Basically, under the UN plan, migration and taxpayer-funded benefits are to be transformed into a “human right,” while governments crack down on criticism. But on December 5, Slovakian and Bulgarian authorities followed Austria, Israel, Poland, Australia, Switzerland, the Czech Republic, Croatia, and other free nations in announcing that they would not be signing up to the UN scheme.
The growing list of defections comes just before the start of a key UN migration summit set to open next week in Marrakesh, Morocco. Globalists are outraged at the resistance. But the list of governments rejecting the plot is expected to keep growing.
In Bratislava, the capital of Slovakia, public pressure to reject the UN scheme has been growing for weeks. Last week, the Parliament even adopted a resolution urging the government to withdraw.
“Slovakia is fully sovereign in defining its own national migration policy,” reads the resolution, adding that the UN Global Compact for Migration was at odds with the nation's security and migration policy.
The resolution also noted that illegal immigration is a negative phenomenon with national security risks. And so, Slovak Prime Minister Peter Pellegrini announced that he would send the objections to the UN. Bulgarian authorities also announced this week that they would reject the pact.
“At this stage, the Bulgarian government believes that the decision not to join the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration protects to the fullest extent the interests of the country and its citizens,” the government press office said in a statement released on December 5.
Here in Austria, public sentiment against the UN plot — and against mass migration — is surging. Top officials have noticed, and are now standing with the people.
“We view some of the points in this agreement very critically,” said Chancellor Sebastian Kurz, who was elected on a platform of stopping the mass migration and standing up to the globalist EU.
“We will therefore do everything to maintain the sovereignty of our country and ensure that we as the Republic of Austria can decide for ourselves on migration issues.”
Vice-chancellor Heinz-Christian Strache with the pro-liberty, anti-establishment Freedom Party offered more specifics. “It cannot ... be that any formulations are adopted that could perhaps or possibly be interpreted to mean that migration can be a human right,” he said. “That can and must not be the case.”
Poland is standing firm, too. Announcing the his nation would not participate, Polish Defense Minister Mariusz Blaszczak blasted the deal and the rationale behind it. “This is not a method that would make it possible to reduce the migration crisis.
On the contrary, it would only intensify the crisis,” he explained, adding that Poland was working with allies to rein in the mass migration.
An official statement from the Polish Interior Ministry noted that the UN agreement is “contrary to the priorities of the Polish government, which are the security of Polish citizens and maintaining control over migration flows.”
Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babis, who announced last month that his nation would also refuse to join, highlighted the danger of the scheme, saying, “it, in fact, defines migration as a basic human right.”
Outside of Europe, governments are waking up as well. Australian Prime Minister Scott Morris, for instance, said that the UN plot to globalize migration policy was “inconsistent” with the best interests of Australia.
He also noted that it “fails to adequately distinguish between people who enter Australia illegally and those who come to Australia the right way.” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu expressed similar concerns in blasting the UN deal.
“We are committed to guarding our borders against illegal migrants,” the Israeli leader said while announcing that the Jewish state would not be submitting to the UN migration pact. “This is what we have done, and this is what we will continue to do.”
In virtually every Western country that has not yet withdrawn, from Canada and Belgium to the Netherlands and beyond, the official opposition is rallying to stop the UN plan, too.
“Canadians and Canadians alone should make decisions on who comes into our country and under what circumstances,'' Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer said this week, blasting Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen and far-left Prime Minister Justin Trudeau for essentially working to erase the nation's borders.
“Instead of signing international agreements that erode our sovereign right to manage our borders, the prime minister should focus on restoring order at home.'”
Other lawmakers have used even more fiery rhetoric, with Conservative Michelle Rempel blasting the UN plan as a “border-erasing policy” and People's Party chief Maxime Bernier noting that it would “normalize mass migration.”
In Belgium, the government may collapse as one of its parties threatens to pull out unless the UN pact is axed. And in the Netherlands, polls show far more people oppose the UN plan than support it.
The effort to globalize immigration policy officially got off the ground in the waning days of the Obama administration at the UN's first Summit for Refugees and Migrants. Obama, who publicly proclaimed his goal of “fundamentally transforming” America, was an enthusiastic supporter, even hosting the Leaders’ Summit on the Global Refugee Crisis the next day.
Those events produced the UN New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants and began the negotiation process for the Global Compact for Migration. And that scheme was supposed to culminate on December 12 in Marrakesh with a global agreement that would gradually restructure immigration policy around the world to facilitate an ever-larger migrant influx from Africa, Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America into the United States, Canada, and European nations.
The problem for globalists, though, was that Trump refused to go along with it. The U.S. government was the first to announce its withdrawal.Read more at TheNewAmerican