By Charles A. Morse
web posted September 4, 2000
There are three factors in place that have transformed America's Military into a agency of the United Nations. Firstly, when the UN was established in San Francisco, April 25, 1945, with traitor Alger Hiss presiding, it was agreed that the Under-Secretary of Political and Security Affairs would always be an official of the Soviet Union. Secondly, the passage of the "UN Participation Act", December 18, 1945, gave the President, in violation of the spirit of Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution, carte blanche over committing US troops to carry out the agenda of the UN Security Council. Thirdly, the creation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO, July 12, 1949, and the Southeast Asian Treaty Organization, SEATO, 1954, placed US troops permanently under the command of treaty organizations operating as "regional arrangements" under Chapter 8 of the UN Charter.
The New York Times, May 22, 1963, let the cat out of the bag when it revealed that "the post of Political and Security Affairs traditionally has been held by a Soviet national…(who) is Senior Advisor to the Secretary General". Extensive evidence, Congressional testimony, and J. Edgar Hoover's FBI, contend that the entire Soviet UN delegation reported to the KGB. The Political and Security Affairs position, headed by a KGB agent, has direct access to the plans and activities of UN forces anywhere in the world. It would stand to reason that these plans would be relayed to the Kremlin and then, presumably, forwarded to Communist forces in the field. This would shed some light on the strange conduct of the Korean and Vietnam wars. Did our American government understand what was going on?
The UN Participation Act, a one time package of "special" agreements, gave the President the power to provide US forces at the request of the Security Council. Rather than Congressional approval, article 1, section 8 of the Constitution, which calls for a declaration of War by Congress, the president could use this one time, congressionally approved act, as the basis to make war at the whim of the appointed UN rather than with the approval of our elected representatives. This act side steps the Constitution and perpetually commits US forces to be used as mercenaries in UN "peacekeeping" operations. Our fighting men and women are sent into battle by un-elected, unaccountable, faceless, mostly non American bureaucrats. The US taxpayer is also on the hook for billions of dollars to subsidize this form of taxation without representation. It is entirely within Congressional prerogative to repeal the UN Participation Act thus re-establishing Congressional authority to declare war.
NATO perpetually commits US troops in the defense of all members and automatically puts us into a war if any NATO member is invaded. With recent advocacy by the Bill Clinton State Department to include States of the former Eastern Bloc and even the former Soviet Baltic States as NATO members, we are behaving provocatively toward Russia and laying the seeds for involvement in a future war. NATO expanded it's scope with the bombing of Belgrade and the occupation of Kosovo Province. Our troops will be committed there for the foreseeable future.
What is not generally understood about NATO and SEATO, is that these treaty organizations are under the direct control of the UN. The UN Charter, Chapter 8, "Regional Arrangements", places NATO under the authority of Article 54 which states "The Security Council shall at all times be kept fully informed of activities undertaken or in contemplation under regional arrangements or by regional agencies". A false impression was created during the bombing of Yugoslavia that the UN and NATO were somehow at odds. In fact, they are one and the same.
The Vietnam War was a UN war, conducted under the auspices of SEATO, a "Regional Arrangement". The Lyndon Johnson State Department, Bulletin #8062, March 28, 1966 stated that "The Southeast Asia Collective Defense treaty authorizes the Presidents actions. SEATO was designed as a collective defense arrangement under Article 51 of the UN Charter…The United States has reported to the Security Council on measures it has taken in countering Communist aggression in Vietnam" We know, as a result of the recently declassified "Rules of Engagement" which laid out how the Vietnam War was conducted, that "countering Communist aggression" in Vietnam was really not the name of the game. This war, conducted under the UN Article 51, resulted in 60,000 American casualties and a humiliating defeat. Was this the objective?
The UN is now attempting to expand its authority, and erode our sovereignty even further with the presentation of a "Charter for Global Democracy" at the Millennium Assembly, convening at UN headquarters in New York, Sept. 2000. This charter would eliminate the Security Council altogether and authorize a standing UN army. Simultaneously, Rep. James McGovern (D-MA), is sponsoring HR 4453 which would facilitate the establishment of a UN Rapid Deployment and Police and Security Force.
America's military is clearly no longer fulfilling it's intended mission of protecting American life, liberty and property. The subordination of our military to the UN, since 1945, has not resulted in a more peaceful world, in fact, quite the opposite. There is nothing preventing us from conducting our affairs in the world in our own interest and that may mean, with Congressional approval and perhaps in concert with allies, engaging in war if the peoples representatives deem this necessary. Our increasing subordination to the UN however, has not only shattered the peace, but is turning us into the mercenaries and cash cow of the world elite.
Chuck Morse is a syndicated talk show host on the American Freedom Network and a contributing writer to Enter Stage Right and Ether Zone.