G. Edward Griffin - The Fearful Master - PDF Archive

Many nations in the United Nations are dictatorships with hardly a pretense at
representative Government. Few of them share values and traditions similar to ours.
There is widespread contempt for the rich Yankee who thinks that his money can buy
friendship. And we should not deceive ourselves. Most of what apparent support we do
get in the UN is the result of financial bribery, nothing more. Conor O'Brien inadvertently
confirmed this when he wrote:
Delegations from countries receiving aid from the United States would
be warned in a friendly way that "Congress might find it hard to
understand" a given vote. Such countries rarely allowed to their
delegates the luxury of an incomprehensible, and therefore potentially
expensive voting position. 2
Shocking as this situation is, it should not be surprising. After all, how does one go about
enlisting the support of feudal princes, tribal chieftains, despots and cannibals? With moral
suasion? The Soviets are perfectly content to let us spend ourselves silly buying the
illusion of temporary leadership while they work behind the scenes consolidating their
control of the UN. It is frightening to ponder what will happen when Uncle Sam's money
runs out.
The voting delegates, however, are not nearly as important in the ultimate control of the
United Nations as are the permanent staff members of the Secretariat. The resolutions
and edicts that are ground out by the General Assembly and the Security Council are, as
we have seen, purposely vague to leave "wide margins of latitude" for implementation by
the Secretary-General and members of the Secretariat. It is in the Secretariat that the
United Nations becomes the reality of world government. It is here among the faceless
thousands of international bureaucrats that ultimate control resides. These men and
women can effectively neutralize any resolution and prevent it from being realistically
carried out; or they can put teeth into those that were never intended to bite.
When Conor O'Brien was transferred from his position as a delegate from Ireland to the
staff of the Secretariat, he was so impressed at the greater importance of his new role that
he was prompted to write:
What produced the sense of shock was the growing impression that
neither the General Assembly nor the Security Council had the full
materials necessary for an adequately informed discussion and
adequately motivated decisions, on the UN operation in the Congo. The
only people who had these materials were the people who saw the
actual telegrams--the inner circle of the Secretariat. . . . As for the
Congo Advisory Committee, "advising" the Secretary-General on the
basis of the information with which the Secretary-General saw fit to
supply it, it seemed, in the light of the telegrams, much less like an
advisory body than like a group of innocent outsiders being taken for a
guided tour. . . .
. . . the Secretariat--rather than the half-paralysed Security Council or
the amorphous General Assembly--was the reality of the United
Nations, the advancing edge of the sense of international community. If
the Secretariat played its cards remarkably close to its chest, as it now
seemed that it was in the habit of doing, it was justified in this, because
it was tremendously important, for the hopes it represented, that it