BY CLIFF KINCAID, PRESIDENT, AMERICA'S SURVIVAL

Hillary Clinton was the consummate professional in exploiting children for political purposes. But the United Nations is trying to demonstrate, during its "Summit on Children" from May 8-10, that it can exploit children, too. The draft conference document, A World Fit for Children, is so bizarre that it asserts that the nations of the world have to protect children from global warming and from Third World debt. This absurd attempt to exploit children to advance the radical left agenda should be repudiated. The U.S. should not even participate in this fraudulent event. It revolves around a radical document, a treaty on children's rights, that outlaws the spanking of children but asserts that a child has a right to play and leisure within the context of being raised to respect the principles of the U.N.

Unfortunately, much of the controversy over the document so far concerns provisions on access to abortion and sex education for young children, and the definition of the term "family." Even if they are "fixed," the document would be tragically flawed.

The situation is so hopeless that some pro-family conservatives rejoiced when the U.S. Mission to the U.N., led by Ambassador John Negroponte, decided not to follow the European lead and endorse a broad definition of family that would include homosexuals raising children. It was also supposed to be a great day when the U.S. Mission decided not to vote for non-governmental organization (NGO) status for the International Lesbian & Gay Association, a pro-pedophile group.

The U.S. delegation is seemingly unaware that the conference is another exercise in America-bashing, paid for in large measure by American taxpayers, and featuring American and European feminists. It is designed to promote a U.N. children's rights treaty to replace parents with government and give the world body influence over education and child development.

A key organizer of the event is Ms. Carol Bellamy (right), a Clinton-Gore holdover at the U.N., who serves as Under Secretary General of the U.N. and executive director of UNICEF. As a radical left state senator in New York, Bellamy voted against a measure which stated that if a fetus survived an attempted abortion and was born alive, then the child should be given the same care as other premature infants. She has been accused of using UNICEF to promote abortion and homosexual rights. In a slap at the U.S., the UNICEF Web site heavily promotes the Convention on the Rights of the Child, a treaty not ratified by the U.S. In a statement on "Child rights in action," UNICEF features a plea for "the universal signature and ratification of child-related treaties and invites all States that have not done so [ i.e. the U.S.] to take action on these instruments at the Special Session on Children and thereby concretely express their commitment to improving children's lives."

The problem with the U.N.'s involvement in "children's rights" can be seen in the feeble U.S. objections to several provisions of the conference document promoting the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The U.S. has objected to them, but has failed to recognize that their insertion into the document is a heavy-handed international effort to humiliate the U.S. and make us look like we're opposed to basic rights for children.

The U.N. says that only two countries have not ratified the treaty, the U.S. and Somalia, and that the U.S. "has signaled its intention to ratify by formally signing the Convention," a reference to Clinton's U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Madeleine Albright having signed the document on February 23, 1995.

So the U.S. is in the same league with backward Somalia. The U.S. is supposed to be embarrassed over this. Instead, we should trumpet this fact as an illustration of how we entrust parents, not government, with the raising and nurturing of children.

The Bush Administration should have taken the offensive and boycotted the conference. It should withdraw Albright's signature from the children's rights convention, in the same way that conservatives have urged the Administration to disavow the Clinton Administration's signature on the International Criminal Court treaty.

The 2000 Republican Platform suggests opposition to the treaty. It says, "Any effort to address global social problems must be firmly placed into a context of respect for the fundamental social institutions of marriage and family. We reject any treaty or convention that would contradict these values."

The failure to reject the treaty outright and boycott the Summit on Children probably reflect the perceived need by the Bush Administration to accommodate feminists and other members of the liberal lobby. U.S. groups supporting ratification include the National Education Association, the National Council of Churches, the Children's Defense Fund, American Council for Social Services, the National Committee for the Rights of the Child, the National Council for Child's Rights, Planned Parenthood, International School of Psychology Association, the National School Board Association, the American Bar Association, and the International Council on Social Welfare.

Liberals call it "The most ratified human rights law ever," with 191 countries as parties to the document.

Conservatives have said with justification that its ratification represents "The most dangerous attack on parental rights in U.S. history." The treaty outlaws the spanking of children and authorizes federal and global influence over how children are educated and raised.

By participating in the Summit on Children, the U.S. Mission to the U.N. is assuming that controversial provisions of the treaty can somehow be modified to meet U.S. objections. This is a losing proposition.

Even if the conference document can somehow be "fixed," the treaty cannot. Article 19 of the treaty has been interpreted by the U.N. as a prohibition on the spanking of children. It states that parties shall take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and education measures "to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse…"

Consider that:

"The Committee on the Rights of the Child which monitors implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child has consistently stated that legal and social acceptance of physical punishment of children, in the home and in institutions, is not compatible with the Convention. Since 1993, in its recommendations following examination of reports from various States Parties to the Convention, the Committee has recommended prohibition of physical punishment in the family and institutions, and education campaigns to encourage positive, non-violent child-rearing and education…

"The Committee on the Rights of the Child is the highest international authority for interpretation of the Convention. Elected by States Parties to the Convention, the 10-member body meets three times a year in Geneva. States Parties must submit an initial report on progress towards implementation of the Convention within two years of ratification; then periodic reports must be submitted every five years."

(Source: http://endcorporalpunishment.org/pages/hrlaw/crc_session.html)

The treaty eliminates parental rights by insisting that children have rights independent of their parents that are guaranteed by government. For instance, it affirms that "The child shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of the child's choice." Article 31 even outlines a right to play. It says that state parties should "recognize the right of the child to rest and leisure, to engage in play and recreational activities appropriate to the age of the child and to participate freely in cultural life and the arts."

Article 29 of the Treaty says that state parties "agree that the education of the child shall be directed to" the "development of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and for the principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations…"

Hence, the child is to become a pawn of the U.N.

Article 42 mandates a federal government campaign to force people to accept the provisions of the treaty. It stipulates that state parties "undertake to make the principles and provisions of the Convention widely known, by appropriate and active means, to adults and children alike. "

Article 43 creates the international body to enforce compliance. It says, "For the purpose of examining the progress made by States Parties in achieving the realization of the obligations undertaken in the present Convention, there shall be established a Committee on the Rights of the Child, which shall carry out the functions hereinafter provided. "

Article 44 says that state parties "undertake to submit to the Committee, through the Secretary-General of the United Nations, reports on the measures they have adopted which give effect to the rights recognized herein and on the progress made on the enjoyment of those rights."

The official program of the U.N. Summit on Children describes how children are going to be used to promote the U.N. and its treaties.

In a display of silliness, more than 300 children will be "official delegates" to the conference. They are carefully chosen by liberal and radical non-governmental organizations (NGOs). The program includes a "Pathways to Peace" event and a "Peace Flag Ceremony" that will feature the "Children of the World" as "peace builders." Teenagers and pre-teens will be trotted in and out as props to lavish praise on the U.N. as a world body for peace.

Various events will have a definite anti-American tone. For example, an event called " The Impact of Small Arms and Landmines on Children" is designed to highlight the fact that the U.S. has not ratified a treaty banning landmines.

A "First Spouses Forum: Women's Leadership For Children," will feature Mrs. Nane Annan, UNICEF Executive Director Carol Bellamy, and Dr. Nafis Sadik of the U.N. Population Fund.

A Panel on "Financing a World Fit for Children" is designed to shake down American taxpayers for billions of more dollars in the name of saving children from poverty. "This event will attempt to identify the most crucial measures that financial authorities need to take to ensure sufficient and sustainable financial resources for child-focused poverty reduction," the program schedule says.

In another thumb in the eye to the U.S., there will be a discussion on how Christian churches are implementing the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

A panel sponsored by the Bill Gates-linked Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI) will discuss how to subject children to more controversial and mandatory vaccines, including possibly an HIV/AIDS vaccine. (30)