British PM Wants to Build a "New World Order"

Ann Shibler
JBS
Tuesday January 29, 2008

Gordon Brown wants to shake things up in the UN Security Council in order to create a "new world order" and "global society."

Follow this link to the original source: "Brown's secret talks on 'new world order'"

During a two-day trip to India (with another two days in China), British Prime Minister Gordon Brown revealed his agenda for altering the UN’s power structure. Twice he underscored India’s bid for a permanent place on what he proposes to be an expanded UN Security Council, thereby assuring “India’s rightful place” in a new world order.

More must be done, Brown said, "to make our global institutions more representative." And, "I support changes to the IMF, World Bank, and the G8 that reflect the rise of India and Asia," he continued. Citing India’s explosive economic growth — due in large part to bad U.S. foreign trade policies — he said, "dramatic and seismic shifts in economy, culture and communication are coming to revolutionise the global distribution of wealth, status, power and influence and creating the world anew."

According to the New Zealand Herald, "Brown has begun secret talks with other world leaders on far-reaching reform of the United Nations Security Council as part of a drive to create a ‘new world order’ and ‘global society’." He is proposing that the UN Security Council’s original five countries be augmented with the addition of India, Germany, Japan, Brazil and one or two African nations not yet specified. His proposal, reportedly under intense discussion with leaders from both India and China, would not include veto power for the newly added countries — at least initially.

Under the pretext of promoting peace and stability he also unveiled a plan for the UN to spend £100 million ($257 million) a year on setting up a "rapid reaction force" to stop "failed states" sliding back into chaos after a peace deal has been reached. "There is limited value in military action to end fighting if law and order does not follow," he said when justifying his plan. "So we must do more to ensure rapid reconstruction on the ground once conflicts are over and combine traditional humanitarian aid and peace-keeping with stabilisation, recovery and development."

While that sounds good, it is important to have a clear-eyed view of the UN. Since its inception, the world has not been a peaceful place. Yet, the organization’s founders and its subsequent supporters have maintained that the purpose of the world body is to eliminate war and promote peace. At this it has manifestly failed. Yet people like the British prime minister suggest that the solution is to give the organization more power and control. Decades of experience, however, strongly suggest the opposite course of action: A peaceful world would be one without the UN.