Among the many conflicting narratives emerging from the fog of the Ukraine war is the future of the “world security system.” Frustrated by the reluctance of Western countries, including the United States, to take more robust action to oppose Russian aggression, Ukraine’s President Zelensky has taken to criticizing the UN system and its subsidiary, NATO, for their lack of resolve.
Indeed, the war has torn the mask off the United Nations, since the world body is not only powerless to stop aggression committed by one of its most prominent members, it also harbors many states in sympathy with the agenda of dictators such as Russia’s Putin and China’s Xi Jinping. The moral indignation of Western countries regarding Russia’s behavior is not at all echoed across much of Africa, Asia, and the Middle East, where many other dictators large and small see Russia’s conduct as a salutary precedent. China in particular is studying the war carefully as it considers when to launch its own war against its hated neighbor and rival, free Taiwan.
Ukraine having never acceded to NATO membership, it has no claim on defense by NATO countries. So what are Zelensky and others now proposing? Nothing less than an overhaul of global security guarantees, allegedly to ensure that what is happening in Ukraine will never happen again. Zelensky himself seems a bit ambivalent, having suggested that the UN Security Council be dissolved if it cannot take concrete action. “We need decisions from the Security Council for peace in Ukraine,” Zelensky told the Security Council, continuing:
If you don’t know how to make this decision, you can do two things, either remove Russia as an aggressor and a source of war so it cannot block decisions about its own aggression and its own war. And then do everything that we can do to establish peace. Or the other option is to show how we can reform or change and work for peace. If there is no alternative, the next option would be to dissolve yourself altogether if there is nothing that you can do besides conversation.
Appealing as that last option might sound, Zelensky seems more enthusiastic about reform. The same day that he suggested dissolving the Security Council, Zelensky also proposed a postwar international conference in Kyiv “in order to determine how we can reform the world security system, how do we establish guarantee of recognition of borders and integrity of states and countries, how we will assert the rule of international law.” Zelensky pleaded:
We must do everything in our power to pass onto the next generation an effective U.N. with the ability to respond preventively to security challenges and thus guarantee peace, prevent aggression and force aggressors to peace.
Stirring words, but what exactly would an “effective UN with the ability to respond preventively … and guarantee peace” look like?
Simply put, it would look like the world government that the United Nations was originally designed to become. Since at least the 1960s, internationalists in the United States and elsewhere have been trying to figure out how to give the United Nations a monopoly on military power — and, in particular, on nuclear weapons — in order to strengthen it to the point that no country, not even the United States or Russia, could challenge its rule. This, after all, was the ultimate policy goal outlined in the Department of State’s infamous book Freedom From War: The United States Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World, published in 1961.
Following two initial stages, in which nuclear weapons development would be curtailed, testing halted, transfers of nuclear technology prohibited, and national military forces progressively reduced, a third and definitive stage outlined in the document envisages a world in which a “UN Peace Force” would achieve military ascendency over all formerly sovereign countries, private ownership of weapons would be prohibited, and the UN would have the power to compel all countries to submit to its rule.
This program, which would certainly bring about the peace and tranquility of global despotism, has never been renounced or modified by American and international foreign-policy elites, and it is a fair bet that any future conference held along the lines Zelensky is proposing would seek such an outcome. Should the Ukraine war mushroom into a world war, the likelihood of such a conference achieving that outcome would be immeasurably greater.
As with all great crises, the Russia-Ukraine war, no matter what course it ultimately takes, is sure to be exploited by globalists to press for fulfilment of long-held aims such as a true world government. Calls for a strengthened international-security system, for war crimes tribunals for Russian malefactors, and so forth, must be understood for what they really are: the cynical exploitation of people’s natural desire to right apparent injustices in order to promote a New World Order.
