Beware Armenia, Know Thy “One World Friends”

By Ardavast Avakian and Antranig Bedrossian

Let us Armenians not only know the critical importance of unity and cohesiveness for the future existence and survival of the Armenian nation, but also be able to identify the existence of forces that are influencing and guiding the foreign policies of the major world powers, which, in turn, could affect Armenia.

For the last eighty years there has existed a gradual transformation of the major nations into worldwide meddling giants. Today they have created a “New World Order”, as was uttered by President George Bush during the Gulf War in Iraq.

The real meaning of the “New World Order” is the convergence of all nations into one, for the creation of the economic control of the world. Free and sovereign nations are an anathema to the supporters of the New World Order. By the development of international and regional institutions, interwoven with each other and linked to a common world center, states and nations would be governed by a “world government” which would have its final say in world matters to the best interests of the powerful. In practice, the priorities of weaker states would be subordinated to those of stronger states. Major powers would try to forcefully convince that their priorities are also the priorities of every other state.

Under this New World Order, international borders would become irrelevant and territorial disputes would be perceived as outdated, a threat to the security of the New World. As a consequence, policies and actions would be taken by the proponents of the New World Order to weaken the national consciousness of nations, for the benefit of world cosmopolitan upbringing, disguised under the concepts of “globalism” and “internationalism.” The formation of multi-ethnic states would be encouraged, and the creation of ethnic (national) states discouraged. Within such states, the development of systems and laws would encourage and even accelerate meddling of populations, so that no one ethnic group could claim ownership of a particular territory, neither on ancestral or demographic basis.

The fewer the number of states, the easier to govern the world; the fewer ethnic groups and minorities exist in the world, the smaller the number of interethnic conflicts will be; the more cultures and languages integrate and disappear, the easier to do business and market similar products all across the planet. International communications systems, controlled by the same “global” forces, are also working in that direction.

National liberation struggles by oppressed and small peoples, seeking their emancipation and self-determination, would be perceived as the new “evil” that the international community under the leadership of leading major powers should fight. This is confirmed by declarations made recently by US Secretary of State Madeline Albright who said, “NATO is now facing a new enemy: the instability of states, caused by poverty, border problems and ethno nationalism.” An army of think tanks is ready to identify theoretical descriptions of national liberation struggles under the euphemism of “ethnic conflict.” They purposefully confront and involve themselves in these struggles with the purpose of destabilizing an area and minimizing the possibility of any one strong sovereign state emerging from the conflict. That would be a threat to their eventual world domination.

In practice, this could mean assistance by major world powers to states, which have border problems, and particularly self-determination struggles to counter within their otherwise contestable borders. This could also mean more bloodshed in the name of territorial integrity of states to the detriment of peoples seeking their emancipation.

This world transformation accelerated during World War I through the creation of a group of one hundred forward-looking social engineers that masterminded the Versailles Peace Treaty. This group formed the nucleus of “The Institute of International Affairs” which was to have branches in New York and London. “The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and “the Royal Institute of International Affairs,” respectively. Since then, this structure, representing powerful economic and political interests, has grown into today’s Group of

Seven and at present is attempting to engineer the inclusion of Russia as its eighth member.

The vehicle by which this convergence of power was created was the United Nations. It was established ostensibly for the illusion that it would end wars. (Then why have wars taken place in Korea, Vietnam, Argentina, the Persian Gulf, Somalia and Bosnia, etc. etc.?) In addition, NATO, which includes, Turkey, has been turned into the enforcement arm of the United Nations. This should explain the support being given today to both Turkey and Azerbaijan by the Group of Seven, namely, Britain, Germany, France, Italy, Canada, Japan and US.

NATO is only another creation of the one worlders, identified in their charter as a defensive organization. Today, its true colors have been exposed as an offensive tool for punishing a nation who wants to remain free of interference by outside forces. The Serb attack once started was not to fail, otherwise NATO’s image will be tarnished and their dreams of world control would be dashed.

The Armenian government should ask the question: “Do we want to be next on the list of small nations to be forced into complying with outside forces, dictating whether we grow or how we are to govern ourselves?

The appropriate answer to this New World Order is a more powerful army for both the Republic of Armenia and Karabagh, supported by a strong economy (by printing and establishing the value of its own money), firm united national ideology, and involving a complex network of communication structures both regionally and internationally.

Ardavast Avakian Sept. 1997
ardavast@att.net

Antranig Bedrossianantranig@net.com.ca