In one of the most significant moves of recent times a new doctrine has been arbitrarily established. This new doctrine has been quickly accepted by the UN, the US, and European countries. This new concept is known as “Responsibility to Protect.”
“Responsibility to Protect” (R2P) asserts that governments must protect their people from four evils – genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. If they do not, the international community may take steps including the dispatch of a U.N. envoy, the imposition by the U.N. Security Council of sanctions and the threat of International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecution. If unsuccessful, those steps can be followed by Security Council-approved military action. This has been invoked in Libya without any of the preconditions being met. For the first time the UN has arbitrarily interfered in the internal affairs of a member nation. That puts the UN in the position of replacing the US as the world’s policeman. This is a giant step toward world government.
This new policy was quickly followed up when France and the UN moved to do the same thing in the Ivory Coast. They again interfered in the internal dispute regarding a disputed election result by bombing the army in an effort to support the rebel forces.
Ramesh Thakur, a political science professor in Canada and a former “R2P commissioner” at the U.N. wrote in a Toronto Star op-ed on Monday.
“R2P is coming closer to being solidified as an actionable norm,” he concluded.
It is not hard to envision a world leader controlling the nations of the world with military force.
Already it is suggested that this new concept should be applied to Israel. A critic of Israel has launched a fresh bid to make a case for outside intervention on behalf of the Palestinians.
Richard Falk, the U.N.’s “special rapporteur on human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories,” said in a report delivered to the Human Rights Council in Geneva on Monday that Israeli policies amount to “ethnic cleansing” and “crimes against humanity.”
Falk’s use of the terms was significant, as they are two of four specified criteria in “Responsibility to Protect.” For those who understand Bible prophecy these events are all too predictable. We stand in awe and wonder as we see the whole end time scenario slowly unfolding.