U.S. Senate ratified 34 treaties, without debate, without vote, without notice

Tuesday, June 26, 2001
http://sovereignty.net/p/land/treaties.shtml
Senate ratifies Desertification Treaty, 33 others
eco-logic report

Editor's note: This article first appeared in the November 1 issue of
eco-logic. It has caused substantial controversy. Callers to Senator Thomas'
office were told that he had nothing to do with the ratification. Other
Senators told callers that the treaty had not been ratified. Clearly, this
treaty slipped through the process without adequate review, and without the

knowledge of some of the Senators who voted for it.

On December 8, Senator Thomas' office called to explain that it was he who
happened to be on the floor late in the afternoon of October 18, and was
asked to "handle" the package procedurally. His office has inquired of the
Foreign Relations Committee to find out how why the treaty was included in
the package.

In the last days of the 106th Congress, the U.S. Senate ratified 34 treaties
- without debate, without a vote, and almost without notice. Most of the
treaties were between the U.S. and a single other nation, having to do with
treatment of criminals, stolen vehicles, and other single-issue matters. Two
of the treaties, however, have much broader implications: the International
Plant Protection Convention, adopted at the World Conference on Food and
Agriculture in Rome in 1997, and the Convention on Desertification, adopted
in Paris, in 1994.

These two treaties are an integral part of the global environmental agenda
contained in Agenda 21, adopted in Rio de Janeiro, at the 1992 Earth Summit
II. The Convention on Climate Change, and the Convention on Biological
Diversity, are also a part of the process through which the non-binding,
"soft-law" Agenda 21, is converted into legally binding international law.
These two newly ratified treaties further entangle the United States in the
United Nations' web of environmental policy.

Consider how easily this was accomplished. On October 18, Senator Craig
Thomas (R-WY), was recognized by the Senate President:

(Congressional Record: Page: S10658)

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to
executive session to consider the following treaties on today's Executive
Calendar. They will consist of Nos. 20 through 53.

I further ask unanimous consent that the treaties be considered as having
passed through their various parliamentary stages up to and including the
presentation of the resolutions of ratification; all committee provisos,
reservations, understandings, declarations be considered and agreed to; that
any statements be printed in the Congressional Record as if read; further,
that when the resolutions of ratification are voted upon, the motion to
reconsider be laid upon the table, the President be notified of the Senate's
action, and that following the disposition of the treaties, the Senate return
to legislative session.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the clerk report each
treaty by title prior to the vote on each treaty, and further I ask for a
division vote on each resolution of ratification.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is so
ordered. The treaties will be considered to have passed through their various
parliamentary stages up to and including the presentation of the resolutions
of ratification, which the clerk will report.

For each treaty ratified, there was entered into the record a Resolution of
Ratification. This resolution sets forth conditions, understandings, and
reservations, which is always the case with international treaties. What this
means, is an open question.

Since 1992, almost all U.N. treaties contain a specific Article that
prohibits reservations. Article 37 of the Convention on Desertification is
such an Article. In such cases, the United Nations, and the other parties to
the Convention, do not recognize or honor such reservations.

When the United States ratified the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in
June, 1992, it attached a laundry list of reservations. Other parties to the
treaty began filing their rejections of the U.S. reservations. What this
means is unclear, since at the present time, the United Nations has no
enforcement mechanism. Decisions of the International Court of Justice are
non-binding.

This situation is changing dramatically with the creation of the
International Criminal Court, adopted in Rome, in 1998 - over the objection
of the United States. The purpose of this new court is to prosecute
violations of "human rights," which are presently defined in the Court's
Charter to be limited to war crimes, genocide, international terrorism, and
the like. The Court, though, has the authority to redefine its jurisdiction
at will, well beyond the reach of U.N. Security Council veto.

Use of the death penalty in the United States is considered to be a violation
of human rights within the United Nations community. American pilots have
been denounced as war criminals by United Nations Human Rights officials.
Delegates to the U.N. Climate Change conferences have accused the United
States of human rights violations for its so-called global warming emissions.

The point is, we are witnessing the restructuring of the United Nations
system which is posturing to acquire the ability to enforce international
law. International law is not modified by any reservations that the U.S.
Senate may include in a resolution of ratification. International law, and
certainly, international attitude, is rarely in the best interest of the
United States.

When the Convention on Desertification was introduced, Tom McDonnell of the
American Sheep Industry Association, and a Director of Sovereignty
International, analyzed the document, looking specifically for potential
impact on U.S. policy. In March, 1998, McDonnell spoke to the Trans-Texas
Heritage Association, pointing out some of the plans the U.N. has for water
use. In July, 1998, eco-logic reported the creation of a new U.N. Commission
on Water (M). The new Commission met in New York in 1999, to discuss the
issues related to global water use management. The discussions included the
need to integrate the other Agenda 21 Treaties into the new, emerging U.N.
treaty on water. The Convention on Desertification is one of those treaties.

Neither the Convention on Desertification, nor the International Plant
Protection Convention, is designed to benefit the United States. Our
ratification only benefits other nations who have demonstrated willingness,
and desire, to bring our nation under the control of an international power.

The ill-advised ratification of these two U.N. treaties - without review,
comment, debate, or even a recorded vote - makes a mockery of the advise and
consent responsibility placed upon the Senate by our Constitution. Further,
it subjects the citizens of the United States to the increasing reach of
global governance by the United Nations