Skip to comments.CFR's Plan to Integrate the U.S., Mexico and Canada
Posted on 10/21/2005 12:23:51 AM PDT by janetgreen
The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) has just let the cat out of the bag about what's really behind our trade agreements and security partnerships with the other North American countries. A 59-page CFR document spells out a five-year plan for the "establishment by 2010 of a North American economic and security community" with a common "outer security perimeter."
"Community" means integrating the United States with the corruption, socialism, poverty and population of Mexico and Canada. "Common perimeter" means wide-open U.S. borders between the U.S., Mexico and Canada.
"Community" is sometimes called "space" but the CFR goal is clear: "a common economic space ... for all people in the region, a space in which trade, capital, and people flow freely." The CFR's "integrated" strategy calls for "a more open border for the movement of goods and people."
The CFR document lays "the groundwork for the freer flow of people within North America." The "common security perimeter" will require us to "harmonize visa and asylum regulations" with Mexico and Canada, "harmonize entry screening," and "fully share data about the exit and entry of foreign nationals."
This CFR document, called "Building a North American Community," asserts that George W. Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin "committed their governments" to this goal when they met at Bush's ranch and at Waco, Texas on March 23, 2005. The three adopted the "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America" and assigned "working groups" to fill in the details.
It was at this same meeting, grandly called the North American summit, that President Bush pinned the epithet "vigilantes" on the volunteers guarding our border in Arizona.
A follow-up meeting was held in Ottawa on June 27, where the U.S. representative, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, told a news conference that "we want to facilitate the flow of traffic across our borders." The White House issued a statement that the Ottawa report "represents an important first step in achieving the goals of the Security and Prosperity Partnership."
The CFR document calls for creating a "North American preference" so that employers can recruit low-paid workers from anywhere in North America. No longer will illegal aliens have to be smuggled across the border; employers can openly recruit foreigners willing to work for a fraction of U.S. wages.
Just to make sure that bringing cheap labor from Mexico is an essential part of the plan, the CFR document calls for "a seamless North American market" and for "the extension of full labor mobility to Mexico."
The document's frequent references to "security" are just a cover for the real objectives. The document's "security cooperation" includes the registration of ballistics and explosives, while Canada specifically refused to cooperate with our Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI).
To no one's surprise, the CFR plan calls for massive U.S. foreign aid to the other countries. The burden on the U.S. taxpayers will include so-called "multilateral development" from the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank, "long-term loans in pesos," and a North American Investment Fund to send U.S. private capital to Mexico.
The experience of the European Union and the World Trade Organization makes it clear that a common market requires a court system, so the CFR document calls for "a permanent tribunal for North American dispute resolution." Get ready for decisions from non-American judges who make up their rules ad hoc and probably hate the United States anyway.
The CFR document calls for allowing Mexican trucks "unlimited access" to the United States, including the hauling of local loads between U.S. cities. The CFR document calls for adopting a "tested once" principle for pharmaceuticals, by which a product tested in Mexico will automatically be considered to have met U.S. standards.
The CFR document demands that we implement "the Social Security Totalization Agreement negotiated between the United States and Mexico." That's code language for putting illegal aliens into the U.S. Social Security system, which is bound to bankrupt the system.
Here's another handout included in the plan. U.S. taxpayers are supposed to create a major fund to finance 60,000 Mexican students to study in U.S. colleges.
To ensure that the U.S. government carries out this plan so that it is "achievable" within five years, the CFR calls for supervision by a North American Advisory Council of "eminent persons from outside government . . . along the lines of the Bilderberg" conferences.
The best known Americans who participated in the CFR Task Force that wrote this document are former Massachusetts Governor William Weld and Bill Clinton's immigration chief Doris Meissner. Another participant, American University Professor Robert Pastor, presented the CFR plan at a friendly hearing of Senator Richard Lugar's Foreign Relations Committee on June 9.
Ask your Senators and Representatives which side they are on: the CFR's integrated North American Community or U.S. sovereignty guarded by our own borders.
Total crap. I hate it. Giving US sovereignty to Canada and Mexico is the final death knell.
What the bleep is wrong with Bush? Is he just a RINO globalist like Bush Sr?
RINO has become an odd term for me lately...Just what does Republican mean anymore? Conservative?
No thanks to all that.
Task Force Urges Measures to Strengthen North American Competitiveness, Expand Trade, Ensure Border Security
May 17, 2005
Council on Foreign Relations
May 17, 2005--North America is vulnerable on several fronts: the region faces terrorist and criminal security threats, increased economic competition from abroad, and uneven economic development at home. In response to these challenges, a trinational, Independent Task Force on the Future of North America has developed a roadmap to promote North American security and advance the well-being of citizens of all three countries.
When the leaders of Canada, Mexico, and the United States met in Texas recently they underscored the deep ties and shared principles of the three countries. The Council-sponsored Task Force applauds the announced "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America," but proposes a more ambitious vision of a new community by 2010 and specific recommendations on how to achieve it.
Pointing to increased competition from the European Union and rising economic powers such as India and China in the eleven years since NAFTA took effect, co-chair Pedro C. Aspe, former Finance Minister of Mexico, said, "We need a vision for North America to address the new challenges." The Task Force establishes a blueprint for a powerhouse North American trading area that allows for the seamless movement of goods, increased labor mobility, and energy security.
"We are asking the leaders of the United States, Mexico, and Canada to be bold and adopt a vision of the future that is bigger than, and beyond, the immediate problems of the present," said co-chair John P. Manley, Former Canadian Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance. "They could be the architects of a new community of North America, not mere custodians of the status quo."
At a time of political transition in Canada and Mexico, the Task Force proposes new ideas to cope with continental challenges that should be the focus of debate in those two countries as well as the United States. To ensure a free, secure, just, and prosperous North America, the Task Force proposes a number of specific measures:
Make North America safer:
Establish a common security perimeter by 2010.
Develop a North American Border Pass with biometric identifiers.
Develop a unified border action plan and expand border customs facilities.
Create a single economic space:
Adopt a common external tariff.
Allow for the seamless movement of goods within North America.
Move to full labor mobility between Canada and the U.S.
Develop a North American energy strategy that gives greater emphasis to reducing emissions of greenhouse gases -- a regional alternative to Kyoto.
Review those sectors of NAFTA that were excluded.
Develop and implement a North American regulatory plan that would include "open skies and open roads" and a unified approach for protecting consumers on food, health, and the environment.
Expand temporary worker programs and create a "North American preference" for immigration for citizens of North America.
Spread benefits more evenly:
Establish a North American Investment Fund to build infrastructure to connect Mexico's poorer regions in the south to the market to the north.
Restructure and reform Mexico's public finances.
Fully develop Mexican energy resources to make greater use of international technology and capital.
Institutionalize the partnership:
Establish a permanent tribunal for trade and investment disputes.
Convene an annual North American summit meeting.
Establish a Tri-national Competition Commission to develop a common approach to trade remedies.
Expand scholarships to study in the three countries and develop a network of Centers for North American Studies.
Co-chair William F. Weld, former Governor of Massachusetts and U.S. Assistant Attorney General, said, "We are three liberal democracies; we are adjacent; we are already intertwined economically; we have a great deal in common historically; culturally, we have a lot to learn from one another."
Organized in association with the Consejo Mexicano de Asuntos Internacionales and the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, the Task Force includes prominent former officials, businessmen, and academic experts from all three countries. A Chairmen's Statement was released in March in advance of the trinational summit; the full report represents the consensus of the entire Task Force membership and leadership.
Chief Executive of the Canadian Council of Chief ExecutivesThomas d'Aquino, President of the Consejo Mexicano de Asuntos Internacionales Andrés Rozental, and Director of the Center for North American Studies at American University Robert A. Pastor serve as vice chairs.Chappell H. Lawson, Associate Professor of political science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, is director.
Building a North American Community: Report of the Independent Task Force on the Future of North America is available on the Council website.
Founded in 1921, theCouncil on Foreign Relations is an independent, national membership organization and a nonpartisan center for scholars dedicated to producing and disseminating ideas so that individual and corporate members, as well as policymakers, journalists, students, and interested citizens in the United States and other countries, can better understand the world and the foreign policy choices facing the United States and other governments.
The Mexican Council on Foreign Relations(COMEXI) is the only multi-disciplinary organization committed to fostering sophisticated, broadly inclusive political discourse and analysis on the nature of Mexico's participation in the international arena and the relative influence of Mexico's increasingly global orientation on domestic priorities. The Council is an independent, non-profit, pluralistic forum, with no government or institutional ties that is financed exclusively by membership dues and corporate support. The main objectives of COMEXI are to provide information and analysis of interest to our associates, as well as to create a solid institutional framework for the exchange of ideas concerning pressing world issues that affect our country.
Founded in 1976, the Canadian Council of Chief Executives is Canada's premier business association, with an outstanding record of achievement in matching entrepreneurial initiative with sound public policy choices. A not-for-profit, non-partisan organization composed of the chief executives of 150 leading Canadian enterprises, the CCCE was the Canadian private sector leader in the development and promotion of the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement during the 1980s and of the subsequent trilateral North American Free Trade Agreement.
The head RINO, GWBush, agreed to this, and now he's talking about "protecting the borders and deporting illegal aliens". He has lost all credibility.
Geez! Haven't you heard?! The CFR doesnt' MEAN anything. It's powerless. Anything you read into their recommendations is just conspiracy theory. Whatever you've heard or read is just propaganda. You need a BIG tinfoil hat.
Mr. Robinson, I cannot believe that you would be in favor of "a new community of North America" which means loss of America's sovereignty. That's what it will be, no matter how fancy they spin it.
Saw that...and then it was immediately followed by, "Well, we can't deport the ones that are already here"...meaning another amnesty scam was in the offing.
I wish they'd quit jerking us around. Seriously.
Huh? I just said no thanks to all that and posted direct from the source. No thanks means I want no part of it.
There are two kinds of Republicans these days: actual (conservative) Republicans and "big tent" Liberal (RINO) Republicans. RINOs are either fiscally Liberal or socially Liberal; neverminding that said facets are mutually exclusive.
Ummm...I think Jim Rob is on your side of the argument.
Phyllis Schlafly is one of America's gems, and what she's telling us is frightening.
There have been FOUR other threads on this. This is an OLD (but GOODIE) article.
Actually I did search for that exact title, but it didn't come up.
It is outrageous...I think there are some things that are going on in the world that must be dealt with. I am talking about the inevitable war that we are going to face with China. This is an attempt to insulate ourselves from the creeping threat of Communist China. They already control the Panama Canal. They just built the largest shipping port in the Phillipines with air strips and resources capable of landing and servicing long range bombers. They are pumping $200 billion into anti US governments in Central and South America in the name of economic development...ie regional influence. Castro and Chavez are just puppets. Venezuela has just bought 100000 ak47's to equip an army they are building (supposedly in response to a perceived threat of a US invasion of their country). We can ill afford to piss off our Northern and Southern neighbors to the extent that they start developing diplomatic and business relationships with China. Mexicans in the United States send $20 billion a year back to Mexico. This is as big a revenue generator for their economy as their entire oil industry. This is why immigration is such a touchy issue with Bush and Mexico right now and also explains his staunch support of a guest worker program. We had nuclear weapons pointed at our cities from Cuba at one time and I don't think we want to repeat that mistake. If a guest worker program of some sort is agreed upon, these people won't be working for a fraction of US wages. They will be paid the same as anyone else that does the job. They will also be paying taxes. I am not advocating wholesale immigration or naturalization of existing illegals. There is a line that has to be walked though and Mexico knows it. They aren't above using the threat of consorting with the enemy to their advantage. I think it is the responsibility of any administration to protect the rights of American workers first and foremost, but without some sort of radical change in thinking by our leaders, this is the road we are headed down. Competition will lead to eroded wages. With the amount of debt that our average family is carrying in the US, we could be in for some tough times ahead. Then there is the inflation that no one seems to be talking about. Once all the money is spent from the equity mortgages everyone seems to be taking out on their houses, the market could take a real nose dive. Bush just tightened the bankruptcy laws on consumer credit for this very reason. Not a pretty site. If the Dems get back in office, their tax rampage should be just icing on the cake. I think everyone subscribes to the utopian idea that if we let every one come over here and compete from overseas for American jobs that we will increase their standard of living to be on par with our own. What no one seems to get is that at the same time, we will significantly reduce our own, basically meeting them half way.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.