Stiglitz on Russia, WTO and NWO

Many people disdain the term New World Order - but like it or not - one is coming: a world order which is not dictated by the hegemons of the USA banking/corporate moguls. See What does the NWO really mean?

Yes, there will be a new world in which the 'profit before people' dogma is not the 'invisible hand' that rules the world. Russia, China and the developing world has had enough of USA militarism for profit, and calling the shots for the rest of the world.

Whether or not one understands the earth shaking importance of the dollar being replaced as reserve currency, this change will rock the world. Perhaps not as fast as the bombs the US showers on its unfortunate imperialistic resource targets. But things are going to change big time. It may take a few years but the change cannot be stopped now.

If there is going to be hope for all, global governance must not be in the hands of the superlatively greedy. A balance of powers which must cooperate for the mutual benefit of all is much preferable. This battle will be fought not with bombs and high tech weapons; but with global trade. The new world order will have to do with how to divide the remaining resources of the planet among nations and their peoples in a fairer way for all. And the World Trade Organization (WTO)is center stage.

Members of WTO

I recall attending an upper division business class in which my fellow students had to give a presentation and overview of the WTO. At the end, I asked a question: If the WTO is so wonderful, why are so many nations protesting its meetings? My bizhead classmates stood frozen like deer in the headlights. They apparently had no answer because they had no real understanding of the topic they were assigned to discuss.

The World Trade Organisation is the power broker in today’s global economy of international trade which is the driver of world economic growth. Although WTO rules assure all countries will get a fair deal regardless of their size or bargaining position, this is sometimes forgotten when superpowers begin feuding in the global arena about cotton and corn. And as in the boxing ring, there are heavyweights and lightweights. Big fish eat little fish. Being the world's economic superpower for decades, the US has eaten a lot of little fish and intends to consume all it can. But the little fish are fighting back now, supporting the plans of China and Russia for a fairer distribution of earth's resources.

The critical drivers of this change are 1) a change in the reserve currency and 2) a fairer shake for all nations in the WTO. When China and Russia are both members of the WTO, the USA will no longer be able to dominate its mechanisms with the hubris of its hegemonic world domination plan.

Joseph Stiglitz is a world renowned maverick economist whose advice has largely been ignored by the governments who represent the interest of multi-national banking/corporate moguls. The article below concerns the entrance requirements of Russia to the WTO imposed by USUK (United States and United Kingdom). Of course USUK does not want Russia to join the WTO as it would dilute their power (and perhaps bring about a new world order not envisioned by the current Masters of the Universe).

Make no mistake: the future depends on a fairer system of international trade, whether or not one finds this boring.

Joseph Stiglitz calls Russia's WTO
entry terms 'outrageous'

02/07/2009
Source
MOSCOW
Prominent U.S. economist Joseph Stiglitz on Thursday called the terms demanded of Russia to join the World Trade Organization "outrageous" and praised Russia for standing up to the global trade body. "The WTO should be an international agreement where, if you agree to go along with the provisions, any country can join," said Stiglitz, winner of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences (2001) and former senior vice president and chief economist of the World Bank.

"That's not the way it's done. The way it is done is what one group called 'extortion at the gate,'" he said during a Moscow-Manchester video conference. "The United States and some other countries have tried to say, 'if you want to join our club, you just don't have to agree with the terms everybody else does, but you have to pay us something extra, you have to go beyond the terms of the agreement and give concessions that other countries don't have to agree to,'" he said. "I think this is outrageous.

And I think it was important for Russia to say 'we won't do that, we will go along with the agreement signed by other countries but we won't be subjected to this kind of extortion,'" Stiglitz said. "Unfortunately poor countries, developing countries, often aren't in that position of strength to say that to the WTO.

And I think it was actually a positive contribution for the sake of the whole global community that Russia did that," the professor at Britain's University of Manchester said. He also said Russia had much less to gain from joining than other countries because its export base depends so much on natural resources and raw materials, which are not subject to trade restrictions. "Meanwhile your market could be flooded with imported goods from other countries that would make it more difficult for you to recreate the industrial base that would be necessary for a strong economy," he said.

Russia has been involved in talks to join the WTO for 16 years, Kazakhstan for 13 years. Belarus recently has shown no desire to join the global trade body. Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan plan to join the global trade body in the form of a united customs territory. They made the decision on June 9 after talks between the three countries' prime ministers.

Related
Why the dollar is dying
When China awakes, it will shake the world. - Napoleon Bonaparte
NWO = New reserve currency
Patrick Bond: Will economists Stiglitz and Yunus add to debate on crisis?
Stiglitz slams inflation-targeting
Stiglitz: The UN Takes Charge (Update: and The Economic Lessons of the Iraq War)

NWO, Clowns ... and the People

It's all but over folks. While most argue about the issues media tells us are important, well laid plans to change your country's soveriegnity are quietly put into implementation. We are at the circus and while we are distracted by the clowns, the center ring act is invisible to all but a very few. Don't believe me? Well, then believe the plan from the horse's mouth.

To paraphrase Karl Rove: While people are busy figuring what we have already done, we are busy implementing the plans we have chosen for the future. And this is exactly what is happening. I am not the only one to notice: indeed, KRS-One and Noam Chomsky said the very same thing about the search for 911 culprits.

One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work.

Video

The bitterest pill is yet to be swallowed. By the time pundits realise they have been watching the clowns and that there is little they can do to change the well laid plans of the elite, it will be too late. The theories the media have meticulously managed for the public consumption as 'conspiratorial' will suddenly become a description of reality, a fierce judgement on the ability of the populace to understand their own confusions and delusions.

I don't ask the reader to believe me. But I do ask you read the following two articles, one quoting Zoelleck, president of the World Bank; and the other a recently published document from the Council on Foreign Relations.

If we do not stop fighting among ourselves and open our eyes and learn from what is painfully obvious if we were only looking, we well deserve to lose our freedoms. No doubt we will then spend our time pointing fingers at each other. If we are not architects of the NWO, we will surely be its victims.

World Bank President Admits Agenda
For Global Government

Paul Joseph Watson
Source
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
World Bank President and Bilderberg elitist Robert Zoellick openly admitted the plan to eliminate national sovereignty and impose a global government during a speech on the eve of the G20 summit.

Speaking about the agenda to increase not just funding but power for international organizations on the back of the financial crisis, Zoellick stated, “If leaders are serious about creating new global responsibilities or governance, let them start by modernising multilateralism to empower the WTO, the IMF, and the World Bank Group to monitor national policies.”

In other words, give global institutions the power to regulate national policy as part of the creation of global government.

What Zoellick is outlining is essentially the end of national sovereignty and the reclassification of national governments as mere subordinates to a global authority that is completely unaccountable to the voting public of any country.

The more cynical amongst us would call this a global dictatorship. Zoellick couches the plan in flowery rhetoric of helping the poor and alleviating poverty, but as we have documented for years, the global elite’s goal of world government has little to do with saving the planet and everything to do with creating a global fascist state.

Zoellick, former Executive Vice President of Fannie Mae and advisor to Goldman Sachs, is a top elitist who was intimately involved in the Enron scandal and the 2000 presidential election debacle. He was also a signatory to the Project For A New American century document that called for invading Iraq as part of implementing a brutal world empire in 1998. He was later a foreign policy advisor to George W. Bush.

As to be expected, Zoellick is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission. He also attended the annual invitation-only conferences of the Bilderberg Group in 1991, 2003, 2006 and 2007.

Meanwhile, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown will use the G20 summit in London to extend an olive branch to China, offering them a central role in the construction of a new world order and a global government, according to reports.

“Brown will hold talks with Hu Jintao, China’s president, following discussions with Barack Obama, amid signs that developing countries see the G20 summit as a chance to impose a new world order and end the era of Anglo-European dominance,” reports the Guardian.


Under the proposal, China will vastly increase its IMF funding in return for more voting rights.

A central focus of the G20 summit will be the proposal to supplant the dollar with a new global currency. Both the IMF and the United Nations threw their weight behind the implementation of a new global reserve currency system to replace the dollar, in the same week that Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told CFR globalists that he was “open” to the idea.

China and Russia brought the issue to the forefront of this week’s G20 when they jointly called for a new global reserve currency a week ago.

Brown has consistently called for global regulation of the financial system as a means towards global governance. In a speech at St Paul’s Cathedral in London yesterday he again called for a new “global society”.

For related stories, see Source

CFR Unveils Global Governance Agenda

March 31, 2009
By Daniel Taylor
Source
The Council on Foreign Relations, often described as the "real state department", has launched an initiative to promote and implement a system of effective world governance.

The program, titled "The International Institutions and Global Governance Program," utilizes the resources of the "...David Rockefeller Studies Program to assess existing regional and global governance mechanisms..." The initial funding for the program came with a $6 million grant from the Robina Foundation, which claims that the grant is "...one of the largest operating grants ever received in Council history."

The IIGG program, launched on May 1st, 2008, is the latest manifestation of an agenda that has existed since and before the founding of the Council on Foreign Relations. Former CFR member, Rear Admiral Chester Ward, stated regarding the group,

"The most powerful clique in these elitist groups have one objective in common - they want to bring about the surrender of the sovereignty and the national independence of the United States. A second clique of international members in the CFR comprises the Wall Street international bankers and their key agents. Primarily, they want the world banking monopoly from whatever power ends up in the control of global government."

The International Institutions and Global Governance Program identifies several "global issues" that require a system of world governance. Environmental issues, terrorism, the global economy and energy are all mentioned. The project then states that a system of "universal membership" could be pursued, or alternatively a regional organization, such as the European Union model.

"In each of these spheres, the program will consider whether the most promising framework for governance is a formal organization with universal membership (e.g., the United Nations); a regional or sub-regional organization; a narrower, informal coalition of like-minded countries; or some combination of all three."

The program calls for the "Re-conceptualizing" of national sovereignty, citing the European Union's "pooling" of sovereignty as a model. The CFR project recognizes that historically, the United States has been resistant to the ideals of global governance. The project states, "Among the most important factors determining the future of global governance will be the attitude of the United States..."

The IIGG program continues, "...few countries have been as sensitive as the United States to restrictions on their freedom of action or as jealous in guarding their sovereign prerogatives." The program then states that the separation of powers as stated in the Constitution, along with the U.S. Congress, stand in the way of the United States assuming "new international obligations."

As stated,

"...the country’s longstanding tradition of liberal “exceptionalism” inspires U.S. vigilance in protecting the domestic sovereignty and institutions from the perceived incursions of international bodies. Finally, the separation of powers enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, which gives Congress a critical voice in the ratification of treaties and endorsement of global institutions, complicates U.S. assumptions of new international obligations."

The actions of the Military Industrial Complex under the Bush Administration have served globalist interests well. "Global structures" are now presented as the mechanism to prevent such atrocities. America's demonization is central to building a system of world governance. Patrick M. Stewart, who is currently the director of the CFR IIGG program, is anticipating the Obama administration "...to seek to turn the page on what many perceived to be 'cowboy unilateralism' of the Bush years, by embracing multilateral cooperation, re-kindling U.S. alliances and partnerships, and engaging in sustained diplomacy within the UN framework," as reported by Xinhua. The IIGG project itself stated in May of 2008 that, "Regardless of whether the administration that takes office in January 2009 is Democratic or Republican, the thrust of U.S. foreign policy is likely to be multilateral to a significant degree."

Globalist forces are hard at work in the economic and political realms in an attempt to shape the future of the world, furthering the dominance of the global elite. Calls for a global currency in response to the economic crisis are regularly occurring, drawing the tacit support of Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, speaking to the CFR.

Henry Kissinger, a CFR member, anticipates that President Obama will, "...give new impetus to American foreign policy partly because the reception of him is so extraordinary around the world. I think his task will be to develop an overall strategy for America in this period when, really, a new world order can be created. It's a great opportunity, it isn't just a crisis."

The Council on Foreign Relations global governance program will undoubtedly be pursued under the Obama administration, which is filled with CFR members. President of the CFR, Richard Haass, is serving as a top adviser to the Obama administration. As the IIGG program admits, regardless of who sits in the White House, the globalist agenda moves forward full speed ahead.

Read the full IIGG project report here.