-Caveat Lector- WJPBR Email News List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Peace at any cost is a Prelude to War! Global Gun Controllers Surrender to U.S Lawrence Auster July 24, 2001 U.S. delegate describes dramatic final hours of closed-door conference "This is not the end. This is the opening skirmish of a war." Thus spoke former U.S. Congressman Charles Pashayan after the conclusion of a grueling two-week-long anti-gun conference in which America held out for its basic gun rights against the entire world — and won. At issue were two paragraphs in the non-binding Program of Action that the United States team had said it would under no circumstances approve. The first of these was the "non-state actors" clause, by which the U.N. member nations would agree "to supply small arms and light weapons only to governments, or to entities duly authorized by governments." The Americans argued that this provision would stop the U.S. from giving military assistance to freedom fighters, to people resisting genocide, or even to a long-time ally such as Taiwan which is not formally recognized as a state. America's other "redline" on which it said no compromise would be accepted was an agreement "to seriously consider legal restrictions on unrestricted trade in and ownership of small arms and light weapons." The Americans viewed this language as a direct attack on the civilian possession of firearms, particularly in light of the fact that many member states have openly stated their desire to turn the non-binding agreement into a legal treaty. The final spurt of negotiations went on until late last Thursday night, then continued all day Friday and all through Friday night, with the delegates meeting in and around Conference Room 4 of the General Assembly building. According to Pashayan, who served as an at-large U.S. delegate, the showdown came in the early hours of Saturday morning, when Canada proposed a watered-down version of the non-state actors clause, "and our delegation did the wise thing in rejecting that." Looking for common ground However, the U.S. was not exactly as isolated as it seemed at this conference. As a European source told NewsMax: "A lot of countries, with which the U.S. would otherwise prefer not to be associated on this issue, are hiding behind the U.S. position on non-state actors. Some Arab countries, as well as the Chinese and Russians, want to continue to sell arms to non-state actors. But since the U.S. took the 'con' position on this clause, those countries haven't had to say anything." African countries in particular insisted on the non-state actors provision because, as a Jamaican delegate told NewsMax, "They are suffering the most from illicit arms." Some observers on the U.S. side suggested a more cynical motive, however: that many of the African governments are dictatorships that don't want anyone else to be in a position to challenge their power. In any case, it cannot be denied that the world's most horrific violence in recent years has occurred in Africa . Asked what sort of compromise was conceivable given the stark differences on the redlined paragraphs, a Slovenian delegate told NewsMax: "They're using lawyer's language that I can't understand." "You mean they're concocting subtle phrases that each side might interpret as it wishes?" "Yes." As the talks ground on through Friday, there were several abortive efforts to find or invent such a non-existent middle ground. In mid-afternoon the anti-gun forces offered a substitute for the civilian ownership clause from which the word "ownership" had been removed. The U.S. rejected this and said that the entire paragraph must be deleted. The conference's president, Camilo Reyes of Colombia, then proposed moving the non-state actors clause into the document's preamble where it would have less force. The Americans opposed this, too. As each effort to find a compromise failed, Reyes would direct the delegates to less troublesome side issues that still needed to be resolved, such as language relating to "national self-determination" which was a sore point between Israel and the Arabs. The U.S. also made one significant concession, agreeing to future conferences to continue the work begun at this conference. Nevertheless, by 4 o'clock Saturday morning the core controversies could be evaded no longer. Several nations made impassioned pleas to the U.S. to accept the two offending paragraphs. Once again, as Pashayan described it, the U.S. stated politely but firmly that it could not yield on these issues, that it had said from the beginning that it would not yield on them. Canada then introduced compromise language to the effect that a nation "has to bear special responsibility when it would send arms to non-state actors." At this point, Pashayan said, the room "fell into a stunned silence because the delegates realized that Canada was pushing the U.S. to the brink. They knew that for the U.S. to say ‘No’ to such watered-down language would make the U.S. really look bad." Canada made it even harder for the U.S. to refuse its offer when it said that it would consent to the deletion of the civilian ownership clause if the U.S. would accept the new language on non-state actors. The U.S. still said no. President Reyes then lambasted the U.S. as the only country that was being obdurate. A break in the meeting was called. During the break some members of the U.S. delegation said the U.S. should hold firm, others said the U.S. should accede to Canada's compromise. The first group replied that although the language was watered down there was some ambiguity in it that could hamper any U.S. President in the future. Pashayan then suggested that the U.S. delegation not do anything for the moment and see what happened next. "I sensed that this body wanted to create a document and the omission of these two things would not kill the document. The U.K. and Canada and Brazil and even Africa were not about to walk out of this conference." When the conference reconvened a few minutes later, it became apparent that a crucial change had occurred on the anti-gun side. The African countries that had been the strongest advocates of the non-state actors clause—including Mozambique, Sierra Leone and South Africa—announced that they would yield to America's demand to delete the paragraph. With this dramatic declaration, Western countries that had been particularly hard core against the U.S. position, including Canada and Great Britain as well as the European Union, said that they would follow the Africans' lead, based on the idea that the African countries were the ones most affected by the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons. In a gracious statement to the Africans, chief U.S. delegate Donald M. McConnell recognized that Africa was not abandoning its principle against trading weapons to non-state actors, but added that the U.S. had its principles too and hoped that Africans would respect them even though they didn't agree with them. After a few hours sleep, the delegates returned to the conference hall to ratify the Program of Action. President Reyes asked if there were any remaining objections. After a few moments of silence had elapsed, he declared that the document was passed by consensus. There then followed a long series of speeches in which delegates congratulated President Reyes and expressed their sorrow that the document had not been much more far-reaching than it was. Charles Pashayan told NewsMax: "It was magnificent to see the U.S. stand up against these forces and not buckle under to what was international political pressure, which was very formidable notwithstanding the fact that the U.S. is the big boy on the block." As for NewsMax's early warnings that the State Department officials on the U.S. delegation might go for a compromise, Pashayan commented: "The people from the State department would have been more inclined to compromise to produce an agreement, that's their business. But they were prepared to follow the directions coming from above to stick with the "redlines" and not go along with watered down language." However, he added, there will be continuing pressure to elevate this Program of Action into a treaty, and also to bring back the issues of private ownership and non-state actors. "All of this has to be understood as part of a process leading ultimately to a treaty that will give an international body power over our domestic laws. That is why we must make sure there is nothing express or implied that would give even the appearance of infringing on our Bill of Rights, which includes the Second Amendment." Lawrence Auster can be reached at [EMAIL PROTECTED] *COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for nonprofit research and educational purposes only.[Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ] Want to be on our lists? Write at [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a menu of our lists! <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
