“The evidence is irrefutable,” World Health Organization Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said on Wednesday. “Restricting [abortion] drives women and girls toward unsafe abortion resulting in complications, even death.” Tedros’ remarks were part of a broad attack upon the recent ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which reversed its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that declared the U.S. Constitution protected a woman’s right to an abortion. Dobbs, on the other hand, held that no such right exists in the Constitution, and returned to states the authority to regulate abortion as they see fit.
While Tedros’ comments may appear directed only to the issue of abortion, his attack is also upon the sovereignty of the United States and the sovereignty of its states in its federal system of government. This is not surprising, since from the time of its inception in 1945, the United Nations has been a world government in waiting. In 1945, in the aftermath of the Second World War, UN advocates used the desire for “world peace” as a way to advance the UN as a foundation for world government. Since that time, UN advocates have used euphemisms such as “global governance,” or “new world order,” or “rules-based international system” for moving toward a global government.
It should also be noted that, before he was elevated to his present position, Tedros was a member of an Ethiopian Marxist organization known as the Tigray People’s Liberation Front. Not surprisingly, UN leadership positions are dominated by socialists of various stripes.
In addition to the ostensible desire to avoid war, UN leaders have used other issues, such as man-made climate change, as excuses to advance their globalist aspirations.
It now appears that fears over international pandemics such as Covid are leading to a new strategy — the use of “healthcare” as the newest excuse for nations to surrender their sovereignty to the United Nations.
Because of this, we can expect the WHO to become increasingly powerful. Now, the director-general even presumes to interfere in the internal affairs of the United States by issuing his opinion on a purely domestic issue. This is despite the clear wording of the UN Charter that the organization will not interfere in domestic matters of member nations.
Tedros argued that abortion is a healthcare issue, and that the limitation of abortion would negatively affect poorer women the most, along with women from marginalized communities. (This is, of course, a typical tactic of the Left — it seems that every issue always affects poor women and minorities the most, at least according to them).
“We really hadn’t expected this from the U.S.,” Tedros complained, condemning the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision as a “backwards” move. “We had really hoped the U.S. would lead on this issue.”
The chief scientist of WHO, Dr. Soumya Swaminathan, supported Tedros’ attack on the U.S. Supreme Court. “I know from my own experience, working in India, that having access to safe abortion is a life-saving measure,” and compared the outlawing of abortion to denying someone access to a life-saving drug. Of course, Dr. Swaminathan neglected to address the issue of what abortion does to the unborn child — ends his or her life. She also failed to mention that denial of access to a “life-saving drug” is actually quite routine in socialist countries around the world.
Swaminathan said that bans on abortion drive women into “the hands of people who are there to exploit the situation, performing unsafe abortion and very often resulting in a huge amount of damage to their health and sometimes death.”
She lamented, “It’s unfortunate to see some countries going backward.”
Tedros expressed concern that other countries might be inclined to follow the leadership of the United States and enact similar measures to restrict abortion. “The global impact is also a concern. If safe abortion is illegal, then women will definitely resort to unsafe ways of doing it. And that means it could cost them their lives.”
We can only hope that the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court will influence more restrictive policies on abortion in other countries — and save the lives of unborn babies around the world, as well as in the United States. But whatever decision they make on this and other political issues, it is their decision to make, not that of the World Health Organization.
This interference in our governmental system by the WHO should serve as a warning that it is way past time for the United States to get out of the United Nations, get the United Nations out of the United States, and lead other nations to do the same — and prevent the continued push for world government from succeeding.
