« ПретходнаНастави »
One of the charter's "principles" governing relations between states calls for “remedying of injustices which have been brought about by force and which deprive a nation of the natural means necessary for its normal development.” This principle parallels that of reparations heard in the US Civil Rights movement.
Article 5 deals with "producer's associations.” “All states have the right to associate in organizations of primary commodity producers in order to develop their national economies to achieve stable financing for their development. ... The association of oil exporting countries (OPEC) is such a group. Banana growers or Bauxite miners might use this principle. Fear of industrialized states is based in the understanding that is most profitable to form such associations if their primary product is consumed by financially able states that do not themselves have the capability of such production. States supporting this concept feel these raw materials have in the past been controlled, to their detriment, by outside states or corporations, e.g., iron ore in Swaziland, petroleum and coffee wherever it is found.
Article 28 concerns "indexing” prices of raw materials to make them equitable with finished products. “All states have the duty to cooperate in achieving adjustments in the prices of exports of developing countries in relation to prices of their imports so as to promote just and equitable terms of trade for them, in a manner which is remunerative for producers and equitable for producers and consumers.” Because manufacturing takes place in industrialized countries, those countries that produce raw materials for export develop trade deficits when buying back finished products. They feel this situation is unfair and feel "indexing" would help remedy inequities.
Scali said, “Many Americans are questioning their belief in the United Nations. They are deeply disturbed.” I would like for many Americans to let their government know they are deeply disturbed-disturbed because they do understand and affirm the aspirations of the developing nations ; because they want the future to be different from the past; and because they want the UN to grow in strength as it attempts to bring the desires of all states into equity.
If you would like to register your feelings, we would be glad to forward your response to Ambassador John Scali at the United States Mission to the UN. If you write directly, we would appreciate a copy.
[Remaining enclosures are on file with the committee.]
STATEMENT OF ELEANORE SCHNURR, UNITED NATIONS REPRESENTATIVE, AMERICAN
BAPTIST CHURCHES USA, NATIONAL MINISTRIES
As the United Nations Representative for the American Baptist Churches, USA, National Ministries, I would like to request that the following statement be included in the records of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Hearings on the United Nations :
For over a period of more than 30 years American Baptists have stated, through Resolutions made at their annual National Conventions, their conviction that in today's rapidly shrinking world of nuclear and electronic war power, the only sane philosophy of international relations, the only sensible theory of national security is one which recognizes the necessity of increasing multilateral cooperation. This applies to trade, to technical assistance and economic aid, to ecological matters as well as to disarmament, and to continuous support of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
While we, as American Baptists, support those efforts in which United States foreign policy makers have endeavored to seek peaceful solutions to crisis situations, we feel that there should have been more use made of the various multilateral channels which are available through the United Nations system.
A foreign policy approach which only involves big power diplomacy and which fails to take into consideration issues of concern to the members of the global family is too narrow, creates gulfs, and widens the gap between divergent interests of nations. The longer we allow such a state of affairs to continue, the more dangerous becomes the illusion that we can safely ignore the needs and interests of the majority of the members of the global community.
Recognizing that we are now truly living in an interdependent world, we feel that the negative votes cast by our Government, concerning issues related to the new economic order, were votes cast in haste and not in contemplation of the long-range interests of the people of the United States or of the world at large.
We feel that the United States Government would much rather be placed in a position where there is knowledge and understanding on its part of the fact that the Third World definitely exists and that new relationships will develop.
As a nation it is not in our best interest to be singled out by other nations as a reactionary country supporting only the status-quo when there is opportunity to make allowance for the aspirations of the underprivileged majority of humanity.
In this respect, it was the United States unwillingness to recognize the repeated demands of the majority of the United Nations membership, during the last session of the General Assembly (29th), calling for an ending of the old economic order, which led to the passage of many United Nations Resolutions which could be interpreted as “anti-U.S.". In reality, these Resolutions were calling for a new and more equitable economic order on which to begin to build a more stable global partnership.
We commend the United States initiative, during the 25th session of the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women (1974), in calling for the convening of an international conference in 1975 to celebrate International Women's Year. The United States has much to contribute to this Conference and we urge our Delegation to assume a leadership role, focusing its energies on issues pertinent to the Conference's subject matter.
We, as American Baptists, still believe and affirm that the United Nations represents, to date, the best international organization through which nations can work for a lessening of world tensions and a strengthening of mutual understanding and cooperation for world peace with justice.
STATEMENT BY CAMPAIGN FOR WORLD GOVERNMENT, INC. Consent of the governed, yes. Rightly a fundamental principle in human relations. Why, then, do we keep it confined within the boundaries of nations? Hunger, security, population, pollution, freedom of the seas and canals, equitable access to goods and natural resources : these urgent problems are global, but is the machinery for solving them global?
Unfortunately, in spite of my best organized and personal efforts as an accredited observer to the funding conference of the United Nations in 1945, the United Nations is an association of sovereign States. This is anarchy, not a practical way to peace.
What is most flagrantly missing in the United Nations is the two-way street familiar in the U.S.A. and other federations leading through elected representatives, to a legislative body capable of resolving problems of general concern because powers to deal with them have been delegated to it. In the other direction, the governing body can enforce its laws directly on individual citizens without the interference of member states.
The building of such a two-way street, from the people to the world organization; and from the world organization to the people directly is the challenge presently before humanity. To accomplish this the United Nations needs :
1. Powers granted to it to deal with world-wide problems, provided.
2. Popular control is maintained through a fair system of elected representatives to one or more legislative branches.
3. Independent enforcement agencies (the smaller the unit needing coercion—that is, the individual citizen, the easier and more peaceful and civilian the enforcement).
4. Independent sources of revenue. Someone will surely raise the cry; what about national sovereignty? That is a bugaboo standing in the way of a peaceful world order. Where does sovereignty reside? According to the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, “The powers not delegated to the U.S. by the Constitution, nor prohibited to it by the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” The people have every right to re-allocate their reserved powers the better to serve their needs, the purpose of government.
The granting of such powers and responsibilities to the United Nations would be a reallocation of sovereignty. This would restrain nations, but wouldn't that be a blessing? It would not diminish the rights of individuals. Quite the contrary. Popular sovereignty would be augmented because the individual gains a say in what happens to him/her, and within this area of citizenship, gains security from wars and threats of wars. How does the individual benefit from the retention of a national sovereignty which denies citizens any franchise in world affairs and leaves these decisions in the hands of a nation's executive, and the use of military force virtually unrestrained ? What kind of protection is this?
Food, peace and security, with justice in close company, these are the primary needs of people all over the world. The kind of political machinery to secure these needs has succeeded in this country for almost two hundred years. Who can say it is impossible to create such machinery at the world level? We have put men on the moon! Of course, it is possible.
Let us proceed now to create the world political machinery necessary to guarantee in all human beings everywhere the unalienable Rights to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness! That is the goal worthy of our great heritage. Respectfully submitted by,
GEORGIA LLOYD, Executive Secretary.
MR. AND MRS. FRANCIS M. RANDALL,
Alabaster, Ala., May 14, 1975. Senator JOHN SPARKMAN, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.O.
DEAR SENATOR SPARKMAN: Enclosed is an article from today's front page of The B'ham News entitled, “Sparkman leading deep probe of U.N.," which I have read and which probe I hope you will pursue with vigor.
Also enclosed is a letter that I sent to you 10 years ago urging you to, among other things, get us out of the UN and the UN out of the U.S. I apologize for the two garbled lines, they were garbled on 4–15–1965, and at that time I had no idea that I would ever be remailing that letter. I am not sending copies of that letter to Senator Allen and all Alabama U.S. Representatives because I have sent them similar letters over the past 10 years. I here ask all of these gentlemen to help you and support that probe into the U.N.
I believe that the testimony of former U.N. Ambassadors such as Mr. Lodge and Mr. Goldberg is biased their job was to promote the U.N. and they still are. They have a vested interest in the error of our participating in the U.N. and neither has the courage to say I made a mistake. Reform won't work—the structure was built on sand—the U.N. was conceived, created and is now OBVIOUSLY controlled by the communists.
Enclosed is Mr. Brooks cartoon of 11-4-74 Re: U.N.—and we've had worse abuses by that so called, "peace," organization. The communist nations of the U.N. are saying nothing about the sickening blood baths and atrocities that are going on in Vietnam and Cambodia. Our President probably hasn't even told Congress about them, Senator Sparkman, but they ARE going on! (See Scott Report of 4-23–75.)
I request that this letter be submitted to the probe on my behalf as I cannot afford to go to Washington to testify, but if your committee wants irrefutable evidence that we need to be Out of the U.N., Mr. Reid Benson of The John Birch Society in Washington can probably convince you all of this need and in short order. Having Mr. Lodge and Mr. Goldberg give evidence on the effectiveness of the U.N. is like asking the crows to guard the cornfield or the fox to guard the chickenhouse.
Congratulations to President Ford (5–15–75) on getting our ship and crew back. That action and the freedom to own gold and the rescue of some of the South Vietnamese civilians and soldiers are the only significant 3 actions of President Ford that I approve of. Today I am very proud of President Ford-hope he will continue to just do what is right and expletive deleted with what the rest of the world thinks of U.S. Sincerely yours,
FRANCIS M. RANDALL,
HARRIET RANDALL. [Enclosures are on file with the committee.]
WASHINGTON, D.C., May 8, 1975. Senator JOHN SPARKMAN, Chairman, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.
The 1975 National Council of the League of Women Voters of the U.S., composed of delegates from all 50 States, the Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia, wishes to commend the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for holding hearings on the United Nations at this crucial point in the UN's history. We deplore recent UN General Assembly and UNESCO General Conference actions which violates the spirit of the UN charter. We do not feel, however, that withdrawal of U.S. participations from these organizations is an appropriate response. We strongly urge that the U.S. provide firm constructive leadership to support UN policies and programs which promote the spirit of the charter.
RUTH C. CLUSEN,
UNITED NATIONS ASSOCIATION
May 24, 1975. Hon. John SPARKMAN, M.C., Chairman, U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR SPARKMAN: It's a pleasure to send you this copy of a Resolution unanimously adopted by the Annual Assembly of Iowa members of the United Nations Association.
It is a further, personal gratification to have followed during the past few days, testimony before your Committee's hearing on the United Nations. It was a most useful congressional activity. Sincerely,
C. G. DOUGLASS,
Executive Director. RESOLUTION
Whereas, the Iowa Division, United Nations Association of U.S.A., Inc., is seeking creativity to develop programs designed to strengthen citizen support for and understanding of the United Nations, and
Whereas, we believe it incumbent upon us to emphasize educational programs for this purpose among youth and adults through out the state and,
Whereas, recent U.N. World Conferences on Population, Laws of the Seas, and World Food Problems demonstrate the validity of a global approach to global problems, and
Whereas, we count it a privilege to commend Congressional committee Chairmen and members who are committed to the more active utilization of the U.N. as a means of facilitating international cooperation, therefore be it
Resolved, That the Iowa Division, U.N.A., meeting in Annual Assembly on May 10, 1975, in Iowa City, commend you for your recent call for a "Strengthened and rejuvenated United Nations” since our "village world” is sorely in need of “international institutions for the solution of global problems."
THE CITIZENS FOR A NEW INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC ORDER
(CNIEO), JUNE 11, 1975
The immediate goal of CNIEO is to stimulate the Congress and to assure that the Administration begins an active and constructive role in NIEO discussionsbeginning this September 1, 1975 at the United Nations, special session on a New International Economic Order (NIEO). No area of policy discussions is more critical than a NIEO—the issues are War or Peace.
The paths to Global Peace and cooperation must be embraced with the mobility and excitement with which men have marched to war.
Congress is asked to submit letters and/or legislation to the President urging full U.S. participation in NIEO discussions.
"There can be no peaceful international order without a constructive relationship between the United States and the Soviet Union—the two nations with the power to destroy mankind ... yet the interdependence that earlier fostered our prosperity and now threatens our decline can usher in a new period of progress if we perceive our common interest and act boldly to serve it. It requires a new level of political wisdom, a new standard of responsibility, and a new vigor of diplomacy." (Kissinger, 1/24/75)
"The world has become interdependent in economics, in communications, in human aspirations. No one nation, no one part of the world, can prosper or be secure in isolation. " .. "The world stands uneasily poised between unprecedented chaos and the opportunity for unparalleled creativity. The next few years will determine whether interdependence will foster common progress or common disaster. Our generation has the opportunity to shape a new cooperative international system ; if we fail to act with Vision we will condemn ourselves to mounting domestic and international crises." (Kissinger, 1/24/75)
"You cannot have a peaceful world without most of the countries and preferably all of the countries feeling that they have a share in it.” (Kissinger, 1/16/75)
"The achievement of peace requires a vision of peace.” (Kissinger, 5/12/75) The philosophies herein reflect :
1. The Kelso, Adler, Hetter thinking of: The Capitalist Manifesto, The New Capitalists, Two Factor Theory—The Economics of Reality :
2. The critical realities outlined by the Club of Rome, Meadows report “Limits to Growth ;'.
3. The "more with less” Bucky Fuller perceptions of our new technologies; and
4. The experience of the founder of CNIEO in the systems, management and economic sciences—from technical and economic feasibility studies of industry-wide automation and organizational designs; urban and interna
tional development projects. The essence of Kelso or Universal Capitalism is ownership by all instead of by the few or by the state.
The CNIEO has been formed in dedication to the following principles; namely, that:
1. Only free and equal discussion will bring liberty from conflict; and
2. Only acceptance of common goals will bring cooperation. This is an attempt to define those goals, and the principal economic tools required to achieve them.
The purpose of the CNIEO is to promote a full discussion of a NIEO in America, in the Congress, at the UN; and to bring forth cooperation and unity by the establishment of a NIEO among nations and peoples in pursuit of common global goals.
The ideologies expressed by CNIEO should in no way distract from the principal goals of bringing capitalist and Communist nations, and all of divided societies—together. Many of the ideas expressed by CNIEO, although capitalistderived—are offered to stimulate dialogue and need not reflect the thinking of members and advocates who are joined together by common agreements to the above principles, purposes and goals. Hopefully, the ideas expressed will focus the best that capitalism, Marxism and democracy have to offer in order to equal and exceed the accomplishments of socialism and Marxism.
The economic philosophy herein described involves the use of strong personal incentives in addition to necessary socialist tools, in order to improve the general welfare and environment.
A NEW INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC ORDER (NIEO)
A NIEO means global cooperation to achieve Global goals. Global goals may be expressed as—SURVIVAL—from the threats of conflict, overpopulation, overconsumption and inflation.
Global goals include: