OBAMA NOMINEES SIGNAL RADICAL PRO-U.N. AGENDA
By Cliff Kincaid
CNN’s “Late Edition” Sunday program featured the views of several observers, including so-called “Republican strategist” Ed Rollins, who could find nothing objectionable in any of President-elect Barack Obama’s controversial pro-U.N. nominations in the foreign policy arena. Rollins’ views were indistinguishable from those of Democratic Party strategist James Carville.
Host Wolf Blitzer commented, “It says a lot, Ed Rollins—correct me if I’m wrong—about his self-confidence, Barack Obama, that he’s bringing in these major figures with a lot of experience and a lot of personality and a lot of strong ideas, in the sense that he’s not afraid that they’re going to fight each other and fight him.”
Rollins replied, in part: “I think that’s one of the greatest compliments to him, is that he’s not afraid of smart, strong people around him.”
This is what passes for media scrutiny of Obama’s foreign policy picks.
In fact, there is much to question. Two nominees in particular—Senator Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice—were close associates of Brookings Institution president Strobe Talbott, an advocate of world government who was named as a trusted contact of the Russian Intelligence service while he was in the Clinton Administration. The charge, which was denied by Talbott, was featured in the blockbuster book, Comrade J, based on interviews with a prominent Russian defector from the U.N.
Talbott wrote a book this year, The Great Experiment, describing his own background in the pro-world government World Federalist Movement and naming a network of friends and close associates that includes former President Bill Clinton and billionaire leftist George Soros. The purpose of Talbott’s book is to promote “global governance,” a euphemism for world government. It is defined in the subtitle as “The Quest for a Global Nation.”
With the nominations of Clinton as Secretary of State and Rice as United Nations Ambassador, Obama’s global agenda is becoming clear. He wants to dramatically expand the power of the U.N., a corrupt global institution that is infested with spies for foreign and hostile interests. Obama’s record in the Senate included sponsorship of the pro-U.N. Global Poverty Act and co-sponsorship of the Jubilee Act. These two foreign aid spending measures alone would cost $920 billion to implement.
Obama also wants to pass several controversial U.N. treaties and says that he would consider joining the International Criminal Court, a U.N. institution that could prosecute American soldiers for “war crimes.”
But you wouldn’t know any of this if you had been watching CNN’s officially designated “Republican strategist” Ed Rollins on Sunday. “Hillary Clinton—16 years experience, eight as first lady, eight as a United States senator,” said Rollins. “You couldn’t pick a better person that has traveled the world and knows the players.” Asked for his opinion of Susan Rice and others, Rollins said, “Extraordinary talent. And I think the interesting thing is, even though I’m the opposite party, these are people that are widely respected by Republicans on the Hill.”
If Rollins is correct about Capitol Hill Republicans, it indicates that the Republican Party is in even worse shape than commonly believed.
Mrs. Clinton, as First Lady, was a cheerleader for the U.N. and made a video appearance at a 1999 conference sponsored by the World Federalist Association (WFA), a group openly dedicated to world government financed by global taxes. President Bill Clinton had previously sent a message to the group on the occasion of the WFA’s awarding of a “global governance” award to Talbott, who had been his Deputy Secretary of State in charge of Russian affairs.
A former Time magazine journalist, Talbott wrote favorably about world government in a notorious column entitled “The Birth of the Global Nation.”
In his message to the WFA, dated June 22, 1993, Bill Clinton noted that Norman Cousins, the WFA founder, had “worked for world peace and world government.” Clinton didn’t disagree with those goals, adding, “Best wishes...for future success.”
Hence, when Hillary Clinton gave her video-taped address in 1999, which was in honor of former “CBS Evening News” anchorman Walter Cronkite receiving the organization’s “global governance” award, there can be no doubt that she was aware of its pro-world government orientation.
Cronkite told the group that “we must strengthen the United Nations as a first step toward a world government” and that America must “yield up some of our sovereignty.” He said this could be accomplished by passing several U.N.-sponsored or supported treaties, including a treaty to ban land mines, the U.N. Law of the Sea Treaty, the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the treaty for a permanent International Criminal Court.
Rice, a former Clinton Assistant Secretary of State, has been close to Talbott as well. In fact, she worked with Talbott at the Brookings Institution until she started advising Obama’s presidential campaign and went “on leave” from the think tank. “I worked with Susan in government for eight years,” Talbott said, when she joined Brookings in 2002.
A Rhodes scholar and member of the Council on Foreign Relations, Rice served as a Brookings Senior Fellow in the Foreign Policy and Global Economy and Development Programs.
Rice favors establishment of a Department of Defense “peacekeeping institute” so that U.S. soldiers can be trained for U.N. missions. She is also on record in support of “a rapidly deployable international civilian police force,” presumably under the control of the U.N.; favors a United Nations military force to intervene in the Darfur region of Sudan; and is a believer in the man-made global warming theory.
She wrote a 2006 article in The National Interest blaming the terrorist attacks on America on September 11, 2001, on living conditions in oil-rich Saudi Arabia. “For years, Saudi Arabia, home to several 9/11 hijackers, experienced rapidly declining GDP [Gross Domestic Product],” she said.
The article, “The Threat of Global Poverty,” urged “far greater U.S. action to reduce global poverty” and called for the U.S. to spend 0.7 percent of Gross National Income on foreign aid, raising annual foreign aid spending by the U.S. to about $80 billion a year. This view was incorporated in Obama’s Global Poverty Act.
When she was running for president, Hillary Clinton told the American Society of International Law (ASIL) that she supported several controversial U.N. treaties, including the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), a measure that conservative women’s groups say would provide a cover for demanding abortion and even decriminalizing prostitution on a global basis.
For his part, Obama told ASIL that he supports Senate ratification of the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, the International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism, and CEDAW.
Regarding the International Criminal Court (ICC), Obama said, “I will consult thoroughly with our military commanders and also examine the track record of the Court before reaching a decision on whether the United States should become a State Party to the ICC.”
However, the World Federalist Association, which now calls itself Citizens for Global Solutions (CGS), favors Senate ratification of the pact.
After the November 4 elections, Don Kraus of CGS wrote under the headline, “Obama and the World Wins!” that “The election of Barack Obama and the global financial crisis have created unprecedented opportunities for global citizens to advance the vision of a well-governed world where nations work together to solve global problems.”
Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!
He also declared, “A new president and strong globalist majority in Congress gives our nation an opportunity to adopt a constructive policy towards the International Criminal Court. And the U.S. will be able to lead the way in a new round of global climate change negotiation. But this can only come about with if [sic] a passionate core of supporters pushes Congress and the White House to get the job done.”
© 2008 Cliff Kincaid - All Rights Reserved