The Kissinger Report & U.S. Government Policy to Depopulate the Planet

By Dr Robert Malone

Recently, a respected colleague, Gavin DeBecker, sent me an email comprising a lengthy analysis and attached documents concerning (formerly classified) National Security Study Memorandum (NSSM) 200 titled the ‘Kissinger Report‘. He also provided links to associated supplemental federal government documents including the National Security Directive Memorandum 314 ‘Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for US Security and Overseas Interests, 11/26/75‘. Gavin is a well-published author, including the pivotal work titled ‘The Gift of Fear : Survival Signals That Protect Us from Violence’, and he had prepared this analysis (below) while preparing a new book. His text, thoughts and analysis are shared by permission of the author.

In considering these documents, it is helpful to keep in mind that Henry Kissinger is a key mentor of Klaus Schwab, was involved (together with the CIA) in originally creating and continues to consult with the World Economic Forum as well as with the CCP/Xi Jinping.

[The short video below is not included in Dr. Malone’s article.  We’ve included it as a brief introduction.  The video features Dr. David Ayoub and Dr. Stan Monteith at the Radio Liberty Conference 2005.  You can watch Dr. Ayoub’s full presentation on Bitchute HERE or Rumble HERE.  Dr. Monteith is no longer with us and his website Radio Liberty no longer exists.  You can find some of his videos HERE.]

It all started with a meeting held in June 1973:

Referring to a memorandum written by General Taylor, General Draper and his colleagues presented their views that the population explosion in developing countries was not only a threat to US interests in the economics and in the development of those countries but also, more fundamentally, presented a danger to the United States’ politico military interests.

General Taylor and General Draper asked Ambassador Porter for his advice on how to proceed with the subject. They said they had talked to General Scowcroft in Mr. Kissinger’s office about it in terms of the possibility of a National Security Council (“NSC”) study. General Draper said he had written the President explaining his views that rapid population growth could endanger the concept of a generation of peace and recommending that the President speak out on this subject.

Ambassador Porter said that they were talking to someone who was already converted to this whole idea. He felt that the US population programs were not closely enough connected to the US’s overall aid programs but were handled too separately. He believed there was no use pumping in aid funds and food without closer correlation with population programs.

Ambassador Porter said he thought that the Soviet Union would not be much interested in internal population programmes because, although they were interested in birth control for China, they wanted to fill their own empty space in Siberia. He agreed, however, with General Draper’s argument that the Soviets should be interested, as the US is, in encouraging developing countries to reduce their rates of population growth. Ambassador Porter said he would make a formal proposal to Kissinger to put the matter on the agenda for the President-Brezhnev talks.

Ambassador Porter and Mr. Claxton both observed that it is important to be able to show abroad that we are not asking peoples of other countries to do more than we are doing at home.

General Draper then brought up his concern that the amendments to the AID bill proposed by 22 members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee would be harmful because … as he understood it, the earmarking for population funds which had been essential to the success of the program was being dropped. He said he would testify before the Foreign Affairs Committee the following week and would urge the Committee to leave $125 million earmarked for population programmes alone and to transfer the health subject with $25 million to the food and nutrition section.

Kissinger Report and Subsequent US Population Control Policy:

The classified National Security Study Memorandum (“NSSM”) known as ‘The Kissinger Report’, undertaken at the direction of President Nixon, laid out detailed plans for population reduction in many countries.  These plans became official US policy in 1975.

Note: USAID figures most prominently in the report and was a co-author, along with CIA and Department of State.

The memorandum and subsequent policies developed from the report were observed as a way the United States could use human population reduction to limit the political power of undeveloped nations, ensure the easy extraction of foreign natural resources, prevent young anti-establishment individuals from being born, and to protect American businesses abroad from interference from nations seeking to support their growing populations.

National Security Study Memorandum 200, Wikipedia 

The summary of The Kissinger Report stated that:

1. actions to accommodate continued population growth up to 6 billion by the mid-21st century without massive starvation or total frustration of developmental hopes; and
2. actions to keep the ultimate level as close as possible to 8 billion rather than permitting it to reach 10 billion, 13 billion, or more.

This major objective – to not exceed 8 billion – combined with the fact that we hit the 8 billion mark in 2022 might help explain the intense urgency of so many planned and organised actions during the past three years.

Perhaps the most obvious result of covid lockdowns and the interruption of commerce is the current record number of people at risk of starvation.  Before the covid era, the number of people at risk of starvation was 135 million.  By the end of 2021, that had increased by another 135 million people, and in 2022, it then increased another 67 million.  The result is currently about 10 million deaths from starvation, 3 million of them children.

Further reading: World Hunger Facts, Action Against Hunger

The Kissinger Report created a template and spending plan that includes:

• Fertility and contraceptive research.
• Biomedical research would be doubled.
• Field testing of existing technology.
• Development of new technology.
• Oral contraceptives (optimal steroid hormone combinations and doses for populations).
• Intra-uterine devices of differing size, shape, and bioactivity should be developed and tested to determine the optimum levels of acceptability
• Sterilisation of men and women has received wide-spread acceptance in several areas. Female sterilisation has been improved by technical advances with aparoscopes, culdoscopes, and greatly simplified abdominal surgical techniques … the use of tubal clips, trans-cervical approaches, and simpler techniques can be developed. For men, several current techniques hold promise but require more refinement.
• Leuteolytic and anto-progesterone approaches to fertility control including use of prostaglandins.
• Injectable contraceptives for women … administered by pare-professionals.  Currently limited by their side effects and potential hazards… can be overcome with additional research.
• Male contraceptive, in particular an injection which will be effective for specified periods of time.
• Injection which will assure a woman of regular periods.  The drug would be given by pare-professionals once a month or as needed to regularise the menstrual cycle.

The report recommends population control only in Least Developed Countries (“LDC”), and cautions that “We must take care that our activities should not give the appearance to the LDCs of an industrialised country policy directed against the LDCs,” though the policy was precisely that.

The report stresses more than once that weaving the concepts of family planning into health programs is a strategy for gaining acceptance and will: “help the US contend with the ideological charge that the US is more interested in curbing the numbers of LDC people than it is in their future and well-being.  We should recognise that those who argue along ideological lines have made a great deal of the fact that the US contribution to development programs and health programs has steadily shrunk, whereas funding for population programs has steadily increased.”

The Report also mentioned mandatory programmes of population control: “A growing number of experts are of the belief that the outlook is much harsher and far less tractable than commonly perceived… the conclusion of this view is that mandatory programmes may be needed and that we should be considering these possibilities now.”