.S. stepped
onto a slippery slope that, even after the
passage of almost 80 years, apparently
has no bottom. On that date , at President
Wilson's bidding, Congress declared
war on Kaiser Wilhelm 's Germany .
That any genuinely vital interests of the
U.S ., requiring our armed intervention,
were at stake in the European catastro-
phe or that our country might gain from
such involvement, were both open to
question from the start.
"What then," the author asks, "was it
all for?" President Wilson answered that
we went to war to "make the world safe
for democracy," a form of government
that, Fuller contends, "existed solely in
the pedagogic imagination of the vision-
ary of Princeton ." In actual fact , he
writes, it was not rule of, by, and for the
people that determined the course of
something sinister: "[T]he government
of the Western nations, whether monar-
chial or republican, had passed into the
invisible hands of a plutocracy, interna-
tional in power and grasp . It was, I ven-
ture to suggest, this semioccult power
which .. . pushed the mass of the Ameri-
can people into the cauldron."
The consequences of the decision, os-
tensibly reached by Wilson and his gov-
ernment, to plunge the nation needlessly
into a foreign war, have been manifold.
First among these was the fact that the
war ended on terms which must be cat-
egorized as the precise opposite of "a
more perfect peace."
No sooner was the Armistice of No-
vember II (1918) signed that its terms
were scrapped by the Allies. Conse-
quently, the period that followed it was
no more than a suspension of arms.
Hysteria ruled the day - the black day
for Europe. Like Sindbad, the Money
Power had released the Jinn - mass
emotionalism - from its bottle of brass,
and henceforth no reason or unreason
could persuade him to return to it.
Secondly, just as the Carthaginian
peace of World War I led directly to
World War II, American involvement in

--
mained aloof from international con- events, but rather something hidden, the one led directly to our involvement
in the other. Worse yet, it led to a spirit
of unbridled internationalism; to the rise
of a threatening communist giant; to
new and bloody wars in Korea and
Southeast Asia; to military and "police
actions" in Europe, Asia, Africa, and the
Near East; to countless international cri-
ses; to the stationing of American troops
over the whole globe; and to recent de-
cisions to place our troops under the di-
rect command of the United Nations. In
short, it led us down a dark road on
which George Washington so sternly
warned us two centuries ago never,
never to set foot.
Needless to say, Fuller could not

Henelelt foresee all of these future happenings in

their exact details when he wrote Deci-

lasteners sive Battles of the U.S.A. in the early

1940s. He did, however, have some in-
kling of our possible future when he

hold the warned that, unless a more perfect peace

were to follow the Second World War
- which was then being waged -
country other wars would soon follow. And
knowing well the leading personalities

together. involved in that war, he was sufficiently

astute to realize that a more perfect
peace was not at all likely . •
'Precision crafted' brass fasteners since 1944. - FR. JAMES THORNTON

8475 Ulmerton Rd. • Largo, FL • 813/531·0406

THE NEW AMERICAN / NOVEMBER 29 , 1993
 LETTERS OF THE REPUBLIC
Another Look at Tyranny
Global Tyranny ... Step by Step: The
United Nations and the Emerging New
World Order, by William F. Ja sper,
Appleton, WI : Western Island s, 1992,
350 pages, paperback. (For ordering in-
formation , see the ad on page 50.)
xperience, contended humorist
E author Josh Billings, incre ases
our wisdom but doesn't reduce
our follies . Looking back on the last
year, since William Jasper's book was
published, bears out that the United
States (and mankind in general) has
been burnt by the folly of submitting to
United Nations policies. Yet we con-
tinue to ignore the lessons we should
have learned.
Of course , the growing U.S.lUN
adventuri sm is not folly, but a result of
purposeful complicity. After all, even a
cat learn s from sitting on a stove ju st
once. Yet the U.S. military is still being
thrust into bizarre and precarious posi-
tions - from nomadic clan wars in the
Horn of Africa , to deep-seated enmities
along th e fault-lines of the bloody
Balkan s, to favoring a psychotic "pro-
gressive" in perhaps the most miserable
land in the Western Hemisphere, where
UN conduct has made life worse for av-
erage Haitian s.
In an article not long ago in the Wash-
ington Post, under a headline reading
"A Laboratory for 'Peacemaking'
Turned Deadly ," the newspaper noted :
"In congressional testimony, Under-
secretary of State Peter Tarnoff hailed
the Somalia operation as a ' model worth
promoting' for future operations...."
Unfortunately, that is undoubtedly the
plan. Tarnoff, as the paper didn't say,
was a member of the Trilateral Com-
mission who came to the State Depart-
ment from his post as president of the
elitist interventionists at the Council on
Foreign Relation s.
Un ch anging Plot
We mention the more recent ex -
amples, including intervention in Soma-
lia, to show how Global Tyranny
remain s pertinent even as the headline s
change from day to day. The past re-
mains prologue. Although Mr. Jasper
THE NEW AMERICA N / NOVEMBER 29. 1993
wrote his book before the Mogadishu
mission played out or Bill Clinton be-
came President, the deed s of the new
Administration fit nonetheless into the
established design behind U.S. foreign
policy .
Mr. Clinton , in other words, contin-
ues to make Jasper's ca se about the
dangers of the new world order. For ex-
I
Jasper's 1992 warning is st ill on tar get
ample, the author quoted Strobe Talbott,
a CFR director and Trilateral Commis-
sion member who was then Time maga-
zine's editor-at-large , as explaining how
world government must come , but pre-
tending that it would not be a central-
ized superstate. Then Mr. Clinton took
office and named that very same Tal-
bott, his former Rhode s Scholar room-
mate at Oxford, to be ambassador to all
the former Soviet republics. Thus, Tal-
bott would help meld the former Soviet
republics into the grand design . What
Jasper warned against, Mr. Clinton has
moved forward to accomplish.
Jasper described how UN Secretary-
General Boutros Boutros-Ghali had
come up with An Agenda f or Peace , a
blueprint for a world army which rede-
fines national sovereignty and can find
as reasons for intervention virtually all
circumstances. "In what social or eco-
nomic spheres, if any , will the world
orderites not find a pretext for interven-
tion?" asked Jasper. "According to the
new UN agenda , there are none. Among
the 'new risks for stability' listed by the
Secretary-General are 'ecological dam-
age' and 'disruption of family and com-
munity life.'
"Other ' sources of conflict' include
'unchecked population growth, ' 'drugs
and the growing disparity between rich
and poor, ' '[p]overty, disease , famine,'
'drought,' 'a porous ozone shield ,' and
abo ut anything else you might imag -
ine."
When it came time for Mr. Clinton' s
maiden speech at the United Nations, he
was generally portrayed as pulling back
a bit from supporting the world body .
This was deceptive as well, coming at a
time when UN failings were obvious.
He did say that there had to be limits on
peacekeeping mis sion s, but that is
hardly placing an onus on the world
body . More significantly, but less pub-
licized by the major media , the Presi-
dent also announced that the U.S. would
support the creation of a " ge nuine
peacekeeping headquarters, with a plan-
ning staff, with access to timely intelli-
gence , with a logistic unit that can be
deployed at a moment's notice , and a
modern operations center with global
communications." The U.S. and the UN
are , in fact, supporting peacekeeping/
multilateralism/new world order man-
dates dealing with internal affairs within
a number of countries - a troubling
and growing trend that Jasper warned
against in his book . As Jasper put it, an
organization that is "powerful enough to
enforce world ' peace ' would also be
powerful enough to enforce world tyr-
anny . No organization should have that
kind of power!"
Regional Government
A step before global government, of-
ten dubbed One Worldism, involves
precursors such as the European Com-
munity , or One Europe. European unifi-
cation , despite its slowdowns, setbacks ,
and apparent bad publicity over com -
mon currency and other problems, is
still moving along its track. The former
49
foreign minister of Germany, for in- mation of a new European Monetary In- In this they have bee n fo llowing the
stance, was fairly blatant about what stitute. True, as far as it goes . However, lead of the Estab lishme nt news organ,
this means for natio nhood . Ha ns- the context is spelled out in Global Tyr- the New York Times, which has had a
Dietrich Genscher is quoted in Global anny: Professor Richard Cooper (CFR) number of editorials in the vein of the
Tyranny as explaining in 1989, "We are of Harvard had signalled that direction following, from May 1992: 'The army
experiencing an increasing abandon - in a 1984 article in the CFRjournal For- of tomorrow is neither the Red Army
ment of sovereignty within the Euro- eign Affairs, when he called for "cre- nor the U.S. Army .... If there is to be
pean Community in favor of this ation of a common currency for all of peace, it will be secured by a multina-
Community and, as I hope, also in favor the industrial democracies, and with a tional force that monitors cease-fires .. .
of [a] European parliament equipped common monetary policy and a joint and protects human rights. Bl ue-hel-
with full rights. " Bank of Issue to determine that mon - meted United Nations peacekeepers are
So it was this October that Germany's etary policy." doing just that."
highest court struck down the final le- The fact that events have not yet ar- Down at the recru iting station, you
gal challenges against the ratification of rived at that point does not mean we can bet, they're not telling the enlistees
the Maastricht Treaty for a politica l and should not be alarmed. that they may fight and die for the
eco nomic union of Eu- emerging new world or-
ro pe . The current for - der. However, a pri me
eign mi nis ter of Ger- tlAmerica goes not abroad in search reason cited by Ameri-
many , Kla us Kin kel, can officials for keeping
comme nted ha ppi ly : of monsters to destroy. She is the our troops in Somalia is
"The European trai n is so the United Na tio ns
back o n track. " This
well-wisher to the freedom and
won't be em barrassed.
road is intended to in- independence of all. She is the champion In the meantime, some
clude eventual military 80,000 bl ue -hel meted
union as well, with
and vindicator only of her own. JJ so ldiers are deployed
France and Germany worldwide in 17 various
having already laid the UN missions. Where will
groundwork in this area. NATO, of A New World Army Americans be sent next? And by whom?
course, is another potential foundation Boutros Boutros-Ghali, secretary-
for military union. Even Eastern Euro - general of the Uni ted Nations and Contrasting World Views
pean countries are now demanding that would-be commander-in-chief of a William Jasper quotes John Quincy
they be allowed to become part of world army, is an enemy of nationalism, Adams as saying: "America goes not
NATO, which originated supposedly as which , he says, "can disrupt a peaceful abroad in search of monsters to destroy.
a bastion against a communist threat global exis tence. Nations are too inter- She is the well-wisher to the freedom
from the East. The most recent response dependent, national frontiers are too po- and independence of all. She is the
from NATO has been in the affirmative, rous and transnational realities ... too champion and vindicator only of her
awaiting but the proper timing. dangerous to permit egocentric isola- own ." The contrast to the Clinton Doc-
Mr. Jasper pointed out in Global Tyr- tionism." trine is dramatic. As things fell apart in
anny that one of the major proponents A year after author Jasper quoted the Somalia, for example, even the Wash-
of On e Europe is a Frenc h socialist secre tary-general thus ly, U.S. National ington Post ha d to rem ark th at the
named Jacques Delors, the president of Security Advisor Anthony Lake tried to Mogadishu mission "seemed to epito-
the EC. And the author made the point, explain the Clinton Doctrine by railing mize the challenges of U.N. 'peace op-
often overlooked in the U.S., that the at isolationist "neo know -nothings." At eration' in the disorderly new world
socialists who dominate the European j ust about the same time, the President order: An uncertain cha in of command,
Parliament are not about to pus h for was stressing that "isolationism and disparities in language and skills among
"free markets" ; yet free-market rhetoric protectionism are poison." Yes, there is contributing national forces and a politi-
was used to promote the Common Mar- a pattern. cal reach that for months has exceeded
ket that preceded the EC. Free market It does seem that the idea to staff a its military grasp."
rhetoric is similarly being misused to United Nations army with United States That conclusion could have been
sell NAFTA (the North American Free troops has been pulled back for rework- drawn from reading Global Tyranny .
Trade Agreement), a supposed "com- ing, but there is little doubt that it has But Mr. Jasper also reaches the logical
mon market" for the U.S., Mexico, and been on the President's agenda, in the conclusion - which is to get the U.S.
Canada. form of Presidential Decision Directive out of the UN. Big government isn 't the
It is one of the greatest strengths of 13. Even ts in Somalia may have post- answer; it' s the problem. And world
Jasper' s valuable work that his charges poned implementation of this dangerous government is an oversized predicament
are well substantiated, most frequently plan for now; that postponement is per- we wouldn't wish on our enemies. Yet,
out of the mouths and writings of the haps the best thing to come out of the in a world government it is our enemies
actual architects of the emerging Euro- incursion into the Horn of Africa . who would rule - having reached that
pean government. One reads in a current Leaders of both the Democrats and throne not suddenly but by step-by-step
news accoun t, for instance, that the pas- Republicans have endorsed the crea tion U.S. acquiescence. •
sage of Maastricht will lead to the for- of stronger UN "peacekeeping" forces . WILLIAM P. HOAR

THE NEW AMERICAN / NOVEMBER 29 , 1993 51

 GET US OUT!
"Reform" Is Not the Answer
E
ven before the tragic events of
Oct ober 3, 1993 that took the
live s of 18 Americans in Mog a-
di shu, a national re asse ssment of our
role in United Nations "peacekeeping"
operations was underw ay. UN "reform"
is in the air. Unfortunately, most publ ic
official s and the American public at
lar ge are operating with some funda-
mentally fl awed premise s when it
comes to dealing with thi s pathetic
world body.
One of the most popular prescriptions
enjoying bipartisan support in Washing-
ton involves the creation of an auditing
office to "root out wa ste." In his Sep-
tember 27th speech to the UN, President
Clinton called on the organization to
"establish a strong mandate for an Of-
fice of Inspector General so that it can
att ain a reputation for tou ghn ess, for
integrity, for effec tiveness ." Con sider-
ing the UN ' s notoriety for waste and
corruption , the popularity of such pro-
po sal s is understandable . E ven th e
President ' s harshe st con gression al crit-
ics seem to agree with him on that point.
On e suc h cri tic, after blist ering Mr.
Clinton ' s UN policies in a new spaper
column , th en voic ed suppo rt for the
Administration's proposed UN account-
ing reforms. "By insisting that the UN
grow s and reforms like the world
around it, " he wrote , "we can help
achieve the noble goals of its founders."
Likewise, Mr. Clinton, in his UN speech,
said, "Let us build new confidence among
our people that the United Nations is
changing with the needs of our time s."
Propaganda Ploys
It is appare nt that man y of these "re-
form" effo rts a re mere prop ag and a
plo ys aimed at winning public support
for "empowering" the United Nation s.
A recent report of the Trilateral Com-
mission observes: "At the moment, gov -
ernments are unwilling to give the UN
ind epend ent so urces of fund s. " B y
which it mean s governments are reluc-
tant to give the UN the authority to levy
"international taxe s on international air
tra vel , shipping, global capital flo ws
and the lik e." "However," say the re-
port' s auth ors, "if over time the effec.- _
52
tiveness and effici ency of the UN in-
creas es, gov ern me nts might be more
willi ng to co nside r dire ct means of fi-
nancing so me activ ities of th e UN. "
Many of those now applauding efforts
to improve the UN' s "efficiency" might
have second thought s if they kne w such
reforms were meant to bring about a UN
with the power to tax American citizens.
Then there is the matter of the UN
Charter itself, that venerated totem of
internationalist tripe, to which political
correctness bids all bow in homage .
Rubbish! The vaunted " peace docu-
ment" is nothing of the sort. As one of
America's leading experts in the field of
international law, Ambassador J. Reu-
ben Clark Jr. , noted back in 1945, the
UN Charter "is a war document, not a
peace document." The ambassador noted
that "there is no provision in the Char-
ter itself that contemplates ending war.
It is true the Ch arter pro vide s for force
to bring peace , but such use of force is
itself war." He observed further:
Not onl y does the Charter Orga-
ni zation not prevent future wa rs,
but it make s practically certain that
we shall have future wars, and as to
suc h wars it take s from us the
power to decl are them , to choose
the side on which we shall fight , to
det erm ine what force s and military
equ ipm ent we shall use in the war,
and to control and command our
sons who will do the fighting.
Ambassador Clark, unfortun atel y,
was pro ven right by the UN ' s record in
Korea, Vietnam ... and Somalia. And
the stakes are growing ever larger, as
U.S. forces are sucked into one UN mis-
sion after another, with a UN "mandate"
that is constantly evolving and exp and -
ing. "Peacekeeping is the most prominent
U.N. acti vity," says Secretary-General
Boutros-Ghali. However, in the next
breath he admits, " Peacekeeping is a
U.N. invention. It was not specifically
defined in the charter but evolved as a
noncoercive instrument of conflict con-
trol." Th at evolutionary tendency is pre-
ci sel y why the org anization is suc h a
men ace to the planet and all the inhabit-
ants and nations thereof. We kno w the
proclivity tow ard usurpation and abuse
by politicians in our own go vernment
under a constitution ble ssed with nu-
merous checks and balances and sepa-
rations of power. The UN Charter has
none of those imp ediments again st the
ac c um ulatio n of power. In fact, its
open-ended co nstruction, and the utter
disregard of its members for the "ru le of
law " they pretend to honor, virtually
guarantees a steady usurpation, concen-
tration , and centralization of power.
The Only Way
This is not a problem that can be
solved with tinkering. As we noted in
Global Tyranny ... Step by Step, "Wi th
the UN we are contending aga inst not
onl y the natural tendency tow ard the ac-
cumulation of power in government, but
also a lon g- st anding , or ganized co n-
spiracy of powerful force s to build,
pie ce by piece, step by step, an omnipo-
tent global government."
The John Birch Society was on the
mark dec ade s ago when it raised the cry
to "Get US out of the UN and get the
UN out of the United States." Now ,
more than ever , the accuracy and ur-
gency of that appea l should be clear. •
- WILLIAM F. J ASPER
THE NE W AMERICAN / NO VEMBER 29, 1993