Greetings,
The claim that the Watchtower Soc. “joined the UN” or in any way compromised their neutral position regarding governments is a bunch of smoke and mirrors! It has been disproved many times on various web pages and discussion groups. Yet, these critics are still desperately attempting to convince others that the WTS politically joined the UN.
The Watchtower Soc. become an Non-Government Organization (NGO) in 1991. The position of an NGO is only consultative; it only aids and promotes the UN's gaining it's objective in that the NGO advises and informs IN AREAS WHICH ARE OF CONCERN TO THE NGO.
Article 3 of the UN charter states: "3. The organization shall undertake to support the work of the United Nations and to promote knowledge of its principles and activities, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITS OWN AIMS AND PURPOSES and the nature and scope of its competence and activities."--ECOSOC Resolution 1296 (XLIV) Arrangements for Consultation with Non-Governmental Organizations
Then section 14 repeats the same thing: "...involve ONLY THE SUBJECTS for which that organization has a special competence or in which it has a special interest."–Ibid
In doing this the WTS is not promoting or condoning the methods, actions or glorification of the UN organization any more than a Witness would be promoting a government when he seeks relief from injustice from any governmental judicial authority! The Bible clearly shows that human governments are controlled by Satan and will be destroyed by God, yet Paul retained his Roman citizenship and participated in the judicial system in order to secure human rights. He promoted the principles and activities of the Roman government "in accordance with Christian aims and purposes." We do no different!
Witnesses support any government in areas which do not conflict with God's laws, and we can become members of periphery organizations which work under governments and advise governments on things such as human rights and religious freedom. This is not the same as becoming part of these governments.
The foundation of the whole argument by critics on this subject is that the Society obligated itself to "support and promote everything the UN stands for." This is a blatant falsehood, a major smokescreen and misrepresentation of the ACTUAL AGREEMENT ORIGINALLY SIGNED by the WTS as shown by the actual documentation.
The facts of the matter are that the UN itself informed the NGOs that "association of NGOs with the DPI DOES NOT CONSTITUTE THEIR INCORPORATION INTO THE UNITED NATIONS SYSTEM!" (Cf. ECOSOC Resolution 1296; Part II,12.)
Here is what the Information Officer of The NGO Section said when questioned about the WTS: The question was: "Some friends of mine are concerned over the WTBTS not saying nice things about the UN, is this a problem?" He answered: "You can criticize the UN. But, we would take offence if they were ...saying they were a UN organization WHEN THEY REALLY ARE NOT."--Mr. Oleg Dzioubinski Information Officer NGO Section Department of Public Information United Nations New York, N.Y.
As can be seen from this quote NGO’s “really are not a UN organization”!! Therefore there was absolutely no unscriptural alliance with the UN by the WTS! Except for all the misrepresentations by those deceitfully trying to discredit the WTS, these plain statements would be the end of the matter.
The fact of the matter is that there was no “mistake” by the WTS when they originally applied to be an NGO. When the WTS agreed to become an NGO in 1991 the OFFICIAL registration papers did not require anything that compromised our position. The Society has stated: "Registration papers filed with the United Nations that we have on file contain no statements that conflict with our Christian beliefs."
The problem was that long after this there was a change in the official requirements for an NGO. In 1994 a brochure was printed up stating: "A new relationship between the UN and NGOs is now being created...We have seen NGOs are taking on important new responsibilities."
Then we find the 1996 Criteria for Association of NGOs describing the work of NGOs using language that Witnesses clearly cannot agree with; encouraging political participation, strengthening and support of the UNSystem etc. Also, in the a later NGO brochure we find that there was in fact an official change in the relationship and requirements of NGOs. (http://www.un.org/MoreInfo/ngolink/brochure.htm) [sorry links no longer good]
Quoting from the brochure: "After three years of negotiation, ECOSOC reviewed its arrangements for consultation with NGOs in July 1996. One outcome was ECOSOC Resolution 1996/31, which revised the arrangements for NGO consultation with ECOSOC....A second outcome...Decision 1996/297, which recommended that the General Assembly examine, at it 51st session, the QUESTION OF THE PARTICIPATION OF NGOS IN ALL AREAS OF WORK OF THE UN."
So all the previous documentation clearly confirms exactly what the WTS has said: That *after* they applied for NGO status there was a change in the language of the Criteria for Association. When this was brought to their attention they *immediately* withdrew their participation.
A fair and reasonable examination of the *facts* can only lead to the conclusion that there was no "unholy alliance" with the UN. There was no contradiction of Christian principles or conflict with stated beliefs and practices of Jehovah's Witnesses. The only "issue" here is in the overactive minds of unreasonable critics.
As soon as it was pointed out to the WTS that the latest version of the "Criteria for Association of NGOs" had been changed long after they originally became an NGO and contained language that they did not agree with they IMMEDIATELY withdrew their registration. Instead of seeing this as a reasonable corrective step it is lyingly presented as some type of coverup. What rot! These same individual's own religions refuse to correct their false doctrines, immoral standards and participation in human slaughter. Yet they want to criticize us for quickly correcting some slight misstep that was not even the WTS fault?
Therefore all the evidence shows that the WTS' obligation was only limited to its own particular interests and did not have anything to do with military activity or any other such non-neutral activity.
The foundation of the whole argument by critics on this subject is that the Society obligated itself to "support and promote everything the UN stands for." This is a blatant falsehood, a major smokescreen and misrepresentation of the ACTUAL AGREEMENT ORIGINALLY SIGNED by the WTS as shown by the above documentation.
Yours,
BAR-ANERGES