A Washington think tank’s multi-national agenda including what Canadians fear will become a huge grab for their water resources cites the globalist vision of investment bank Goldman Sachs while Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson was its chief as the source of its priorities, WND has learned.
A report from the Center for Strategic and International Studies recently was leaked to the press, and included suggestions that a predicted shortage of water in the United States and Mexico might be addressed by the vast fresh water resources in Canada, prompting a negative reaction from several Canadian groups.
The CSIS’s “North American Future 2025 Project,” WND has reported, prompted Canadian activists to organize over what they anticipate will be a CSIS-driven U.S. grab for Canadian fresh water resources.
The study itself cites the globalist views of Jim O’Neill, Goldman’s head of Economic Research, who defined the “BRIC” economies of Brazil, Russia, India, and China as the growth opportunities of the future. His conclusions came during a period when Secretary of the Treasury Henry M. Paulson served as chairman and CEO at the corporation.
The stated goal of the CSIS project is to make strategic recommendations on “long-range policy decisions about North America, with an emphasis of future scenarios.” The underlying concept is that an integrated North America is required to be competitive in the coming global economy projected for 2025.
The CSIS concerns in the North America 2025 Project report are typically expressed as continental concerns and references. The United States is rarely mentioned in the report as a separate economic or political entity.
For example, on the future of “North American labor mobility,” CSIS observes that “changes in the global economy have led to the creation of a new international division of labor – the shifting labor markets that arise from changing the geographic specialization of global production patterns.”
Noting that nine percent of Mexican-born individuals are now living in the United States, the CSIS report commented that, “The free flow of people across national borders will undoubtedly continue throughout the world as well as in North America, as will the social, political, and economic challenges that accompany this trend.”
Commenting that by 2030, energy consumption in China and India will be more than quadruple their 1990 level, the CSIS report recommends that, “Trilateral coordination of energy policy is crucial to assuring North America’s future competitiveness and regional security.”
CSIS also applies a continental perspective to its suggestions for the environmental future of North America in 2025. What is implied is continental management of environmental factors ranging from the atmosphere to fresh water.
How will North America foster technological innovation to remain competitive in 2025 to capitalize on increased global demand for high technology? How will North America foster “the development of human capital” by pursing policies “designed to educate new generations of future laborers and to improve the skill-set of the current workforce?” These are typical CSIS questions.
The CSIS Research Plan
CSIS is planning to hold a series of 7 closed-door roundtable discussions with governmental officials (both administrative and legislative), business leaders, and academics. The number of participants will be limited to between 21 and 45 individuals, with an even number from the U.S., Mexico, and Canada.
CSIS roundtables are being held now and CSIS anticipates final release of its conclusions on September 30, 2007.
There is no discussion anywhere in the CSIS report on the North American Future 2025 Project that expresses a concern to stop the outsourcing of U.S. manufacturing jobs to China or in the need to preserve an economically strong U.S. middle class.
WND has already reported the CSIS report was secret until the Council of Canadians advocacy group obtained a copy and leaked it to the press. WND cannot find the CSIS report posted or archived on the CSIS website.
The Goldman Sachs priorities were established by Secretary of the Treasury Henry M. Paulson while he served as chairman and CEO at the corporation. At that point, investments in China and India were identified as first tier opportunities, followed by Brazil, Russia and Mexico.
Paulson Earns Millions with Goldman Sachs in China
In 2006, Goldman Sachs set a record by earning $4 billion from a six-month-old investment of $2.6 billion for approximately 5 percent of the Industrial & Commercial Bank of China, the nation’s largest bank. This profit was the largest for Goldman on any trade since the investment bank was founded in 1869.
Reporting this news on Oct. 23, 2006, the International Herald Tribune said, “The China bonanza is the result of more than 70 visits by Paulson, the former Goldman chief executive, who became the 74th U.S. Treasury Secretary last June.”
Reports said Paulson also was well paid for the economic success of his globalist preferences. In 2007, Goldman Sachs paid Paulson $110 million to cash out his outstanding stock options and restricted stock. In 2005, Paulson received a $38.3 million bonus for the year.
And coming on as Secretary of Treasury, Goldman Sachs paid Paulson an $18.7 million cash bonus for his half year of work in 2006.
The Goldman Sachs BRIC Agenda
Goldman’s attention to China can be traced to a 2001 report by O’Neill, in which under Paulson’s supervision he defined the “BRIC” opportunities.
In “Dreaming with BRICs: The Path to 2050,” an October 2003 study, O’Neill argued, “Over the next 50 years, Brazil, Russia, India and China – the BRICs economies – could become a much larger force in the world economy.”
Of these four countries, Goldman has consistently been most enthusiastic about the prospects for China and India.
In October 2003, Goldman projected that India’s economy could be larger than Japan’s by 2032 and that China’s economy could be larger than the U.S. by 2041 (and larger than everyone else as early as 2016).
“In US dollar terms, China could overtake Germany in the next four years, Japan by 2015 and the US by 2039. India’s economy could be larger than all but the US and China in 30 years,” the report said.
O’Neill’s optimism over China and India was rooted in his globalist view that the world’s currently dominant economies, especially the United States, would continue outsourcing jobs to the cheaper labor markets available in China and India.
Goldman has not argued that as a result of the growth in their economies China or India would develop affluent middle classes any time soon.
On this point, the October 2003 Goldman BRIC report commented that by 2030, China’s per capita income could be roughly what Korea’s is today and by 2050, China’s per capita income could be similar to where the developed economies are now (about US $30,000 per capita).
In 2007, O’Neill redefined the acronym “BRIC” to “BRICM.” to include Mexico along with Brazil and China in the second tier of what he saw as developing countries with great global growth prospects.
Are you a representative of the media who would like to interview the author of this story? Let us know.