Terror on the Horizon

News Service October 23, 2001

Terror on the Horizon

By Henry Lamb

So far, President Bush has resisted the calls to consolidate our response to Sept. 11, under the authority of the United Nations. The attack was against the United States, and the United States should respond. Other nations that wish to help may do so, but only to the extent that their help fits into our strategy. Response decisions should be made in the Oval Office – not in the corridors of the United Nations.

So far, so good, but the pressure to turn over the war to the "international community" will continue to mount.

There are no less than 12 international treaties dealing with terrorism, and even more U.N. resolutions on the subject. The United Nations has an Office for Drug Control and Crime Prevention, with a staff of 350, in 22 offices around the world. Within this agency, there is a Terrorism Prevention Branch. If this agency has prevented any terrorism, it is not public knowledge – it certainly did not prevent the terror that struck the United States on Sept. 11.

The primary reason the United Nations is powerless to deal with terrorism is that it doesn't know what terrorism is. The United Nations has been unable to draw a definitive line between "terrorists" and "freedom fighters." When a car-bomb explodes on a busy street in Israel, much of the world sees it as the work of freedom fighters. The victims define it as an act of terrorism.

While every American recognized Sept. 11 as an act of terrorism, Osama bin Laden saw "God Almighty hit the United States ...," and his followers celebrated the "freedom fighters" in the streets.

The United States cannot allow the nation to get bogged down in this quagmire of indecision. We must maintain our own defense and our own right to rid the world of any and all who would plot to attack innocent civilians in America.

The United Nations has taken up the cause of terrorism with a new enthusiasm in the wake of Sept. 11. Kofi Annan has already called for a new "comprehensive" treaty on terrorism – a treaty to give the United Nations power to end global terrorism. This new initiative will attract many admirers and, sadly, many of those admirers will be Americans.

The United Nations already has in place the bureaucracy to implement the treaty. The new International Criminal Court (ICC) has now been ratified by 42 of the necessary 60 nations required for entry into force. The ICC will be authorized to prosecute "crimes against humanity," which is a vague term, to be defined by the court.

The world is very close to giving the United Nations the tools it needs to enforce its vision of global governance. This new treaty on terrorism could provide the public support the United Nations needs.

What's wrong with this scenario?

The majority of the members of the United Nations consider Israel's response to a Palestinian car-bomb to be an act of terrorism, not self-defense. The masses of protesters in Pakistan consider America's response attack on the Taliban to be an act of terrorism, not self-defense.

United States leadership in economic sanctions against Cuba, Iraq and Iran have repeatedly been called "crimes against humanity" by U.N. officials. America's standard of living – consuming 25 percent of the world's resources for only 5 percent of the world's population – has been cited repeatedly at U.N. meetings, as a "crime against humanity."

Make no mistake: The United Nations will target the United States the moment it has the power to do so, to bring the United States under its control. After all, it is our economic, social and foreign policies that are said to be the "injustice" that caused the Sept. 11 attacks. A new treaty on terrorism, a reinforced bureaucracy for the Prevention of Terrorism and a new International Criminal Court are major steps toward providing the United Nations with the power it needs.

The two remaining elements the United Nations needs to complete its global governance power grab are also quickly being assembled: a U.N. standing army and independent funding. Several nations have already committed troops to the United Nations.

Next March 18-22, in Monterey, Mexico, a world conference will assemble to hear the report of the High Level Panel on Financing for Development. This panel will recommend a Global Taxing Authority, a global tax on the foreign exchange of currency, a tax on the use of fossil fuels and a new U.N. Economic Security Council to oversee and implement the independent financing for the United Nations.

All of these pieces of global governance have been under construction for years. They are all coming together now. The events of Sept. 11, and America's response, will serve the same purpose World War II did in providing justification for creating an international authority to end war – or terrorism – as the case may be.

The United States is the only power on earth strong enough to prevent this terror on the horizon – this last step toward global governance. So far, President Bush has resisted the pressure. Whether or not the American people have the understanding – and the will – to stay the course of independence and freedom is the most important question our nation has ever faced. The answer will unfold over the next several months.

Henry Lamb is the executive vice president of the Environmental Conservation Organization and chairman of Sovereignty International.