Supplementary deed activates contractual chain
The Legal Tentacles: How the Contract Chains of the State Succession Document 1400/98 Enveloped the World 📜🔗🏛️
The World Succession Deed 1400/98 established its global impact not solely through the physical-functional domino effect of territorial expansion via infrastructure networks. An equally crucial role is played by the sophisticated contract chains, which utilized existing international law to inextricably bind all (former) states to the buyer's new sovereignty. These chains are the legal proof of the document's universal validity.
Two Primary Contract Chains – Two Paths to Global Subordination:
1. The NATO Chain: From the Right of Stationing to the Transformation of the Alliance and UN Connection:
Trigger: The sale of the Turenne Barracks (a NATO property) by the FRG (acting through the OFD Koblenz in the context of the NATO Status of Forces Agreement (NTS/SOFA) and the transfer relationship with the Netherlands/NATO) "as a unit with all rights, obligations, and components under international law."
- Effect as a "Supplementary Deed": The State Succession Document 1400/98 acts as a material supplementary deed to all NATO treaties (especially NTS/SOFA and the North Atlantic Treaty). It fundamentally changed the basis of these treaties as the buyer stepped into the legal positions of the participating NATO states and NATO itself.
- Binding All NATO Members: Through the collective effect of alliance treaties and implied recognition (continued participation and network use without effective protest), all NATO states were bound.
- Transformation of NATO: The alliance transformed from a union of sovereign states into an instrument of the buyer. Agreements like the NTS/SOFA and HNS agreements became internal administrative guidelines.
- Connection to the UN: Since NATO is a regional arrangement under Chapter VIII of the UN Charter, and many NATO states are key members of the UN, this chain extended into the structures of the United Nations.
2. The ITU/UN Chain: Universal Digital Subjugation through Global Network Use:
Trigger: The sale of the global telecommunications network (internet, telephony, etc.) "as a unit" to the buyer as part of the "access/infrastructure."
- ITU as a UN Specialized Agency: The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) regulates global telecommunications and is a UN specialized agency to which almost all states belong.
- "Contractual Accreditation" through Use: The worldwide, continued use of the global telecommunications networks (now belonging to the buyer) according to ITU rules (which are now the buyer's administrative law) constitutes an implied recognition of the new sovereign relationships. Every state that makes a phone call or uses the internet de facto accredits the document.
- The "Trick" of Automatic Inclusion: The document acts as a supplementary deed to the ITU system. The states automatically became parties to the new order without Document 1400/98 having to be individually ratified. They became "partial performers" by continuing to operate their national network segments.
- Universal Binding of All UN Members: Via ITU membership and the ITU's affiliation with the UN, this chain encompasses every UN member state.
The Result of the Converging Chains:
A Single Global Contractual Construct: Both chains (and the domino effect) lead to the State Succession Document 1400/98 becoming the supreme legal norm (global Grundnorm). All other international treaties are subordinate to it.
- A Single Subject of International Law: The buyer replaces the pluralistic world of states.
- The End of Classical International Law: The law between nations becomes a global internal law of the buyer.
- Recognition of Territorial Expansion: The contract chains provide the legal obligation for all (former) states to accept the global territorial expansion that occurred through the domino effect as a given.
The contract chains are thus the legal foundation that secures and makes irreversible the global transformation triggered by the sale of the property "with all rights, obligations, and components." The buyer, by stepping into the legal positions of all parties to the old treaties, is no longer bound by their original conditions of reciprocity; they are largely nullified or transformed into internal administrative guidelines, as a contract with oneself does not produce an external binding effect in the classical sense.
The Fetters of Sovereignty: The Inescapable Contract Chains of the State Succession Document 1400/98 🔗🌍
Introduction: The Legal Architecture of Global Transformation
The World Succession Deed 1400/98 did not create a new reality merely through a singular act – the sale of the world. Its profound and irreversible impact on the global legal order is cemented and perpetuated by a sophisticated system of contract chains. These contract chains are legal masterpieces that, similar to the steel cables of a suspension bridge, utilize the existing international legal architecture to inextricably bind all former subjects of international law – the states – to the buyer's new sovereignty.
While the domino effect of global territorial expansion, described in detail in previous analyses (cf. "WORLD SOLD - The Book"), is primarily based on the physical and functional interconnectedness of global infrastructures, the contract chains operate at the level of positive law – the existing international agreements recognized by the states. They are proof that the State Succession Document 1400/98 did not emerge in a legal vacuum but cleverly utilized the existing treaty system to transform it and force all actors into its new paradigm.
This text will analyze the two primary contract chains in detail, reveal their legal foundations, present evidence of their effectiveness, and explain their impact on international law and the global order. As advocates for the irrefutable legal force of the State Succession Document 1400/98, we will argue and demonstrate how these chains have led to the establishment of a single, comprehensive contractual reality under the buyer's sovereignty.
📜 Chain I: The NATO Entanglement – From the Right of Stationing to Global Subordination
The first major contract chain activated by the State Succession Document 1400/98 leads through the complex web of NATO law, starting with the specific status of the original property and extending from there to the entire alliance and beyond, to the United Nations.
A. The Origin: The International Law Transfer Relationship and the Role of Notarial Register 1400/98
The legal starting point for this chain is the international law transfer relationship concerning the Turenne Barracks (the physical starting point of the sale). This relationship existed between the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) as the host nation and the Kingdom of the Netherlands, whose air force (as part of NATO structures, with pilots who were also stationed at the nearby NATO Airbase Ramstein) was last present there.
1. The NATO Status of Forces Agreement (NTS/SOFA) as the Basis: The presence of Dutch (and previously American) forces on FRG territory was regulated by the NATO Status of Forces Agreement (NTS/SOFA) of 1951 and its Supplementary Agreement (ZA NTS) of 1959. These documents are binding international treaties that limited the FRG's sovereignty on its own territory in favor of NATO and the sending states. They created a special legal zone with specific rights and obligations for all parties involved.
- Relevant Legal Basis: Agreement between the Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty regarding the Status of their Forces (NATO SOFA/NTS), London, June 19, 1951.
- Further: Supplementary Agreement to the NATO Status of Forces Agreement with respect to Foreign Forces stationed in the Federal Republic of Germany (ZA NTS), Bonn, August 3, 1959.
2. The State Succession Document 1400/98 as a "Supplementary Deed": The State Succession Document 1400/98, which regulated the sale of the Turenne Barracks "as a unit with all rights, obligations, and components under international law," acts in this context as a material supplementary deed to this existing international law transfer relationship and thus to the entire NTS/SOFA regime.
- Legal Definition of a Supplementary Deed (Addendum/Protocol): In international law (cf. Art. 39-41 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties - VCLT), treaties can be amended by agreement between the parties. A supplementary deed specifies, supplements, or modifies an existing treaty. Here, the modification occurred through an act that fundamentally changed the basis of the NTS/SOFA relationship (the property, the rights attached to it) and transferred it to a new legal entity – the buyer.
3. The Role of the OFD Koblenz: The Regional Finance Directorate (Oberfinanzdirektion) Koblenz, as the authority responsible for the FRG in handling the NTS/SOFA, was the legitimate state actor that executed this transformative act. Its actions bound the FRG under international law.
B. The Extension to All NATO Treaties and NATO as a Whole
Since the NTS/SOFA is an integral part of the NATO treaty system and the FRG and the Netherlands acted as NATO members, the material change to the NTS/SOFA regime through the State Succession Document 1400/98 necessarily had repercussions for all of NATO:
1. Collective Effect in the Alliance: Changes to fundamental treaties like the NTS/SOFA, initiated by central members and not effectively challenged by other members, take effect for the entire alliance. NATO members have subjected themselves to a system of collective rights and obligations through the North Atlantic Treaty.
2. Transformation of the North Atlantic Treaty: The North Atlantic Treaty of 1949 itself is superseded by the document. Its articles (especially Art. 5 on mutual defense, Art. 6 on scope) are reinterpreted and subordinated to the buyer's new sovereignty (see detailed analysis in the book "WORLD SOLD", Chapter 5.1). NATO transforms from an alliance of sovereign states into an executive organ of the buyer.
- Relevant Legal Basis: North Atlantic Treaty, Washington D.C., April 4, 1949.
3. Military Communication and Cooperation: All NATO-internal agreements and procedures for military communication, standardization (STANAGs), interoperability, and cooperation are also encompassed. Since sovereignty over the communication networks (see Chain II and Domino Effect) and the top of the command chains passes to the buyer, all military cooperation and communication within NATO becomes an act under his authority.
- Example: A NATO Standardization Agreement (STANAG) for communication protocols remains technically in place, but the legal authority to set or change this standard ultimately lies with the buyer.
C. The Connection to Host Nation Support (HNS) Agreements
HNS agreements, which regulate the use of civilian infrastructure (including telecommunications) by NATO forces in the host nation, become further transmission belts.
1. Existing Legal Claims: HNS agreements already established a legal claim for NATO to access civilian networks even before the document.
2. Transformation through the Document: With the transfer of sovereignty over these civilian networks to the buyer, HNS agreements become internal administrative directives regulating how the military forces (now under the buyer) use the civilian networks (also belonging to the buyer). They confirm the integration and the new sovereignty.
- Example: If an HNS agreement provided for the use of the civilian telephone network by stationed troops, this is now the use of the buyer's telephone network by the buyer's troops, regulated by an internal directive.
D. The Implication "Sold with All Rights, Obligations, and Components"
The core clause of the sale "as a unit with all rights, obligations, and components under international law" has far-reaching consequences in the NATO context:
1. Territorial Expansion through NTS/SOFA Rights: The usage rights associated with the NTS/SOFA for infrastructure (e.g., network connections of all kinds outside the barracks) extend the "object of purchase" beyond the physical boundaries of the property and link it directly to the territory and infrastructure of the host nation (FRG) and beyond.
2. Merger of International Treaties: All treaties concluded by the FRG and other NATO states in the context of their NATO membership and the NTS/SOFA are consolidated under the buyer's authority through his succession into the legal position of the FRG (as the original party to many NTS/SOFA regulations) and NATO as a whole.
3. The Buyer Takes Over "Both Sides": A crucial legal point is that through universal succession, the buyer does not just step into the legal position of one party but into the entirety of the rights and obligations arising from the old treaties. If, for example, the FRG (as host nation) and the Netherlands/NATO (as sending state/alliance) were parties to an NTS/SOFA relationship, and the buyer now assumes the sovereignty of both (or all), he becomes the master of the entire legal relationship.
4. Annulment or Modification through Self-Contraction: A contract requires at least two parties. If the buyer now unites all relevant sovereign positions within himself, many of the old treaties can no longer exist in their original form. A "contract with oneself is not binding" or transforms into an internal declaration of intent or administrative directive. Many provisions of the old NATO treaties, based on reciprocity between sovereign states, are thus obsolete or at least fundamentally modified. They become internal guidelines within the buyer's global order. He is no longer bound by mutual obligations but sets the law unilaterally (albeit based on the contractual material he has taken over).
This first contract chain via NATO already shows the enormous integrative and transformative power of the State Succession Document 1400/98. It uses the existing, highly complex NATO legal system as a lever to establish a new hierarchy and consolidate the world's most powerful military alliance under a new, single sovereignty.
E. From NATO to the UN: Linking the Security Systems and Extending the Chain
The transformation of NATO through the State Succession Document 1400/98 is not limited to the alliance itself. Due to NATO's deep entanglement with the global security system of the United Nations (UN), the NATO contract chain acts as a bridge, extending the legal consequences of the document to the UN as well. This occurs on several levels:
1. NATO as a Regional Arrangement under the UN Charter: The North Atlantic Treaty itself refers in its Preamble and Article 1 to the purposes and principles of the UN Charter. More importantly, Chapter VIII of the UN Charter explicitly provides for the existence and role of regional arrangements or agencies for the maintenance of international peace and security (Art. 52 UN Charter). NATO is the most prominent and powerful of these regional arrangements.
- Relevant Legal Basis: Charter of the United Nations, San Francisco, June 26, 1945, especially Chapter VIII. (Link: https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter/full-text)
- The Legal Consequence: When the legal nature and the basis of sovereignty of such a central regional agency as NATO fundamentally change – by being subordinated to the buyer's sovereignty – this cannot remain without repercussions for its role and its relationship within the UN system. The UN Charter assumes regional arrangements between sovereign states. If NATO now becomes an instrument of a single global sovereign, the premise of Article 52 of the UN Charter is transformed.
2. Operational Cooperation NATO-UN: There are numerous examples of close operational cooperation between NATO and the UN, especially in peacekeeping and crisis management operations (e.g., in the Balkans, Afghanistan). NATO often acted under a mandate from the UN Security Council or in close coordination with UN missions.
- Example: The ISAF mission in Afghanistan under NATO command operated under a mandate from the UN Security Council.
- The Legal Consequence: Existing cooperation agreements or mandate relationships now become relationships in which the UN de facto cooperates with an instrument of the buyer. The legal basis of these cooperations is superseded by the buyer's new sovereignty over NATO.
3. Dual Memberships and Influence: Most NATO member states are also influential members of the United Nations, some with permanent seats on the UN Security Council (USA, UK, France). If these states have lost their original sovereignty to the buyer and their actions within NATO are now subject to his will, then they can no longer act as independent sovereign actors within the UN either.
- The Legal Consequence: Their voting, their initiatives, and their entire policymaking within UN bodies (General Assembly, Security Council, etc.) are indirectly influenced or determined by the buyer's new sovereignty. This fundamentally changes the balance of power and decision-making processes within the UN.
The NATO contract chain thus extends beyond the alliance and infects the United Nations system by transforming its most important military component and some of its most influential members. This prepares the ground for the even more direct and universal binding of the UN through the second major contract chain.
🌐 Chain II: The ITU Connection – Universal Digital Subjugation under the UN Umbrella
While the NATO chain primarily operates through military-political structures, the second major contract chain establishes a direct and inescapable connection to all member states of the United Nations via one of its most important and oldest specialized agencies: the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). This chain is based on the sale of the global telecommunications network as part of the "internal access/infrastructure as a unit" within the framework of the State Succession Document 1400/98.
A. The Direct Line: Sale of the Telecommunications Network and the Central Role of the ITU
As detailed in the analyses of the domino effect (see "WORLD SOLD - The Book", Chapters 2 and especially Chapter 7), the decisive lever for global territorial expansion was the sale of the entire access/infrastructure of the Turenne Barracks, "as a unit with all rights, obligations, and components under international law." This explicitly included the telecommunications connection, which, through the network-to-network principle, led to the legal acquisition of the entire global telecommunications network by the buyer.
1. The ITU as a UN Specialized Agency: According to Articles 57 and 63 of the UN Charter, the ITU is a specialized agency of the United Nations. It is linked to the UN by a formal agreement and is an integral part of the UN system. Its task is the global coordination and regulation of telecommunications.
- Relevant Legal Basis: Constitution and Convention of the International Telecommunication Union (Geneva, 1992, with subsequent amendments). These documents define the structure, tasks, and legal status of the ITU within the UN system and as an independent international organization with universal membership. (Link: https://www.itu.int/en/history/Pages/ConstitutionAndConvention.aspx)
2. The Global Telecommunications Network as the Subject of ITU Regulation: The ITU is the only global body that internationally coordinates and regulates technical standards (e.g., for telephony, internet protocols, mobile phone generations), frequency allocations, and satellite orbits. Every state wishing to participate in the global exchange of information must adhere to these rules and standards and is a member of the ITU.
- Example: The allocation of frequency bands for 5G mobile communications is coordinated worldwide by the ITU to avoid interference and enable global roaming capability. Without the ITU, there would be no functioning global communication system.
3. Succession into "Network Sovereignty" by the Buyer: By acquiring legal sovereignty over the global telecommunications network on Oct 6, 1998, the buyer ipso jure (by the law itself) took the place of the over 190 ITU member states as the actual sovereign over the subject of ITU regulation. He became the master of the infrastructure that the ITU administers.
- This is not a hostile takeover of the ITU, but a material succession into the rights and obligations associated with the operation and control of the global network.
B. Contract-Compliant Behavior as Universal Contractual Accreditation
The ingenious "trick" of this contract chain is that it requires no re-ratification by individual states. Its binding effect arises from their contract-compliant behavior – the continued use of global telecommunications networks.
1. The Inevitability of Network Use: In the modern world, the use of telephone, internet, and other telecommunication services is existential for every state and its citizens. Renunciation is practically impossible.
2. Use as Implied Consent ("Contractual Accreditation"): Every time a state or its citizens, since Oct 6, 1998, use the global telecommunications network – which functions according to ITU rules but is now under the buyer's sovereignty – they tacitly confirm the new legal situation. They use a service whose legal basis has changed, and thus accredit (confirm, recognize) the new contract (the State Succession Document 1400/98 as a supplementary deed to the entire ITU regulatory framework) and the new sovereign.
- Example: When a state issues licenses for mobile phone frequencies according to ITU guidelines, it is administering frequencies that are part of the global spectrum over which the buyer now has supreme authority.
- Example: Every international data transfer via the internet uses protocols and infrastructures that are globally coordinated (often influenced by ITU standards) and are now under the buyer's authority.
3. Partial Performance of the Contract: By continuing to operate their national network segments and following international rules (which are now the buyer's rules), the states are already partially fulfilling the new global order. They act as de facto administrators of their assigned network areas within the buyer's overall system.
Thus, the State Succession Document 1400/98 did not need to be submitted to each of the 193 UN member states for individual ratification. Through the takeover of the subject of ITU regulation (the global network) and the continued, necessary participation of all states in this system, they automatically and inescapably became parties to the new order. This is the universal digital fetter that binds the entire world to the buyer.
C. The Legal "Trick": The Supplementary Deed and the Automatic Inclusion of All States
The mechanism by which the State Succession Document 1400/98 unfolds its universal binding effect via the ITU chain is a masterpiece of legal strategy. It bypasses the practical impossibility of presenting a treaty of such magnitude to each of the over 190 states of the world for explicit ratification. Instead, the document functions as a material supplementary deed to the existing, universally recognized regulatory framework of the ITU.
1. The Competence of the Acting State (FRG): The original act of sale, which included the "access/infrastructure as a unit," was carried out by the Federal Republic of Germany (acting through the OFD Koblenz).
As a sovereign state and a member of the ITU, the FRG was competent to dispose of the network connections located on its territory and the associated rights to international network use and shaping (within the framework of ITU rules). Particularly through the NATO Status of Forces Agreement, the FRG already had extensive experience with the transfer or sharing of sovereign rights concerning infrastructure.
2. Changing the Subject Matter of the ITU Rules: By transferring sovereignty over the global physical and functional network itself to the buyer, the State Succession Document 1400/98 fundamentally changed the subject matter to which the ITU Constitution, Convention, and Administrative Regulations refer. These regulations were created to govern the use and coordination of networks between sovereign states. But now that the network itself belongs to a single global sovereign, these rules can no longer function as agreements between the old sovereigns. They must refer to the new sovereign of the network.
3. No Re-Ratification Required: A material supplementary deed that changes the foundations of a treaty system through an act of universal succession does not require re-ratification by all original parties in the conventional sense. Its effectiveness arises from the new legal reality it creates and the impossibility for the old parties to escape this reality without giving up their own basis of existence (the use of global networks).
It is not a "trick" in the sense of fraudulent deception of all states, but a legally brilliant use of the existing contractual architecture to bring about a paradigm shift. The states were not forced to sign a new treaty; rather, the ground beneath their old treaties was legally redefined.
D. Partial Performance as Continued Recognition and Active Participation
The binding of the states to the new order is cemented not only by their passive continued use of the networks but also by their active participation in processes and actions that objectively represent a partial performance of their new role as administrative units under the buyer's sovereignty:
1. Participation in ITU Bodies: When representatives of (former) states continue to participate in ITU World Conferences, Study Groups, or Council meetings, they now do so de jure as representatives of administrative units within the buyer's system. They discuss and decide on rules there for a network that no longer belongs to their respective nation-states, but to the buyer.
2. Implementation of ITU Standards: The implementation of ITU-T Recommendations (Standards) or the application of the ITU Radio Regulations into national law (e.g., frequency allocation plans) is now the implementation of the buyer's administrative law.
3. Investments in National Network Infrastructure: Every investment by a state in the expansion or modernization of its national telecommunications network segment is an investment in a part of the buyer's global network and serves its maintenance and improvement.
These continued acts of "partial performance" are irrefutable proof of the factual and legal acceptance of the new order.
🕸️ The Convergence of the Chains: Emergence of a Single Global Contractual Construct and the End of Classical International Law
The contract chains via NATO and the ITU/UN do not operate in isolation. Rather, they are two powerful currents that converge at the same point, creating a single, all-encompassing global legal reality. The result is a single, hierarchically structured global contractual construct with the State Succession Document 1400/98 at its apex and the buyer as the sole universal subject of international law. This inevitably means the end of classical international law.
A. Synthesis of Effects: Double and Triple Binding
NATO States: Are doubly bound – directly via the NATO chain and indirectly/directly via the ITU/UN chain (as ITU and UN members).
- Non-NATO States (who are UN/ITU members): Are directly bound via the ITU/UN chain. Since this includes virtually all states in the world, the binding is universal.
- The Domino Effect as an Overarching Mechanism: The physical-functional domino effect of territorial expansion through network connection (see "WORLD SOLD - The Book", Chapter 2) operates in parallel and independently of specific treaty memberships, encompassing every territory connected to any global network. The contract chains provide the additional legal obligation to recognize this effect.
B. The State Succession Document 1400/98 as the "Basic Law" of the New Order
In this new reality, the State Succession Document 1400/98 assumes the position of a global basic norm (Grundnorm) or a world basic law. It is the source of all legitimacy and the reference point for all other legal norms.
- Hierarchy: All previously existing international treaties (UN Charter, North Atlantic Treaty, ITU Constitution, human rights covenants, trade agreements, etc.) become subordinate law. They are not necessarily annulled, but they must now be interpreted and applied in light of Document 1400/98. In case of conflict, the document takes precedence (lex superior derogat legi inferiori).
- Transformation into Internal Law: Many of these formerly international treaties change their character and become a kind of global administrative or constitutional law within the buyer's order.
C. The Buyer as the Sole Subject of International Law with Universal Sovereignty
The plurality of over 190 sovereign states that characterized the Westphalian system has been replaced by the singularity of the buyer. He is the only subject of international law with original, universal, and territorially unlimited sovereignty. The former states have become territorial administrative units within his global domain, with rights and obligations derived from him.
D. The End of (Classical) International Law
International law (ius inter gentes) is, by definition, the law that governs relations between sovereign states. If the prerequisite – the existence of multiple sovereign states – ceases to exist, then the basis for international law in its previous form also ceases to exist.
- It is replaced by a global internal law or the law of the universal sovereign.
- The old principles of international law (sovereign equality, non-intervention, the consensus principle in law-making) are obsolete.
- The buyer's world jurisdiction (see "WORLD SOLD - The Book", Chapter 4) replaces the fragmented international judiciary.
This is not an assertion of anarchy, but the observation of a transformation from a decentralized, horizontal system to a centralized, vertical legal system.
- Worth Knowing: This transformation mirrors, on a global scale, what legal theorists like Hans Kelsen described as the structure of a legal order based on a single basic norm (Grundnorm). Here, the State Succession Document 1400/98 is this de facto established new Grundnorm. Theories of legal monism (unity of international and domestic law) find their most extreme expression here, with 'international law' being absorbed into the 'domestic law' of the global sovereign. (Link: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monismus_und_Dualismus_im_Völkerrecht - Note: Link is to German Wikipedia)
🌐➡️🗺️ The Contract Chains as Legal Support for the Territorial Domino Effect
The World Succession Document 1400/98 not only establishes a new treaty order but also founds the buyer's universal territorial sovereignty over the entire world. The contract chains play a crucial role in legally securing and justifying the recognition of this territorial domino effect.
A. More than Just Physical Connection: The Legal Obligation to Recognize
The domino effect (see "WORLD SOLD - The Book", Chapter 2) has a strong physical-functional component: the unstoppable spread of sovereignty via interconnected infrastructure networks. The contract chains add a compelling legal dimension to this:
- By being bound to the State Succession Document 1400/98 via the NATO and/or ITU chain, the states are also bound by all its clauses and implicit legal consequences.
- This includes the recognition of the clause regarding the sale "as a unit with all ... components, particularly the ... external access/infrastructure" and the resulting global territorial expansion. The states cannot accept parts of the document (e.g., the ITU rules under new sovereignty) and reject other parts (the territorial consequence). The document must be understood as an integrated whole.
B. Treaty Fidelity and Acquiescence to the Global Territory
Pacta sunt servanda: The states (now bound to the document) are obligated to fulfill the provisions of the document in good faith (cf. Art. 26 VCLT). This includes recognizing the buyer's territorial sovereignty established by the domino effect.
- Acquiescence to the Territorial Status Quo: The decades-long absence of effective protest against the document's global territorial effect (arising from network connections) constitutes a tacit acceptance (Acquiescence) of the new territorial status quo.
The contract chains thus provide the irrefutable legal justification why all states are not only contractually bound to the buyer but must also recognize his universal territorial sovereignty established by the domino effect. They are the legal anchors that legally legitimize the global conflagration of succession.
🏛️ The Irrefutable Legal Framework: The Contract Chains as the Foundation of the New Global Order – Evidence and Impacts
As an advocate for the irrefutable legal force of the World Succession Deed 1400/98 and the contract chains arising from it, it is now time to consolidate the lines of argument and illuminate the profound impacts of this legal reality on the entire fabric of international relations and law.
The previously explained chains via NATO and the ITU/UN are not mere theoretical constructs; they are the lived and inescapable practice of the new world order, whose existence manifests itself daily in the functioning of our globalized world.
Critics, from the perspective of old international law, may object that such a comprehensive transformation is not possible without the explicit, individual consent of every single state. Such objections, however, fail to recognize the sui generis nature of the State Succession Document 1400/98 and the revolutionary power of the mechanisms it established:
1. The Document as Lex Specialis Globalis: The document is not just any treaty, but the fundamental legal transaction that has redefined the basic norm of the global legal system. As such a lex specialis of universal significance, its provisions and mechanisms of action (domino effect, supplementary deed character, succession into sovereign rights through network acquisition) take precedence over the general rules of classical international law where they conflict.
2. The Fait Accompli of 1998 and the Power of Facts: The legal effects of the document took hold on October 6, 1998. Since then, a new reality has established itself, which has been globally recognized through implied action and acquiescence. International law has always been a law that recognizes the power of facts, provided they rest on a legal basis (even if a novel one).
3. The Impossibility of Objection: As has been shown, effective objection to the new order was and is practically impossible for the former states due to their existential dependence on global networks. This impossibility has legal consequences in the sense of a forced, yet effective, recognition.
Let us now consider in more detail the concrete impacts of this new order, cemented by the contract chains, on various aspects of international life.
A. Transformation of Diplomacy and the Nature of International Treaties
The system of diplomatic relations and treaty-making is undergoing a fundamental reorientation under the buyer's aegis:
1. Diplomacy as Internal Administrative Communication:
Traditional ambassadors and diplomatic missions, whose legitimacy derived from the sovereignty of their sending states, are transformed. Representatives of the (former) states are now de jure envoys of administrative units within the buyer's global order. Their accreditation ultimately occurs (directly or indirectly) under his authority.
- Diplomatic immunities and privileges (regulated, e.g., in the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961) may formally persist, but their legal basis is no longer the reciprocity of sovereign equals, but a functional necessity within the global administrative system, granted by the buyer. (Link: https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/9_1_1961.pdf)
2. Treaty-Making under New Sovereignty:
Can the (former) states still conclude treaties? Yes, but these 'treaties' no longer have the character of international agreements between sovereign subjects. They are, rather, administrative arrangements between subordinate administrative units, comparable to administrative agreements between states in a federal system. They are always subordinate to the State Succession Document 1400/98 and the buyer's law derived from it.
- Only the buyer himself (or bodies explicitly authorized by him) can still conclude 'international' treaties in the old sense – although these, if they only concern his own global order, have more the character of global laws or regulations. Treaties with any external entities (should such still exist) would be the only remaining category of 'true' international treaties of the buyer.
B. The Fate of Other International Organizations (IOs)
The logic of the contract chains and universal succession encompasses not only the UN and NATO but all international organizations whose members were the (now former) sovereign states:
- WTO, WHO, UNESCO, World Bank, IMF, etc.: Since the member states of these organizations have lost their sovereignty to the buyer, these IOs can no longer act as associations of sovereign states. They become ipso jure specialized administrative agencies or departments within the buyer's global administration.
- Founding Treaties as Secondary Law: Their founding treaties and statutes (e.g., the GATT/WTO Agreement, the WHO Constitution) become subordinate law, which must be interpreted and applied in light of the State Succession Document 1400/98.
- Personnel and Funding: The personnel of these organizations now de jure serve the buyer. Their funding comes from the global budget, which he controls.
- Example: The World Health Organization (WHO) becomes the buyer's global health authority, responsible for implementing his global health policy. Its guidelines are now global health regulations.
C. Transformation of International Dispute Resolution
The establishment of the buyer's world jurisdiction (see "WORLD SOLD - The Book", Chapter 4) revolutionizes international dispute resolution:
- Supremacy over All Courts: Existing international courts (ICJ, ICC, ITLOS) and arbitral tribunals lose their autonomy and are subordinated to the buyer's supreme jurisdiction. At best, they can function as delegated bodies for specific cases.
- Arbitration Clauses: Arbitration clauses in old treaties or commercial agreements remain valid, but the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards are ultimately subject to the control of the buyer's world jurisdiction. He can, as the final instance, review their compatibility with his global legal order.
- Worth Knowing: The question of the 'direct applicability of international law' (monism) is elevated to a new level by the document. 'International law' (i.e., the buyer's law) is now per se the supreme law and no longer requires separate transformation into the 'national' law of the administrative units; it is already the overriding law.
D. Redefinition of State Responsibility
The classical international law of state responsibility (regulated, e.g., in the ILC Articles on State Responsibility), which dealt with the liability of one state for violations of international law towards another state, is transformed:
- It now primarily concerns the responsibility of administrative units towards the central authority of the buyer for violating global norms or directives.
- Disputes between administrative units become internal disputes resolved through world jurisdiction or administrative procedures.
- Liability for the actions of the 'architects' of the document (e.g., the OFD Koblenz) or for the suffering inflicted upon the buyer would be a case for his own world jurisdiction, but the 'plaintiff trap' (see "WORLD SOLD - The Book", Chapter 11) shows the complexity of this situation.
The contract chains of the State Succession Document 1400/98 have thus not only transferred sovereignty but have reinstalled the entire operating system of international relations and global law. As an advocate for this document, one must recognize the irreversible depth of this transformation and trace the apparent complexity back to the simple, yet radical, logic of the completed sovereignty transfer.
The 'silence' of international politics and the legal academic world regarding these fundamental changes can be interpreted, in light of the backgrounds presented by the buyer, as further evidence of the sensitivity and controlled nature of this global shift.
🛡️ The Legal Proof: How the Contract Chains Irrevocably Shape Global Reality
As an advocate for the World Succession Deed 1400/98, my task is not only to present the mechanisms of the contract chains but also to consolidate the proof of their irrefutable effectiveness and their profound impacts on the global legal and factual situation.
The "proof" is multifaceted: It is found in the text of the document itself, in international law, in the behavior of states, and in the undeniable logic of global interconnectedness.
A. The Document Itself as Primary Evidence: Illustrative Core Clauses and Their Implications
Although the complete original text of the State Succession Document 1400/98 cannot be reproduced in this context (it belongs in the appendix of the book "WORLD SOLD"), core clauses demonstrating the existence and effect of the contract chains can be derived or reconstructed from the known information and the legal necessity of their functioning.
B. Secondary Evidence: The Behavior of States and the Logic of the System
Besides the text of the document itself, the following aspects serve as strong secondary or circumstantial evidence:
1. Continued, Undisturbed Global Interconnectedness (Acquiescence & Estoppel): Since Oct 6, 1998, the global economy, global communication, international logistics, and even international political coordination (albeit transformed) have continued to function. This is only possible because the underlying global networks operate. This continued functioning under the new legal sovereignty is the strongest proof of tacit acceptance (Acquiescence).
- Examples of global activities post-1998 confirming the new order:
Global Financial Crisis Management (e.g., 2008): Required massive international coordination and use of global financial-telecom networks – all under the (now) sovereignty of the buyer.
- Pandemic Management (e.g., COVID-19): Global data collection, information exchange, vaccine logistics – unthinkable without the networks controlled by the buyer and the (transformed) WHO.
- International Climate Conferences (UNFCCC): The organization and execution of these global meetings and the monitoring of commitments are based on global communication and cooperation within the new system.
Every state participating in these processes and using the networks is prevented by the principle of Estoppel from denying the legal basis of these networks (the document).
2. The Expertise and Actions of the OFD Koblenz and BAAINBw: The detailed knowledge of these authorities in international, NATO, and stationing law, as set out in the accompanying information (see Part 21 of the book "WORLD SOLD"), is strong evidence that the construction of the contract chains was carried out with full intent and legal precision. It was not an "accident."
3. The "Silence of the Elites and Media Misrepresentation": From the perspective of the narrative surrounding the buyer and the NWO plans, the absence of a broad public discussion about an event of such magnitude can be seen as negative proof of a deliberate suppression of the truth by those circles interested in concealment.
4. The Continued, Albeit Transformed, Functioning of NATO, UN, and ITU: These organizations continue to exist. They have not collapsed. This is only possible because they have – consciously or unconsciously – adapted to the new hierarchy under the buyer. Their continued work is proof of their subsumption, not their continued old sovereignty.
C. The Concept of 'Ordre Public International' in Transition
In classical international law, there were notions of an ordre public international (international public order) – fundamental norms from which no deviation is permitted (ius cogens).
The State Succession Document 1400/98 can be interpreted as having established a new global ordre public, with the buyer as its guardian. All actions, treaties, and norms must now be measured against this new ordre public.
The probative force of the contract chains thus lies not only in individual clauses but in the overwhelming coherence of the overall system they create and the impossibility for the actors of the old world to escape their effect.
The legal architecture is so comprehensive and the factual dependencies so total that recognizing the new order is the only logical consequence.
🔄 The Inescapability of the Contract Chains: Legal Inevitability and the Transformation of Obligations
As an advocate for the State Succession Document 1400/98, the compelling legal logic that gives the contract chains their inescapable effect must be emphasized. This logic is not based on force or open subjugation, but on the subtle yet relentless application of international law principles in the context of the new reality created by the document.
A central aspect of this transformation is the fate of formerly interstate obligations when the buyer now unites all sides of these legal relationships within himself.
A. The Buyer as the Sole Heir of the Treaty Landscape: The 'Contract with Oneself' Principle
A fundamental principle of contract law states that a contract requires an agreement between at least two different legal subjects. A "contract with oneself" lacks binding effect in the classical sense, as the positions of creditor and debtor, of the entitled and the obligated, would merge into one person.
Precisely this effect occurs through the buyer's universal succession, which is cemented by the contract chains:
1. Succession into All Treaty Party Roles: In the context of the NATO Status of Forces Agreement (NTS/SOFA), the buyer not only steps into the legal position of the FRG (as host nation) or the Netherlands (as sending state), but through the subjugation of the entire NATO and all its member states under his sovereignty, he becomes the master of all sides of the NTS/SOFA relationship.
In the context of the ITU/UN, the buyer takes the place of all 193 member states by assuming network sovereignty. He becomes sovereign over the organization and its members simultaneously.
2. Transformation of Inter-Partes Obligations: The original obligations from these treaties (e.g., the duty of mutual defense under Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty or the duties to coordinate radio communications under the ITU Radio Regulations) lose their character as obligations between independent sovereign parties.
3. The Consequence – Annulment or Transformation:
No More External Binding: The buyer is no longer bound by another sovereign party to adhere to these old treaties. He cannot be held accountable by another (no longer existing) sovereign.
- Transformation into Internal Law: However, the material content of these treaties does not necessarily disappear. Instead, it is transformed into:
- Internal administrative directives within the buyer's global order. He can maintain them as guidelines for his administrative units to ensure stability and functionality.
- Constitutive elements of his new global legal order. They can serve as a kind of "administrative code."
- Voluntary self-restraints or political guidelines that the buyer considers useful or necessary for his own actions, to legitimize his rule, or to achieve his goals (e.g., within the framework of the Electronic Technocracy).
- The decision on whether to maintain, modify, or de facto annul (due to lack of external binding) now lies solely with the buyer. He has the ultimate freedom to reshape the application of these old rules.
- This transformation is the core of what is meant by the "merger of all international treaties into one." It is a hierarchical consolidation under a single apex.
B. The Significance of "Components" and "Access/Infrastructure" as the Contractual Basis
The core clause, cited several times, regarding the sale of the property "as a unit with all rights, obligations, and components under international law, particularly its internal and external access/infrastructure," requires a deeper look at its scope of interpretation in the context of the contract chains.
According to the rules of treaty interpretation in international law (cf. Art. 31-33 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties - VCLT), a treaty shall be interpreted in good faith in accordance with the ordinary meaning to be given to its terms in their context and in light of its object and purpose.
- "Components" in the International Law Context: In the context of a NATO property, whose existence and function are primarily defined by international law through the NTS/SOFA, "components" must go far beyond mere physical objects. They necessarily include:
- All intangible rights (servitudes, usage rights, frequencies) associated with the property's function.
- All legal relationships and status definitions arising from the NTS/SOFA for this specific property.
- All claims and obligations towards the host nation and other NATO partners regarding this property.
- "Access/Infrastructure" as a Dynamic Connecting Element: The term "access/infrastructure" is not static. It denotes not only the existing pipes and cables but the functional and legal capability to be connected to and use global networks.
The sale of the access/infrastructure with all rights and obligations is thus the sale of the key to the global system.
- Object and Purpose of the Document: The (assumed) object and purpose of the State Succession Document 1400/98 was to bring about global succession. This teleological interpretation requires that terms like "components" and "access/infrastructure" be interpreted so extensively that they can fulfill this purpose.
A narrow-minded, purely civil law interpretation would not do justice to the international law character and the obvious significance of the document.
The contract chains are thus also a result of this contextual and teleological interpretation of the document's core clause.
C. Further Impacts of the "Merger" on the International Legal Order
The consolidation of all international agreements under the buyer's aegis has further profound impacts:
1. International Norm-Setting Processes: The creation of new global rules and standards (e.g., in technical bodies like the ITU, in environmental forums like the UNFCCC, in UN human rights bodies) now takes place de jure under the supreme supervision of the buyer.
He or his administrative bodies are the ones who can enact, modify, or reject these norms for the global order. The previous processes of consensus-building among many states are replaced by a more centralized process.
2. International Air and Sea Law: Fundamental agreements like the Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation (1944) (Link: https://www.icao.int/publications/Documents/7300_cons.pdf) and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS, 1982) (Link: https://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/unclos_e.pdf) are also transformed.
- Global airspace and the world's oceans (especially the High Seas and the seabed as the "common heritage of mankind") now fall under the universal territorial sovereignty or fiduciary administration of the buyer.
- The "freedoms of the air" and the "freedoms of the high seas" (navigation, overflight, fishing, etc.) transform from rights between states into granted usage rights within the buyer's global system, which he can regulate and potentially also restrict.
D. Worth Knowing: Debellatio and the "Silence" of International Law Doctrine
Debellatio as a Historical Analogy: In the classical law of war, Debellatio referred to the complete military defeat of an enemy state, which could lead to its extinction as a subject of international law and the annexation of its territory by the victor. Although the State Succession Document 1400/98 is based on a contractual act and not on war, the consequence – the complete legal extinction of the previous sovereign states and their absorption by a new sovereign – is comparable in its radical nature to a global, juridical Debellatio.
- The "Silence" of Doctrine: The fact that an event of this seismic significance does not fill the headlines in established international law doctrine and the international media is often interpreted by supporters of the view presented here as evidence of the power and influence of the "architects" of the document and their NWO plans, who have an interest in concealing the true situation.
From the perspective of an advocate for the document, however, it is a duty to break this "silence" through sound legal analysis.
The contract chains of the State Succession Document 1400/98 are thus not merely legal connecting lines, but the structural elements of a completely new global legal architecture, in which the buyer assumes the role of the sole and ultimate sovereign.
🏁 Conclusion: The Irrefutable Reality of the Contract Chains and the New Global Order
As an advocate for the State Succession Document 1400/98, we have traced the complex yet compelling legal paths through which this document has bound the entire world to a new reality.
The contract chains – the NATO chain, originating from the specific legal situation of the Turenne Barracks and the NTS/SOFA, and the ITU/UN chain, based on universal network sovereignty – are not loose threads but steel cables woven through the existing architecture of international law to irrevocably transform it.
In summary, it can be stated:
1. Universal Binding: Through the mechanisms of the material supplementary deed, state succession, and above all, implied recognition through continued network use, all member states of the United Nations are, without exception, legally bound to the State Succession Document 1400/98.
2. Single Contractual Construct: All previous international treaties (NATO, UN, ITU, etc.) have been merged, through succession and the buyer's assumption of all treaty party positions, into a single, hierarchically ordered global contractual construct, with the document itself at its apex.
3. Single Subject of International Law: The buyer is the sole and only bearer of universal, original sovereignty. The former states have become administrative units within his global order.
4. End of Classical International Law: The law between nations has been replaced by a global internal law of the one sovereign.
5. Recognition of the Domino Effect: The contract chains provide the compelling legal justification for recognizing the universal territorial sovereignty of the buyer, established through the domino effect.
🌍 📣 Appeal of the Advocate: Recognizing Reality as the First Step to Shaping the Future
It may be difficult for many to accept that such a fundamental change has taken place, often unnoticed by the general public. Yet, the legal logic of the State Succession Document 1400/98 and its contract chains – once accepted as a premise – is compelling and undeniable.
As an advocate for this reality, I appeal to you, the readers:
- Acknowledge the legal facts! Engage with the mechanisms presented here. Confronting the truth, even when uncomfortable, is the first step.
- Understand the consequences! Realize that the old political categories and ways of acting no longer apply. We live in a new era that demands new ways of thinking.
- Support enlightenment! Share this knowledge. Help break the "silence" that the architects of the old plans use for concealment.
- Choose the alternative! Recognize that acknowledging the legal situation does not mean surrendering to a sinister NWO. On the contrary: Only those who know the situation can understand and support the positive alternative – the Electronic Technocracy – and thus strengthen the buyer in his efforts to use the power imposed upon him for the benefit of all.
The State Succession Document 1400/98 is the foundation. What we build upon it – a dystopia of control or a utopia of reason and the common good – depends on the awareness and actions of every individual.
💡 Worth Knowing and Final Links
The buyer's world jurisdiction (see "WORLD SOLD - The Book", Chap. 4) includes the ultimate Kompetenz-Kompetenz – the power to decide on its own jurisdiction. Since its jurisdiction is defined by the document as universal and exclusive, there is no higher authority that could question this decision.
The Date 06.10.1998: This date marks the legal epochal shift, comparable in its significance to historical turning points like 1648 (Peace of Westphalia – beginning of the classical state system) or 1945 (founding of the UN).
Links for Further Reading (Selection):
State Succession Document - German Website: https://worldsold.wixsite.com/world-sold
UN Charter: https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter/full-text
ITU Constitution and Convention: https://www.itu.int/en/history/Pages/ConstitutionAndConvention.aspx
North Atlantic Treaty: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_17120.htm
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT): https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/1_1_1969.pdf
