"The concept of national sovereignty has been immutable,
indeed a sacred principle of international relations.
It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to
the new imperatives of global environmental cooperation.”
- UN Commission on Global Governance

The Final Phase – Global governance

Over the last decade, the United Nations has brazenly been reinventing itself into a global government, striving to obtain the legal framework, financial resources and grassroots support to implement its policies. As outlined in my preceding articles it has effectively seized legal and regulatory control in many countries, through Agenda 21, and developed a Constitution, the Earth Charter, for its vision on a transformed global interdependent society.

In 1992 the UN formed a Commission on Global Governance charged with devising a system of future global management. Second in charge of the Commission, and lead author of its report, was Maurice Strong, with whom readers will be quite familiar by now. After several years of “extension consultation” with “world leaders, philosophers, and futurologists” the Commission produced a report entitled “Our Global Neighbourhood.”

The report contained many highly controversial recommendations. It was warmly welcomed by activists within the UN but harshly criticised by libertarians around the world who claimed that its recommendations entailed abolishing national sovereignty and suppressing the freedom of individuals. The report specifically denied it was supporting "global government" preferring the term "global governance" but its contents reveal all elements required for a genuine government. Besides, a little reflection yields the following question: How can one have global "governance" without global "government"?

The following are excerpts from Our Global Neighbourhood:

"...countries are having to accept that in certain fields, sovereignty has to be exercised collectively, particularly in respect of the global commons."

"...the principle of sovereignty...must be further adapted to recognize changing realities."

"...there is a need to weigh a state's right to autonomy against its people's right to security."

"It is time to begin thinking about self-determination in a new context - the emerging context of a global neighbourhood rather than the traditional context of a world of separate states."

"The concept of global security must be broadened from the traditional focus of security of states to include the security of people and the security of the planet."

“Regionalism must precede globalism. We foresee a seamless system of governance from local communities, individual states, regional unions and up through to the United Nations itself.”

"The concept of national sovereignty has been immutable, indeed a sacred principle of international relations. It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives of global environmental cooperation. What is needed is recognition of the reality that...it is simply not feasible for sovereignty to be exercised unilaterally by individual nation-states, however powerful."

One of the primary thrusts of Our Global Neighbourhood was the formation of “regional blocs or unions to enhance political, economic and environmental security”. The report proposed that “Regional Neighbourhoods” be established modelled closely on the successful example of the European Union. Recent years have seen a large number of such regional unions emerging, or being strengthened, including the African Union, The Mediterranean Neighbourhood Partnership, the Gulf States Coalition, and the proposed North American Union. The report also recommended a gradual reduction in the sovereignty of independent states, arguing strongly in favour of international “courts of accountability”, binding global agreements and significantly enhancing the legal authority of the UN. Dr Robert Muller, Assistant Secretary-General of the UN, and co-founder of UNESCO, clearly describes this UN plan for a new 'World Union':

"In my view, after fifty years of service in the United Nations system, I perceive the utmost urgency and absolute necessity for proper Earth government ... There is no shadow of a doubt that the present political and economic systems - if systems they are - are no longer appropriate and will lead to the end of life evolution on this planet. We must therefore absolutely and urgently look for new ways. The less we lose time, the less species and nature will be destroyed.

Since the United Nations is the only world-wide, universal organization that is presently available, since it had fifty years of valuable experience and many successes, since it paved the way to proper Earth government, instead of putting it on the defensive, unjustified attacks and criticism, reduction of resources and non-payment of obligatory contributions, governments should honestly ask themselves if a better way would not be to consider a second generation United Nations upgraded by a true quantum jump into a proper Earth preserving and human well-being and justice ensuring organization of our planet.

The continental approach to a world union remains an important avenue. One could conceive five continental unions: the European Union, an American, an African, an Asian, and an Australian Union. A World Union could be constructed as a super-structure and common political, economic and environmental instrument to achieve these objectives. "
from - The Earth Charter in Action

This strategy appears to be based on the Club of Rome's proposal to divide the earth into 10 administrative regions which they outlined in their report Mankind at the Turning Point. You can find their original map in my previous article on that topic. Interestingly the UN is currently in the process of reviewing and reforming the organization, with particular emphasis on the Security Council. Several alternative models have been proposed which will make the Council more 'representative and democratic.' One of these, the Italian Model, proposes replacing the current 10 seats held by individual nations with 10 seats representing 'regional unions', 2 seats for Europe, 3 for Asia etc. You can compare the different proposals here.

Our Global Neighbourhood concluded with 12 key recommendations which I have listed below, and it was these that caused such a furore that the rest of the report barely received a comment. The UN claimed that the report was merely a “visioning exercise” intended to generate discussion and did not represent official UN policy goals. The report was effectively shelved and the Commission was disbanded:

1.  Consolidation of all international agencies under the direct oversight of the United Nations.
2.  Regulation by the United Nations of all transnational organizations and financial institutions.
3.  Independent source of revenue for the United Nations and taxes on aircraft and shipping fuels, and licensing the use of the global commons.
4.  Eliminate the veto power and the permanent member status on the Security Council.
5.  Authorize a United Nations ready reaction force.
6.  Require United Nations registration of all arms and the reduction of national armies as a part of a multilateral global security system under the authority of the United Nations.
7.  Require individual and national compliance with all United Nations Human Rights treaties.
8.  Activate the International Criminal Court, make the International Court of Justice compulsory for all nations, and give individuals the right to petition the courts to remedy social injustice.
9.  Create a new institution to establish economic and environmental security by ensuring sustainable development.
10.  Create a new international environmental court.
11.  Adopt a declaration that climate change is an essential global security interest that requires the creation of a high-level action team to allocate carbon emission based on equal per-capita rights.
12.  Cancellation of all debt owed by the poorest nations, global poverty reductions, and for equitable sharing of global resources as allocated by the United Nations.

One of Kofi Annan’s first actions when he became Secretary-General of the United Nations was to appoint Maurice Strong as his Senior Policy Advisor. He then tasked Strong with preparing a plan to “reform the institution of the United Nations”. In 2002 Strong produced a 95-page document, entitled Renewing the United Nations: A Programme for Reform, which was basically a step-by-step program to implement many of the recommendations of Our Global Neighbourhood. Many of these reforms have been slowly working their way through UN system. However, after Maurice Strong was indicted for his involvement in the Iraq Oil-for-Food scandal he was forced by pressure from the United States to resign from his UN roles.

The reforms he designed are being implemented by the UN but they have not been the transformation that he desired. It is the opinion of this author that the current bureaucratic and unwieldy structure of the United Nations is unlikely to ever deliver the “global interdependent society” that the Earth Charter, and the Green Movement, is fervently calling for. Most members of the general population are not motivated to change by mere words in a charter, and the majority are likely to resent further intrusion into their lives.

True fundamental change is most often born out of crisis. A common creed among the Green Agenda activists has long been “order out of chaos”. They believe that people from all nations will literally beg for their New World Order if it can promise safety and security at a time when people feel under personal imminent threat. To once again quote the famous words of David Rockefeller “A New World Order is coming … all we need is the right major crisis.” And remember, it was the Rockefeller family that donated the land on which the United Nations now stands.

Thus it seems far more likely that the UN itself will be transformed, most likely after some major international crisis which the UN is unable to prevent or respond to adequately. After all the League of Nations was born after the first truly global crisis, World War 1, and then it was “reformed” into the United Nations following World War 2. However there are some serious impediments to the implementation of the final phase of the Global Green Agenda:

1.  Evangelical Christianity – True Bible-believing Christians are very likely to resist the imposition of any system of global governance, especially if it based around an earth-centred religion. Christians realise that this earth is temporary and will soon pass away. The Bible specifically warns them that humans will eventually end up “worshipping the creature instead of the Creator.” However the leaders of certain christian denominations seem to have no problem with the Agenda. Pope Benedict proclaimed, during Live Earth that “environmental degradation is a sin, and Global Warming is a defilement of the Divine Will.”

2.  Islam – Moslems are also likely to fiercely resist any New World Order that mandates a form of earth-worship. There are more than one billion followers of Islam and they show remarkably little enthusiasm for accommodating New Age eco-theology into their doctrines. Hence it is likely that the power of Islam will have to be shattered before the Global Green Agenda can be fulfilled.

3.  The United States of America – The USA once fiercely defended it's national sovereignty but President Obama seems eager to sign up to a binding global climate treaty that would impoverish his country. He has filled his cabinet with a stellar cast of climate alarmists, including mega-doomers John Holdren and Steven Chu.

4.  Communist China – The totalitarian Communist Party of China is very unlikely to relinquish much of its power to a new transformed United Nations. However China is currently treading a precarious path. It’s economic miracle is in fact a house of cards built on slave labour and artificially managed conditions. China is very vulnerable to an economic collapse which could lead to a popular revolution or bankrupt the country.

5.  Authoritarian Russia – Putin has established a tight authoritarian grip on Russia and is unlikely to bow willingly to a resurrected UN. However Putin could soon be gone and a new Gorbachev could arise. Another possibility is that Russia could also once again lose its position as a global power broker through economic problems or war.

So, to quickly summarise, the activists behind the Global Green Agenda have established regulatory control in many societies through Agenda 21, they have written a Constitution for their transformed global society with the Earth Charter, and they have even described, in detail, how their new global system will be operate in Our Global Neighbourhood. However several obstacles must be removed before the final phase of the Agenda, global governance based on a system of earth-worship, can be fulfilled.

Firstly, a situation must arise where otherwise apathetic, or even hostile, members of society will beg for a new global system. They must feel so personally threatened that they will eagerly give up their personal liberty for the promise of safety and security. Our Global Neighbourhood said the surrender of liberty is "a principle that will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the imperatives of global environmental cooperation." In my opinion Global Warming is currently being used as a conditioning tool with its fervent call for global unity to save a wounded planet.

Secondly, certain nations and religious groups are unlikely to accept a new global system that involves the loss of national sovereignty, the loss of individual liberty, and reverence for the earth as a divine being. So what events could possibly bring about the conditions that would allow the emergence of a one world government? I will briefly describe what I consider to be the most likely scenario.

Ezekiel 38 and 39 describe an attack on Israel by a coalition of Islamic nations and Russia. It seems that this conflict also involves other parts of the globe. The invading forces are completely destroyed by God’s divine intervention. The military power of Russia is annihilated, and Islam, which promised its believers a final ultimate victory, is shattered. The world economy lies in total ruin. Significant areas of the planet are devastated. People everywhere are distraught and in despair. Emergency meetings are held at the United Nations where the blueprints for a new global system are presented and quickly adopted.

“We need a new beginning” they will say, “We all must change and renounce our old destructive ways.” Amazingly everything is already in place. The Earth Charter would be endorsed as a Planetary Constitution and the Security Council replaced with some new 'United Earth Council.' The world would be divided into ten administrative regions with each one represented by an Earth Councillor. The blame for the recent conflict, and many of the worlds other problems, would be placed firmly on traditional religions. They would be swiftly outlawed and replaced by reverence for the earth itself. “We nearly destroyed Gaia!” they would say, “We nearly destroyed our own Mother!”

As David Rockefeller stated, “all we need is the right crisis”. Everything is now in place. They are just building momentum and waiting for the storm they know is coming. You don’t need to look in the shadows for the coming world government. It is standing right before your eyes. When they bring “order out of chaos” the United Nations will be transformed and the final global empire will be born.