By Joan Russow

SEPTEMBER 28, 1992

 Many of these problems have arisen from a development model that is environmentally destructive  ( Agenda 21, 18.45 Fresh water)

A very serious outcome of UNCED is occurring in Education in Canada. through industry's fostering  an "environmentally destructive development model"  in the guise of environmental enlightenment.

In chapter 36 of Agenda 21, a very important distinction is made between promoting "education," promoting "public awareness," and  promoting 'training."  It appears to be clear in Agenda 21 that non-governmental organizations, community-based groups, women's groups and aboriginal groups are called upon to assist educators in reorienting education.  The role of industry is ascertained to be limited to specific areas of business, industrial and training programs.

" Educational authorities, with appropriate assistance of non-governmental organizations, including women's and indigenous peoples' organizations should promote all kinds of adult education programmes for continuing education in environment and development, basing activities around elementary/secondary schools and local problems.  The authorities and industry should encourage business, industrial and agricultural schools to include such topics in their curricula.  The corporate sector could include sustainable development in their education and training programmes.   Agenda 21, section36.5 l

by Joan Russow and disributed before and at the  World Trade Conference in Seattle 

We are now living in the wake of negligence from years of
institutional collusion among governments, corporations and the
military. Currently there is a concurrence of disasters: the violation
of human rights, including civil and political rights, the denial of
social justice, the degradation of the environment, and the escalation
of war and conflict. The WTO has been instrumental in fostering this
collusion to the detriment of the global community. In the year 1999,
the culmination of the decade devoted to international law, rather
than continue with this collusion which has jeopardized civil society
and the global ecosystem, the WTO should be dismantled and emphasis
should be placed on member states living up to their international
public trust commitments and obligations and adhering to the rule of
law.

By Joan Russow and David White 

1999 was the culmination of the decade devoted to the furtherance of international law. In reporting about the WTO in Seattle, Thomas Friedman, foreign affairs columnist for the New York Times. appeared to ignore the significance of the international law negotiated at the United Nations in New York. 

In his piece “those flat-earth advocates rally senseless in Seattle” (reprinted  in the SeattlePost-inteligencer   he ignored or disregarded years of  international law negotiated at the UN in New York.

There appears to be two significantly different existing international regimes.  The first, the WTO, NAFTA, GATT, APEC, and FTAA are negotiated primarily apart from the UN. These agreements generally promote vested economic interests.  The second, the body of international law negotiated over the 56 years of the United Nations, generally promote the “public trust”.  The “public trust” agreements encompass obligations incurred and commitments  made to prevent war and conflict and to eliminate weapons of mass destruction; to reduce the military budget and transfer the savings into social programs; to ensure social justice, to eradicate poverty, and to guarantee human rights, labour rights, right to food and housing and civil and political rights; to preserve the environment,  to reduce the ecological footprint, to respect the inherent worth of nature beyond human purpose ...

Joan Russow Ph.D,

Canadian Voice of Women  pRESENTATION ON A PANEL  For the Briefing to NGOs, Security Council and Heads of UN Agencies Tuesday, June 8 2000

Since its inception, the United Nations has been the international hope for "preventing the scourge of war". Yet rather than prevent the scourge of war the member states have continually increased military budgets and the production of arms.

Rather than act on the commitment from the 1972 United Nations Stockholm Conference on the Environment and Humans, to prevent the production of weapons of mass destruction, the Security Council has maintained the veto of the countries that have been most responsible for producing weapons of mass destruction.

For over fifty years through international agreements, the member states of the United Nations have drafted the blueprint for attaining the Culture of Peace. Member states of the UN, in addition, to incurring obligations through conventions, treaties, and covenants to prevent the scourge of war, have created expectations through General Assembly resolutions and have made commitments through UN conference action plans to address the issue of the necessity of reducing military budgets.

On January 1st, 1999, the Citizens' Public Trust Treaty is circulating worldwide for signing by individuals, community groups and non governmental organizations. It is released initially in English, French and Spanish, with translations into the other official languages of the United Nations to follow. Eventually, it is intended that the proposed Treaty with signatures will be submitted to state goverments and to the United Nations.

The Citizens' Public Trust Treaty calls upon member states of the United Nations to carry out and extend the international obligations, commitments and expectations they have made to fulfill the global public trust. This Treaty will provide an effective means of counteracting the process of corporate globalization that threatens to undermine over 50 years of international agreements related to the following obligations, commitments, and expectations:

1. to Promote and fully guarantee respect for human rights, including labour rights, the right to adequate food, shelter and health care, and social justice;

2. to Enable socially equitable and environmentally sound development; 3. to Achieve a state of peace, justice and security; 4. to Create a global structure that respects the rule of law; and 5. to Ensure the preservation and protection of the environment, respect the inherent worth of nature beyond human purpose, reduce the ecological footprint and move away from the current model of over-consumptive development;

Two Parallel Crimes Against humanity: US and its allies on Afghani and Iraqi citizens  and Libya, on its own citizens.

written and posted  in 2011

Is there a difference in kind or in degree between what Kaddafi is doing to his citizens and what the US and its allies have been doing to citizens in Afghanistan and Iraq. The US has been allowed by the international community to engage in illegal and aggressive acts of war with citizens in both countries being designated as ``collateral damage``.

Yet, engaging in an illegal and aggressive war, by US and its allies is not deemed to be a crime against humanity and in Max  Boot’s term is only  a savage war of peace or in Obama`s term,  a just  war

Undoubtedly there will be set up an International Tribunal on war crimes to try Gadhafi, but will there ever be an International Tribunal to try Bush, Blair, Rumsfeld, Cheney

Note the rest original article was deleted when the site was extirpated in 2012

AWARE THAT

While the United Nations representing over 180 nation states was negotiating the follow-up to the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development OECD representing 28 states has been undermining the UN process by setting up their own international agreement ( the Multilateral Agreement on Investment-MAI). The MAI has been devised  to promote and entrench in terms of rights and obligations the vested interest of the corporate sector.

For years behind the scenes, the OECD countries comprised of corporate-sympathetic administrations have been working with the corporate sector to undermine years of obligations incurred by states through conventions, treaties and covenants, years of commitments made through conference action plans and years of expectations created through General assembly resolutions. 

Through these international obligations, commitments and expectations  states have  undertakenthe following :

(i) to promote and fully guarantee respect for human rights and social justice;

(ii) to ensure the preservation and protection of the environment;

(iii) to create a global structure that respects the rule of law;

(iv) to achieve a state of peace; justice and security , and

(v) to enable socially equitable and environmentally sound development.

APRIL 22, 1996

GLOBAL COMPLIANCE RESEARCH PROJECT

Dr. Joan E. Russow, Co-ordinator, Global Compliance Research Project,

1230 St. Patrick St.Victoria, B.C. V8S 4Y4, Canada.

TEL/FAX 604-598-0071 e-mail This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .

1996 PETITION

CALLING FOR

AN INTERNATIONAL COURT OF COMPLIANCE

RECOGNIZING that for fifty years since the formation of the United Nations, member states have undertaken obligations reflected in the Charter, treaties, conventions, and covenants; and have created expectations reflected in declarations, conference commitments and resolutions.

REMINDED of the General Assembly resolution establishing a decade of International Law from 1990 –1999.