North American Union

From Citizendium, the Citizens' Compendium
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is developing and not approved.
Main Article
Talk
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
This editable Main Article is under development and not meant to be cited; by editing it you can help to improve it towards a future approved, citable version. These unapproved articles are subject to a disclaimer.

Those claiming the existence of a North American Union (NAU) plan say that consecutive U.S. Presidents, along with the leaders of Canada and Mexico, intend to create a single government and currency for the three nations, similar to the European Union. Most consider it a conspiracy theory including by the conservative journal, Human Events.[1] Often, those claiming this plan refer to a 2005 Council on Foreign Relations report called "Building A North American Community," which calls for improving security between the borders, steps to grow the American economy, and improving trade, not any kind of merger.[2]

For several years, WorldNetDaily has reported on an alleged plan to combine the United States, Mexico, and Canada into a North American Union. Reports said the plan had been created by the Council on Foreign Relations, and accepted by Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama, as an evolution of NAFTA[3].

Among the most prominent supporters of this claim is Lou Dobbs, formerly of CNN. MediaMatters has criticized his reporting. [4]

  • BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America sounds benign, hardly like a policy that critics call NAFTA on steroids. It's a deal that few have even heard of.
  • REP. MARCY KAPTUR (D), OHIO: It's being done, again, by very few people at the very top, on behalf of the investment class. But the working class of people, political officials across our country from communities, from cities and so forth, they don't know anything about this.
  • TUCKER: Yet, it was agreed to by Mexico's President Fox, Canada's Prime Minister Martin, and President Bush in 2005. The administration officials counter their critics by saying everything about SPP is on the White House Web site. And they say the partnership is not a treaty, but more of an outline of priorities between the United States, Mexico and Canada. Still, some wonder why there haven't been public discussions about the goals being pursued.
  • UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This SPP includes, for instance, a committee that is sitting down to harmonize our meat inspection and food safety. So, how far away from a trade agreement can your dining room table and what you feed your kids be?
  • TUCKER: Other parts of the agreement mention border security as an issue, which include all of North America. In fact, the name of the agreement is not Security and Prosperity of the United States, but of North America.
  • PETER MORICI, PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS, UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND: When we elect officials, we expect them to act on our behalf. When we get involved in cooperative frameworks with other countries for joint regulation of fisheries or rail transportation or the skies, we're basically sharing our sovereignty with that government and outsourcing some of what we give our elected officials.
  • TUCKER: As disturbing as some find SPP, there is legislation in the House introduced by Florida's Katherine Harris that closely resembles the goals of the partnership.
  • (END VIDEOTAPE)
  • TUCKER: Included in that bill is a section which calls for the securing of Mexico's southern border by the United States and Canada. Lou, that's not the border with the United States. That's the border they share with Belize and Guatemala.
  • DOBBS: The idea that the White House would respond that this is on their Web site, this involves intricate workings amongst the Commerce Department of this country and Canada and Mexico's, of course A regional prosperity and security program? This is absolute ignorance. And the fact that we are -- we reported this, we should point out, when it was signed. But, as we watch this thing progress, these working groups are continuing. They're intensifying. What in the world are these people thinking about?
  • TUCKER: Well, they say, look, these are a declaration and an outline of our priorities.

References