BARBER: Were Canadians sold out?

The Trudeau Liberals seem to love the United Nations Organization.On Sept. 22, 2024, the Pact for the Future was adopted by the UN. Amrita Paul, Director of Global Affairs Canada and others have been involved in the formation of this pact, and 192 nations have agreed. There are several important themes each with specific goals: Sustainable Development; Climate and Financing for Development, Digital Cooperation, Peace and Security, Youth and Future Generations, and Human Rights and Gender. There are considerations often with multiple points, under each heading — the main document is 61 pages long. The thing is that the adoption of all or any of them has the potential to change the laws of Canada and how you live. Some context: Overall, the UN has markedly steered off its original course. Conceived during the Second World War, its original mission was to prevent war in the future, ensure security and international cooperation, and to promote human rights and fundamental freedoms. However It now has so many activities that it often fails to make an impact.Wars have not been prevented. The International Labour Organization estimates there are 40 million slaves in the world. The UN rights and freedoms efforts are totally insufficient. Countries challenging international security are well known and some countries while speaking of international cooperation, quietly are disaffiliating. For the UN to undertake a new worldwide effort in so many areas may not prove any more successful than the ones at which it is already failing. But then, is the real motivation what is implied and not stated? Is the UN actually getting involved in areas that conflict with national sovereignty?To be sure, there are good points often reiterating or recommitting to long standing goals of justice, equality, non-discrimination, human rights, human dignity and the rule of law. However, “justice” is only mentioned on five pages, “rule of law” is mentioned on five pages, non-discrimination on two pages but “gender equality” is mentioned on eight pages. The pact repeatedly states that it will be guided by “principles of equity...” and “equity” is mentioned on seven pages.The document emphasizes “multilateralism” and places the “World Trade Organization at its core.” This is a call to continue the globalization system of the first decades of the 21st century, with its export of polluting industries to developing countries, the hollowing out of the working and middle classes, large corporations dominating the world economic sphere and people with connections becoming unbelievable wealthy. It could even be argued that such language is an attempt to prevent the USA moving toward a trade policy based on bilateralism.There is a call to increase the use of renewable energy production, but with no mention of ameliorating the devastation produced by refining rare earths, chemical pollutants from batteries, or damage to the general environment and to fauna with dams used for power production. There are repeated expressions of the climate change agreements needing to be strengthened, but no call to hold non-compliant nations to account.Another change called for is the expansion of the UN Security Council. This council was created by those nations who were most responsible for ending WW II. It includes the idea that they will step forward to prevent WW III. It is not designed to reflect the general assembly which changes could lead to. The Security Council has usually been conservative in its activities because of the different orientations of the nation members. Agreement for any action is slow in formation. There is an agreed upon “Emergency Platform,” which grants new powers to the UN Secretary General in the event of a global emergency, termed “global shock” (e.g. COVID 19, or an economic disaster,) although what constitutes such an emergency is not well defined and a plan for increasing his/her power in such an emergency is still forthcoming. The world-wide reaction to Covid seems to be the model here. In short, the first cases appeared in Wuhan, China. As it spread, the Chinese government started locking down both individuals and businesses. Dr. Tedros Ghebreyesus the head of WHO, who gained his position with consequential help from China, acted in two ways. The first was to try to protect China and the second was to advocate the China model. This model was implemented in many of the developed countries including Canada. The health benefits from the Canadian action plan are still debatable but the denial of Chartered Rights and personal freedoms were historic.A section of the pact is titled, Digital Compact. This is a plan to have the UN govern the development of Artificial Intelligence, which includes creating committees for a global discussion on governing AI and an international scientific body on AI. There is also a plan to include the Tech Giants in an increase in “public/ private partnerships.” This however, is a means for controlling media to promote the UN goals, and to suppress other voices that question them, rather as we saw during the COVID crisis. This is supported by language in the document to police the internet for 'misinformation,' etc. Perhaps the model is what transpired in the USA’s presidential race in 2020 wherein Big Tech was clearly favoring the Democratic party, and it rings similar to measures taken in Canada under Trudeau. We also must look closely at the record of the UN in its creation of committees and scientific panels to study climate change. We have seen that the outcomes of these UN activities are unfortunately not driven by the scientific method but by politics. We can expect nothing different regarding AI. The free flow of scientific findings unhindered by politics is necessary if we want to develop the best solutions.The Youth and Future Generations is a plan to have the youth around the world participate in political activities. There is a lot of lip service paid to idealism with leftist leanings. But platitudes, and vagaries fill the pages. A new position at the UN was created to develop this aspect. One could speculate about the agenda.: Certainly, young people have the largest stake in the future, but their naivety and lack of experience raises the question of them being exploited for political purposes. Although there are other items that could prove troubling, one more will be noted. The document calls for the “international tax governance structures… improvement” and “developing a UN framework convention on international tax cooperation.” Also, to “Explore…international cooperation on the taxation of high-net-worth-individuals…” The progressive tax structure was a development of Marxists to bring about their communist utopia. It should be seen as discrimination against individuals who are the very people any society ought to hold up as exemplary. Further, the wording in this section does not rule out the possibility of the UN directly taxing all people. Even if we make explicit that a UN tax is off the table, multinational agreements on taxation, will limit the sovereignty of each nation that agrees. Voters in these nations would lose their voice on one of the most important aspects of being governed.Most importantly, these areas and more are troubling because the language in the document is so open-ended. It can be understood as meaningless or as opening the door for a one world government. Some of the items in this pact raise eyebrows but like so many other UN documents it is written in a vague and ambiguous manner on purpose. One of the “tools” that political entities use is the creation of documents that seem placid with the excuse of not wanting to raise objectionable points. On close examination however, the language used would allow those very objectionable points. If someone indicates this, it can be denied because nothing is explicit. After some time, those points will be slowly implemented because that was the goal. If some party objects, well, “that was passed years ago.” As always, the devil is in the details. It is hoped our next government will make a critical evaluation of this document to determine if it is beneficial for Canada.Dr. A.W. Barber is the former Director of Asian Studies at the University of Calgary. He is internationally active and has wide-ranging interests.

BARBER: Were Canadians sold out?

Related Stories