The World Peace Organization for the One World Government
Peace in The Democratic Republic of Congo
To the People of the Democratic Republic of Congo, may your peace prosper!
This evening I will begin a discussion concerning how to create peace within
your country. Suzeranda Melchizedek is a channel, or what has been a called a prophet, and
the information coming through her comes from a spiritual teacher who has presented and
planned and created many governments in the past. Suzeranda herself has done this many times
in other lifetimes. I wish to speak now about what you can do to create peace within your
country and across the planet.
The Democratic Republic of Congo is in a unique position. No other country has the capacity
right at this moment to begin a whole new government promised in the past by a dictator who
has since expired, but who still participates on the spiritual level in helping to create
peace within his country. This time is very important because many countries will, in the near future, be looking at how to create an
international government, and you are starting anew to create both a national and an international government within your country.
Peace comes within a country when all people are in agreement for it to come. Oftentimes
disasters — wars or other traumatic experiences — lead us to the point where we realize that enough is
enough! and we no longer wish to experience the hardships. People continue on in a certain set
of experiences until they decide it no longer suits them, and then they begin to create something
that is more to their liking. You, as the government of the République Démocratique du Congo,
are in the unique position that after many years of strife and turmoil, you are now beginning
to look at something new, and that suits you better.
Flexibility is the key while maintaining stability across your country and across the
globe, for this is occurring on many levels.
This is a proposal for you — a letter, per se — that introduces the idea of how to create
peace across the planet by first creating peace on a national level in your country, and
then expanding the idea when your country is stable to envelope a wider perspective, in
terms of an international relationship with the One World Government that is evolving at the
present time, and being introduced by the same group of people who are presently advising
you on this.
For world peace to come, each individual must reach the same level of understanding that your
country, as a group of people, is facing now. Each individual must approach the idea that what
happened in the past no longer suits us and we can embrace something much better. In the past,
on an international level and on a national level, most countries and globally,
functioned to put one individual or one country, or one continent, possibly, above all others.
It was a form of jockeying for power, and this you are well aware of because you have taken
the same understanding and worked to create bloodshed and assassination as a form of choosing
a new ruler. Whoever was the strongest and the most powerful became the next leader.
But now this no longer suits you, and you "do not have to sell your soul", which is a term
in the United States meaning you do not have to give that which is most dear to you
to have what you desire. In fact, you do not have to give up anything at all, other than
the bloodshed and the assassination attempts in order to create peace in your country.
Peace will come easily and for the highest good for all people.
And so, now this comes to you as a way of showing the world that you can take a leadership
role, by creating peace first within your country, and then on an international basis, by
eventually participating in a One World Government based on the Constitution of the United
States, if you should so desire, and which is now being proposed by this group of individuals
who are presenting you with the proposal.
So to get on with this proposal, how can you expect to create peace within a country that has
been at war and seen bloody massacres for so long, and even until recently there was a question of
how long your leader can expect to survive under the circumstances? How can an individual, who
is aware of the danger and the risk, assume responsibility for the leadership of a country
when so much is at stake?
People often put aside their own desires for the good of the tribe and their country. Life
is very difficult for the leader of a country, especially at war. Laurent Kabila was a man
who understood that his position was on shaky ground, and that each day when he awoke there
was a chance that it would be his last. But still he walked forward, and now his son assumes
responsibility for what the father began.
Laurent Kabila offered his countrymen the option of elections should the rebels within his
country leave. He offered an incentive that would make his country stronger, but he was not
able to achieve this. But now, as I said, people within your country have come to the
realization that peace is desirable, and so now the conditions, with Thabo Mbeki’s assistance
and that of South Africa, and the United States, have now come to fruition, where peace is
possible and in the best interest of all people.
But what can you create? How will you do this?
Before we continue with the proposal, I have a comment to make about how to create world
peace on an international level.
The world is progressing to the point where people are playing by a different set of rules than
what had been played in the past. As I said at the beginning of this proposal, people are
reaching the point where they do not wish to continue facing the same obstacles and dilemmas,
and so people are ready for change. On an international basis the same
process is occurring. People realize that international law has been a game of
"one-upmanship." Now that is coming to an end, and what is coming to fruition is the idea
of an international government that treats everybody equally.
The most important idea to take from this proposal is that of treating
everyone equally. If you were to create an international government where people
are not treated equally, nobody would want to participate. How would you choose who had
more control or power? It would slide back into the game playing that has been
so prevalent in international politics and international law. It just doesn’t work anymore.
There has to be a way for each individual to have rights, and for the states — the governments,
so to speak &mdash: to have their rights. For all people to be treated equally, and for statesmanship
for the people rather than for the bureaucracy that exists in running a country, the
lowest individual within the country must be seen as equal to the most prominent individual on
a legal basis, because otherwise there will always be "one-upmanship" that will
treat people unfairly.
In the One World Government that we are working to create and attempting to bring to
fruition within the next few years, each country must be seen as having the right to express
its own culture. A culture is based on common history and a common set of rules, so to speak.
Each individual under Universal Law — and Universal Law applies to all people because this law
was set into place by the Creator of All That Is — under Universal Law, has rights granted by
the Creator. Universal Law guarantees the right to create whatever you wish so long as you do
not prevent another individual from do so also.
So you see, as international law mimics Universal Law, everything will become much fairer.
Relationships between individuals, and between governments, and between man and his Creator and
how that reflects on a religious basis within cultures, will become much more evenly balanced
within the community of cultures.
The reason I bring this up is to address the idea that Universal Law is, technically speaking,
a reflection of man’s relationship with his Creator, and as you attempt to create a government,
you are mimicking this relationship. An individual has inalienable rights to create the life
that he or she chooses, and a government needs to uphold these rights for the good of all
You can look at it this way; if you are attempting to have a stable population who
are expressing the highest good that they are capable of creating within their culture, the
people are happy, they are content with their lives, and they are fulfilling their purpose in
life. People desire to be able to create the life that they would like to live, and it is in
the best interest of the leader of the country to allow this to occur.
Say for example, since your country has been torn apart by war for so long, that your
population, through the fighting, has been prevented from expressing their highest good.
Businesses have collapsed because of inability to maintain commerce within the
country. Shipping has collapsed, natural resources have been plundered. There is no economic
basis to maintain a stable business environment. It is not the highest good for all people
to be at war, and to prevent people from being able to express their highest capacity to create.
Now, compare that to creative individuals who are living in peace, each with different talents
and gifts, creating a stable environment, business-wise and family-oriented capacity for
growth and stability.
Let’s begin now to consider who comes out ahead when everything is moving forward for the
highest good for all people. If a country has been oppressed economically by war then the
money that is spent on arms is lost. Say, Laurent Kabila ordered that 20 million dollars
(US$ 20,000,000.00) be sent out of the country in order to purchase arms for fighting against
the rebels. Now say that that money was invested instead into an area that, commerce-wise,
has been neglected, to allow that to prosper — to invest it back into the
community in which it came from. It would be like a flower blossoming and sending out seeds
for more potential growth instead of using it for killing people. It could be used to make an
area that has been depressed for so long, to make it grow and to prosper.
What can you do to bring this about on an economic basis?
The first thing to do it to be aware, economically speaking, that people would like to prosper
in such a way that they will benefit from the use of their talents and gifts, and in the
process of sharing these talents and gifts, the people around them — their families and
friends and neighbors and community — can also prosper. If a businessman is prosperous,
everyone benefits — but not through corruption, because that is like a hole that money is poured
into and people never have a chance to prosper. We are talking about Universal Law now, the Law of
Cause and Effect, that says, "What one person does to another will be done to that person."
"What you do to another individual will be done to you." So, if you are basing your business
practices on greed, the individual that you are harming is mostly yourself.
To go forward, and to take advantage of the Universal Law that allows each individual to
prosper and grow according to what they have the capacity to create, this is your first stage
of creating economic stability. You do not wish to... If you are creating a stable environment
and a stable economy, it is not in your best interest to allow businessmen to assume the total
burden of what you are trying to create. There needs to be a sense of balance and stability,
allowing people to create and grow without interference. Taxation, for example, needs to be
moderate and not excessive. It cannot put too great a burden on the people who are paying
What is important is to allow things to occur without too much management — without
micromanaging the situation — but to let go of any sense of strangling hold that
could happen by too much bureaucracy.
This evening we will begin with a new subject. In the last chapter I discussed the role
economics plays in creating a government that is stable and is the highest good for all
people. Tonight I would like to talk about the military and the part they play in this
new government, should you choose to accept this possibility.
In the past, you depended heavily upon your military strength as you jockeyed for power.
But, now that you are creating a situation where everyone can express their highest good, your
military presence that you created internally and internationally... As the One World
Government is created and developed, it will not be as necessary as it was in the past. You can
begin to allow it evolve away from a military force into more a National Guard that protects in
a defensive manner rather than an offensive position.
You depended on your strength to make a statement of power, and now your position
will be that of protection from natural disasters, and to maintain a force that will
slowly be no longer necessary. You will just evolve out of it slowly.
But, maintain what you have, and as things change and people retire out of your military, it
will no longer necessary to replace them with some form of recruitment.
Past military exercises to maintain military strength, or skirmishes against
rebels, will slowly take on a gamesmanship form, just as occurred in the past when the
knights in Europe were such a force to be reckoned with, and they slowly found themselves
maintaining their military prowess by playing games.
In the United States, training exercises oftentimes are a form of game playing, and as you
maintain the power that your military has and it becomes more gamesmanship, you will see
your culture begin to evolve, and the thoughts associated with war in the younger people
will evolve out of the past standard ideas concerning military
A culture evolves very slowly. Many people in your country have thought of war as a
necessity. As much as you have desired peace, war and military strength were important. Now, as it becomes
less important in your country to maintain its military strength,
the people’s ideas will slowly begin to change — their perspective will change.
It will take many years before people trust each other on a level that allows true peace.
You will understand that you have found true peace when people sit down to eat together, and
tribes begin to intermarry on a regular basis. Already you will see that locations have begun
to make changes, but it is not very common yet in your country for much intermingling. That
will come soon. I recommend that you allow whatever cultural changes that may come.
Peace comes when people are in agreement for it to come. Everyone has to benefit in some
way for it to come. If one person is oppressed in any way, then what will come is
dissatisfaction with life, and it will foment more dissatisfaction. It will be like a weed
that grows in a garden and continues to spread seeds of discontent. One person has the
capacity to crumble an empire, and this you are well aware of by the events surrounding the
death of your father, and of previous leaders. All it takes is one individual working against
everyone else to cause people to question what is occurring.
For peace to come, you must enable everyone to come out ahead or to benefit from the plan.
The way to make this happen is to allow them to choose for themselves what it is they would
like to create. You are not telling them what to create; you are allowing them by setting up
a system that enables them to create what they choose. Then the responsibility for what they
have created falls back on them. If you look at it this way, you are not creating a government,
you are creating an opportunity for them to paint a certain picture, but what they create is their
own creation — their own idea. It is like giving an artist unlimited colors in paint and
allowing him to create what he chooses in the picture.
It doesn’t take long for change to come and for this opportunity to become apparent. When
the millennium started on the stroke of midnight on the first of January in 2000, people became
aware that the old no longer suited them and that they could create something new. Already
the seeds were planted in the minds of people as this day dawned, and this new millennium began.
But the millennium is a span of time that encompasses several years and there are many opportunities
for change as people all over the globe encounter these ideas that have been allowed to
blossom. The idea behind setting up an opportunity for peace in your country is not to
tell anyone what to do, but allow them to figure it out for themselves what they would like
to do, and to experiment and to grow and to enable them to do this. Then they will naturally
choose something that will benefit all people.
Right now people have been reaching a dilemma — a crisis point — and the times are changing.
In your country, possibly more than any other, there has been the idea of peace coming, and
after so many years of turmoil and war, that now there is an opportunity for change.
Oftentimes it is easier for people in crisis to change when given this opportunity rather than when
they have been in a period of stagnation and apathy. It is harder to get people moving ahead
from a point of stagnation, or being at a standstill, than it is to direct a change. This is
the role you will play — to direct the change that is already occurring and to allow
the people to move forward at their own pace rather than to motivate change through the fear
of making a step in a certain direction.
I will give you an example of this. If you are trying to instigate a plan for a
major cultural change... Say, for example, foreign people were to come into your country with health practices
that were different to your own. In the United States there has been the traditional form of
medicine, and alternative forms of medicine have been introduced that go counter to the
traditional forms. There has been a sense of frustration with traditional practices. People were aware that change
was necessary and beneficial to everyone. Some doctors of traditional medicine
became fearful, and went to the legal system to prevent change. It was a form of
stagnation. In many cases, alternative forms of medicine were squashed and prevented from coming about.
What kind of change can come in your country when nothing is moving forward? If you allow the alternative forms
of medicine to move forward instead of stopping them, they introduce ideas into the traditional forms and there is
a blending of the two forms, and all benefit from it. New ideas introduced into a country, as long as they do not
harm anyone in any way — anyone’s religious beliefs or cultural beliefs or ideas of this matter — allow choice,
and they allow a wider perspective, and no one is harmed in any way.
What you would be doing in a similar circumstance is to allow change to occur and to direct it
in such a way that enables both sides to benefit. The alternative form can benefit
from the traditional ideas — the stability of it — and the traditional forms can benefit from
innovation. So you see, as ideas are introduced and not suppressed, a wider perspective
can be gained from the situation.
Tomorrow I will discuss how to allow change to come in your culture that will enable
a new form of government to be established in the near future that will benefit all
people in this way. You have an opportunity to direct the changes. Instead of preventing
people from creating what they choose, you can direct it so that each person benefits.
Before you start to create this new form of government, there is one other
issue of which to be aware. On an international basis, each country in the near future will work to create a form
of government that allows international law to be expressed for the highest good for all
In the past, as people were jockeying for power, one nation tried to gain more prestige, more
power, more military might, more sense of benevolence or presence, so that people would
approach that country as a father-figure and therefore they would gain more power. Thabo Mbeki came to your country
as a father figure, and this enabled you to begin the peace process in your country. It
also enabled him to gain a sense of freedom for his own people.
There is a Universal Law that whatever you give, you also receive. If you give a sense of
freedom from oppression, then this is what you will also receive.
It is time to begin to consider what form of government to achieve in your country — what you is
capable of creating. It isn’t just you, the leaders of this country, who make this decision,
but all people in the world, even, work together to create a belief structure that enables
something to come to fruition.
If everyone was in a boat and all rowing different directions, the boat wouldn’t get very
far. It is only when everyone is rowing in harmony, in syncopation, and is in rhythm, that
any form of progress can be made.
I wish to tell you that as people decided that the old no longer suited them, it placed people
in a dilemma situation because now they had to choose what did suit them. They were in
agreement for the old to be gone, but what kind of harmony can be achieved when people must
decide what it is they would like to create? A gloomy picture of war and discord; it is easy
to agree, for example, that this no longer suits them. But when you have unlimited options
as to what to create, what will you choose?
This indeed is a dilemma, for where you are is intolerable, but how do you get everyone
The answer is simpler than it appears on the surface. In fact, there is actually only
one true answer to this dilemma, and to any dilemma, for that matter, and that is the highest good
for all people. If everyone benefits from the choice in some way, and in fact, is so pleased
with the opportunity to create it, then people will leap at the opportunity to do this.
This is what you are looking for right now. The one option that everyone will be so pleased
with that it will suit them just fine.
How do you do this?
The first thing to realize is that everyone has certain rights. These rights are given to
them — to you &mdash: by the Creator of All That Is. Under Universal Law, each individual has the
right to create whatever they choose, so long as it doesn’t interfere with the right of any
one else to do so also. As I said earlier in this proposal, it is not to
tell anyone what to do, but to set up a structure, or framework, that will enable people to
choose what it is that they would like to do.
If you had a large piece of cake, or a large pile of money, and several people had to
share it, the only way you could get an agreement about it is if you were scrupulously
fair and made each portion equal. If you were in a situation that enabled each person to vote
on where to take a vacation... Say, a family was choosing where to go, you would choose the
situation where the majority would rule. These two concepts are considered fair.
If only one choice is possible, if you make it so the majority rules, and over half the
population of the group thought it was a good idea, then the smaller half would go along
with the larger because they would consider it fair. They might object to it, possibly come up with
an alternative option, or additional information to consider, but these two ideas are
considered by people to be a fair and equitable way of doing this.
The form of government that I recommend when making its laws these two ideas. When you
are working for the will of the people, you use one idea, and when you are working for the
right of the people you use the other idea. So you see, this is how you allow everybody
to come out ahead, and for it to be fair.The one option you don’t have in a form of government
is to tell people what they must do. This is guaranteed to cause dissension. In the past, the
more you try to hold onto something and to force it into a certain channel or a certain direction,
the less control that you have. By allowing things to move forward by using these two concepts of
being fair and equitable, then people will agree to what you have to say.
The best thing to do is to allow people to choose for themselves what it is they would like to
create. I will give you an example. If an issue comes up where people would like to see a
change, if all people are in agreement for this change to come, then it will come quickly and
easily. Over half the population of the Earth now has agreed for peace to come, and so peace
can come. You see, if it can come on an international basis, it can also come within your own
country, using these same ideas and these same concepts.
Unicameral governments do not function fairly and equitably because there is no way for
all people to be treated equally under this concept. If you attempt to create what other
countries have created by instituting a unicameral form of government, there will be dissension. It is
as if you are creating uneven portions in cutting up the cake.
Another form of government that does not work is a dictatorship, and this you are aware of,
because, again, it does not treat all people equally.
Monarchies do not function for the same reason. In a way, a dictator is an elite individual,
held higher than the rest of the population. Control is maintained by force, oftentimes,
and under Universal Law, the more you attempt to control things the more out of control they
get, the more chaos you introduce into the system.
So you see, the longest lasting form of government is the one that is the most fair
and equitable, and treats all individuals equally and allows them to choose for themselves
what it is that they would like to create.
The United States of America is based on a form of government that appears to be fair and
equitable. Over the years, certain practices have introduced a sense of chaos into the system.
This has come from greed and one-upmanship games that no longer are in effect. This
organization presenting this proposal is also introducing a proposal into the United States to
remove the laws that have created chaos in the system.
As you continually strive to base your government on that which treats all
people equally and allows them to create whatever it is they choose, then you will begin to create
a long lasting government. So be it and so it is!
The last topic that I would like to address is the judicial system. Your
legislative branch that I referred to in the first part of this proposal creates a "Cause
and Effect" situation. They cause laws to be created. The effect of these laws
is the judicial system. In between, deciding whether these laws can be executed, or can
be created in a form that will be workable, is the executive branch. The effect of
these laws is the judicial branch. How effective the legislative branch and the executive
branch are depends on the effect of your laws.
If you can create a court system that makes decisions that are fair and equitable between
individuals or between companies, between all the different levels of government and how
it relates with individuals and companies, then you know you have created a truly fair and
equitable system. This is what you would be hoping to strive for.
For you to create a government to participate in the One World Government that is being formed, it will
take planning and preparation. The same applies for the individual government that is
forming within your country. No one has ever done anything like this before — create a
structure that will enable an international government to form. The same rules apply
within your country as for this One World Government. In a way, you are enabling your
country, because you are creating both at the same time, to work more efficiently than other
countries that have a structure already in place, and have to work to fit the additional
structure into place.
The organization presenting this proposal has the capacity to show you what is necessary,
in terms of structure, to create the combination One World Government and national
government within your country, based on the highest good for all people.
It is not in your best interest to attempt to create separate structures, but it is in your
best interest to attempt to create a combined structure that will enable you to set into place
both governments at the same time.
I wish to tell you that no one will be harmed by creating this, and that in the near future
your government has the capacity to be functioning with efficiency and with ease.
It is not difficult to set this into place. What is difficult is the planning and the
preparation required to enable each area of your country to assume responsibility for
creating it. I recommend a series of classes be set up with representatives from each area
coming and assuming responsibility for this. This organization has the capacity to teach
these classes, the different aspects of the plan. So be it and so it is.
One more thing to address is a cabinet. This will require the executive branch of
this government structure to function in such a way that the various aspects and departments
be addressed. You can choose people who are knowledgeable in the fields to come to assist
you in this, and they will handle the various aspects of your government.
The final thing for you to choose is people who are knowledgeable in business
and law, etc., who can represent you in the various departments of the One World
Government. So be it and so it is.
©Copyrights 2004, The World Peace Organization for the One World Government