munKNEE.com Your Key to Making Money
The supposedly dead “Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America”
proposal calling for the “integration” of Canada and Mexico with the U.S. into a North American monetary union complete with a new currency and a regional authority of governance seems to be alive and well and slowly evolving according to the original unofficial plan to bring it about. Below is more on these ominous plans which would adversely affect the sovereignty of each of the 3 countries involved. Words: 1685
The above is an introduction to an article* written by Alex Newman (www.thenewamerican.com) which Lorimer Wilson, editor of www.munKNEE.com has edited below for length and clarity – see Editor’s Note at the bottom of the page. This paragraph must be included in any article re-posting to avoid copyright infringement.
Newman goes on to say, in part:
As early as January of 2005, high-ranking officials were discussing the best way to sell the ideaof North American “integration” to the public and policymakers while getting around national constitutions. The prospect of creating a monetary unit to replace national currencies was a hot topic as well. [I would surmise that the entity that such an integration would bring about would be called CAMEX (CA for Canada, AME for America and MEX for Mexico). The new currency would likely be called the “came” although some have suggested that it be called the “pesollar”.]
Details of Scheme Leaked by WikiLeaks
Some details of the schemes were exposed in a secret 2005 U.S. embassy cable from Ottawa signed by then-Ambassador Paul Cellucci. The document was released by WikiLeaks on April 28, 2011 but, so far, it has barely attracted any attention in the United States, Canada, or Mexico beyond a few mentions in some liberty-minded Internet forums.
Numerous topics are discussed in the leaked document — borders, currency, labor, regulation, and more. How to push the integration agenda features particularly prominently.
Steps to be Bring About “Incremental Integration” Accelerating
Under the subject line “Placing a new North American Initiative in its economic policy context,” American diplomatic personnel in Canada (with the apparent agreement of Canadian economists) said they believed an “incremental” path toward North American integration would probably gain the most support from policymakers. The cable also touts the supposed benefits of merging the three countries and even mentions what elements to “stress” in future “efforts to promote further integration.” It lists what it claims is a summary of the “consensus” among Canadian economists about the issues, too.
Integration is a little-used term employed mainly by policy wonks but, while it may sound relatively harmless, it generally describes a very serious phenomenon when used in a geopolitical context — the gradual merging of separate countries under a regional authority.
Home Delivery Available! If you enjoy this site and would like to have every article posted on www.munKNEE.com (approx. 3 per day of the most informative articles available) sent automatically to you then go HERE and sign up to receive Your Daily Intelligence Report. We provide an easy “unsubscribe” feature should you decide to opt out at any time.
Similar processes are already well underway in Europe, Africa, and South America and, according to critics, the results — essentially abolishing national sovereignty in favor of supranational, unaccountable governance — have been an unmitigated disaster, although the U.S. government doesn’t think so…
After the creation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) — similar in many ways to the European Common Market that preceded the political union in Europe — the integration scheme has only accelerated…
Potential Canadian Opposition Recognized
The best way forward, according to the cable, is via gradual steps. “An incremental and pragmatic package of tasks for a new North American Initiative (NAI) will likely gain the most support among Canadian policymakers,” the cable states in its summary, saying:
“Our research leads us to conclude that such a package should tackle both ‘security’ and ‘prosperity’ goals…This fits the recommendations of Canadian economists who have assessed the options for continental integration.”
Toward the end, the cable offers more advice on how to advance the integration agenda by tailoring the narrative:
“When advocating [the North American Initiative to integrate the three countries], it would be better to highlight specific gains to individual firms, industries or travelers, and especially consumers,” noting that it’s harder to “estimate the benefits” on a national or continental scale.
Supposed Benefits of North American Integration
Past positive Experience: In a section headlined “North American Integration: What We Know,” the cable offers nothing but praise for the merging of the continent’s once-sovereign nations that had already been achieved claiming that:
“Past integration (not just NAFTA but also many bilateral and unilateral steps) has increased trade, economic growth, and productivity” despite the fact that countless economists disagree.
Of course, true free-trade advocates also correctly point out that the thousands of pages of regulations making up the agreements should hardly be considered examples of genuine free trade.
Security: So-called “security,” the other big integration selling point, is featured prominently in the document as well:
“A stronger continental ‘security perimeter’ can strengthen economic performance…It could also facilitate future steps toward trilateral economic integration, such as a common external tariff or a customs union.”
Law Enforcement: Law enforcement “cooperation” is good too, the embassy and the U.S. ambassador claim matter-of-factly:
“Cooperative measures on the ‘security’ side, a critical focus of current bilateral efforts, can deliver substantial, early, and widespread economic benefits…Security and law enforcement within North America have evolved rapidly since 9/11…Collaboration to improve these processes could yield efficiency improvements which would automatically be spread widely across the economy, leading to general gains in trade, productivity, and incomes.”
The Alleged “Consensus”
Economic: According to the document, “many” economists agree with the scheme. The cable says they support the principle of “more ambitious integration goals” such as a customs union, a single market, and even a continental currency to replace the dollar. On top of that, they supposedly believe such a union should involve all three major North American countries — the United States, Mexico, and Canada.
The cable cautions, however, that “most” of the economists believe the gradual approach is “most appropriate” — for now, at least – and all of them apparently agree that such an approach “helps pave the way to these goals if and when North Americans choose to pursue them.”
The embassy cable also included a summary of what it calls the “professional consensus” among Canadian economists on various issues related to integration.
“At this time, an ‘incremental’ approach to integration is probably better than a ‘big deal’ approach,” the document states under the “process” subheading, supposedly referring to the economists’ opinions. However, governments should focus on choosing their objectives, and not on choosing a process.”
Border/Perimeter Security: Next in the cable is the question of “border vs. perimeter,” as the formerly secret document puts it. “Even with zero tariffs, our land borders have strong commercial effects,” the embassy said. However, “some” of the effects — such as law enforcement and “data gathering” — are described as “positive.”
“Canada and the United States already share a security perimeter to some degree; it is just a question of how strong we want to make it,” the 2005 document notes. Apparently Canadians’ main reason for seeking a perimeter approach to security and borders, as opposed to a border between the two nations, is to avoid the “risk” that “discretionary” U.S. decisions to stop terror or disease might impede commerce and, evidently, the nations’ rulers did decide to make the perimeter stronger.
U.S. President Barack Obama and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper [have already] met in Washington, D.C., and hammered out a deal on solidifying the common “perimeter” around the two countries [see here]. Also part of the agreement, which conspicuously bypassed both countries’ legislatures, was a diminished role for the nations’ shared border. The development of a biometric system to track North Americans was agreed to as well, as were numerous other controversial measures.
Labor Markets: In terms of labor markets, the so-called “consensus” among the unidentified Canadian economists is also — surprise! — the pursuit of even more integration. “Many Canadian economists point to labor markets — both within and among countries — as the factor market [sic] where more liberalization would deliver the greatest economic benefits for all three countries,” the document states.
Legality: Next, the cable…highlights another startling proposition about how to achieve an end-run around the Canadian Constitution. “Inter-provincial differences [in regulation] are important here, since Canada’s federal government does not have the benefit of a U.S.-style ‘interstate commerce’ clause,” the document states. “While much of the problem is domestic in nature, an international initiative could help to catalyze change.”
Yes, the U.S. embassy referred to the wildly abused and misapplied “commerce clause” as a “benefit” that Canada lacks and it actually suggested, hiding behind unnamed “economists,” that the constitutional “problem” could be minimized by foisting an “international initiative” on the Canadian people.
Customs Union: The cable also claims the “economists” support a customs union, a feature developed in the European Union once the integration process was well established. “A common external tariff, or a customs union which eliminated NAFTA’s rules of origin (ROO), is economically desirable,” it states.
Currency Union: The document summarizes the “consensus” on the subject of a currency union. It said the supposed economists were “split” on the issues of returning to fixed exchange rates or even abolishing Canada’s fiat dollar and replacing it with American Federal Reserve fiat currency [although such a move would NEVER under ANY circumstances be agreed to by the Canadian citizenship]. The cable gives the final word on the topic of a currency union to the Canadian central bank boss. He is quoted as saying that “monetary union is an issue that should be considered once we have made more progress towards establishing a single market.”
Conclusion
The scheme to merge North America into a political unit with its own legislature and currency is largely the brainchild of the world government-promoting Council on Foreign Relations but, although leaked documents have revealed that governments were trying to keep the process under wraps, integration is now proceeding out in the open for the most part.
Where the campaign will eventually end remains to be seen but if North American Union advocates get their way, the U.S. Constitution and its Mexican and Canadian counterparts could soon be rendered irrelevant. After that, plugging the regional units into a global system would be a relatively simple matter, critics and supporters both argue.
*http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-mainmenu-26/north-america-mainmenu-36/7336-wikileaks-exposes-north-american-integration-plot (To access the article please copy the URL and paste it into your browser.)
Editor’s Note: The above article has been has edited ([ ]), abridged (…), and reformatted (including the title, some sub-titles and bold/italics emphases) for the sake of clarity and brevity to ensure a fast and easy read. The article’s views and conclusions are unaltered and no personal comments have been included to maintain the integrity of the original article.