The UN and Climate Change – Ten Fateful Words

Posted on Tue 11/09/2010 by

4


I saw this article on Saturday just gone, and it immediately piqued my interest. Click on the link and read the article before going any further.

UN climate panel calls for carbon and transport taxes.

Nearly three years ago now, I started contributing posts at this site, in the form of a series on the implications of what might be the result if we were to blindly adhere to what was being asked of us by the UN in the form of The Kyoto Protocol. I had an idea that this series would be short, but the more I looked, the more I found that needed to be said on the subject. Right from the start I looked at this Kyoto Protocol and the closer I looked, the more the hairs on the back of my neck started to prickle up with concern.

What stood out the most from looking at this Protocol was one short phrase of barely ten words. At the time, the Countries of the World were divided by the UN into two areas. These were referred to as Annexes, and in effect, this was a list of the ‘Haves’ and the ‘Have Nots’. That list is a little longer now, as more Countries came on board over the years since this Kyoto Protocol was first mandated by the UN, at their COP 3 meeting in Kyoto Japan in 1997. Now there are 192 Countries which are subject to this Protocol. Of those Countries, 40 of them have been categorised as Annex 1 Countries, and the remaining 152 Countries as Annex 2 Countries. From that first list of 40 Countries, 23 of them were further culled into a sub group, and after that group of highly developed Countries came those ten fateful words.

(Developed Countries which pay for all costs of developing Countries)

In those early days, when I was still feeling my way around with the Posts I was submitting, I found some of this information at the Wikipedia site, (at this link) and now with the benefit of hindsight, that indeed was quite fortunate. I first mentioned this small statement in that early series, and in another Post at this link in November of 2008. Now, almost three years after that first Post here, I am aware that the Wikipedia site is not all that good as a reference, because it is subject to individuals with their own viewpoints going into it and, er, amending the information to reflect their own agendas. However, at the time, that list of Countries and that short bracketed phrase were plainly there for everyone to see. At the time, even as recently as those three years ago, it would have seemed to be an innocuous enough statement.

That short statement is still there at the link, but is now virtually overpowered with so much added information, that it is almost hiding there in plain sight. Luckily I mentioned it at the time, almost three years ago, and also just prior to the now comprehensively failed UN COP 15 round of talks in Copenhagen in early December of last year. Incidentally, just prior to that meeting, the site was, er, whitewashed and that short statement disappeared. It reappeared there at a later date, but now the site has been more comprehensively whitewashed and has now become a huge entry, when earlier it was barely two screens of information. The areas indicating those Annex Countries has been expanded considerably in a manner that effectively justifies the opinions of those who have access to change what is written there. I also mentioned this same occurrence in a Post at this link just after that Copenhagen meeting.

When those ten words are now taken into the context of what was said in the article at the top of the Post here, it becomes apparent that what I mentioned at the many times I have posted on this matter is in fact quite true. I speculated that those ten words would effectively mean that the source of money that the UN would be using for their desired aim would have to come in the form of an income based around the CO2 emissions (along with costs placed on other Greenhouse Gases) of those 23 named First Word developed Countries.

In other words, those Countries would then have to impose that cost on CO2 emissions in those Countries, and that money would then be forwarded to the UN for distribution in those remaining 152 undeveloped Countries, so that they might better deal with their emissions, minus the UN’s handling fee of course.

This article from three days ago effectively confirms just that.

So then, why has the UN so blatantly revealed its hand now?

That is one way of looking at it, but all along, it was actually there in plain sight for everyone to see, so it’s not really a case of blatantly revealing their hand now. This time, they are in fact saying it out loud, whereas earlier, they did not particularly want to draw attention to it, because maybe, just maybe, people might actually put two and two together.

Why has the UN done this now?

Well, you see, that is a little complex, and has many aspects. The first of those is that The Kyoto Protocol had a sunset clause. It was only to be in effect until 2012. Because at the time, in those earlier days, this debate was only in its infancy, and this Protocol was released then with feel good clauses inserted in it that seemed quite innocuous at the time. Now that the realisation has set in that it was always something that was never going to work, no matter what draconian measures were initiated, it has become unwieldy, because things have changed so comprehensively.

Because things have indeed changed so comprehensively, the original intent, which was considered ‘feel good’ and fair at the time, has now become an implement to be used almost as the proverbial ‘blunt force object’ with which to beat some Countries about the head with.

Countries that were included on that original list as Developing Countries are now effectively the same as those Developed Countries. This is starkly in relief when you consider China was classified as Developing, as was India and some other Countries as well, and now China is the largest emitter on the Planet of CO2.

The main point in question here is that this Kyoto protocol is a legally binding document, and why would China especially want to now be included in those Countries that have to pay, instead of being one who is a net recipient, if you can see what I mean.

That now failed meeting in Copenhagen was meant to discuss an implement that would replace this original Kyoto Protocol, something that the UN desperately needs to be in place by the time Kyoto’s sunset clause comes into effect.

Now, the article from three days back comes to light because the next meeting after Copenhagen is scheduled to begin in Cancun, Mexico in three weeks, and again, the UN is desperate to find a way to replace Kyoto.

The same failure that was Copenhagen will be the same result from this meeting in Cancun. There will be to and fro, and there will be another ‘feel good’ statement produced at the end of the conference, just like the ineffectual ‘feel good’ statement that came out of Copenhagen, but with an existing and very favourable legally binding document already in place, why would anybody want to change things that were going to be detrimental to their Country.

A second, and probably the major point is the money, and as I have said all along, this argument is not about the Environment, but is really only about the money.

To that end, Countries that are seeking to implement a vast new tax on these Carbon Dioxide emissions, well they have seen just how much money can be raised from them, and seeing those large numbers are hungrily eying them off to add to their own bottom lines, and not really all that willing to be just handing it all over to the UN for distribution in those developed Countries.

So, the UN, now desperately seeking to paint itself as relevant, is now fighting a losing battle on numerous fronts, a battle it is bound to lose, and lose comprehensively.

It now starts to become obvious that Kyoto is going to expire without anything of a concrete nature to replace it.

What started out as something idealistic has become the weapon of its own destruction. The Protocol called for emissions to be reduced to a level 5% lower than they were in 1990, oh, except for the U.S. that is, They had to reduce their levels to 7% lower than they were in 1990. Incidentally, not one Country on Planet Earth has actually achieved this, and in fact most Countries have doubled or tripled their emissions, and some have even gone beyond that, no matter what measures have been put in place to limit those emissions.

I mean, when those 152 Developing Countries have a legally binding document that categorically states that all they need do is to report their emissions, why would they want to change that, just another point why those Countries will not want anything less than that in a replacement for The Kyoto Protocol.

So the UN is now caught in a cleft stick of its own manufacturing.

They will desperately try to paint Cancun as a success, but with so many Countries from both of those Annexes having grievances, then Kyoto will never be replaced by anything that will have anywhere near the ‘bite’ that they thought they had with the original Kyoto Protocol.

It was good at the time, and great fanfare was made as every Country bar one signed on, but right now, it’s the Sword of Damocles poised above the collective head of the UN.

There were many things about Kyoto that should have given people cause to sit up and take notice, but those ten fateful words were the biggest killer, and now the UN is looking for other methods to find its money, and that is very effectively shown by the article at the top of the Post.

The UN is now calling for Countries to impose these vast new taxes, send the money along to the UN, so they can distribute it to those still Developing Countries, minus, of course, their own handling fee.

Oh, and what will the UN be doing with this money?

Their subsidiary Organisation, The World Bank is subsidising the construction of (and wait for it, because this will really make your eyes pop) Coal Fired Power Plants, as shown in this article from September of last year.

Gee! Fancy that!

It really is just about the money, and now even the UN is admitting that.

UPDATE

I was asked which Country was the only one not to add their second signature to the Kyoto Protocol, thus agreeing to abide by its legal requirements.

That Country was in fact the U.S. This has always been sheeted home to President George W Bush.

It was however under the Clinton Administration, with Al Gore as his Vice President. They did not even bother to present the bill to Congress after The Senate voted not to ratify the Protocol. Now you might think that the Clinton presidency might have been restricted by a Republican dominated Senate, but the vote in The Senate to NOT ratify the Kyoto Protocol was in fact 95-0, and read that again. Not one Senator supported it, so it was a dead duck from the start.

Now, why I mention this also correlates to what I mentioned above about the Wikipedia site being whitewashed. That statement about the Clinton Administration not ratifying the Protocol, and that crucial Senate vote, was once there printed at that site for all to see. It is however, now missing, been whitewashed from the site, and a statement directly blaming President George W Bush has been inserted there as well.

About these ads