💾 Archived View for gemini.spam.works › mirrors › textfiles › law › pub_7277.asc captured on 2020-10-31 at 17:16:31.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
FREEDOM FROM WAR
THE UNITED STATES PROGRAM
FOR GENERAL AND COMPLETE
DISARMAMENT IN A PEACEFUL
WORLD
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DEPARTMENT OF STATE PUBLICATION 7277
Disarmament Series 5
Released September 1961
Office of Public Services
BUREAU OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS
INTRODUCTION
The revolutionary development of modern weapons within a world divided
by serious ideological differences has produced a crisis in human
history. In order to overcome the danger of nuclear war now confronting
mankind, the United States has introduced at the Sixteenth General
Assembly of the United Nations a Program for General and Complete
Disarmament in a Peaceful World.
This new program provides for the progressive reduction of the
war-making capabilities of nations and the simultaneous strengthening of
international institutions to settle disputes and maintain the peace. It
sets forth a series of comprehensive measures which can and should be
taken in order to bring about a world in which there will be freedom
from war and security for all states. It is based on three principles
deemed essential to the achievement of practical progress in the
disarmament field:
First, there must be immediate disarmament action:
A strenuous and uninterrupted effort must be made toward the goal of
general and complete disarmament; at the same time, it is important that
specific measures be put into effect as soon as possible.
Second, all disarmament obligations must be subject to effective
international controls:
The control organization must have the manpower, facilities, and
effectiveness to assure that limitations or reductions take place as
agreed. It must also be able to certify to all states that retained
forces and armaments do not exceed those permitted at any stage of the
disarmament process.
Third, adequate peace-keeping machinery must be established:
There is an inseparable relationship between the scaling down of
national armaments on the one hand and the building up of international
peace-keeping machinery and institutions on the other. Nations are
unlikely to shed their means of self-protection in the absence of
alternative ways to safeguard their legitimate interests. This can only
be achieved through the progressive strengthening of international
institutions under the United Nations and by creating a United Nations
Peace Force to enforce the peace as the disarmament process proceeds.
---------
There follows a summary of the principal provisions of the United States
Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World. The
full text of the program is contained in an appendix to this pamphlet.
FREEDOM FROM WAR
THE UNITED STATES PROGRAM FOR
GENERAL AND COMPLETE DISARM-
AMENT IN A PEACEFUL WORLD
SUMMARY
DISARMAMENT GOAL AND OBJECTIVES
The over-all goal of the United States is a free, secure, and peaceful
world of independent states adhering to common standards of justice and
international conduct and subjecting the use of force to the rule of
law; a world which has achieved general and complete disarmament under
effective international control; and a world in which adjustment to
change takes place in accordance with the principles of the United
Nations.
In order to make possible the achievement of that goal, the program sets
forth the following specific objectives toward which nations should
direct their efforts:
The disbanding of all national armed forces and the prohibition of their
reestablishment in any form whatsoever other than those required to
preserve internal order and for contributions to a United Nations Peace
Force;
The elimination from national arsenals of all armaments, including all
weapons of mass destruction and the means for their delivery, other than
those required for a United Nations Peace Force and for maintaining
internal order;
The institution of effective means for the enforcement of international
agreements, and for the maintenance of peace in accordance with the
principles of the United Nations;
The establishment and effective operation of an International
Disarmament Organization within the framework of the United Nations to
insure compliance at all times with all disarmament obligations.
TASK OF NEGOTIATING STATES
The negotiating states are called upon to develop the program into a
detailed plan for general and complete disarmament and to continue their
efforts without interruption until the whole program has been achieved.
To this end, they are to seek the widest possible area of agreement at
the earliest possible date. At the same time, and without prejudice to
progress on the disarmament program, they are to seek agreement on those
immediate measures that would contribute to the common security of
nations and that could facilitate and form port of the total program.
GOVERNING PRINCIPLES
The program sets forth a series of general principles to guide the
negotiating states in their work. These make clear that:
As states relinquish their arms, the United Nations must be
progressively strengthened in order to improve its capacity to assure
international security and the peaceful settlement of disputes;
Disarmament must proceed as rapidly as possible, until it is completed,
in stages containing balanced, phased, and safeguarded measures;
Each measure and stage should be carried out in an agreed period of
time, with transition from one stage to the next to take place as soon
as all measures in the preceding stage have been carried out and
verified and as soon as necessary arrangements for verification of the
next stage have been made;
Inspection and verification must establish both that nations carry out
scheduled limitations or reductions and that they do not retain armed
forces and armaments in excess of those permitted at any stage of the
disarmament process; and
Disarmament must take place in a manner that will not affect adversely
the security of any state.
DISARMAMENT STAGES
The program provides for progressive disarmament steps to take place in
three stages and for the simultaneous strengthening of international
institution.
FIRST STAGE
The first stage contains measures which would significantly reduce the
capabilities of nations to wage aggressive war. Implementation of this
stage would mean that:
The nuclear threat would be reduced:
All states would have adhered to a treaty effectively prohibiting the
testing of nuclear weapons.
The production of fissionable materials for use in weapons would be
stopped and quantities of such materials from past production would be
converted to non-weapons uses.
States owning nuclear weapons would not relinquish control of such
weapons to any nation not owning them and would not transmit to any such
nation information or material necessary for their manufacture.
States not owning nuclear weapons would not manufacture them or attempt
to obtain control of such weapons belonging to other states.
A Commission of Experts would be established to report on the
feasibility and means for the verified reduction and eventual
elimination of nuclear weapons stockpiles.
Strategic delivery vehicles would be reduced:
Strategic nuclear weapons delivery vehicles of specified categories and
weapons designed to counter such vehicles would be reduced to agreed
levels by equitable and balanced steps; their production would be
discontinued or limited; their testing would be limited or halted.
Arms and armed forces would be reduced:
The armed forces of the United States and the Soviet Union would be
limited to 2.1 million men each (with appropriate levels not exceeding
that amount for other militarily significant states); levels of
armaments would be correspondingly reduced and their production would be
limited.
An Experts Commission would be established to examine and report on the
feasibility and means of accomplishing verifiable reduction and eventual
elimination of all chemical, biological and radiological weapons.
Peaceful use of outer space would be promoted:
The placing in orbit or stationing in outer space of weapons of mass
destruction would be prohibited.
States would give advance notification of space vehicle and military
launchings.
U.N. peace-keeping powers would be strengthened:
Measures would be taken to develop and strengthen United Nations
arrangements for arbitration, for the development of international law,
and for the establishment in Stage II of a permanent U.N. Peace Force.
An International Disarmament Organization would be established for
effective verification of the disarmament program:
Its functions would be expanded progressively as disarmament proceeds.
It would certify to all states that agreed reductions have taken place
and that retained forces and armaments do not exceed permitted levels.
It would determine the transition from one stage to the next.
States would be committed to measures to reduce international tension
and to protect against the chance of war by accident, miscalculation, or
surprise attack:
States would be committed to refrain from the threat or use of any type
of armed force contrary to the principles of the U.N. Charter and to
refrain from indirect aggression and subversion against any country.
A U.N. peace observation group would be available to investigate any
situation which might constitute a threat to or breach of the peace.
States would be committed to give advance notice of major military
movements which might cause alarm, observation posts would be
established to report on concentrations and movements of military forces.
SECOND STAGE
The second stage contains a series of measures which would bring within
sight a world in which there would be freedom from war. Implementation
of all measures in the second stage would mean:
Further substantial reductions in the armed forces, armaments, and
military establishments of states, including strategic nuclear weapons
delivery vehicles and countering weapons;
Further development of methods for the peaceful settlement of disputes
under the United Nations;
Establishment of a permanent international peace force within the United
Nations;
Depending on the findings of an Experts Commission, a halt in the
production of chemical, bacteriological, and radiological weapons and a
reduction of existing stocks or their conversion to peaceful uses;
On the basis of the findings of an Experts Commission, a reduction of
stocks of nuclear weapons;
The dismantling or the conversion to peaceful uses of certain military
bases and facilities wherever located; and
The strengthening and enlargement of the International Disarmament
Organization to enable it to verify the steps taken in Stage II and to
determine the transition to Stage III.
THIRD STAGE
During the third stage of the program, the states of the world, building
on the experience and confidence gained in successfully implementing the
measures of the first two stages, would take final steps toward the goal
of a world in which:
States would retain only those forces, non-nuclear armaments, and
establishments required for the purpose of maintaining internal order;
they would also support and provide agreed manpower for a U.N. Peace
Force.
The U.N. Peace Force, equipped with agreed types and quantities of
armaments, would be fully functioning.
The peace keeping capabilities of the United nations would be
sufficiently strong and the obligations of all states under such
arrangements sufficiently far-reaching as to assure peace and the just
settlement of differences in a disarmed world.
APPENDIX
DECLARATION ON DISARMAMENT
THE UNITED STATES PROGRAM FOR
GENERAL AND COMPLETE DISARMA-
MENT IN A PEACEFUL WORLD
The nations of the world,
Conscious of the crisis in human history produced by the revolutionary
development of modern weapons within a world divided by serious
ideological differences;
Determined to save present and succeeding generations from the scourge
of war and the dangers and burdens of the arms race and to create
conditions in which all peoples can strive freely and peacefully to
fulfill their basic aspirations;
Declare their goal to be: A free, secure, and peaceful world of
independent states adhering to common standards of justice and
international conduct and subjecting the use of force to the rule of
law; a world where adjustment to change takes place in accordance with
the principles of the United Nations; a world where there shall be a
permanent state of general and complete disarmament under effective
international control and where the resources of nations shall be
devoted of man's material, cultural, and spiritual advance;
Set forth as the objectives of a program of general and complete
disarmament in a peaceful world:
(a) The disbanding of all national armed forces and the prohibition of
their reestablishment in any form whatsoever other than those required
of preserve internal order and for contributions to a United Nations
Peace Force;
(b) the elimination from national arsenals of all armaments, including
all weapons of mass destruction and the means for their delivery, other
than those required for a United Nations Peace Force and for maintaining
internal order;
(c) The establishment and effective operation within the framework of
the United Nations to ensure compliance at all times with all
disarmament obligations;
(d) The institution of effective means for the enforcement of
international agreements, for the settlement of disputes, and for the
maintenance of peace in accordance with the principles of the United
Nations.
Call on the negotiating states:
(a) To develop the outline program set forth below into an agreed plan
for general and complete disarmament and to continue their efforts
without interruption until the whole program has been achieved;
(b) To this end to seek to attain the widest possible area of agreement
at the earliest possible date;
(c) Also to seek - without prejudice to progress on the disarmament
program - agreement on those immediate measures that would contribute to
the common security of nations and that could facilitate and form a part
of that program.
Affirm that disarmament negotiations should be guided by the following
principles:
(a) Disarmament shall take place as rapidly as possible until it is
completed in stages containing balanced, phased and safe-guarded
measures, with each measure and stage to be carried out in an agreed
period of time.
(b) Compliance with all disarmament obligations shall be effectively
verified from their entry into force. Verification arrangements shall be
instituted progressively and in such a manner as to verify not only that
agreed limitations or reductions take place but also that retained armed
forces and armaments do not exceed agreed levels at any stage.
(c) Disarmament shall take place in a manner that will not affect
adversely the security of any state, whether or not a party to an
international agreement or treaty.
(d) As stated relinquish their arms, the United Nations shall be
progressively strengthened in order to improve its capacity to assure
international security and the peaceful settlement of differences as
will as to facilitate the development of international cooperation an
common tasks for the benefit of mankind.
(e) Transition from one stage of disarmament to the next shall take
place as soon as all the measures in the preceding stage have been
carried out and effective verification is continuing and as soon as the
arrangements that have been agreed to be necessary for the next stage
have been instituted.
Agree upon the following outline program for achieving general and
complete disarmament:
STAGE I
A. To Establish an International Disarmament Organization:
(a) An International Disarmament Organization (IDO) shall be established
within the framework of the United Nations upon entry into force of the
agreement. Its functions shall be expanded progressively as required for
the effective verification of the disarmament program.
(b) The IDO shall have: (1) a General Conference of all the parties; (2)
a Commission consisting of representatives of all the major powers as
permanent members as permanent members and certain other states on a
rotating basis; and (3) an Administrator who will administer the
Organization subject to the direction of the Commission and who will
have the authority, staff, and finances adequate to assure effective
impartial implementation of the functions of the Organization.
(c) The IDO shall: (1) ensure compliance with the obligations undertaken
by verifying the execution of measures agreed upon; (2) assist the
states in developing the details of agreed further verification and
disarmament measures; (3) provide for the establishment of such bodies
as may be necessary for working out the details of further measures
provided for in the program and for such other expert study groups as
may be required to give continuous study to the problems of disarmament;
(4) receive reports on the progress of disarmament and verification
arrangements and determine the transition from one stage to the next.
B. To Reduce Armed Forces and Armaments:
(a) Force levels shall be limited to 2.1 million each for the U.S. and
U.S.S.R. and to appropriate levels not exceeding 2.1 million each for
all other militarily significant states. Reductions to the agreed levels
will proceed by equitable, proportionate, and verified steps.
(b) Levels of armaments of prescribed types shall be reduced by
equitable and balanced steps. The reductions shall be accomplished by
transfers of armaments to depots supervised by the IDO. When, at
specified periods during the Stage I reduction process, the states party
to the agreement have agreed that the armaments and armed forces are at
prescribed levels, the armaments in depots shall be destroyed or
converted to peaceful uses.
(c) The production of agreed types of armaments shall be limited.
(d) A Chemical, Biological, Radiological (CBR) Experts Commission shall
be established within the IDO for the purpose of examining and reporting
on the feasibility and means for accomplishing the verifiable reduction
and eventual elimination of CBR weapons stockpiles and the halting of
their production.
C. To Contain and Reduce the Nuclear Threat:
(a) States that have not acceded to a treaty effectively prohibiting the
testing of nuclear weapons shall do so.
(b) The production of fissionable materials for use in weapons shall be
stopped.
(c) Upon the cessation of production of fissionable materials for use in
weapons, agreed initial quantities of fissionable materials from past
production shall be transferred to non-weapons purposes.
(d) Any fissionable materials transferred between countries for peaceful
uses of nuclear energy shall be subject to appropriate safeguards to be
developed in agreement with the IAEA.
(e) States owning nuclear weapons shall not relinquish control of such
weapons to any nation not owning them and shall not transmit to any such
nation information or material necessary for their manufacture. States
not owning nuclear weapons shall not manufacture such weapons, attempt
to obtain control of such weapons belonging to other states, or seek or
receive information or materials necessary for their manufacture.
(f) A Nuclear Experts Commission consisting of representatives of the
nuclear states shall be established within the IDO for the purpose of
examining and reporting on the feasibility and means for accomplishing
the verified reduction and eventual elimination of nuclear weapons
stockpiles.
D. To Reduce Strategic Nuclear Weapons Delivery Vehicles:
(a) Strategic nuclear weapons delivery vehicles in specified categories
and agreed types of weapons designed to counter such vehicles shall be
reduced to agreed levels by equitable and balanced steps. The reduction
shall be accomplished in each step by transfer to depots supervised by
the IDO of vehicles that are in excess of levels agreed upon for each
step. At specified periods during the Stage I reduction process, the
vehicles that have been placed under supervision of the IDO shall be
destroyed or converted to peaceful uses.
(b) Production of agreed categories of strategic nuclear weapons
delivery vehicles and agreed types of weapons designed to counter such
vehicles shall be discontinued or limited.
(c) Testing of agreed categories of strategic nuclear weapons delivery
vehicles and agreed types of weapons designed to counter such vehicles
shall be limited or halted.
E. To Promote the Peaceful Use of Outer Space:
(a) The placing into orbit or stationing in outer space of weapons
capable of producing mass destruction shall be prohibited.
(b) States shall give advance notification to participating states and
to the IDO of launchings of space vehicles and missiles, together with
the track of the vehicle.
F. To reduce the Risks of War by Accident, Miscalculation, and Surprise
Attack:
(a) States shall give advance notification to the participating states
and to the IDO of major military movements and maneuvers, on a scale as
may be agreed, which might give rise to misinterpretation or cause alarm
and induce countermeasures. The notification shall include the
geographic areas to be used and the nature, scale and time span of the
event.
(b) There shall be established observation posts at such locations as
major ports, railway centers, motor highways, and air bases to report on
concentrations and movements of military forces.
(c) There shall also be established such additional inspection
arrangements to reduce the danger of surprise attack as may be agreed.
(d) An international commission shall be established immediately within
the IDO to examine and make recommendations of the possibility of
further measures to reduce the risks of nuclear war by accident,
miscalculation, or failure of communication.
G. To Keep the Peace:
(a) States shall reaffirm their obligations under the U.N. Charter to
refrain from the threat or use of any type of armed force - including
nuclear, conventional, or CBR - contrary to the principles of the U.N.
Charter.
(b) States shall agree to refrain from indirect aggression and
subversion against any country.
(c) States shall use all appropriate processes for the peaceful
settlement of disputes and shall seek within the United Nations further
arrangements for the peaceful settlement of international disputes and
for the codification and progressive development of international law.
(d) States shall develop arrangements in Stage I for the establishment
in Stage II of a U.N. Peace Force.
(e) A U.N. peace observation group shall be staffed with a standing
cadre of observers who could be despatched to investigate any situation
which might constitute a threat to or breach of the peace.
STAGE III
A. International Disarmament Organization:
The powers and responsibilities of the IDO shall be progressively
enlarged in order to give it the capabilities to verify the measures
undertaken in Stage II.
B. To Further Reduce Armed Forces and Armaments:
(a) Levels of forces for the U.S., U.S.S.R., and other militarily
significant states shall be further reduced by substantial amounts to
agreed levels in equitable and balanced steps.
(b) Levels of armaments of prescribed types shall be further reduced by
equitable and balanced steps. The reduction shall be accomplished by
transfers of armaments to depots supervised by the IDO. When, at
specified periods during the Stage II reduction process, the parties
have agreed that the armaments and armed forces are at prescribed
levels, the armaments in depots shall be destroyed or converted to
peaceful uses.
(c) There shall be further agreed restrictions on the production of
armaments.
(d) Agreed military bases and facilities wherever they are located shall
be dismantled or converted to peaceful uses.
(e) Depending upon the findings of the Experts Commission on CBR
weapons, the production of CBR weapons shall be halted, existing stocks
progressively reduced, and the resulting excess quantities destroyed or
converted to peaceful uses.
C. To Further Reduce the Nuclear Threat:
Stocks of nuclear weapons shall be progressively reduced to the minimum
levels which can be agreed upon as a result of the findings of the
nuclear Experts Commission; the resulting excess of fissionable material
shall be transferred to peaceful purposes.
D. To Further Reduce Strategic Nuclear Weapons Delivery Vehicles:
Further reductions in the stocks of strategic nuclear weapons delivery
vehicles and agreed types of weapons designed to counter such vehicles
shall be carried out in accordance with the procedure outlined in Stage
I.
E. To Keep the Peace:
During Stage II, states shall develop further the peace-keeping
processes of the united Nations, to the end that the United Nations can
effectively in Stage III deter or suppress any threat or use of force in
violation of the purposes and principles of the united Nations:
(a) States shall agree upon strengthening the structure, authority, and
operation of the united Nations so as to assure that the United Nations
will be able effectively to protect states against threats to or
breaches of the peace.
(b) The U.N. Peace Force shall be established and progressively
strengthened.
(c) States shall also agree upon further improvements and developments
in rules of international conduct and in processes for peaceful
settlement of disputes and differences.
STAGE III
By the time Stage II has been completed, the confidence produced through
a verified disarmament program, the acceptance of rules of peaceful
international behavior, and the development of strengthened
international peace-keeping processes within the framework of the U.N.
should have reached a point where the states of the world can move
forward to Stage III. In Stage III progressive controlled disarmament
and continuously developing principles and procedures of international
law would proceed to a point where no state would have the military
power to challenge the progressively strengthened U.N. Peace Force
(emphasis added) and all international disputes would be settled
according to the agreed principles of international conduct.
The progressive steps to be taken during the final phase of the
disarmament program would be directed toward the attainment of a world
in which:
(a) States would retain only those forces, non-nuclear armaments, and
establishments required for the purpose of maintaining internal order;
they would also support and provide agreed manpower for a U.N. Peace
Force.
(b) The U.N. Peace Force, equipped with agreed types and quantities of
armaments, would be fully functioning.
(c) The manufacture of armaments would be prohibited except for those of
agreed types and quantities to be used by the U.N. Peace Force and those
required to maintain internal order. All other armaments would be
destroyed or converted to peaceful purposes.
(d) The peace-keeping capabilities of the United Nations would be
sufficiently strong and the obligations of all states under such
arrangements sufficiently far-reaching as to assure peace and the just
settlement of differences in a disarmed world.
The end of Publication 7277.
THE JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY BULLETIN
Less Government, More Responsibility, And - With God's Help -
A Better World
No. 383 April 1991
WHOSE SIDE ARE THEY ON?
by
John F. McManus
In the interest of peace, many Americans have been persuaded to support
disarmament programs and to create as a substitute for each nation's
military a United Nations Peace Force. Most feel certain that their own
rights and the independence of their nation would in no way be placed in
jeopardy. But there is a vital question few seem willing or able to ask:
Who would be left to restrain the all-powerful United Nations?
For his Secretaries of State and Defense, President John F. Kennedy
selected Dean Rusk and Robert S. McNamara. Each was a member of the New
York-based Council on Foreign Relations, a private organization formed
in 1921 for the purpose of bringing about a one-world government.
Only nine months into his administration - on September 25, 1961, to be
precise - Mr. Kennedy travelled to UN headquarters in New York to
present a proposal entitled Freedom From War: The United States Program
For General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World. The work of
the Rusk-led State Department, with the willing acquiescence of the
McNamara-led Defense Department, the proposal was published as
"Department of State Publication 7277."
In his remarks before the UN, President Kennedy asked for a commitment
from all nations "not to an arms race, but to a peace race - to advance
together step by step, stage by stage, until general and complete
disarmament has been achieved." He did not get any such commitment, yet
the United States embarked on the Kennedy-launched program.
Freedom From War (or "7277," as it is frequently called) proposes three
stages of disarmament ending with the transfer of the armed forces of
our nation to the United Nations. As Senator Joseph Clark of
Pennsylvania approvingly reminded his colleagues in a Senate speech on
March 1, 1962, this program is "the fixed, determined and approved
policy of the government of the United States."
A reading of the document itself confirms that disarmament "would
proceed to a point where no state would have the military power to
challenge the progressively strengthened U.N. Peace Force...." In other
words, the only significant military power left in the world would be
the United Nations.
The provisions of the treacherous proposal would actually leave our
nation defenseless before the UN, and before any other nation that
didn't similarly disarm. And it would place the UN's superior military
power in the hands of the UN's Undersecretary for Political and Security
Council Affairs, the overseer of all UN military activity. This post, by
virtue of a secret agreement concluded at the founding of the UN (an
arrangement later confirmed by an astonished former UN Secretary General
named Trygve Lie), has always been held by a communist. The man who
holds it today, is Vasiliy S. Safronchuk of the Soviet Union. Unless our
leaders are stopped, they will succeed in turning over our military
forces to the United Nations where they will be controlled by a
communist.
********************************************
Since the UN was created, there have been 14 Undersecretaries for
Political and Security Council Affairs. All have been communists, and
all but one have come from the Soviet Union.
1946-1949 Arkady Sobolev 1963-1965 V.P. Suslov
(USSR) (USSR)
1949-1953 Konstantin Zinchenko 1965-1968 Alexei E. Nesterenko
(USSR) (USSR)
1953-1954 Ilya Tchernychev 1968-1973 Leonid N. Kutakov
(USSR) (USSR)
1954-1957 Dragoslav Protitch 1973-1978 Arkady N. Shevchenko
(Yugoslavia) (USSR)
1958-1960 Anatoly Dobrynin 1978-1981 Mikhail D. Styenko
(USSR) (USSR)
1960-1962 Georgy Arkadev 1981-1986 Viacheslav A. Ustinov
(USSR) (USSR)
1962-1963 E.D. Kiselev 1987- Vasiliy S. Safronchuk
(USSR) (USSR)
********************************************
Subverting Our Sovereignty
Are our leaders really implementing this plan? Yes, they are! The
Nuclear Test Ban Treaty is part of it; the treaty banning the use of
outer space for nuclear weapons is part of it; the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty is part of it; and so is the Intermediate
Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty, signed by President Reagan and Soviet
leader Gorbachev and ratified by the U.S. Senate in 1988.
When Freedom From War was first made public, many startled Americans
tried to obtain a copy. It was quickly declared "out of print" by
federal authorities. Then, it was superseded in April 1962 by a "more
precise" statement of the U.S. disarmament policy in a document entitled
Blueprint For the Peace Race: Outline of Basic Provisions of a Treaty on
General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World.
Presented formally to an 18-nation UN Committee on Disarmament meeting
in Geneva, the foreword to the Blueprint states that it doesn't cancel
the plans given in Freedom From War. It merely "elaborates and extends
the proposals of September 25," the date that Freedom From War was
unveiled at UN headquarters by President Kennedy. In complete accord
with Freedom From War, the Blueprint spells out its overall goal in the
third of its three stages: "The Parties to the Treaty would
progressively strengthen the United Nations Peace Force established in
Stage II until it had sufficient armed forces and armaments so that no
state could challenge it."
When questioned about the commitment of the United States to the
Blueprint, A. Richard Richstein, General Council of the U.S. Arms
Control and Disarmament Agency, stated in a May 11, 1982 letter that
"the United States has never formally withdrawn this proposal." In
January 1991, William Nary, the official; historian of the Arms Control
and Disarmament Agency, confirmed again that "the proposal has not been
withdrawn." Mr. Nary also confirmed that "certain features of it have
been incorporated into subsequent disarmament agreements."
In summary, the plan to disarm the United States in favor of an
all-powerful United Nations Peace Force is unfolding. It calls for
relinquishing virtually all of our nation's military forces to a UN
command whose leader, by agreement between the U.S. and the USSR during
the founding sessions leading to the creation of the UN, will always be
a communist. In the end, "no state could challenge" the communist-led
military power of the United Nations.
This supposed "disarmament" program, therefore, is not as much about
weapons elimination as it is about weapons distribution and control. If
the program succeeds, only the UN and those nations skirting UN weapons
prohibitions will be armed. It is remarkably similar to the drive that
would outlaw private ownership of firearms. (emphasis added) If that
drive should ever succeed, only the government and those who are outlaws
would possess guns. Law-abiding citizens would be at their mercy in the
latter case; law-abiding nations would be at the mercy of the UN and
outlaw nations in the other.
Background To This Situation
How did we get into such a situation? Who are the individuals promoting
such a suicidal proposal? Why is Congress going along instead of
repudiating this dangerous program? How do we get out of it before it's
too late?
At the founding of the United Nations in 1945, the delegation from the
United States included a young State Department official named Alger
Hiss. Widely acclaimed for both his ability and his enthusiasm for the
world organization, he rose to become the acting secretary general of
the founding UN conference. As a member of the steering and executive
committees of the conference, he played a major role in drafting the UN
Charter. He also helped to staff the U.S. delegation and was chosen by
his peers for the prestigious task of personally transporting the
Charter to the President and to the Senate for ratification.
Alger Hiss, however, was later found to have been a secret communist,
more loyal to a foreign power than to the nation of his birth. A 1950
State department document named 15 other key U.S. government officials
who were responsible for planning the creation of the UN. They, too,
were subsequently named as secret communists by official agencies.
************************************************
Five years after the 1945 founding of the United nations, official
records released by the State Department# identified the individuals
listed below as key U.S. contributors to the planning for the world
organization. Each of the 16 was subsequently identified in sworn
testimony before U.S. government agencies as a secret communist.
Alger Hiss Nathan Gregory Silvermaster
Harry Dexter White Harold Glasser
Virginius Frank Coe Victor Perlo
Noel Field Irving Kaplan
Laurence Duggan Solomon Adler
Henry Julian Wadleigh Abraham George Silverman
John Carter Vincent William K. Ullman
David Weintraub William H. Taylor
# Postwar Foreign Policy Preparation, 1939-1945, U.S. State Department
************************************************
Not only was the U.S. represented by a sizable number of communists, our
nation's delegation also contained 43 individuals who were then or soon
would be members of America's leading Establishment organization, the
privately-run Council on Foreign Relations. Alger Hiss himself was both
a communist and a CFR member as was another U.S. member of the UN
planning team, Lauchlin Currie. As communists, and as CFR members, they
worked diligently to bring the world government into existence, and they
labored just as hard to have the United States a part of it.
There were, of course, delegations from the USSR and the other founding
nations. These were made up of communists, socialists, one-worlders, and
easily manipulated starry-eyed dreamers. All were committed to world
government at the expense of national sovereignty. All wanted the United
Nations to be supreme. There was to be no more war as soon as the United
Nations was given sufficient power, especially unchallenged military
power, to keep the peace.
For the past 45 years, intense pro-UN propaganda has convinced many
Americans (and many others as well) that the words "peace" and "United
Nations" are virtually interchangeable. Anyone who opposes the UN risks
being labelled a warmonger. Those who support the UN customarily find
themselves showered with accolades.
Peace is so universally desired that almost anything seems reasonable to
achieve it. Proposals to empower the UN with the world's dominant
military capability have received widespread support. At first glance,
the idea may seem to have some merit. A world police force formed to
keep the peace. Wouldn't it be wonderful!
Suppose, however, that the unchallengeable power of the United Nations
fill into the wrong hands? Suppose it ended up at the disposal of Alger
Hiss and his comrades? Couldn't it be used to impose a tyranny on the
rest of mankind? Wouldn't any would-be tyrant gravitate to the
organization?
Even if the UN wire not run by communists, socialists, and one-worlders
who despise nationhood, wouldn't the awesome power we are talking about
be sufficient to corrupt anyone? Who would be able to bridle any UN
leaders who had been given greater power than anyone else on earth?
Don't Discard Americanism
It can't be said too often that America is unique. Our nation began with
the thunderous assertion in the Declaration of Independence that
"men...are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights."
According to the founding premise of this nation, rights come from God,
not from government. And the declaration then declared that governments
are formed solely "to secure those rights." That's all! Secure God-given
rights, not provide for wants, redistribute the wealth, or make
dependent serfs out of the people.
With the marvelous foundation laid in the Declaration, the men who
formed this unique and wonderful nation the wrote a Constitution whose
sole purpose was to govern the government, not the people. America was
expected to be a nation where the government was limited by law and the
people were limited by freely accepted moral codes such as those found
in the Ten Commandments.
Nothing like America had ever existed in all history. And did this
nation prosper! Millions left the old world to come here penniless - not
to be cared for but to enjoy freedom and opportunity. America became the
hope of the world - even for these who were not fortunate enough to live
within our borders.
The United Nations, on the other hand, has no place for God. If rights
don't come from God, the presumption is that they are granted by
government. The UN actually fosters such a presumption, as can be
discovered in its International Covenants on Human Rights.
What must be understood is that a government that presumes to grant
fundamental rights - which is what the UN does - is a government that
can suspend them at will. If the "self evident " truths in the
Declaration of Independence are canceled or forgotten in favor of the
UN's ways, all rights given us by our Creator will exist only at the
extremely dubious pleasure of the United Nations.
The reality here is that the UN turns the entire American system on its
head. To consider submitting our nation to the dictates of the
anti-American, pro-communist and Godless United Nations is suicidal.
Yet, this is exactly what our leaders have been working towards for
several decades. Sad to say, it is perfectly obvious that this is
precisely what President Bush is talking about when he repeatedly
expresses his desire to create a "new world order."
Unfortunately, the desire for peace has clouded the vision of many
otherwise clear-thinking Americans. Many have been persuaded to think
only of the concept of "peace," but not what kind of peace. No one
should ever forget that there is the peace of the grave, the peace of
submission, and the communist peace that consists of no opposition to
communism. Peace with justice, the goal of anyone possessing good will,
is as likely under United Nations domination as is the chance that water
will flow uphill.
Whenever thoughts such as these are brought to the attention of sensible
Americans, enthusiasm for UN-style peace diminishes rapidly. "Let's keep
our independence!" is a common response. "Why should we trust others to
look after our well-being?" is another. But too few are aware of the
dangers inherent in an all-powerful world government. And too few,
therefore, have been guarding against transferring U.S. military forces
and U.S. sovereignty to the United Nations.
The "New World Order"
In an exclusive interview published in the December 31, 1990/January 7,
1991 issue of U.S. News and World Report, President Bush called for "a
reinvigorated United Nations" that he hoped would bring about the "new
world order." What should be reinvigorated instead are the U.S.
Declaration of Independence and Constitution.
During a January 9, 1991 press conference, Mr. Bush said that the crisis
in the Middle East "has to do with a new world order [that] is only
going to be enhanced if this newly activated peacekeeping function of
the United Nations proves to be effective." Obviously, he considers our
forces in the Middle East to have been under the UN's peacekeeping
jurisdiction. And isn't it curious that this supposed "peace"
organization's authority was used in starting the war in the Middle East?
Then, in his January 19, 1991 speech to the nation, the President again
touted the "new world order," describing it as "an order in which a
credible United Nations can use its peacekeeping role to fulfill the
promise and vision of the UN's founders." He didn't remind anyone that
the UN's founders were communists, socialists, one-worlders, and
starry-eyed dreamers who would happily tear down the unique foundations
of the United States and replace them with the UN Charter.
What To Do To Save America
Answers to some of the questions we have already raised, and to others
that anyone reading this pamphlet must have, begin with an understanding
of the grip on America held by the Council on Foreign Relations. Mr.
Bush, a member of the CFR's Board of Directors as recently as 1979, can
point to more than 350 CFR members currently serving as U.S. Government
officials. A similar CFR dominance prevailed during the Reagan years and
in several previous administrations.
Current U.S. Officials holding membership in the CFR include Secretary
of Defense Cheney, National Security Advisor Scowcroft, Joint Chiefs
Chairman Powell, CIA Director Webster, and Deputy Secretary of State
Eagleburger. Don't expect any to block further entanglement of the
United States in the UN.
There are also 16 U.S. senators and a like number of U.S.
representatives who hold membership in this organization. Don't expect
them to protect our nation from UN domination.
Realize too, that practically nationally important organ of the news
media is led by a CFR member. Any senator or representative who wishes
to receive favor from the media goes along with subverting America to
internationalist goals. Any senator or representative who tries to keep
our nation independent runs the risk of having the media make him seem
like a lunatic.
The great majority of the American people who value their freedom and
their nation's independence have to become informed and alarmed about
the path down which we are being taken. There will be no change without
a rising tide of indignation. And there will be no rising tide of
indignation until the frightening details about the ongoing subversion
of this nation have been placed in the hands of many more Americans.
Happily, there are reliable sources of information both about President
George Bush's commitment to his "new world order" and about the Council
on Foreign Relations itself. We highly recommend two books:
1. The Establishment's Man, by James J. Drummey, a tastefully written
yet devastating expose' of the political career of George Bush;
2. The Shadows of Power, by James Perloff, a history of the Council on
Foreign Relations taken from its own papers and publications.
The enemy is within the gates of our great land. Those who would deliver
out nation to a UN-controlled "new world order" have achieved great
power and influence. Whether they are stopped in time is up to
individuals who will read a pamphlet like this one, books like those
recommended above, and a great deal more information that is available
to anyone. Once informed, an American worthy of the name will work with
others to throw the rascals out of office, and, in the words of George
Washington, "put none but Americans" in charge of guarding this nation.