World Peace rests on UN Members demanding action against ‘foreign-imposed’ regime change.

A Global Call is needed. It is time the world and its people woke up to some ground realities, known but ignored for far too long. In pursuit of wealth, profit and power over nations and people, a handful of nations have seen fit to use force and aggression deploying fictitious and varied manipulative systems using UN mechanisms to descend upon nations and cause chaos. Divide and Rule a feature of colonial rule is taking a new form today. There are no wars today, there are internal conflicts which have everything to do with foreign sponsored regime change programs. These covert/overt agendas are planned not by governments but by a handful of invisible industrialists who get powerful governments and their leaders to do the dirty work. If this is the scenario, it can easily be stopped so long as the world and its people are ready to stand up and say ‘no more’. It is now time for the nations of the world and their people to realize that the world is getting nowhere and none of the UN’s ‘peace initiatives’ will hold water when they know and we know that beneath the façade of peace terminologies a handful of nations are plotting to overthrow democratically elected governments and create chaos in these nations.

The United Nations was formed not to take over nations. The Preamble states its objective as being explicitly to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, to protect people from conflicts and to solve conflicts. What is also clearly stated is the policy of non-intervention.

UN Resolutions are getting abused. Libya’s case is a good example. NATO intervened in Yugoslavia without any UN Security Council resolution. However, Article II para 4 of the UN charter legally rules out the use of violence (threat and/or aggression).

UN is to function as moderator. UN bodies are meant for reasonable and peaceful settlement – why is the UN Human Rights Council and in particular the High Commissioner acting in contravention of these golden rules? She is currently adopting a cane approach and that too only to selected nations? Who has given her this authority? On what grounds is she abusing her position to issue arrest warrants, this is not how the UN was mandated to function by its own Charter? Members of the UN system need to immediately address this. Simply because their nation is not the target they should keep silent. If the world is to become a better place people need to stand up and be counted when wrong is happening. The UNHRC is doing great damage to world peace and only Members of the UN can stop it before the High Commissioner ends up further abusing systems and precedents that are being newly created outside of the mandate.

The examples of foreign-imposed regime change are many:

Hawaii, 1893 — U.S. forces invaded the island kingdom of Hawaii and forced the surrender of the ruling Queen Lili’uokalani as she secretly worked on a new constitution that would restore power and influence to native Hawaiians. Power had shifted to non-native sugar planters and businessmen via a “Bayonet Constitution” imposed in 1887, though the royal family continued to preside. After Lili’uokalani surrendered, local business interests pushed for annexation by the United States, which occurred in 1898. Hawaii became the 50th U.S. state in 1959. To this day, however, a few Hawaiians still dispute the validity of U.S. rule.

Colombia/Panama, 1903 — President Theodore Roosevelt was unable to reach a deal with Colombia to build a canal through its isthmus of Panama, so the United States took advantage of a revolt in the region and quickly recognized Panama as an independent country. The diplomatic recognition was followed quickly by a deal to build a U.S.-run canal. America ran the canal and a surrounding zone until turning it over to Panama in 1999.

Japan, 1945 — Japan surrendered to World War II’s allied powers on Sept. 2, 1945 (atomic bombs dropped by US on 6^th and 9^th August 1945 on Hiroshima and Nagasaki), and soon was placed under allied control administered by U.S. Gen. Douglas MacArthur. According to the U.S. State Department’s Internet site, “U.S. objectives were to ensure that Japan would become a peaceful nation and to establish democratic self-government supported by the freely expressed will of the people.” A new constitution took effect in 1947 and Japan — now a U.S. ally described by the State Department as “a constitutional monarchy with a parliamentary government” — gained full sovereignty in 1952.

Iran, 1953 — U.S. manipulation helped lay the groundwork for the overthrow of elected Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadeq, Mossadeq had incurred the wrath of Britain by nationalizing the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, and U.S. President Eisenhower reportedly feared Iran was unstable and its oil might fall under the Soviet Union’s sphere of influence. In Mossadeq’s place, the pro-American Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi installed a puppet prime minister, reasserted his power and effectively ruled for decades. However, his regime was so brutal and unpopular that it is seen as a prime reason for Iran’s vehemently anti-American Islamic revolution in 1979.

Guatemala, 1954 — A CIA-supported coup by Guatemalan exiles invaded from a base in Honduras and overthrew the democratically elected, but leftist regime of President Jacobo Arbenz, who was engaged in controversial land reform measures that transferred corporate land to farmers. Until Arbenz resigned during the coup, code named “Operation Success” by U.S. intelligence, CIA plots to assassinate him and other Guatemalan officials were under consideration, published reports on declassified government records say. U.S.-backed Col. Carlos Castillo Armas replaced Arbenz as president, but a decades-long civil war ensued, causing an estimated 100,000 to 200,000 deaths or disappearances during the rule of strongmen friendly to the United States.

Cuba, 1961 (failed) — The United States trained a force largely of Cuban exiles to invade Cuba and topple its Communist leader Fidel Castro. However, the so-called “Bay of Pigs” invasion failed, as did numerous subsequent U.S.-sponsored attempts to kill Castro.

South Vietnam, 1963 — President Ngo Dinh Diem and secret police chief Ngo Dinh Nuh, his brother and chief adviser, were assassinated while trying to escape the country during what historians believe was a U.S.-sanctioned coup.

Chile, 1973 — The Nixon administration provided covert funding and the CIA conducted operations to weaken democratically elected, socialist government of Chilean President Salvador Allende and pave the way for a military coup, according to reports on U.S. government documents declassified during the Clinton administration. Thousands of people died or disappeared under the subsequent 17-year rule of Allende’s successor, Gen. Augusto Pinochet.

Grenada, 1983 — Bernard Courd, a leftist friendly to Communist Cuba, seized power after a series of coups on this Caribbean island nation where about 1,000 American medical students studied. President Reagan, saying the medical students were in jeopardy, soon ordered an invasion, dubbed “Operation Urgent Fury,” which defeated the Marxists and resulted in a pro-U.S. democratic government.

Panama, 1989 — The United States already had indicted Panama’s leader, Manuel Noriega, on drug-trafficking and racketeering charges in 1988, when it launched “Operation Just Cause” at the end of 1989 — invading Panama, seizing Noriega, and later putting him on trial in Miami. Panama turned to anti-Noriega leadership chosen in an election that Noriega had annulled months before, and continues to operate under democratically elected leaders. Noriega, who allegedly at one time was a paid CIA informant, was sentenced to 40 years in a U.S. prison in 1992 after a controversial trial, though a judge later reduced the sentence to 30 years. In 1999, the United States turned over control of the Panama Canal to the democratized government of Panama.

Haiti, 1994 — With a U.S.-led multinational invasion force poised to attack and restore democratically elected leaders under a United Nations mandate, military leaders on the poverty-stricken Caribbean island of Haiti stepped down. They had seized control in 1991 from the elected president, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, who was restored under the protection of the multinational force. U.S. peacekeeping troops quickly pulled out as Aristide consolidated power. However, Haiti’s financial troubles continue, it has been criticized for its human rights record and subsequent elections were widely denounced as corrupt and undemocratic.

The custodian of international justice is said to be the International Court. However, we are a little puzzled that with the involvement of US in a series of global regime change including assassinations of elected foreign leaders, the UN and ICC should simply watch US and allies descend on and destroy nations.

In the case of Libya, the ICC delivered an indictment against Gaddafi that he was not fit to be leader of Libya and was to be arrested and brought to the Hague.

ICC also indicted Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir for his alleged responsibility in perpetrating genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes in Darfur and ICC viewed that he too was not fit to lead.

We recall the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia (ICTY) indicted Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic. The former ICTY prosecutor who issued the arrest for Milosevic is Louise Arbor now head of International Crisis Group. Her argument is that “If a state launches a massive criminal enterprise against its people, why should ‘all necessary measures’ fall short of disabling those responsible, including by forcibly removing them from power?”

If the ICC is meant to function for justice why would it align itself to political prerogatives proved by its actions which came immediately after UN Security Council referrals in the case of Libya and Sudan.

We need to go back to the ICC case when Nicaragua took US to court in 1984 over sponsoring terrorism. Naturally, the U.S. sponsorship of a Nicaraguan group displays a transnational paradigm within state sponsored terrorism. The use of proxy organizations has been to keep the sponsors invisible. There are 4 ways to identify such

1. Sponsorship support is political or moral for a groups ideological stance

2. Logistical and technical support involving direct provisional support for a group/groups (supplying materials/military hardware)

3. Foreign-state assistance to group to achieve goals

4. Joint operations – foreign state directly engages with proxy in operational affairs (US/Allies aligned with rebels throughout Arab Spring operations)

Initially, in 1981, the CIA’s aim was to feed, clothe, arm and supervise the contras (Hamilton & Inouye, 1987). As the Reagan doctrine was developed. This is exactly what India did by arming and training various Sri Lankan Tamil groups in India. Sri Lanka certainly has a case against India and the evidence against India is fool proof.

US established the National Security Decision Directive 17 in 1982. This provided the CIA with $19 million in military aid that was to be utilised in recruitment and support (Huggins, 1987). Between 1979 and 1991 this aid amounted to over $6 billion (Gareau, 2004). The Reagan administration attempted to portray the support that the U.S. gave the contras as humanitarian ‘counter-terrorism’.

USA is today calling for international inquiries when it forgets that in 1998 US was happy to take any country to court for war crimes and hold everyone to standard except USA. What kind of morals does US function with?

The Court ruled, in 1986, that the U.S. government had broken international law through its support for the Contras, and ordered the United States to pay reparations. The amount was not specified, but estimates ran as high as $17 billion dollars at the time which the US did not pay,

The Third World has yet to discover how imperialism works. Africa’s leaders are targets. For Kenya’s William Rutu and Uhuru Kenyata escape may look a distant dream. The likelihood of them being frisked away or ending up as dead as Osama is a possibility that cannot be ruled out. There is also the possibility of making them fugitives. Capturing the two is not an impossibility for Kenya is filled with white presence. Once the President and his Deputy become fugitives, what the Americans will need is just a Resolution from the UN Security Council to the effect that both Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto surrender to the ICC or face the consequences “with all options being left open” to capture them. These are examples that could happen to any Third World nation leader.

Third world leaders need to now pool together. They must rid themselves of the fascination they have over been ruled by the whites for in essence everything boils down to just that. . It is easily visible in the corporate sector as well. In multinational companies the white CEO is likely to always get higher perks/privileges and even salary. In the hotel industry how many top slots are given to non-whites with on par remunerations? Compare the salaries of the new set of non-whites holding top global spots and there is a major difference.

However, it has now come to a time when the people of the Third World must now rally together. We must show solidarity with fellow nations victims of regime change – Venezuela, Syria, Thailand and Ukraine the newest victims and the likelihood of other nations falling cannot be ruled out. The simple lesson is there is no bargaining and the leaders who attempt to bargain end up first to fall. To fall with dignity has to be a better option and it is one that would at least guarantee history’s respect.

The leaders of the Third World need to rally together – they must use the podium of the UN to not be party to bringing down fellow Third World nations. If it is economies that rule the day – surely the Third World can build up their own by isolating the handful of nations that are acting as bullies. Countries need to realize that these First World bully nations cannot survive without the Third World, they are not self-sufficient and they need the Third World, their bounty is built on the interests charged for non-visible money sent as loans but money given back to them as interest from Third World nations.

People now must begin to open their eyes to the charade taking place in global politics and global economy. If Russia, China and India cannot provide leadership to bring out the Third World from becoming flogged and destroyed the 3 nations must realize that the rest of the world are simply dominoes for the handful of bullies who are eyeing Russia, India and China. We shall leave out India at this juncture for India is at present acting as a vassal for the West yet, hopefully India will realize it has a bigger role to play without stooping to the low levels it does to please white nations.

The fact of the matter remains – regime change is taking place all around us. The local agents that have been co-opted include media, legal fraternity, segments of youth belonging to elite families, trade unions, opposition parties and political leaders – mass protests, false flags, lying media, religious entities representing the West, journalists paid to distort news become part of the general apparatus for regime change.

If movements against governments find their roots to foreign nations who are funding, sponsoring and even training these groups the world needs to accept that these are illegal and immoral practices and condemn them.

The people of these nations need to be forewarned.

Shenali D Waduge
Sri Lanka