After what many population control professionals saw as a humiliating defeat at the Earth Summit, the head of an international population control advocacy group has charged the Vatican with “treason” for its opposition to coercive birth control language contained in environment agreements.
Organizations advocating escalated worldwide population control programs were dismayed because all text referring to contraception or birth control was stricken from official agreements at the Brazil conference in June. Strong opposition to the pro-contraceptive language was raised by non-governmental organizations from developing countries and by feminist groups. The pro-contraceptive position articulated in the agreements remained largely unchanged, however, because references to “demographic” problems remained.
The attack on the Catholic Church was made by Werner Fornos, president of the Population Institute, at a 9 July press conference sponsored by the Sierra Club. According to Fornos, the presence of Vatican representatives in Brazil constituted “an unusual abuse of authority,” because the Church was able “to use its clout to have itself defined as a nation, and therefore have access to meetings and conferences that no other religion can participate in.”
Fornos was also critical of a statement by Archbishop Renato Martino, the Vatican delegate to the Brazil meeting, which condemned population activities that infringe on “the liberty, dignity and conscience of the human person.” According to Fomos, Martino’s remark “intimidated most country delegations around the world.”
In reality, however, opposition to U.S.-supported population control goals was based on political differences of opinion which had little to do with Church influence. Representatives of women’s organizations charged during preparatory meetings that it was unfair for the industrialized countries — who are most responsible for environmental pollution — to propose reducing women’s fertility as a solution. Their objections were part of a larger disagreement between developing countries and wealthy nations over limiting consumption.
Opponents of the population language also attacked the motives of the United States in sponsoring international family planning operations. They cited a Nixon-era National Security Council memorandum which urged that 13 of the largest developing countries be targeted for especially harsh population control measures. All of the countries were in either Asia, Latin America or Africa. Women’s organizations attending the alternative Global Forum charged that the document was blueprint for covert action to protect the dominant political position of the Anglo—Saxon race.
The formerly-secret memorandum, known as National Security Study Memorandum 200 (or NSSM 200), was a subject of discussion at the Washington press conference, as well.
According to Fornos, the controversial memorandum is still in effect today, but he complained that it is merely “collecting dust in the basement of the National Security Council.”
Referring to a follow-up study done a year and a half later, Fornos noted that the National Security Council had given “instructions to all American Ambassadors to make this a top priority of American foreign policy.” “Each embassy,” he said, had been “instructed to respond back every three months on what initiatives they had undertaken” to advance the cause of international population control.
Responding to a question from the audience, Fornos stated that he had received a copy of NSSM 200 in 1977, but he added that “it remains classified today.” In reality, however, the report was declassified in 1989, and released to the public in 1990. A copy of the 229-page document is on file in its entirety at the National Archives in Washington.
Fornos also used the press conference as an opportunity to call upon President Bush to sign an appropriation bill, recently approved by the House and expected to pass the Senate this summer, which raises the amount of funds for overseas population activities and provides $20 million for the United Nations Population Fund. He acknowledged that both the Population Institute and the Sierra Club are IRS tax-exempt institutions and “cannot endorse a presidential candidate or get involved in politics.” But he added, “This isn’t politics, this is an implementation of conscience.” Something, presumably, that is off limits to the Vatican.
In a prepared statement, Nancy Wallace, the Washington director of the Sierra Club’s population program, joined Fornos in accusing the Catholic Church of interference, and told reporters that representatives of the Pontifical Council on the Family were responsible for the refusal of the U.S. government to fund United Nations population operations.
But the speakers maintained that they were not guilty of anti-Catholic bigotry. “Let me say when I charge the Vatican with treason to humanity, that I don’t do so lightly,” announced Fornos. “I am not a Catholic basher.”
