“The
president of the United States is an internationalist. He’s going to
do what he can to create a place where the idea of America is just
that—it’s an idea. It’s not an actual place defined by
borders.”—Rep. Tom Tancredo
As technology
makes it possible for us to travel long distances faster,
communicate more easily and cheaply across space and time and stay
informed about events happening in even the most far-flung parts of
the globe, the world seems to be getting smaller by the minute.
Such
globalization, in effect, does away with national borders, leaving
no one untouched. Just think of the car sitting in your driveway
with parts manufactured in eight different countries, the food on
your table, grown in far-off places and shipped to your local
grocer, and the customer service representative for your local phone
company, who just happens to be answering your call from India or
Canada.
While
globalization has certainly proven to be a boon for corporations and
a source of convenience for the consumer, the geo-political aspects
of globalization are more unnerving and can clearly be seen in the
merging of European nations into a single legal and economic entity
known as the European Union.
Suddenly, the
idea of a North American Union—a merging of the American, Canadian
and Mexican physical, economic and legal borders, which was once
ruminated on only by conspiracy theorists, no longer seems quite so
far-fetched. In fact, according to some commentators, academics and
political analysts, the groundwork has already been laid.
In October
2004, the Council on Foreign Relations brought together leaders from
the United States, Mexico and Canada to study how the three
countries could better facilitate economic activity across their
physical and legal borders. Building on the groundwork already
established by the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), this
task force published two documents, Trinational Call for a North
American Economic and Security Community by 2010 and Building a
North American Community, which chart a drastically different course
for the United States. And a Spring 2005 summit in Waco, Texas,
attended by President Bush, President Vicente Fox of Mexico and
Canada’s Prime Minister set us firmly on this path. During the
summit, the three leaders agreed to establish the Security and
Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), which is essentially
a framework for a North American Union.
So what does a
North American Union mean for the United States? According to some,
this could mean a completely unified North America—meaning no
American currency, no American borders and, most critically, no
sovereign American law. In fact, proposals have already been floated
for a North American Court of Justice (with the authority to
overrule a decision of the U.S. Supreme Court), a Trade Tribunal and
a Charter of Fundamental Human Rights
As a result of
such a merger, conservative activist Jerome R. Corsi foresees an
immediate challenge to our First Amendment free speech laws, as well
as our Second Amendment right to bear arms under such a unified
court structure. As he explains in Human Events, “citizens of both
Canada and Mexico cannot freely own firearms. Nor can Canadians or
Mexicans speak out freely without worrying about ‘hate crimes’
legislation or other political restrictions on what they may choose
to say.”
Particularly
worrisome is the fact that most of these proposals are being
advanced in secret, behind closed doors. “President Bush signed a
formal agreement that will end the United States as we know it,” CNN
correspondent Lou Dobbs proclaimed, “and he took the step without
the approval from either the U.S. Congress or the people of the
United States.” Evidently, as Corsi has noted, the plan is “to knit
together the North American Union completely under the radar through
a process of regulations and directives issued by various U.S.
government agencies.”
Clearly, the
integration of the North American countries would facilitate
commerce by making it easier for corporations and immigrants to
cross borders. However, this could drastically alter America’s
constitutional and legal framework and end America as we know it—not
to mention creating a monstrous bureaucracy that would make the
Office of Homeland Security look like a well-organized machine.
So what can we
do about it?
First, we must
demand that Congress closely analyze this proposed transnational
merger. Second, Americans need to demand that President Bush be more
forthright about his intentions. Third, “we the people” need to
voice our concerns to our elected representatives and insist that
they protect our rights. Certain members of Congress have already
formed a Coalition to block the North American Union, while some
states are working on resolutions that would oppose the
implementation of a North American Union as well as any plans that
would lead to the integration of the United States into a larger
international governmental structure.
However, as
with all things, it all comes down to the bottom line. For
mega-corporations, a North American Union may be the gateway to more
money. But for Americans, the bottom line must be something more
than economic concerns—it is maintaining our sovereignty as a
nation. That’s what the American Revolution was all about. And along
with sovereignty come the Bill of Rights and our Constitution. They
are, after all, what have made America unique and a beacon of
democracy to the rest of the world.
Constitutional attorney and
author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford
Institute. He can be contacted at
johnw@rutherford.org.
Information about The Rutherford Institute is available at
www.rutherford.org.
