The Omega Letter Intelligence Digest

Vol: 37 Issue: 11 - Monday, October 11, 2004
Annan Names EU as UN's Successor?
by Jack Kinsella

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan gave an interview in the Irish Times in
which he told the paper he was 'excited' at the prospect of a possible
deal that would make the EU military the defacto military arm of the
United Nations.

Annan said of the proposal, "You may not necessarily even have to fight."
Speaking from the rarified atmosphere of the UN's Ivory Tower, Annan
explained how THAT works, inadvertently giving away a clue as to why the
UN prefers John Kerry.

"You sometimes have to show force in order not to use force."  Aha!  SCARE
the enemy to death?  No, no,the paper explained helpfully. In some crisis
areas, the inhabitants were intimidated by "local bullies" who would not
stand up to an international force.

Let's see if I am understanding this correctly.  "Local bullies" will
ignore the United States, (whose military power dwarfs the EU), but if
confronted by an 'international force' (whose default position is to
announce in advance it's a bluff), well, they'd just be so terrified
they'd flee at the mere prospect of an EU-backed UN intervention threat.

According to the paper, the UN proposed EU battlegroups or "hit squad"
concept is in line with 'new thinking on international military action to
prevent genocide, avoiding a repetition of the Rwanda tragedy ten years
ago.'

Too late. The Rwanda tragedy is being repeated -- right now -- while the
Islamic-dominated UN continues to stonewall until the Islamic forces of
the Sudan are finished wiping out the mainly Christian black population in
the south.

(On the other hand, it will give the UN ANOTHER tragedy it can avoid
repeating later.  After all, there are 525,948 minutes in a year.  That
leaves room for 525,947 more 'moments of silence' for the victims of UN
imcompetence)
 
 

Assessment:

Kofi Annan has already declared the U.S. invasion of Iraq to be "illegal."
Panel member Gareth Evans, a former foreign minister of Australia, told an
audience at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars:

"A central reason for our appointment was concern that the U.N., and
indeed the whole multilateral security system, was really at a crossroads
with the resurgence of unilateralism from You Know Whom, and increasing
willingness to bypass the Security Council."

(Note to the uninitiated: 'You Know Whom' is the United States.  Evans
presumably believed only international scholars like himself would be able
to decipher his clever code and figure it out)

To combat the 'unilateralism' of 'you know who', Annan has appointed a
16-member "High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change" to make
recommendations for restructuring the UN Security Council.

The ultimate goal is to expand the U.N. Security Council, and to eliminate
P-5 - the permanent member status of the five nations that hold veto power
over Security Council actions.  Annan's High Level Panel isn't expected to
recommend the elimination of the veto system immediately -- instead, they
will push for the expansion of the Security Council, first.

Originally, the Security Council consisted of 11 members, five of which
were permanent, each with veto power. The remaining six members served
two-year terms, rotated among the member nations. The Council was expanded
to 15 members in 1965, with no change in the status of the permanent
members.

Four nations - Brazil, Germany, India and Japan - have formed a group to
lobby for permanent member status.  Germany and Japan were denied
permanent status in 1945, since the UN was created by the Allies
specifically to prevent a repeat of the Axis aggression that spawned the
war in the first place.

Annan's High Level Panel has been deliberating in relative secrecy for
nearly a year. Their report may also be kept secret - at Kofi Annan's
discretion.

In any case, whatever Kofi's Panel recommends, it can't be implemented
without US approval.  The US still has its veto until it agrees to repeal
the P-5 veto status at the Security Council.

That fact could be the United Nations' undoing.  Annan's High Level Panel
is expected to draft the rules of engagement which will prevent, or at
least provide the basis for international condemnation of 'unilateral'
action (by 'you know who') in the future.

The rest of the world has drawn a line in the sand over US willingness to
circumvent the United Nations when it is in America's best interests.

If the UN can't implement the reforms, then it will be obvious that the UN
cannot contain and control the United States. In that case, there is
little to be gained by UN membership for smaller states, and therefore,
little reason to allow the UN a role in their own internal affairs.

On the other hand, if the United States allows the reform measures to go
forward, it is a signal that the US is willing to be governed by the
United Nations -- and its proposed EU military force.

Annan's High Panel will not issue its recommendations until after the US
general elections, and probably not until early next year.

All concerned recognize the restructuring proposal is a 'make or break'
deal.  Depending on how the US votes, the restructuring proposal will
either empower the UN to the degree it will have true global governing
status, (shared with the European Union) or it will mean its impending
demise.

The Bible says that, in the last days, a global government will come to
power, headed by the antichrist and made up from the nations of the
revived Roman Empire.

According to Scripture, it will govern the Western world directly, and
will indirectly influence the other three spheres of global power that
will exist during that time -- Gog Magog, (Russian alliance) the Kings of
the East (China, etc.) and the Kings of the South (mainly Islamic North
Africa)

(That the government of antichrist exerts only 'indirect' influence (in a
similar matter to the UN, for example) is implied by the fact that
eventually, each of these entities goes to war against him.)

Which is pretty much EXACTLY what Annan's High Level Panel is setting the
stage for.

The UN may well collapse, but politics, like nature, abhors a vacuum. The
UN's multifaceted global institutions are critical to maintaining the
smooth operation of the global economy, human rights, global health
issues, international dispute arbitration and so on.

The World Bank, IMF, International Court, etc., etc. just can't disappear
without having a devastating effect on international politics.   Somebody
will have to pick up the pieces.

In inviting the EU 'battlegroups' to take on the role of United Nations'
policy enforcer,  Kofi Annan has inadvertently (or calculatingly, who
knows?) named the UN's successor.  The EU already has some 25 individual
votes at the UN, plus two vetoes, compared to Russia, China and America's
single vote and single veto.

The EU enjoys the confidence of the Arab world, is mending fences with a
subdued Russian Federation, has good relations with China and is heavily
entrenched, both politically and economically, with Africa.

The United States, with its single vote and single veto, has practically
no friends at all in any of these regions.  At best, it has 'allies of the
moment' -- like Pakistan or some of the Gulf emirates -- allies that would
turn on Washington in a heartbeat if it better served their own interests.

America does have important allies and genuine friends, like Australia, or
Great Britain -- but these alliances flow through Europe and our shared
heritage, much more than through a shared ideology.

America's closest friend and ally, Canada, has already proved that its UN
membership trumps US friendship when it comes to the hard questions.

Ideologically, America's only genuine ally is Israel, itself the target of
global envy and hatred.

Of America's role in the global government during the Tribulation Period,
the Bible is silent.  If America does play any role, it will be as a
subordinate part of a greater European government, not as an overarching
superpower.

Of Israel, the Bible says it will be the target of global genocidal hatred
during the Tribulation, and there is no mention of Israel having any
allies at all, apart from the Lord God of Israel.

The United Nations is preparing a restructuring system that will stand or
fall based on the decisions of whoever is in the White House when Annan's
High Level Panel issues its recommendations early next year.

That president will have a full term to decide whether to subordinate
America to the UN -- giving the UN a temporary reprieve from
self-destruction -- or whether to veto the restructuring effort, which
will strip away any illusion of UN relevancy and ultimately result in its
collapse as a viable institution, and paving the way for the rise of the
antichrist.

It is no coincidence that in this election,  to the exclusion of all
presidential races in living memory, the two positions of the two sides on
the issue of globalism could not be more profound.

In one corner is John Kerry, who is running on the platform that George
Bush is a unilateralist who should have subordinated US interests to UN
oversight and who pledges that, if elected, he will do so in the future.

In the other corner is George W. Bush,  who most certainly will not cede
US sovereignty to the UN, no matter how it may be restructured.

Waiting in the wings to see how it all turns out is the European Union.

Buckle up!