SouthernWorldwide.com – The U.S. State Department announced on Monday its refusal to endorse a declaration from the International Migration Review Forum, citing concerns that the United Nations is promoting “replacement immigration” in the United States and across the Western world.
The United States did not participate in the second International Migration Review Forum, which took place from May 5-8 at U.N. Headquarters in New York. The department confirmed in a statement that it will not support the forum’s progress declaration.
The International Migration Review Forum serves as the U.N.’s primary global platform for member states to assess the implementation of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration. This year’s forum was scheduled to produce an intergovernmentally agreed “Progress Declaration.”
President Donald Trump had previously withdrawn the U.S. from the U.N. process to develop the Global Compact for Migration during his first term in 2017. The State Department’s recent statement reaffirms the federal government’s opposition to this initiative.
The Global Compact was adopted in 2018, following the U.S. withdrawal from the development process. According to the U.N. and the International Organization for Migration, the compact is designed as a cooperative framework to enhance migration governance among nations.
“As Secretary Rubio stated, opening our doors to mass migration was a grave error that jeopardizes the unity of our societies and the future of our populations,” the department’s statement declared. “In recent years, Americans have directly witnessed the detrimental impact of mass immigration on our communities: border chaos and crime, states of emergency in major cities, and billions of taxpayer dollars diverted to accommodate migrants with hotels, flights, mobile phones, and cash assistance.”
“A significant portion of these expenses was driven by U.N. agencies and their affiliates, which not only facilitated the influx into our country but also proceeded to redistribute the wealth and resources of our own citizens to millions of foreigners from disadvantaged regions globally,” it continued.
The department argued that these events were far from safe, orderly, or regular. It emphasized that the costs were “primarily borne by working Americans who were forced to compete for scarce employment opportunities, housing, and social services.”
“The U.N. has little to say about these consequences,” the department noted.
“President Trump is prioritizing the interests of Americans, not those of foreigners or globalist bureaucrats,” the statement asserted. “The United States will not endorse any process that, either directly or indirectly, imposes guidelines, standards, or commitments that restrict the sovereign, democratic right of the American people to make decisions that serve our nation’s best interests.”
The department concluded its statement by articulating its objective not to “manage” migration, but rather to “foster remigration.”
In a series of posts on X also announcing the decision to object to the declaration, the department stated that U.N. agencies “systematically facilitated mass migration into America and Europe, even as citizens of these nations called for restrictions on migration.” It further highlighted that U.N. materials associated with the Global Compact advocate for expanding legal migration pathways and refer to the “regularization” of migrants.
The International Organization for Migration explains that the forum convenes every four years to allow countries to review progress and determine future steps in migration policy. The IOM, which oversees the U.N. Network on Migration, indicates that this network comprises 39 U.N. agencies dedicated to assisting countries with migration-related issues.
The department alleged that “UN agencies – working with the NGOs they fund – established a migration corridor through Central America and to the U.S. border,” the post detailed. “While the American people suffered under an unprecedented wave of mass migration, the UN was actively directing migrants towards our southern border.”
“After facilitating mass migration into the United States, UN agencies criticized the deportation of illegal immigrants,” the post continued. “Similarly, when the United Kingdom experienced a surge in illegal boat crossings, UN agencies condemned plans for deportations. U.N. officials even lobbied aviation regulators to prevent the deportation of migrants, an unacceptable infringement on the UK’s national sovereignty.”
The U.N. Network on Migration characterizes the compact as “non-legally binding.” A text of the compact hosted by the U.N. also affirms that it respects the sovereign right of states to establish their national migration policies and to differentiate between regular and irregular migration status.
The declaration itself describes the Global Compact as a collaborative framework, acknowledging that no single state can address migration challenges in isolation, while simultaneously upholding state sovereignty.
The department challenged the compact’s portrayal of migration as “safe, orderly, and regular.”
“For the citizens of Western nations, mass migration was never safe. It introduced new security risks, imposed financial burdens, and weakened the cohesion of our societies,” it stated.
“The United States will not legitimize global compacts that enable mass migration into America or other Western nations,” the post concluded.
U.N. materials present the compact as a cooperative framework for addressing cross-border issues such as labor migration, border management, migrant protections, and development. U.N. agencies, including the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, describe the IMRF as a state-led review process with the involvement of relevant stakeholders.
Read more : Pacers President Apologizes for Draft Lottery Outcome
Fox News Digital has reached out to the U.N. for comment.
