Changes

An example of this fake "sovereignty" is the [[George W. Bush|Bush Administration]]'s plans for [[Iraq]] when planning for the nation's future after the [[Iraq War]]. Not only did the Bush Administration support handing the country over to the UN, but it effectively admitted that Iraq would not be a truly sovereign nation while verbally stating otherwise.<ref name="Jasper2004"/> According to then-Secretary of State [[Colin Powell]] in 2004: "They will be sovereign, but I think as a result of agreements, as a result of ... [UN] resolutions that are passed, there will be some constraints on the power of this sovereignty."<ref name="Jasper2004"/> While stating that Iraq would be "sovereign," they effectively admitted that their [[newspeak]] definition of "sovereignty" was synonymous with one-world globalism.<ref name="Jasper2004"/>

An example of this fake "sovereignty" is the [[George W. Bush|Bush Administration]]'s plans for [[Iraq]] when planning for the nation's future after the [[Iraq War]]. Not only did the Bush Administration support handing the country over to the UN, but it effectively admitted that Iraq would not be a truly sovereign nation while verbally stating otherwise.<ref name="Jasper2004"/> According to then-Secretary of State [[Colin Powell]] in 2004: "They will be sovereign, but I think as a result of agreements, as a result of ... [UN] resolutions that are passed, there will be some constraints on the power of this sovereignty."<ref name="Jasper2004"/> While stating that Iraq would be "sovereign," they effectively admitted that their [[newspeak]] definition of "sovereignty" was synonymous with one-world globalism.<ref name="Jasper2004"/>

Another example of the fake definition of "sovereignty" comes from Stewart Patrick of the "International Institutions and Global Governance Program" in his 2017 book ''The Sovereignty Wars''. The thesis of his book, according to the globalist [[Council on Foreign Relations]] website is that "the United States can protect its sovereignty while advancing American interests in a global age."<ref name="CFRSovereigntyWars">[https://www.cfr.org/book/sovereignty-wars The Sovereignty Wars]. ''Council on Foreign Relations''. Retrieved November 27, 2017.</ref> In reality, Stewart promotes a globalist worldview where nations must make "sovereignty bargains", twists the definition of sovereignty to mean more than autonomy and independence, and attacks the [[Trump Administration]] for actually taking steps to preserve national sovereignty such as by announcing its exit from the [[Paris climate agreement]].<ref name="CFRSovereigntyWars"/> In a 2017 op-ed, he made the same globalist arguments, stating that "sovereignty" also demands "fundamental responsibilities", and he used policies pursued by [[George W. Bush]] and [[Barack Obama]] – both globalist presidents who both lived in the early 21 century when globalism was the main international ideology – as examples to prove his point.<ref>Patrick, Stewart (September 23, 2017). [https://www.usnews.com/opinion/world-report/articles/2017-09-23/what-donald-trump-got-right-and-wrong-about-sovereignty-at-the-un Trump's Sovereignty Doctrine]. ''U.S. News & World Report''. Retrieved December 3, 2017.</ref>

Another example of the fake definition of "sovereignty" comes from Stewart Patrick of the [[Council on Foreign Relations]] in his 2017 book ''The Sovereignty Wars''. The thesis of his book, according to the globalist [[Council on Foreign Relations]] website is that "the United States can protect its sovereignty while advancing American interests in a global age."<ref name="CFRSovereigntyWars">[https://www.cfr.org/book/sovereignty-wars The Sovereignty Wars]. ''Council on Foreign Relations''. Retrieved November 27, 2017.</ref> In reality, Stewart promotes a globalist worldview where nations must make "sovereignty bargains", twists the definition of sovereignty to mean more than autonomy and independence, and attacks the [[Trump Administration]] for actually taking steps to preserve national sovereignty such as by announcing its exit from the [[Paris climate agreement]].<ref name="CFRSovereigntyWars"/> In a 2017 op-ed, he made the same globalist arguments, stating that "sovereignty" also demands "fundamental responsibilities", and he used policies pursued by [[George W. Bush]] and [[Barack Obama]] – both globalist presidents who both lived in the early 21 century when globalism was the main international ideology – as examples to prove his point.<ref>Patrick, Stewart (September 23, 2017). [https://www.usnews.com/opinion/world-report/articles/2017-09-23/what-donald-trump-got-right-and-wrong-about-sovereignty-at-the-un Trump's Sovereignty Doctrine]. ''U.S. News & World Report''. Retrieved December 3, 2017.</ref>

At the beginning of the [[Obama Administration]], one notable policy proposal representing the views of liberals and globalists was titled ''A Plan for Action: A New Era of International Cooperation for a Changed World: 2009, 2010, and Beyond''.<ref name="Bolton2009"/> The plan promoted what it called "responsible sovereignty," and, among other statements, stated that "Global leaders increasingly recognize that alone they are unable to protect their interests and their citizens–national security has become interdependent with global security," and that the U.S. must, therefore, submit itself to "a rule-based international system that rejects unilateralism and looks beyond military might."<ref name="Bolton2009"/> In other words, this plan, while claiming to support "sovereignty," in actuality promotes EU-style globalism and "global governance" that would do away with real national sovereignty.<ref name="Bolton2009"/>

At the beginning of the [[Obama Administration]], one notable policy proposal representing the views of liberals and globalists was titled ''A Plan for Action: A New Era of International Cooperation for a Changed World: 2009, 2010, and Beyond''.<ref name="Bolton2009"/> The plan promoted what it called "responsible sovereignty," and, among other statements, stated that "Global leaders increasingly recognize that alone they are unable to protect their interests and their citizens–national security has become interdependent with global security," and that the U.S. must, therefore, submit itself to "a rule-based international system that rejects unilateralism and looks beyond military might."<ref name="Bolton2009"/> In other words, this plan, while claiming to support "sovereignty," in actuality promotes EU-style globalism and "global governance" that would do away with real national sovereignty.<ref name="Bolton2009"/>