Exposing the Global Population Control Agenda

By Brian Clowes, Ph.D.

The Formalization of United States Population Policy

The United States National Security Council is the highest decision-making body on foreign policy in the United States. On December 10, 1974, it promulgated a top secret document entitled National Security Study Memorandum or NSSM-200, also called The Kissinger Report. Its subject was “Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests.” This document, published shortly after the first major international population conference in Bucharest, was the result of collaboration among the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and the Departments of State, Defense and Agriculture.

Kissinger Report cover

The Kissinger Report was made public when it was declassified and was transferred to the U.S. National Archives in 1990.

Although the United States government has issued hundreds of policy papers dealing with various aspects of American national security since 1974, The Kissinger Report continues to be the foundational document on population control issued by the United States government. It therefore continues to represent official United States policy on population control, and is posted on the USAID website.

NSSM-200 is critically important to pro-life workers all over the world, because it completely exposes the unsavory and unethical motivations and methods of the population control movement.

The Purpose of The Kissinger Report

The primary purpose of U.S.-funded population control efforts is to maintain access to the mineral resources of less-developed countries, or LDCs. The Kissinger Report says that the U.S. economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries. That fact gives the U.S. enhanced interest in the political, economic, and social stability of the supplying countries. Wherever a lessening of population pressures through reduced birth rates can increase the prospects for such stability, population policy becomes relevant to resource supplies and to the economic interests of the United States.

In order to protect U.S. commercial interests, NSSM-200 cited a number of factors that could interrupt the smooth flow of materials from LDCs to the United States, including a large population of anti-imperialist youth, whose numbers must be limited by population control. The document identified 13 nations by name that would be the primary targets of U.S.-funded population control efforts. Under the heading of “Concentration on key countries” we find:

Assistance for population moderation should give primary emphasis to the largest and fastest growing developing countries where there is special U.S. political and strategic interest. Those countries are: India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nigeria, Mexico, Indonesia, Brazil, the Philippines, Thailand, Egypt, Turkey, Ethiopia and Columbia [sic]. … At the same time, the U.S. will look to the multilateral agencies, especially the U.N. Fund for Population Activities which already has projects in over 80 countries to increase population assistance on a broader basis with increased U.S. contributions. This is desirable in terms of U.S. interests and necessary in political terms in the United Nations.

According to The Kissinger Report, elements of the implementation of population control programs could include:

  • the legalization of abortion;
  • financial incentives for countries to increase their abortion, sterilization and contraception-use rates;
  • indoctrination of children; and
  • mandatory population control and coercion of other forms, such as withholding disaster and food aid unless an LDC implements population control programs.

The Kissinger Report also specifically declared that the United States was to cover up its population control activities and avoid charges of imperialism by inducing the United Nations and various non-governmental organizations—specifically the Pathfinder Fund, the International Planned Parenthood Foundation (IPPF) and the Population Council—to do its dirty work.

Cause of Massive Human Rights Violations

The document has directly and inevitably encouraged atrocities on an enormous scale in dozens of the world’s nations. Just four examples are shown below.

  • China. For many years, the United States government funded the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). In April, 2017, the Trump Administration finally took the step of ending UNFPA funding. Why? One of the main targets of UNFPA money is the People’s Republic of China (PRC). The State Department grounded the change of policy the fact the agency “supports, or participates in the management of, a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization” in China. While the UNFPA denies it, according to its own documents, the UNFPA has donated more than $100 million to China’s population control program; financed a $12 million computer complex specifically to monitor the population program; provided the technical expertise and personnel that trained thousands of Chinese population control officials; and presented China with a United Nations award for the “most outstanding population control program.” Those unfamiliar with the countless abuses perpetrated under this program might consider reading material from 2015-present at the links for the  U.S. Congressional Hearing on China and Population Research Institute (PRI) for evidence. As the PRI article states, “More children were aborted under the one-child policy than the entire population of the United States.”
  • Peru. During the years 1995 to 1997, over a quarter of a million Peruvian women were sterilized as part of a program to fulfill then-president Alberto Fujimori’s family planning goals. Although this campaign was called the “Voluntary Surgical Contraception Campaign,” many of these procedures were obviously coerced. In fact, women whose underweight children were on government food programs were threatened with the withholding of this food if they refused to be sterilized, and others were kidnapped from their families and forcibly sterilized.
  • Uganda. Uganda became the first African country to roll back its adult HIV infection rate, from 21 percent in 1991 to about six percent in 2004, a 70 percent decrease. The nation accomplished this amazing feat by discouraging condom use and by changing the behavior of the people. The population control groups could not allow this success to interfere with their inflexible template, so they aggressively undermined President Yoweri Museveni’s program. Timothy Wirth, president of the United Nations Foundation, called this highly effective program “gross negligence toward humanity.” The United States Agency for International Development (USAID), Population Services International, CARE International, and others have been pushing condoms as hard as they can in Uganda. Rates rose over seven percent, which Edward Greene, former senior research scientist at the Harvard School of Public Health, ascribes to riskier behavior and less fear of HIV as a death sentence. Recently rates have declined back to 6.2% again.  Nevertheless, Uganda’s initial success rate is perhaps the most egregious example of population control ideology trumping the science of proven HIV prevention programs.
  • India. In 2014 there was renewed international attention on India’s continuing forced sterilization program after dozens of women were killed and many more harmed due to the assembly line procedures being done in grotesquely unsanitary conditions. Female sterilization is still India’s primary method of “contraception.” According to the New York Times, as of 2016 four million tubal ligations are still done annually.  This continues to be financed by the US and other Western governments and foundations. As of 2017 there are no plans to stop sterilizations, but the Indian government is introducing free injectable contraceptives, which will also have major negative health impacts on women.

Outline of the Population Control Strategy in The Kissinger Report

The Kissinger Report explicitly lays out the detailed strategy by which the United States government aggressively promotes population control in developing nations in order to regulate (or have better access to) the natural resources of these countries.

The following outline shows the elements of this plan, with actual supporting quotes from NSSM-200:

  • The United States needs widespread access to the mineral resources of less-developed nations (quote shown above).
  • The smooth flow of resources to the United States could be jeopardized by LDC government action, labor conflicts, sabotage, or civil disturbances, which are much more likely if population pressure is a factor: “These types of frustrations are much less likely under conditions of slow or zero population growth.”
  • Young people are much more likely to challenge imperialism and the world’s power structures, so their numbers should be kept down as much as possible: “These young people can more readily be persuaded to attack the legal institutions of the government or real property of the ‘establishment,’ ‘imperialists,’ multinational corporations, or other—often foreign—influences blamed for their troubles.”
  • Therefore, the United States must develop a commitment to population control among key LDC leaders, while bypassing the will of their people: “The U.S. should encourage LDC leaders to take the lead in advancing family planning and population stabilization both within multilateral organizations and through bilateral contacts with other LDCs.”
  • The critical elements of population control implementation include:
    • Identifying the primary targets: “Those countries are: India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nigeria, Mexico, Indonesia, Brazil, the Philippines, Thailand, Egypt, Turkey, Ethiopia and Colombia.”
      Enlisting the aid of as many multilateral population control organizations as possible in this worldwide project, in order to deflect criticism and charges of imperialism: “The U.S. will look to the multilateral agencies, especially the U.N. Fund for Population Activities which already has projects in over 80 countries to increase population assistance on a broader basis with increased U.S. contributions.”
    • Recognizing that “No country has reduced its population growth without resorting to abortion.”
    • Designing programs with financial incentives for countries to increase their abortion, sterilization and contraception-use rates: “Pay women in the LDCs to have abortions as a method of family planning. … Similarly, there have been some controversial, but remarkably successful, experiments in India in which financial incentives, along with other motivational devices, were used to get large numbers of men to accept vasectomies.”
    • Concentrating on “indoctrinating” [NSSM-200’s language] the children of LDCs with anti-natalist propaganda: “Without diminishing in any way the effort to reach these adults, the obvious increased focus of attention should be to change the attitudes of the next generation, those who are now in elementary school or younger.”
    • Designing and instigating propaganda programs and sex-education curricula intended to convince couples to have smaller families, regardless of social or cultural considerations: “The following areas appear to contain significant promise in effecting fertility declines, and are discussed in subsequent sections … concentrating on the education and indoctrination of the rising generation of children regarding the desirability of smaller family size.”
    • Investigating the desirability of mandatory [NSSM-200’s language] population control programs: “The conclusion of this view is that mandatory programs may be needed and that we should be considering these possibilities now.”
    • Considering using coercion in other forms, such as withholding disaster and food aid unless a targeted LDC implements population control programs: “On what basis should such food resources then be provided? Would food be considered an instrument of national power? Will we be forced to make choices as to whom we can reasonably assist, and if so, should population efforts be a criterion for such assistance?”
  • Throughout the implementation process, the United States must hide its tracks and disguise its programs as altruistic:

“There is also the danger that some LDC leaders will see developed country pressures for family planning as a form of economic or racial imperialism; this could well create a serious backlash. … The U.S. can help to minimize charges of an imperialist motivation behind its support of population activities by repeatedly asserting that such support derives from a concern with:

The right of the individual couple to determine freely and responsibly the number and spacing of children and to have information, education, and means to do so; and
The fundamental social and economic development of poor countries in which rapid population growth is both a contributing cause and a consequence of widespread poverty.”

The Basic Question: Is Population Control Necessary?

There is growing awareness that the world “population explosion” is over or, indeed, that it never actually materialized. When the population scare began in the late 1960s, the world population was increasing at a rate of more than two percent per year. It is now increasing at less than one percent per year, and this rate is expected to continue to drop due to continuing population control activities.

The Kissinger Report predicted that the population of the world would stabilize at about 10 to 13 billion, with some demographers predicting that the world population would balloon to as high as 22 billion people. Now it is estimated that by 2050 population will level out at around 9.7 billion.

The worldwide application of the strategies recommended in The Kissinger Report has resulted in regional population growth rates decelerating so fast that they are already causing severe economic and social problems in Europe, the former Soviet Union, Japan, Singapore and Hong Kong. Many developing nations are now aging even more rapidly than the developed world, which foretells of even more severe problems for their relatively underdeveloped economies. The developed nations had the opportunity to become rich before they became old; if a nation becomes old first, it will never become rich.

From the very beginning, the concept of a “population explosion” was an ideologically motivated false alarm specifically designed to allow rich nations to pillage the resources of the poorer nations. The resulting push for population control in LDCs has borne absolutely no positive fruit in its decades of implementation. In fact, population control ideologies and programs make it even more difficult to respond to the impending grave crisis looming in the form of a disastrous worldwide “population implosion.” It is time to begin urging families to have more children, not less, if we are to avoid a worldwide demographic catastrophe.

The first step in such a massive change in policy is, of course, to change our vision and our values. In order to do this, we must repudiate old ways of thinking and outmoded ways of accomplishing our objectives.

NSSM-200 represents the worst aspect of the “advanced” nations meddling in the most intimate affairs of less-developed nations. It reinforces the image of the “ugly American.” It advocates violating the most precious freedoms and autonomy of the individual through coercive family planning programs.

The Kissinger Report purports to show concern for the rights or welfare of individuals and of nations, but it was conceived from the idea of the “right” of the United States to have unfettered access to the natural resources of developing nations. The United States and the other nations of the developed world, as well as ideologically-motivated population control NGOs, should be supporting and guiding authentic economic development that allows the people of each nation to use their resources for their own benefit, thereby leading to an enhancement of human rights worldwide and healthier economies for all.

No human relationships are closer or more intimate than those found in the family. Yet the “developed” world has spent more than 137 billion dollars just since 1990 attempting to control the number of children born to families in developing nations through the widespread imposition of abortion, sterilization and birth control under the umbrella terms “family planning services” and “reproductive health.”

All that the tens of billions of dollars of population control expenditures have accomplished is to make hundreds of millions of large poor families into small poor families. It is unfortunately left to our imagination to wonder what might have happened if these resources had been invested in health and educational infrastructure, and in research dedicated to finding peaceful strategies to transition nations from corrupt governance to truly representative and accountable courts and public service sectors.

Children are not an obstacle to development, they are the hope for the future of any society. People are not the problem, they are the solution.

 

(This article was updated in January 2017)

35 thoughts on “Exposing the Global Population Control Agenda

  1. Well its states in our constitution those that have the ability (Government or Elite) have the responsibility to take action. Now what are the responsibility well population control could be one. China should be down sized by all means nesessary in my book not the united states at about 500,000.000. All women in the world should hav there tubes tied at the age of 10 so they can live there lives with out getting pregnat by force by under age by wrong choice in there lives an cant get pregnat til the age of 25 if they chose to do so. That way they can live free from the fear of bringing in babies to a world were there lives are not addiquit. No why not snip the male. Now the women would say well once a man is snip there is no coming back as a women can get un-tied an then can have kids but only 2 kids. With the man she marries if she is to divorce the man she with she will get her tubes tied an can never have kids with no other man same goes for the man he has kids an divorces his wife he gets snip an is not allow to have kids with other women that alone should stop both sides from having kids with everybody they get in volve with. Is it crule an over controling not in my book it is comon sense to help keep the population down an help the planet as well an force the people to stay together which if they do they will be allowed to have 2 more children after 20yrs of being together if they are up to it. No ofcourse this New World Law will be implimented by the vote of all the people an government to try to understand that we need to do this for the World sake not just our own feelings. This J.J.J.G of Spanish decent born as an American. . .

    1. Some people WISH they could make everyone on the planet do what they say, as if they are gods to be obeyed. As if the lies (bogus science) that they shroud themselves in is a regal cloak. Not going to work. They can keep lying and keep failing. The satanic new world order types are destined for destruction, and sooner than you think. And even prior to that, no reasonable, free people are going to subject their bodies to government dissection and domination like the poor, subservient chinese. It is curious to see the money printing and government bribing “elite” pretend to be the guardians of the human race. The are only the masters of fools, those too braindead to see through their lies.

  2. Who is identified with the Global Climate Agenda? Could they be connected to the “Global Population Control Agenda”? Connection or not the vast majority of scientist say our planet is under siege and stressed. Some naysayers utter that the planet goes through climate change every 10K years or so. That is true. However, during this cycle one thing is different… Mother Earth is supporting, feeding and disposing of waste for 8 billion humans and 10s of billions of other forms of life. Scientists say that Mother earth is under stress. With all his knowledge on the subject presidential candidate Donald Trump calls global climate message a “hoax”. Needless to say he will not get our vote. Is there further evidence?
    The Artic and Greenland ice shelves are melting, seas have risen and there is evidence of a threat to costal communities. Moreover, human activity and encroachment into formerly pristine regions plays havoc on the ecology. Today “Papa” Hemmingway would not be able to write his novel “The Snows of Kilimanjaro” because the mountain’s snow cap is all but gone.

    Then, look at our food producers. For strictly economic reasons they are injecting and spraying lethal substances into our food in order to speed maturity.

    God save the planet.

  3. Good article, Dr. Clowes.

    Any perceived need for global population control is no reason to do so using unethical means. That said, we know that Machiavellians are out there and will justify some distorted system of ethics in order to accomplish killing a significant number of people for the hope of the survival of their own progeny.

    It occurred to me that many of the questionable if not downright evil policies we face today are geared toward lowering the birth rate or generating death. Aside from abortion, for example, take the whole homosexuality and transgender issue. What better way to keep people from having babies and getting them to willfully submit to sterilization? Also, I had not known about the Ugandan tactic. It would be interesting to see the statistics on STDs in countries that provide condoms to their people versus countries that don’t. Another example may be the intentional arming of radical Islam. What better way than war to get people killed off.

    On the other side of it, genetic research is moving along by leaps and bounds. The reason, I suspect, is that eugenics is the other side of the coin. For those that remain, they want to ensure that all the genetic diseases are eradicated. It’s another reason for pushing prenatal testing with an eye toward aborting defective children.

    1. Two World Wars as well as the great influenza outbreak after the First World War, etc. etc. haven’t made a dent in our world’s population as we have gone from 1 billion to 7.6 billion people in less than three centuries. Quite obviously drastic measures need to be taken such as no food aid to impoverished countries. Look whats happened to Haiti as an example of the microcosm to the macrocosm. mass sterilization should be implemented to countries that won’t comply with willing population control, no more than 2 children per family for example. I agree with the eugenics and also prenatal testing with the abortion of problematic fetuses.

      1. I agree. These are difficult decisions to make but much more difficult will be watching our grand children suffer without basic resources that we now taken for granted. We need to continue to promote population control but also promote minimalistic living. As populations decrease and education becomes more of a focus in developing nation’s so will it’s populations’ need for personal independence. Imagine if the entire population of India suddenly had the desire to each have their own home and one or two cars. We not only need less people. We also need to be using less resources. Tiny houses everybody!?!

      2. I AGREE! However, using barbaric surgeries on a woman is so expensive, dangerous, and complicated. Join me in promoting the MUCH easier, safer, AND cheaper fix of simply snipping all the men so they may remain permanently flaccid. It would leave them with the dignity of keeping all their perfect right to fatherhood, and eradicate horrendous costs of rapes everywhere. The minimal cost would be to provide a tube which does triple duty of sucking, catching, and inserting the semen into a woman who wants to carry it, and SO SIMPLE! The tubes would only be used once or twice to accomplish desirable pregnancies.

  4. “None Dare call it a Conspiracy” by Gary Allen, 1971 book and youtube speech. The new world order explained. Rockefellers established Population Council in 1950s and still exists today. Wikipedia. The long-lasting (4 years) birth control implants Nexplanon etc. PC developed for 3rd world illiterates is now implanted in US girls. Etonogestral/Nexplanon Lawsuits: this drug can kill or sterilize. Implants are pushed onto career-minded women.

  5. I always thought that the “Global Village” would educate people and bring them up to 1st world standards. As it turns out, the corporations want to bring the entire world down to one low exploitable level. Raise the standard of living instead of stealing everything and over population will take care of itself.

  6. The main weapon that is currently being used to stem population is without question the promotion of homosexuality. There can be no doubt that those who wish to control populations haven’t slept on this particular weapon and it’s ability to destroy the traditional family.

    1. I suspect the enormous push for elderly innocs for flu, pneumonia, shingles, etc. is a tactic for hastening death of vulnerable, frail seniors(& not only frail) in an effort to control population & resulting use of public health/food assistance. Any comments?

  7. Hi there,I read your new stuff named “Exposing the Global Population Control Agenda – Human Life International” daily.Your humoristic style is witty, keep up the good work! And you can look our website about تحميل اغاني.

  8. Please correct me if my information is incorrect but unless I’m mistaken the global population growth was only around 1 billion just a few centuries ago and now today despite two World Wars and numerous other factors that have killed millions of people we have a global population growth of 7 and a half billion people. Today that 7.6 billion mark is the “new- 1 billion” and so quite obviously global “over-population” is already here and heading exponentially higher.

  9. The global population has doubled in the last 40 years and is projected to double again in the next 36 years. Sooner or later we will reach a point where we need a death lottery (not in our lifetime).
    With technology of today, we are saving more and more lives. More and more children are being born. Our government pays or credits people for having more and more children. Our government is pushing for bigger families.
    Why do all the bleeding hearts in the USA want to continue to let people into the US? Legal or illegal our population is exploding.
    California has a water shortage, they take water from other states, yet, they keep promoting population growth through letting people into the country. I live in Texas and I am noticing more and more people moving here from California because of population, lack of employment and other various reasons.

    1. If we look at developing countries, we notice that the fertility rates drop as countries develop. For example, let’s consider the Philippines. It has a fertility rate of 3.02, which is far below its 1955 rate of 7.42. No, we aren’t headed for starvation because less developed countries are still developing.

    2. The U.S. fertility rate is below replacement at 1.7. Our policies are discouraging live births. Our country is slowly dying.

  10. China had a 1 child policy (I believe Kissinger played a role in that?).
    They have moved to a 2 child policy, but some of the damage is done.
    I think if they can level off, they will be fine.

    Europe (especially the Central, East and Southeast) parts are having so little kids its actually worrying me. Similar with Taiwan, Japan, Singapore and all those type nations.

    The areas where I fear problems is India and Bangadesh. They are still quite poor.
    They have toilet problems, they are one of the more packed populations.

    And finally Africa. the UN projections show their population will be growing greatly.
    They can probably handle double the population, but can they handle triple or more people?

    I imagine the “globalist” types will want to keep the low fertility rates and importing more and more from the third world. Europe, North America, Australia will look completely different.

    I have seen fertility rates fall from 3.5-2.5 in white nations to 1.5.
    So how to stop these extremists in positions of power?

  11. I don’t know which is scarier: that our government is involved in a worldwide conspiracy or that nobody can bloody compose a paragraph anymore without capitalization, misspellings, and a total lack of grammar. Here’s an example: the united states sould knot have enybodi snipped, sow there aint problems cause i tink thats a reel poblem

  12. Look up the worlds 100 most populated cities, add up their population numbers, double it for folks living in the country around those cities. Its a ballpark figure, granted. But you may be surprised at the number, and maybe even question how in the heck can there be 7 billion people in the world. It doesn’t even come close.

  13. The author of this article is in la-la land, if he thinks the planet isn’t ALREADY overpopulated. Never mind arguments that population could be sustainable in years to come.

    It might be true that if everyone lived a modest lifestyle, the numbers are okay. But unless everyone suddenly becomes Armish, this isn’t going to happen. Consumerism is deeply entrenched.

    Competition for non-essentials breeds enough discord in society, e.g. having a bigger house than your neighbour. Imagine, once ESSENTIALS are in short supply. Water, for example.

    I expect an increase in conflict.

    Look at the unbelievably cruel atrocities committed in some of the major conflicts: WWI, WWII, Vietnam. And this is before we began stretching the earth to breaking point.

    More people brings more suffering. Because there are more people to suffer. And fewer resources for each of those people.

    This site seems motivated by archaic religious teachings that are frankly dangerous in today’s world. I, myself, am religious. I spend much time in daily prayer and believe I have a relationship with God.

    But I do not believe that all teachings of the Bible are to be taken literally. And some that were, are not suitable for today. Because, plainly, people need to stop breeding. I was brought up in a family hostile to homosexuality, and when younger, this stained my opinions on homosexual relationships. But now I am conscious of our effects on the planet, I say, thank God for homosexuality.

    As for sterilisation…if only the UK had a financial incentive for males, like the Indian scheme cited here. I am considering paying myself.

    I’m certainly not preachy to friends about this. But for me, no children seems *absolutely* the right thing.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *