{"id":10446,"date":"2024-10-30T14:22:53","date_gmt":"2024-10-30T13:22:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/?p=10446"},"modified":"2025-01-21T14:27:42","modified_gmt":"2025-01-21T13:27:42","slug":"andrej-plenkovic-did-not-advocate-for-a-new-global-order-under-a-single-world-government","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/2024\/10\/30\/andrej-plenkovic-did-not-advocate-for-a-new-global-order-under-a-single-world-government\/","title":{"rendered":"Andrej Plenkovi\u0107 did not advocate for a new global order under a single-world government"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n

Original article<\/a> (in Croatian) was published on 23\/10\/2024; Authors: Anja Vladisavljevi\u0107<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

By supporting the non-binding UN Pact for the Future, the government is not bringing Croatia into \u201cnew global, secret structures, without the will and decision of Croatian citizens\u201d.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

At the UN Summit on the Future held this September, Prime Minister Andrej Plenkovi\u0107<\/strong> emphasized<\/a> the importance of global unity in the face of current challenges such as wars and climate change. He expressed Croatia’s commitment to multilateralism and readiness to contribute to a \u201cfairer, more peaceful, and more sustainable global order\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

While other state leaders expressed<\/a> similar sentiments, some domestic media paid special attention to Plenkovi\u0107’s speech, claiming that he – one of the 4,000 summit participants<\/a>, including heads of state, observers, members of intergovernmental organizations, and senior UN officials – was \u201cannouncing major global political restructurings\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This claim is based on speeches given by the Croatian Prime Minister at United Nations gatherings (the Summit on the Future and the General Assembly) last month, analyzed by Darko Petri\u010di\u0107<\/strong> in his article, \u201cThe New World Order Secretly Penetrates Croatia: It\u2019s All Due to One Powerful Man\u201d. The article was published on October 8, 2024, on the web portal Dnevno.hr (1<\/a>, 2<\/a>), and later republished by 7dnevno<\/a> and Epoha<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cWhile in America, Prime Minister Andrej Plenkovi\u0107 gave two significant and, it could be said, concerning speeches for the Croatian nation at the United Nations building in New York. Unfortunately, these two speeches justify, as conspiracy theorists claim, the existence of the New World Order project, which, according to Plenkovi\u0107\u2019s statements, Croatia is ready to join. Although the prime minister expressed this unambiguously and openly, which is unusual for him, these statements passed through Croatian media without the expected commentary\u201d.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

His stance on the future relationship between Croatia and the increasingly evident and omnipresent New World Order project is clear from a quote in his speech before the UN on September 23, 2024, at the Summit on the Future: \u201cThese are the three key areas requiring collective attention: conflict prevention, sustainable development, and a fairer and more inclusive system of global governance, which should be the focus of the international community\u201d, the article states.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

According to the author, Plenkovi\u0107\u2019s mention of a \u201cneed for a fairer and more inclusive system of global governance\u201d masked an \u201cimaginary necessity for forming the New World Order\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cIn other words, the current global insecurity, war hotspots, and terrorist threats can be eliminated by a \u2018new system of global governance,\u2019 meaning a single-world government, one center of power, or ultimately the New World Order that has been warned about for over 20 years\u201d.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

The author also questions the mandate Plenkovi\u0107 has to bring Croatia into \u201cnew global, secret structures, without the will and decision of Croatian citizens\u201d, and argues that citizens should decide on joining such a project through a referendum.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What was discussed at the UN Summit?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

During the UN Summit on the Future<\/a>, held on September 22 and 23 in New York, world leaders gathered to strengthen global cooperation in increasingly turbulent times. This took place amid rising criticisms<\/a> of the UN, whose central mission is to maintain peace and international security, for its failure to stop wars and hold aggressors accountable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At the summit, the Pact for the Future<\/a> was adopted, which UN Secretary-General Ant\u00f3nio Guterres described as a key agreement representing \u201ca step toward a more effective, inclusive, and interconnected multilateralism.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The pact focuses on crucial areas such as sustainable development, climate change, threats to peace, protection of civilians in armed conflict, digital cooperation, human rights, and the transformation of global governance. Although the document is the result of 18 months<\/a> of negotiations led by Germany and Namibia, Petri\u010di\u0107 links its adoption to the allegedly influential speech by the Croatian Prime Minister:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cThe fact that Prime Minister Plenkovi\u0107’s speech was not at all insignificant is underscored by the fact that, in the same week during his stay in America, the \u2018Pact for the Future\u2019 was adopted, a document through which some UN member states committed to strengthening multilateralism for a \u2018better future for all humanity.\u2019 It is unclear which member states accepted this pact, and little is known about its contents, except that it contains 56 measures across various areas in more than 20 pages. In any case, it will be necessary to analyze the content of this document as soon as possible, although its messages and intentions are probably hidden between the lines\u201d.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Firstly, it is incorrect to say that it is unknown which member states accepted the Pact. This could be immediately determined during the live broadcast on September 22 (1,<\/a> 2<\/a>). Later, the UN issued a statement<\/a> explaining the voting process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A representative of the Russian Federation proposed an amendment (A\/79\/L.3<\/a>) to the Pact related to the UN\u2019s intervention in matters \u201cunder the domestic jurisdiction of any state\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, the representative of the Republic of the Congo, speaking on behalf of the African Group, emphasized the need for UN unity in finding solutions to today\u2019s challenges and proposed taking no action on the Russian amendment. This proposal was adopted with 143 votes in favour, 7 against (Belarus, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Iran, Nicaragua, the Russian Federation, Sudan, Syria), and 15 abstentions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is also incorrect to say \u201cnot much is known about the content\u201d, as that the entire document <\/a>has been published on the UN’s website. It is true that the Pact contains 56 measures or tasks that are set before the UN (1<\/a>, 2<\/a>). The document includes two annexes \u2013 the \u201cGlobal Digital Compact\u201d and the \u201cDeclaration for Future Generations\u201d \u2013 which address AI regulation and consider the interests of future generations in global decision-making.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In contrast to the author of the web portal Dnevno.hr, some commentators believe that the UN’s measures are actually a list of idealistic goals rather than concrete, significant actions. Al Jazeera<\/a> writes that the pact is full of \u201clofty goals and commitments but is weak regarding actual, realistic steps the organization can take to implement its vision\u201d. The inability to resolve ongoing conflicts is one example highlighted by this media outlet:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWhile the Israeli war in Gaza, the Russia-Ukraine war, and the civil war in Sudan continue to claim lives, this again obliges the UN to support the International Court of Justice (ICJ). But at a time when Israel has clearly stated it will not allow the UN court to influence its devastating war, in which more than 41,000 people have been killed in Gaza, the new pact does not indicate how the organization plans to get members to follow its rules\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Similar criticisms were made by an Anadolu<\/a> Agency commentator who writes that the \u201cPact for the Future contains many positive concepts but does not propose any significant effective change\u201d. She also pointed out the absence of important issues, such as international tax reform that would include a carbon tax or taxation of international financial transactions. She notes that the document was revised several times, resulting in reduced ambitions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cDue to the inability to achieve full consensus, it became necessary to settle on the lowest common denominator around which everyone could agree. In that process, economic and social rights emerged as some of the most notable casualties\u201d, writes Anadolu.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The fact that the Pact was long in preparation, revised several times, and emerged with the \u201clowest common denominator\u201d does not support the argument made on domestic web portals about a strong connection between Plenkovi\u0107’s speech and the adoption of the Pact for the Future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Another important point to note: the Pact and its annexes are not binding<\/a>. Member states are merely encouraged<\/a> to integrate these goals into their national policies. This may raise concerns about implementation (especially as some principles, such as the protection of civilians in conflict, are violated daily), but those fearing a \u201cfirm hand of global governance\u201d can breathe a sigh of relief.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Plenkovi\u0107’s speeches are actually no different from others\u2019<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In his speech at the Summit on the Future, the Prime Minister stated that this summit is crucial because \u201cthe choices we make now will define the world for future generations\u201d. He highlighted three key areas that require the joint attention of all international actors: \u201cconflict prevention, sustainable development, and a fairer and more inclusive system of governance\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cInternational institutions must evolve to be more representative, promoting human rights and social development that reflect the diversity of the world\u2019s nations. The outcome of this summit provides us with a clear roadmap. Now it is up to us to turn those plans into reality. Now is the time to act. Croatia is ready to contribute to a fairer, more peaceful, and more sustainable global order\u201d, states the transcript and translation<\/a> of his speech.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

These quotes are also mentioned<\/a> in the referenced articles, in which phrases like \u201cinclusive governance system\u201d are interpreted as an announcement or introduction of a New World Order.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Plenkovi\u0107 was not the first or only state leader to advocate for more inclusive governance within UN institutions. It was a recurring theme throughout the discussions<\/a>. These appeals were framed within broader calls for reform in global governance (1<\/a>, 2<\/a>, 3<\/a>) to better include underrepresented voices, especially from the Global South, young people, and marginalized communities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It should be noted that \u201cglobal governance\u201d is understood as visibility and representation of states, organizations, and other actors in UN bodies. According to the UN report<\/a> from the second day of the Summit, state leaders emphasized the need to rethink global governance and create a fairer, more inclusive multilateral system that \u201cbenefits all countries\u201d instead of \u201cincreasing the power of a few\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe confidence that this UN system can serve everyone continues to decline\u201d, warned Penny Wong, Australia’s Foreign Minister. Emphasizing the need for reform, she highlighted that the Security Council should represent voices from Africa, Latin America, and the Asia-Pacific region, adding that small states and their interests must be heard.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mahamoud Ali Youssouf, Djibouti’s Foreign Minister, also stated that the body needs to become more representative and \u201ccorrect the injustice done to Africa and other regional groups\u201d. The term \u201cinclusive governance\u201d or a similar variation was also used by the prime ministers of Norway and Madagascar, as well as the foreign ministers of Peru, Nicaragua, and Turkey.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Plenkovi\u0107 at the UN General Assembly<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

 This topic<\/a> also extended to the 79th session of the UN General Assembly, which took place a few days after the Summit on the Future. Dnevno.hr and other web portals reported<\/a> that Plenkovi\u0107 also advocated for a New World Order there, albeit with slightly more subtlety:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cA few days later, after his speech at the Summit on the Future, Plenkovi\u0107 also addressed the UN General Assembly, where he did not mention the New World Order with phrases like \u2018sustainable world order\u2019 and \u2018new global governance system.\u2019 Instead of those terms, he used an alternative phrase, meant to conceal the true intentions of the Pact in the future, which is multilateralism. Plenkovi\u0107 stated: \u2018The Pact for the Future, a key document for strengthening multilateralism that we adopted earlier this week, elaborates on the reform of the General Assembly and the Security Council, and we believe that we should strengthen, reform, and revitalize these two institutions\u201d.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Plenkovi\u0107, like other colleagues in the Assembly, stated<\/a> that the \u201cmultilateral system of addressing climate, biodiversity, and sustainable development\u201d must be strengthened.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Multilateralism<\/a> refers to a global system in which multiple countries work together through international institutions and frameworks to respond to shared challenges. It is the idea that global cooperation \u2013 rather than unilateral action by individual countries \u2013 is essential for addressing issues that cross national boundaries, such as climate change, pandemics, conflict resolution, and economic inequality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Plenkovi\u0107\u2019s speech was thus similarly oriented. He spoke of the importance of \u201csmall\u201d, underrepresented, countries and the need for them to be visible within UN bodies. \u201cThe UN Secretariat should be adapted to its purpose, and the selection of the Secretary-General and all others, especially high-ranking positions, should be guided by principles of merit, transparency, inclusiveness, gender and geographical rotation\u201d, states the transcript and translation of his speech published on the Government\u2019s website<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

An old conspiracy theory<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Earlier this month, we wrote<\/a> about how disinformation spread on social media, claiming that the aforementioned UN Pact for the Future entails the establishment of global governance and requires member states to relinquish sovereignty. As we explained at the time, by signing this non-binding agreement, no one surrenders sovereignty to the UN; rather, member countries merely reaffirm their commitment to the goals they have already pledged.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The article analyzed here follows a similar line. It links multilateralism and global governance to an old conspiracy theory about the New World Order<\/a>, suggesting that global institutions, corporate interests, or secret elites are working together to control the world. The author suggests that terms like \u201cinclusive global governance\u201d are euphemisms for stripping nations of power and giving it to unelected global leaders. He draws parallels with the COVID-19 pandemic and environmental measures, which he claims also served this purpose.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Such ideas have circulated for some time in both domestic and international disinformation circles. In these circles, almost every kind of global cooperation is viewed as an attempt to eliminate freedom and impose extensive control over citizens. For example, climate action frameworks discussed in multilateral forums are described as attempts to restrict development and regulate<\/a> private life. Similarly, health measures recommended by organizations like the WHO are described as mechanisms to control populations through vaccines or the imposition of quarantines, as we saw in many conspiracy theories about COVID-19 (1<\/a>, 2<\/a>, 3<\/a>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To gain credibility, conspiracy theorists often cite international summits, treaties, and agreements as evidence that governments are conspiring to impose global policies without public consent. This has been documented by Faktograf on several occasions (1<\/a>, 2<\/a>, 3<\/a>, 4<\/a>, 5<\/a>) where it has been shown that authors of these claims fixate on a particular segment of a document (often just a word or phrase) and attempt to give it an inflated meaning.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The same has happened with Plenkovi\u0107’s speeches at the UN last month. It is true that his statements \u201cpassed without the expected comments\u201d in Croatian media, as reported by Dnevno.hr, 7dnevno, and Epoha, but for a very simple reason: they did not deviate from other statements and they did not ‘unambiguously and unequivocally’ announce a New World Order that Croatia plans to join.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Original article (in Croatian) was published on 23\/10\/2024; Authors: Anja Vladisavljevi\u0107 By supporting the non-binding UN Pact for the Future, the government is not bringing Croatia into \u201cnew global, secret structures, without the will and decision of Croatian citizens\u201d. At the UN Summit on the Future held this September, Prime Minister Andrej Plenkovi\u0107 emphasized the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":10448,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"_uf_show_specific_survey":0,"_uf_disable_surveys":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[316],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-10446","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-fact-checks"],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10446","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/6"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10446"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10446\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":10450,"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10446\/revisions\/10450"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/10448"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10446"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10446"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10446"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}