Walter Cronkite Promotes Law Of The Sea Treaty
October 1, 2007
By Cliff Kincaid
Dan Rather is making headlines suing his former employer, but Rather's predecessor, Walter Cronkite, is busy promoting world government. Cronkite has just surfaced as one of the 101 "prominent leaders" signing a letter urging Senate passage of the Law of the Sea Treaty. His CBS affiliation is listed on the letter, making it seem as though the media giant is taking sides in the debate over the pact. This would not be surprising; media coverage has been overwhelmingly pro-treaty. A news conference I participated in on September 26 to oppose the treaty was ignored by most of the media. However, Newsmax.com, CNSNews.com and the Washington Times were among those covering it.
Cronkite, a cranky liberal in his old age, has also been a fundraiser for many years for the World Federalists, who have declared that the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), by creating an independent source of revenue for the U.N. through a global tax, signals the emergence of a world government.
Convinced by international lawyers in their JAG offices that the treaty somehow guarantees freedom of navigation on the high seas, U.S. military leaders backing UNCLOS have no awareness of the real agenda behind UNCLOS. Admiral Patrick M. Walsh, the Vice Chief of Naval Operations for the Department of the Navy, is scheduled to be one of three witnesses before Senator Joe Biden's Foreign Relations Committee on Thursday, September 27, promoting the pact. All of the witnesses will be in favor of the treaty. No contrary witness is being permitted to speak at the hearing. But what do you think will be going through Admiral Walsh's mind when he finally discovers that some of those on his side of the issue want to prosecute him and other U.S. military leaders for "war crimes" in Iraq and elsewhere?
The "strange bedfellows" aspect of this controversy demonstrates how out-of-place our military leaders are in backing UNCLOS. This is a treaty written and promoted by those who want to restrict U.S. military power. Strangely, Admiral Walsh and other Navy and Coast Guard officials are on the same side of the issue as Citizens for Global Solutions, the group pushing the International Criminal Court treaty that could land our military leaders in foreign jails.
Don't take my word for it. Don Kraus, the Executive Vice President of Citizens for Global Solutions and the director of the organization's Government Relations Department and Political Action Committee, has written on a blog that it is absolutely imperative for the liberal Senate to pass UNCLOS because that is the only way to pave the way for accession to the International Criminal Court (ICC) treaty. The ICC is a U.N.-sponsored international court that could prosecute and put Americans in foreign jails. The most frequently mentioned American targets are U.S. soldiers and their military and civilian leaders, who could be prosecuted and sentenced for "war crimes" without Bill of Rights protections.
But that's not all. Kraus says that, if the Senate passes UNCLOS, then he and his fellow "progressives" can anticipate Senate action on several other treaties in addition to the ICC.
In his own words, this is what Kraus says, "If the Senate will not accede to this convention, how can we expect them to support the ratification of the backlog of multilateral treaties waiting for a vote including:, the International Criminal Court treaty, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, the Women's Convention (CEDAW), the Rights of the Child, the Biodiversity Treaty, and many others. What will happen when it is time for the Senate to consider the successor to the Kyoto protocol, which runs out in 2012?"
There you have the secret agenda behind this treaty, in the words of one of those vigorously promoting it. UNCLOS is supposed to set the stage for passage of other U.N. treaties, including the ICC and one on "children's rights." The latter will prohibit parents from spanking their children. The so-called women's rights treaty known as CEDAW (Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women) will mandate abortion on demand and other feminist "rights" on a global level.
Kraus tells his fellow "progressives" that the fight for UNCLOS will also set the stage for Senate action and passage of more treaties on "climate change." By that he presumably means higher taxes, perhaps on a global basis, to combat alleged man-made global warming. "One senate staffer I talked to recently has been yelling at groups coming to talk with him about climate change," writes Kraus. "He's been telling them that he doesn't want to talk to them unless the first words out of their mouth is 'Law of the Sea,' because if we can't get this one through, none of the others agreements are going to get through.'"
So UNCLOS is a foot-in-the-door for a wide-ranging international agenda. Of course, Kraus should know. His group, Citizens for Global Solutions, used to be known as the World Federalist Association, which openly supported world government financed by global taxes. On October 19, 1999, Walter Cronkite accepted the group's Global Governance Award and declared, "Today we must develop federal structures on a global level. We need a system of enforceable world law-a democratic federal world government-to deal with world problems."
Cronkite also urged Senate ratification of a list of treaties. He declared, "Ratify the Treaty to Ban Land Mines, the Law of the Sea Treaty, the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, the Convention to Eliminate All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Most important, we should sign and ratify the Treaty for a Permanent International Criminal Court."
Doesn't this sound like the list offered by Don Kraus? Could there be an agenda behind Biden's push to ratify UNCLOS? We do know that Biden's chief of staff, Antony Blinken, is a former Clinton Administration official.
The implication behind Kraus's concern is that liberal Democrats better get UNCLOS passed now, with Bush Administration support, because it's going to be much tougher to ratify the measure under a Democratic president when Republican senators are most likely to come together in opposition.
Of course, there's nothing stopping Republican Senators from opposing Biden and Bush when it comes to UNCLOS. But do they have the courage to tell their President that he is seriously wrong?
All eyes are now on the Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, who has yet to take a stand on the treaty.
Back in 1994, when McConnell was leading the effort against so-called campaign finance reform, on the grounds that it was an unconstitutional abridgement of free speech rights, he declared that "I am a proud guardian of gridlock." He did everything possible to stop this measure from passing.
Many conservatives are hoping that McConnell once again assumes the role of "guardian of gridlock" on the issue of American sovereignty and UNCLOS. McConnell is going to have to decide if he is with Bush, who was maneuvered by the State Department into backing UNCLOS, or with President Reagan, who rejected it. McConnell has such clout and credibility that he alone can save or sink this treaty. His decision will help determine the future direction of the Republican Party on the most critical issue of our time. More importantly, America's survival as a sovereign nation hangs in the balance.