G. Edward Griffin - The Fearful Master - PDF Archive

In 1953 the United Nations Economic and Social Council was asked to discuss the rise of
slave labor in the USSR. The council would not discuss the matter and removed it from
the agenda. When Red China conquered the independent nation of Tibet, set about
systematically destroying its race and its culture, and proceeded to murder over fifty
thousand Buddhists, the United Nations looked the other way. Years afterward it passed a
vague resolution which started off by praising the principles of its own Charter and then
called for "respect for the fundamental human rights of the Tibetan people and for their
distinctive cultural and religious life." The resolution did not even mention the name of the
aggressor!
When Soviet tanks moved in to crush the Hungarian Revolution, the UN suddenly ceased
its talk about "self-determination," "anti-colonialism" and "the peace and security of man."
As a matter of fact, throughout the blood bath, the Hungarian delegates from the
Communist regime continued to attend United Nations meetings, to vote, and to enjoy all
the respect and privileges of membership without one word of protest from the other
countries. When the UN committee which had investigated the Communist suppression of
freedom in Hungary finally submitted its report to the General Assembly, the United
Nations was suddenly too busy to consider it. When the item came up on the 1960
agenda, we find the following official explanation of what happened: "The press of other
business prevented the Assembly's consideration of the item on Hungary." 12 As the Wall
Street Journal editorialized on September 19, 1960: "Abdication of the UN's professed
moral purpose is looming; it follows logically from the prevailing double standard at the UN
which indicted the West for Suez and Lebanon, but was indifferent to the Communist rape
of Tibet and Hungary."
The United Nations has always loudly professed the right of self-determination as a basic
right. The Charter proclaims "respect for the principles of equal rights and selfdetermination."
In 1955 the social commission of UNESCO declared: "All peoples and all
nations shall have the right of self-determination--namely, the right freely to determine
their political, economic and cultural status." But when anti-Communist Katanga applied
for some of that self-determination, the UN suddenly ran out--or did it? At the very time
that it was denying this right to Katanga, the United Nations admitted Communistcontrolled
Outer Mongolia to the ranks of peace-loving nations. It recognized Syria's
independence and admitted it to the UN when it seceded from the United Arab Republic. It
did the same when Senegal broke away from the Mali Federation; Pakistan from India;
Sudan from Egypt. While the United Nations was insisting that the Congo could not
function economically without Katanga, it cut up an area about one tenth the size of
Katanga and created two whole new nations; the Kingdom of Ruanda and the Republic of
Burundi.
At the very time that the Security Council was condemning Portugal for defending its
citizens against Communist-inspired atrocities in Portuguese Angola, it refused to take any
action whatsoever in a clear cut case of unprovoked aggression against Portuguese Goa
by pro-Communist Nehru of India. 13 All animals may be equal, but some are obviously
more equal than others.
The list is endless. The United Nations' actions speak so much louder than its words that
one can only wonder in amazement at the number of otherwise observant Americans who
have fallen for all its propagandizing about human rights. But the above item regarding
Nehru suggests a good place to end this part of the story. The London Daily Telegraph a
few years ago reported that a young recruit in India's army was asked during a written