A Covenant With Death

Population Control
A Covenant With Death
William Norman Grigg
Source: The New American
October 17, 1994

We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement ... we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves ....

-- Isaiah 28:15

In Cairo, Egypt on September 13th, delegations from more than 180 countries approved the Programme of Action of the United Nations International Conference on Population and Development, a 20-year plan to "stabilize" the world's human population at a cost of no less than $17 billion. Although the delegations of 19 Catholic and Muslim nations expressed reservations concerning the program's approach to abortion, pre- and extra-marital sex, and other moral issues, not a single contingent rebelled against the document's misanthropic premise, which was that the growth of the human population must be restrained through the imposition of global controls.

The acceptance of this premise is a significant victory for the socialist worldview: If population growth creates a "crisis" exceeding the remedial abilities of free people, then the question is no longer whether global socialism is "necessary," but rather the specific form that system will take. Accordingly, it was appropriate that the major secondary theme of the conference was "development" -- meaning redistribution of wealth from the industrial "North" to the impoverished "South."

Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member Timothy Wirth, Undersecretary of State for Global Affairs and leader of the U.S. delegation to Cairo, exulted on September 13th that "the world will never be the same after Cairo." A glimpse of the radical impositions envisioned by the Cairo plan was provided on September 5th in a speech offered by J. Brian Atwood (CFR), director of the Agency for International Development (USAID). According to Atwood, "We will all be changed by this global discussion. In time, individuals will change their outlook. Societies will change their mores. Religions will interpret their beliefs differently..." (emphasis added).

The Cairo event attracted more than 15,000 people, most of them associated with non-governmental organizations (NGOs) clustered at the far left end of the political spectrum. Jane Fonda dropped by to inform her eager audience that severe alterations in human lifestyles are "inevitable." The conference also received a lecture from aging oceanographer and leftist Jacques Cousteau, who has publicly stated that population stabilization will require the eradication of 350,000 people every day.

Although the assembled eco-luminaries were unified in their insistence that the American "consumption-oriented" way of life is killing "Mother Earth," few of them were inclined toward asceticism or frugality. The delegates and organization representatives luxuriated in air-conditioned conference halls. Conference attendees dined on imported American beef -- the production of which, according to eco-extremists, contributes to ozone depletion. Furthermore, the production and revision of countless reports, charts, press releases, and other documents created the region's greatest deforestation threat since the Phoenician ship-building industry decimated the cedars of Lebanon. This world-class hypocrisy is an organic part of the vanguard conceit which animates those who presume to rule the globe: The rules don't apply to those who would rule humanity.

Counterfeit Consensus

The Cairo conference, like every other significant UN assembly, was essentially an exercise in ratifying a preordained conclusion. Even before a single syllable had been uttered in the conference plenary sessions, officials of the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) were proclaiming that a "consensus" had been achieved. Yet nobody was able to define exactly what the term "consensus" means. In Atwood's arithmetic, even opponents of the ICPD's objectives are included within the "new global consensus" which the Cairo conference supposedly represents: "Even those who chose not to endorse this conference's plan of action, and those who have seen fit to boycott this conference, will be influenced by the consensus we have already achieved."

During a September 6th press briefing, ICPD spokesman Ayman El-Amir told reporters that the Cairo program would be "adopted by consensus" and emphasized that "consensus is unanimity." However, El-Amir allowed that "nations may sign the document with reservations" and insisted that there could be "unanimity with reservations." He also observed that the ICPD program could not be defeated by a majority vote, because "that is not how things have historically been done at the UN."

However, during a press conference held the very next day, U.S. delegation leader Timothy Wirth offered yet another nuance to the increasingly elusive concept of "consensus," stating that "consensus is not unanimity." Wirth insisted that "consensus" had already been achieved despite persistent disagreements regarding abortion and other moral issues.

The ICPD insiders could have spared themselves such rhetorical exertions, as "consensus" was inescapable. In terms of both the conference leadership and the composition of national delegations, the event displayed more inbreeding than Cleopatra's pedigree. Fred Sai, president of the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), served as chairman of the ICPD Main Committee; Nafis Sadik, director of the United Nations Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA), acted as secretary-general for the conference.

The U.S. delegation, whose task it was to shepherd reluctant national delegations into the global "consensus," was larded with globalists, radical feminists, and abortion industry representatives. Of the 42 official delegation members, 17 represented anti-natalist NGOs. That number included Pamela Maraldo, president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America; Jeanne Rossoff of the Alan Guttmacher Institute; and career feminist malcontent Bella Abzug. Delegation leader Wirth was associated with Planned Parenthood in Colorado.

Similar arrangements were made to assure that other national delegations joined the preferred "consensus." Congressman Christopher Smith (R-NJ), who was sent to Cairo as an unofficial U.S. delegate at the insistence of House Minority Leader Bob Michel (R-IL), points out that IPPF was represented in no fewer than 60 national delegations; furthermore, USAID funds paid travel expenses for 123 members of foreign delegations, and the UNFPA also helped pay travel costs for an unspecified number of delegates.

Socialist Inspiration

The "NGO community," a worldwide constellation of private and quasi-private interest groups, also played a significant role in creating the counterfeit "global consensus." The ICPD "NGO Forum" opened on September 4th with a ritual "peace prayer" which invoked the blessings of an unspecified deity upon the four quarters of the globe. According to Norwegian Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland, it is the "NGO community" which will hold governments accountable to the objectives of the Cairo document and assist in implementing the program.

Mrs. Brundtland, who was easily the most popular speaker at the Cairo event, is one of the principal architects of the concept of "sustainable development," having served as chair of the United Nations Commission on the Environment and Development. Significantly, she is also vice president of the Socialist International (SI). Asked by THE NEW AMERICAN about the SI's influence on the "NGO community," Brundtland replied: "We are giving inspiration and support to the whole NGO community, where we share common concerns on many issues." In a sense, the "NGO community" may be referred to as the new Global International, refining and expanding the mission of the Socialist International.

Prior to the Cairo conference, the. Clinton Administration took great care to make certain that the "consensus" remained uncontaminated by mainstream opinion. On September 6th Tim Wirth stated that the Clinton Administration had laid the groundwork for the Cairo conference by conducting a series of public meetings concerning the issues of population and development. Wirth declared, "Those meetings looked like America." However, Wirth apparently resides in an America devoid of capitalists. During the September 9th press briefing, Wirth was asked about the complete absence of business organizations among the U.S. delegation's NGO contingent. Wirth's reply says volumes about the nature of the "consensus" which supposedly sustains the Cairo plan: "In choosing NGOs, we had a series of hearings in Washington and around the country, and people who were especially concerned, interested, or helpful were those that were chosen. And we did not receive testimony or input from a number of members of the business community."

Accordingly, the U.S. delegation's NGO representatives were selected, in part, on the basis of their helpfulness. This characteristic was further defined by Wirth in remarks about the Audubon Society, which was represented in the U.S. delegation. Wirth told a reporter that Audubon is "especially helpful" because "they bring out the arguments for public support" of population and "sustainable development" policies.

One of the most "helpful" American NGOs was Population Action International (PAI). On September 8th, PAI released a report which asserted that the Cairo program would require a fourfold increase in population control funding worldwide -- the greatest portion of that burden, predictably, to be borne by the United States. Among those who spoke at the PAI press conference was Undersecretary Wirth, who warmly endorsed PAI's "findings."

Following the press conference, PAI President James Speidel sought to minimize the financial impact of the fourfold increase in population control funds, telling reporters, "A lot of people seem to think this is a huge chunk of taxpayer money, but it's less than two cents out of every dollar spent. There is really a very small amount of foreign aid funds spent on population programs. The government spends billions and billions of dollars on all kinds of programs, from space to agriculture. With the billions that are already spent, what difference would a billion or two billion make?"

THE NEW AMERICAN asked Speidel to explain why population control efforts can't be privatized if the "necessary" funds are so trivial. Speidel, momentarily taken aback, exclaimed, "Well, then where would you get the money?" He insisted, "What works in the population field is a partnership between nonprofit organizations and the public sector. The most successful programs involve both NGOs and government." THE NEW AMERICAN raised the same question with PAI spokeswoman Sally Ethelson, who framed the question of tax funding as one of tutoring recalcitrant Americans about their "global responsibilities": "Governments are those that are best able to mobilize resources, and Americans need to realize that their tax dollars going overseas actually help them in the long run, rather than harm them. We're basically talking about whether we're going to have a quality of life for people around the world. And ultimately that will affect our own quality of life."

Faithful Dissent

Millions of people around the world possess a vastly different concept of "quality of life" and want no part of the population control "consensus." Within that number can be found devout Christians, Jews, and Muslims whose religious principles are offended by their compelled complicity in population control programs. Prior to the Cairo conference, Muslim groups in Egypt and elsewhere loudly objected to the proposed plan of action, which included an effort to guarantee universal access to abortion. Muslim pro-life activist Dr. Kajid Katme, speaking at a press conference conducted by the International Right to Life Federation, earned an ovation from Egyptian journalists when he declared, "For Muslims, God is the only population controller." Efforts were made by the ICPD leaders to avoid a direct confrontation with Islam over abortion; however, they spared nothing in their confrontation with the Catholic Church.

The most heavily contested passage in the draft document was chapter 8.25, which identifies "unsafe abortion" as a threat to world health and contains language suggesting that decriminalizing abortion is necessary in the interest of "women's health." For most of the conference the Holy See, in tandem with allies in the Muslim world, sought to modify this paragraph. The final version began with the declaration, "In no case should abortion be promoted as a method of family planning." This is the same language which had been contained in the 1984 UN population document -- language which has been summarily ignored by the UNFPA and IPPF, which have continued to offer financial and political support to Communist China's "one child" policy, which features coerced abortion.

During the debate over paragraph 8.25, a well-orchestrated campaign of anti-Catholicism took place. The three ICPD daily publications (Terraviva, ICPD Watch, and the Earth Times) ran cartoons, headlines, and "news" stories condemning the Holy See for "hijacking" the conference. Buttons proclaiming "I'm Poped Out" were displayed on every conceivable surface, including the laptop computers of numerous journalists. A petition was circulated demanding the eviction of the Holy See from the UN -- once again, in the interest of obtaining "consensus." A Spanish-language headline blared, "The Vatican Delays While Women Die." One cartoon proudly displayed at the booth of an anti-natalist NGO depicted Pope John Paul II as a simian in clerical garb, clutching the dead and naked body of a brutalized woman. Patricia Scalia of the Catholic Campaign for America complained to THE NEW AMERICAN: "The level of anti-Catholicism here is simply unbelievable."

The Holy See's position was that 90 percent of the Cairo document was acceptable. Still, on September 13th the Vatican delegation, led by Archbishop Renato Martino, expressed reservations about the draft final document, objecting that "while in identifying behavior which the text itself considers 'high-risk' or undesirable, all too often it limits itself primarily to suggestions as to how the 'risks' can be reduced or contained, shying away from proposing a change in such behavior at the roots." This is not because the document modestly shies away from suggesting radical changes in human behavior; it is because changes rooted in repentance are not compatible with the UN's objectives.

A "Right" to Comply

According to the Cairo program's preamble, "All members of and groups in society have the right, and indeed the responsibility, to play an active part in efforts to reach [population control] goals." This fascinating concept of "rights" is also found in Chapter II of the document, which states that the implementation of the Cairo program "is the sovereign right of each country...." In other words, individuals and nations enjoy the "right" to comply with the UN's directives regarding population control, economic redistribution, and social reconstruction.

The most important subsidiary theme of both the ICPD and the program produced by the conference is the "empowerment of women," which will require nothing less than the reconfiguration of all private and public institutions in conformity with feminist demands. In a conference plenary address on September 6th, Johanna Dohnal, Minister for Women's Affairs, declared, "Equality and empowerment of women means more than just the right to birth control. It means power-sharing; it means better access to political leadership; it means economic self-reliance of women. Women want redistribution in all aspects of their lives."

The Cairo plan states, "The power relations that impede women's attainment of healthy and fulfilling lives operate at many levels in society, from the most personal to the highly public." It therefore follows that government intervention at all levels -- particularly within the family -- is necessary in order to achieve "empowerment" for women.

The Cairo program states, "While various forms of the family exist in different social, cultural, legal and political systems, the family is the basic unit of society and as such is entitled to receive comprehensive protection and support." Lest this be taken as a casual endorsement of the conventional family, the program elaborates that the conditions of modern life have wrought "considerable change in family composition and structure" and that "traditional notions of gender-based division of parental and domestic functions ... do not reflect current realities and aspirations." Accordingly, the Cairo plan adumbrates a concentrated campaign to abolish the embattled remnants of the "patriarchal" family.

The program instructs governments to inaugurate "national campaigns to foster women's awareness of the full range of their legal rights, including their rights within the family"; it directs "leaders at all levels of society" to "speak out and act forcefully against patterns of gender discrimination within the family"; it decrees that "the equal participation of women and men in all areas of family and household responsibilities, including family planning, child-rearing and housework, should be promoted and encouraged by Governments."

According to Mrs. Brundtland, "Traditional religious and cultural obstacles can be overcome by economic and social development, with the focus on enhancement of human resources." It is through the government supervised "empowerment" of women that religious and cultural values will be dissolved. This is why the Cairo plan of action places heavy emphasis on the political empowerment of women, on women's "education," and on making women financially "autonomous." Brundtland and many others (particularly in the U.S. delegation) emphasized that changing the role of women is an indispensable prerequisite for "sustainable development." Accordingly, global lending institutions, led by the World Bank, gladly offer "microeconomic" loans to women in Third World countries. By "empowering" women economically, family unity is disrupted, thus making the task of religious and cultural reconfiguration less difficult. These loans also make women in Third World countries dependent upon globalist institutions and vulnerable to their anti-life priorities.

"Population Stabilization"

THE NEW AMERICAN asked Undersecretary Wirth to explain the distinction between "population control" and "population stabilization" -- an alleged distinction frequently cited by Wirth and other luminaries at the Cairo conference. Wirth replied, "Nobody likes to be 'controlled'" and insisted that the "population movement is moving away from targets and numbers. When you use targets and goals, there's a temptation to establish quotas; people become worried about meeting their quotas, and that's the wrong way to go about doing it." Wirth insisted that the "right way" to fulfill population objectives is through the use of education, "increased opportunities for women," and the other elements of the Cairo plan of action.

THE NEW AMERICAN pointed out that the rhetoric of the conference suggested that previous attempts to solve the population "crisis" through "education" had been unsuccessful and asked: "What comes after education? What if education doesn't 'take'?" Wirth replied: "Education will 'take,' unless there are a lot of people going around trying to kill this document." By this reasoning, those who resist the radical "reforms" embodied in the Cairo plan have only two choices: They may either conform to the Cairo agenda, or be blamed for the coercive measures which would be enacted after "education," "empowerment," and "sustainable development" fail.

Many of the Third World residents who came to Cairo did so to offer public testimony regarding the post-"education" means that are used to obtain "population stability." On September 7th, several feminist groups conducted an event entitled "Crimes Against Women Related to Population Policies" at the NGO Forum. Those crimes were described by feminists who accept the premises of population control but are appalled by the policies which flow from those premises. A summary statement issued at the hearing explained that testimonies had been taken from women around the world exposing "the widespread crimes against women and women's bodies and [identifying] the ideology of population control as the source of these crimes." The statement concluded that "population policies worldwide discriminate against the poor, the disabled, indigenous people," and that "population control policies remain racist and eugenicist" and make use of "bribery, inducements, misinformation on adverse effects of drugs as well as outright violence through forced sterilization...."

Among the accounts offered in Cairo was the testimony of Marie Souza de Farias of Brazil, who had been lured into accepting Norplant. Her doctors had assured her that she "would always be ready for sex." Implantation of the contraceptive caused dizziness, hemorrhaging, and heart problems; belated removal of the device led to hepatitis and early menopause. The Brazilian woman stated, "I believe that Norplant acceptance in the U.S.A. is due to misguided information provided by those who coordinate the tests around the world."

Numerous women offered similar stories about the use of Third World women as test subjects for Norplant and other contraceptives. Others, particularly those from the subcontinent, offered accounts of coerced sterilization. Ruth Monoroma described the plight of the Dalit women in India, who are among the poorest of that country's poor. Although "family planning" agencies will bring sterilization and contraception "services" directly to these women, they have no access to clean water and sanitary facilities. States Monoroma: "We call Family Planning the 'butcher camps.'" Women are still routinely forced to accept sterilization in India.

Others in the region are lured into "voluntary" sterilization by social service agencies and lending institutions. Halima Begum of Bangladesh, who underwent sterilization in exchange for promises of food and money to build a house, is now chronically ill and shunned by her relatives. Significantly, Bangladesh is the home of the Grameen Bank, the World Bank's most notable program for the economic "empowerment" of women. The Grameen Bank was cited by numerous speakers in Cairo -- including Jane Fonda -- as a model to be followed throughout the world.

Africa's Misery

Also found among those who have witnessed the "benevolence" of the global population control effort is Dr. Margaret Ogala, a Kenyan pediatrician. Speaking at a pro-life press conference on September 6th, Dr. Ogala related her experiences as director of a crisis pregnancy center and medical director of a pediatric hospital for children born with AIDS. Dr. Ogala testified that the "cultural imperialism" of population control has devastated her nation by disrupting "the African woman's natural capacity to nurture":

What I have seen at the center is that in spite of the fact that most of my clients are girls from very difficult circumstances, they do not give up their babies for adoption. There is a capacity for nurturing in the African woman that perhaps people in the West cannot understand. These girls simply do not give up their children, however difficult their circumstances.

According to Dr. Ogala, poor mothers in Kenya have to make tremendous sacrifices to obtain medicines such as penicillin. However, she reports, "When we walk out of the emergency ward of my hospital, there is a family welfare center [family planning clinic] a few meters away where we have never lacked for each and every contraceptive, including IUDs, Norplant, condoms. Whatever the agencies can provide, you find it in our hospitals. They will never lack for those things; we never run short, despite the fact that we are always running short of many truly important things."

Dr. Ogala noted that the Kenyan population control effort has done nothing to improve the life of Kenyan women and much to deepen their misery. "If you repeat a story often enough people will believe you, particularly when they face a very hard life. But now their lives are actually harder. They cannot feed the children that they're having, despite the fact that they've done what the Kenyan government has told them. They've been told that if they have fewer children then their conditions would be better. And it's simply not true."

When Dr. Ogala was a college student, demographic texts predicted that Kenya's population would be 35 million in 1989. However, "What we found in 1989 was that the population was actually only 25 million Kenyans, and many of us fear that the number is actually even smaller than that. The government actually didn't want to publicize the number." The country's children and youth are being decimated by AIDS: "Young people are dying in the thousands. The leader of our delegation has said that by 2025 the number of Kenyans dying from AIDS will equal the number of Kenyans dying from all other causes. In some hospitals nearly one of every three infants is born with AIDS. Yet we are constantly being told that Kenya's population must be reduced even further."

According to Dr. Ogala, "In the name of population control, people are treated almost like rats -- there are too many, and they're unwanted. And in the name of controlling this human pestilence, anything is justifiable, so that things are done to poor Third World women that could not be done to anybody else. And this is something that I cannot accept. Anytime they want to test something, they bring it and they try it on the women of the Third World, because we have so many people; any method is justifiable, so long as it is used on a woman who is poor and helpless."

Mercy Wambui of Kenya's Energy and Environment Association shares Dr. Ogala's perceptions. Wambui was dismayed that the Cairo conference focused on population control rather than on economic development. "Don't tell me about family planning and contraceptives," Wambui stated rhetorically to THE NEW AMERICAN. "In my country it's easy to get contraceptives, but not aspirin." Wambui is outraged by the frankly anti-life priorities manifest by the World Bank, which has made "population stabilization" a top priority.

Wambui pointed out that the IMF's "structural readjustment" policies have created tremendous economic dislocations in Kenya, which have further exacerbated the country's health care system: "Our doctors are presently on strike, we have no basic medicines or equipment, women and children are dying -- but there's always money for population control." Kenya suffers from many things, notes Wambui, but "overpopulation" is not one of them. "Should we be aiming at reducing population, or should we be aiming at improving our quality of life? Our focus shouldn't be, 'reduce population for a better life' -- it doesn't work."

An Open Secret

The sentiments expressed by Ogala and Wambui were shared by numerous delegates and representatives of countries in the "developing world," many of whom complained that the Cairo conference focused on the population question to the exclusion of the question of economic development. The largely unaddressed subject of "development" -- that is to say, of global economic redistribution -- will be addressed at the UN World Summit for Social Development, which will take place in Copenhagen, Denmark next March.

Leonardo Casco, a Honduran attorney who advised his country's ICPD delegation, told THE NEW AMERICAN that the use of financial compulsion by USAID to obtain cooperation from his country is an open secret: "Nobody here will talk about it openly, but people understand it," he remarked. "There is a program of action carried out by the Ministry of Health in Honduras, a plan covering 1990 to 1994, funded with $50 million from AID. This includes several good things for the health [of Hondurans], but as well is included a section that establishes targets on contraception prevalence."

Casco reported that these "targets" are pursued by the Honduran Institute for Health and Social Security and the IPPF. "According to official statistics given by the Health Ministry, there are 15,000 a year in Honduras who are sterilized," Casco told THE NEW AMERICAN. Reports are accumulating of women who have been involuntarily sterilized: "We are preparing a lawsuit on behalf of these women, some of whom were sterilized by doctors who decided, without telling them, that they had had too many children already."

The intervention of UN agencies, USAID, and anti-natalist NGOs has created the same distortions in Honduras that Dr. Ogala described in Kenya, according to Casco. "Basic antibiotic medicines are lacking in my country, but the IPPF cabinets are full of contraceptives, while women are dying because of a lack of basic medicine."

Rwanda a Model?

How serious is the UN about the "need" for population control? Ask the Rwandans -- while they still exist. On the penultimate day of the Cairo conference, Patric Mazimuka, the Rwandan Minister for Youth and Cooperation, held a press conference in which he described his government's plans for "post-genocide population management." Although Rwanda has lost more that 1.5 million souls -- one-fifth of its population -- to fratricidal warfare, Mazimuka insisted that "the government will have to try to keep the family on track because we cannot afford a big population."

Mazimuka's statements provoked no controversy at the Cairo conference, as they were perfectly harmonious with the premises contained in the ICPD's world plan of action -- namely, that people are a "resource" to be managed by global supervisors in the interest of "sustainable development," and that the family is an administrative unit of the global mega-state. Those who wish to understand what "sustainable development" portends should imagine a Rwanda-style tragedy on a global scale.

Another useful glimpse into the population control mindset was offered on September 5th during a question/answer session involving Vice President Al Gore. A man who identified himself as a member of the United Nations Association from Pasadena, California made reference to the impending UN occupation of Haiti: "Why can't the United Nations send huge hospital ships to Haiti to deliver good medicine to an impoverished people. Giving good medicine establishes confidence in the doctors, which could then get an agreement to have small families, to accept contraceptives, sterilization, and abortion."

Gore's reply avoided a direct response to the proposition of family-planning-by-extortion. However, his interlocutor persisted: "What about hospital ships that can deliver family planning?" After a brief discussion with USAID Director Atwood, Gore delivered the following answer:

The UN force that has been authorized to re-establish stability and support the re-establishment of the legitimate government of Haiti has been supplemented by a highly developed plan to assist that nation in a sustainable economic recovery. There was a [foreign aid] donor's conference this last week in Paris. There has been a great deal of highly sophisticated work that has given attention to a broad range of problems that need to be addressed in Haiti .... There will be an effort by the world community, by the international community, to address a broad range of problems in Haiti and help them get back on their feet.

It is significant that Gore did not reject outright the suggestion that UN "aid" to Haiti may be used as leverage to compel Haitians to accept sterilization, abortion, and other "family planning" options -- perhaps because (as demonstrated above) such linkage is a common population control practice.

Globalizing FACE?

Just as individual women are browbeaten into abortions or sterilizations by population controllers, nations which retain their pro-life values will be compelled to surrender them under threat of political ostracism, economic sanctions, or worse. Congressman Chris Smith (R-NJ), a dissident in the otherwise monolithically pro-abortion U.S. delegation to Cairo, condemned the Clinton Administration's "obsession with abortion on demand." Smith told THE NEW AMERICAN that the Administration's attempt to draw a distinction between a "global right to abortion" and "assuring access to abortion" is basically meaningless. "It is access to abortion that is causing all of the controversy in the states," Smith said, noting that the health care debate foundered on the issue of government funded .... to abortion in a access national health care system.

Asked how a global guarantee of "access" to abortion might be enforced, Smith told THE NEW AMERICAN: "If abortion becomes a so-called human right, any country that does not follow suit could be held in international fora to be in violation of that [right], and some actions might be taken against the government." According to Smith, "This has been one of the concerns of Ireland, with regards to its pro-life law, which courageously was put in by the people themselves by way of referendum."

At Cairo, the Clinton Administration and its globalist allies incessantly proclaimed their desire to make abortion and coercive population control measures "unnecessary." But it is also true that Lenin wanted to make the gulag "unnecessary"; he simply wanted to create a "New Soviet Man," and coercive measures would have been avoided had Lenin's subjects submitted to "education." Likewise, Hitler tried several "solutions" to the "problem" of racial impurities before the "Final Solution" became "necessary."

Because it sets forth the "necessity" of radical controls over human fertility, the Cairo program is a covenant with death. But, as Isaiah said of the corrupt political leadership whose earlier covenant with death he assailed, "... your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, then ye shall be trodden down by it."