THE UNITED STATES OF EUROPE
AND THE WORLD PLOT
by Mary H. Gray
The New Times
January 17, 1958. Vol.24 No.1
As the Grand Plan for a United. States of Europe
nears fulfilment there is much activity of conferences
in London, Paris, Rome and elsewhere and hurrying
to and fro. There is also less humbug; the real
objectives. of the network of organisations that have
sprung up since the war are no longer camouflaged.
The cat had to come out of the bag sometime, but not
before Britain, the main catch, was secured.
Great Britain, always elusive, is now all but
committed to the European Free Trade Area by her
Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary; once inside
the gates of a "United Europe" there will be no
The Free Trade Area is the lure; it is the honey
on the flypaper from which we shall find it impossible
to extricate ourselves. A nation can withdraw from an
agreement; a treaty can be annulled; but once a people have discarded their nationhood and merged
their identity in a cosmopolitan crowd, they are no
longer a nation. And that is just what is planned
for the British people.
Last September a booklet, Designs for Europe was
issued by Political and Economic Planning (P.E.P.).
It is the blueprint for an "Integrated Europe", all
ready to put into effect when the, various treaties
are signed. This quasi-official body was conspicuous
before the war for always knowing beforehand what
was being planned for this country. It has its nose
into everything and apparently gets funds without
Its astonishingly accurate outline of the Grand
Design for Europe so far developed gives also a
short history of the "European Idea" (towards integration) so all-knowing that one suspects P.E.P. to
be; if not the originators at least the hatchery of the
cunning plot to filch the independence of the
Among organisations mentioned as constantly
urging governments to take action to bring about
integration are M. Monnet's Action Committee for
the United States of Europe, the European Movement
(with its U.K. Council), the European Atlantic
Group and our old antagonist, Federal Union.
The devastation and dislocatien of the war, says
P.E.P., created the need for co-operation between
European and North American countries in the
political, economic, military, social and cultural
fields. (We recall how "America" co-operated for a
start by cutting off Lend-Lease to Britain.)
There is now no secrecy about the aims of the
multitudes of bodies created in Europe in the last
twelve years; each and all of them are bound for the
same goal though by different routes. P.E.P. makes
no bones about it; in its own words, they are working
for "European integration requiring a transfer of
national sovereignty to a supra-national authority".
The first of the "bewildering array of institutions" was the Economic Commission for Europe,
created in 1947. It was, as one might expect, the
offspring of UNESCO; its purpose economic reconstruction in Europe, and it probably did do some
work. But its emergence, followed by others, so soon
after U.N.O. itself was established, suggests the
underlying purpose of the United Nations, which is
not to keep the peace of the world but to cover it
with a web of organisations under its control, to
promote internationalism and centralise power in the
hands of a small junto.
What else is the meaning of the multiplicity of
what an Australian M.P. once called "Alphabetical
Monstrosities"? Some of them are direct offshoots of
U.N.O.; others seen to be self-appointed - as the
Council of Europe. Once established, they call upon
the "free" nations for recognition.and support. Later,
they assume powers. and' functions that properly
belong to the sovereign nations and constitute themselves advisers, directors - even dictators - of
national policies.. (Witness the impertinence of the
Council of Europe in criticising British policy in
The Organisation for European Ecoriornic Co-operation (O.E.E.C) was formed in 1948, specifically at that time to distribute Marshall Aid through
a joint European Recovery Programme. Owing to
this, the U.S. and Canada became associate members
and have remained so.
Western European Union, set up in 1948, grew
from the Brussels Treaty Organisation. Its functions
are wide and include military, but the latter have
been taken over by N.A.T.O.
The Council of Europe, founded in 1949, requires
an article to itself. The European Coal and Steel
Community, designed to pool the coal and steel of
France and Germany, was extended to include the
other four countries that will, with the former, form
the Common Market of the six. The E.C.S.C. is a
"supra-national" organisation. (Supra-national, according to P.E.P., means not controlled by the member governments, but by an independent body to which
member states cede certain of their sovereign powers,
including the making of decisions.)
The Common Market of the six - France, West
Germany, Italy, Holland, Belgium and Luxembourg,
of which M. Spaak is the moving spirit, is that Customs Union which Britain, because of her Commonwealth and colonial ties, could not join; for while the
six enrich themselves, by selling to each other without
tariffs, they exclude outsiders by imposing tariffs on
Someone invented the Free Trade Area as the next
best thing for Britain, whereby she could participate
in the "advantages" of the Common Market while
retaining freedom of trade with the Commonwealth
and control of agricultural products. This is not yet
conceded, as some of the other countries strongly
object. Either Britain is all-in or all-out, they say,
and all-in means that she will no longer be mistress
in her own house.
The Common Market is but one aspect of the
overall design for the United States of Europe, and
those who are working for integration, says P.E.P.,
"are prepared to lose their separate national identities, to give up independent national policies and
become 'Europeans'." Are Britons willing thus to
commit national suicide?
The foregoing institutions, each with its own staff,
Council and Assembly, have various ramifications.
Some overlap, which provides an excuse for rationalisation, to combine them as far as possible with joint
secretariats. Hence Mr. Selwyn Lloyd's "Grand
Design" to create a single European Assembly,
consisting of five commissions to deal with political, economic, sócal and cultural, legal and administrative, and defence affairs. One Secretariat to serve
all and - believe it or not - membership to be open
to any country!
Mr. Ormsby Core of the Foreign Office emphasised
at Strasbourg that European Unity must be part of
the wider Atlantic Community; so, if we go on like
this, a United Europe will soon be world-wide!
But of course that is the idea. The integration of
Europe - with goodness knows who else is the first
stage in the greater plan for a World Government.
Centralise in small groups; then in larger groups:
then join the groups together and you have One
World! At the pace things are moving the plot is
nearing its consummation, and our leaders, whether
they know it or not, are going to deliver us right
into the Enemy's hands.
One small but vital matter I have omitted to mention. (It is also tactfully omitted by P.E.P.) "There
must", said M. Gaillard, when Finance Minister of
France, "in the Common Market scheme be a unity of
monetary policies. Otherwise the tariff reductions will
be of little value." At that rate, once involved in a
United Europe, what hope of monetary reform or
any other reform in this country? We should have to
ask permission of the ruling clique, and as International Finance would still rule the roost - well!
The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation was
formed in April, 1949, as a Western political and
military defensive alliance. Its membership included
Canada and the United States as well as the European States. The supreme body is the Council which meets at international level two or three times a year, but it also has permanent representatives, assissted by national delegations.
The Chairman and Secretary-General has wide
powers; may initiate policy and is responsible for
carrying out the Council's policy. He also directs
the Secretariat in Paris, about 600 strong. At present
he is M. Spaak of Belgium, a man whose past conduct
is not above reproach.
It may be recalled how, when the last war was
ended, the Belgian King wished to return to his
throne. The Belgian Parliament and a special
plebiscite of the people declared overwhelmingly in
favour of his return, but M. Spank thought otherwise.
He threatened the country with revolution if the
King returned, so, rather than cause trouble to his
people, the King abdicated.
This, then, is the man in command of N.A.T.O. and the motive power in the implementation of the "United States of Europe". What can we expect from one who betrays his own people? It is a sign of the warped values of our time that Paul Henri Spaak was last June awarded the Charlemagne prize by the town of Aachen in West Germany - for his services to "European Unity" !
On that occasion he stated that "their aim should be to create an integrated Europe in the heart of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation" !
There is the declaration of "Common Purpose";
(we took for granted that every treaty had a common
purpose) ; there is the "concept of Inter-dependence"
and the "pooling of ideas" - generalisations as fluffy
as a cirrus cloud unless brought down to earth.
About Inter-dependence the Editor of the Glasgow
Herald enlightens us: "To be a genuinely constructive
element in Western policy it must entail actual sacri-
fices of independence or sovereignty, both foreign
M. Spaak obliges by explaining the pooling busi-
ness: "We must pool our resources to achieve higher
standards of living and increased military effectiveness."
"All NATO countries", asserts M. Spaak, "must
also have a world policy to avoid such crises as
occurred over Suez last year." He, of course, drags in
the Sputniks to reinforce his argument. (Query: Was
the advent of the Sputniks neatly timed to happen
before the big NATO Conference?)
But M. Spaak reached the top note of his address
with this:-"Once we establish inter-dependence
between all the partners of the Atlantic Alliance,
there will be no problems, scientific, military,
economic or political that we cannot solve." My, My!
Let's have inter-dependence straight away!
Nevertheless, behind all this high-flown talk there
is something quite sinister. Mr. Eisenhower is
reported to have a new policy for NATO. It appears
to be an inter-continental defence system, with
exchange of troops between Europe and America. The
U.S. will station intermediate-range ballistic missiles
with a range of 1,500 miles in NATO countries, with
the probability that some missiles with nuclear war-
heads will be given to those allies.
Mr. Dulles "wants to give them a sense of participation in their use" - but the allies would not decide
when they were to be used. That momentous decision
rests solely with the United States, who wish to retain
a veto over the use of nuclear weapons, says the
"New York Herald Tribune".
Before Britain is pushed into the Free Trade Area
there is likely to be a tussle. Chief stumbling-blocks to her entry are the Government's "firm policy" on
agriculture, horticulture and Imperial Preference.
But the Prime Minister and his henchmen have shown
such agility in leaping hurdles when the whip is
cracked that I am doubtful whether they will hold out
against Spaak and his co-ordinators.
The two main sections of opinion - the manufacturers and exporters on the one hand and "Labour"
on the other, are not opposed on the issue. They are
all for it, except a minority of the former - those
likely to suffer - and they are strongly opposed.
The industrialists (some at least) see opportunities
galore for expanding trade; "Labour" sees the
glorious promise of "full employment"; neither sees
the trap for the bait.
Yet most are agreed that Imperial Preference must
be retained. We shall see. Britain's relations with the
Commonwealth are not discussed in the P.E.P. pamphlet. Canada is spoken of, rather as paired with
the U.S.A.; Australia and New Zealand are not mentioned. Probably P.E.P. has cast them in the role
of satellites of a Greater America!
I mentioned Federal Union earlier as calling for
European Integration. For the benefit of the uninformed, Federal Union is an ideological disease that
came out in spots about 20 years ago simultaneously in various parts of the world. Its earnest desire is the
subordination of the nations to a higher Authority
and the surrender of their right to self-government in
everything that matters.
It is, in fact, working for a World Government,
and in that aim it has the backing of 115 members
of the House of Commons and a fair following of
other soggy-brained sentimentalists who do not see
that their demand is treasonable (perhaps some of
them do). The United Nations Association has the
I have wandered somewhat from P.E.P., but in
truth these movements and P.E.P. have a common
origin. They are the fruits of Fabian Socialism,
which in turn is linked with Marxism and internationalism.
P.E.P. claims to be an independent research body,
financed from private resources. Founded in 1931, it
is recognised as a charitable trust (!) for educational
purposes, therefore PAYS NO TAXES and as a
"scientific society" PAYS NO RATES!
The triumphal progress of the nation-destoyers
bears out the boast of Dr. Arnold Toynbee (who recently completed his much-vaunted World History)
when, as Secretary of the Royal Institute of International Affairs at Copenhagen in 1931, proclaimed
that "We" are working feverishly "but with all our
might" to wrest their sovereignty from the nations.
There are two questions to which it is imperative
we find the answers ere we are lost forever as a
(1) Who precisely are Arnold Toynbee's
(2) What sort of paralysis has gripped our
political leaders - of whatever party - that their
patriotism is of so poor a quality?
Are they under
some dire compulsion to barter our priceless heritage
of tradition, culture and independence? And for
what? A trade deal! Are they in a hypnotic trance,
under some evil spell that constrains them?
There is an answer, and those who know it must
work "with all their might" to spread the knowledge,
for it reveals a cunningly laid plot.
Please take particular note of the date of this article .. it was written in January 1958... over fifty years ago... don't try and tell me there has not been a plot to enslave the world!