Black People : Bribing 3rd World nations to trash Kyoto Protocol

Discussion in 'Black People Open Forum' started by Ankhur, Dec 18, 2009.

  1. Ankhur

    Ankhur Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,710
    Likes Received:
    3,006
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    owner of various real estate concerns
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Ratings:
    +3,014
    « Previous Story | Next Story »
    December 17, 2009


    “A Naked Form of Blackmail”: Naomi Klein on Secretary of State Clinton’s Proposal to Set Up $100 Billion Climate Aid Fund for Developing Countries
    Secretary Clinton said the US would consider contributing to an international $100 billion annual climate aid fund for poorer nations beginning in 2020 if the Copenhagen talks resulted in a comprehensive deal. It is unclear how much money the US would give to the fund. Aid groups say the $100 billion would be insufficient. We speak with journalist Naomi Klein. [includes rush transcript]



    Guests:

    Naomi Klein, Author and journalist. She is blogging from Copenhagen for The Nation. Her recent articles include “Climate Rage.”

    Jade Lindgaard, journalist with the French news website Mediapart.



    AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to play a clip of Hillary Clinton’s news conference just a few minutes ago. She was just here in the room outside where we’re broadcasting from in the Bella Center, had just arrived. People were asking her, you know, is, in fact, President Obama coming? We’re hearing rumors that he isn’t. But this was the announcement she said she had come to deliver.


    SECRETARY OF STATE HILLARY CLINTON: And today I’d like to announce that in the context of a strong accord, in which all major economies stand behind meaningful mitigation actions and provide full transparency as to their implementation, the United States is prepared to work with other countries toward a goal of jointly mobilizing $100 billion a year by 2020 to address the climate change needs of developing countries.


    We expect this funding will come from a wide variety of sources, public and private, bilateral and multilateral, including alternative sources of finance. This will include a significant focus on forestry and adaptation, particularly—again, I repeat—for the poorest and most vulnerable among us.



    AMY GOODMAN: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton just arrived here in Copenhagen, dealing with the questions of will these talks collapse and making her announcement about what the US is putting on the table. Naomi Klein, your response?


    NAOMI KLEIN: Well, it was an extraordinary press conference, because it was really like just the most naked form of blackmail. She put this figure on the table. She said the US will contribute to a $100 billion fund, but only if the terms of their deal are agreed to by all of the countries here. So it was “agree to our terms.” And those terms are very clear. They’re kill the Kyoto Protocol, instead of legally binding emissions, transparency, which I don’t even know what that means, and no overall target, but these national plans. And as Jade has just outlined, those national plans do not meet the crisis. So it’s a horrible choice that the United States has put before the world: accept a completely unacceptable agreement that will not solve the climate crisis, or receive no money to deal with the effects of that crisis, which you are already living—the droughts, the floods, the malaria.


    You know, I just blogged about this, and the headline I put on is "Climate Structural Adjustment,” because this is what the International Monetary Fund was so famous for doing. You need help? Your country is collapsing? Here’s our list of demands: privatize your water, lay off your people. But this is on a massive, massive scale. So, yeah, I would call it blackmail. And I think that, unfortunately, countries are so desperate for aid that they may well accept this terrible deal. And that’s—those are the stakes here.


    AMY GOODMAN: Jade Lindgaard?


    JADE LINDGAARD: Yeah, it’s interesting, because Hillary Clinton is saying that this money will be for the most vulnerable and the poorest countries. And the EU has the same strategy. They want to help Africa. And it’s a way of choosing which country you want to help. And this thing is not equal. I mean, China is a competitor to the US economy, but China has a lot of poor people living within its borders. And the way—the rich countries, in the way of picking who they want to help, is a bit disgusting, honestly.


    NAOMI KLEIN: It also makes the blackmail more effective, because if it’s completely arbitrary, if it’s really up to the US who they decide to help, then countries realize that if they stand up to the US in these negotiations, they won’t get the money.


    So one of the questions that Secretary Clinton received was, what mechanism will there be in order to decide who gets this $100 billion? And let’s remember, it’s not the US giving $100 million; it’s all the countries combined—


    AMY GOODMAN: A hundred billion.


    NAOMI KLEIN: Sorry, a hundred billion, by 2020. And It’s not clear whether it’s going to be already pledged funds and so on.


    But leaving aside the questions of whether this is a bit of a shell game in terms of where the money is coming from, developing countries have been very clear that they want to have a say in how the money is allocated, that there has to be a genuinely democratic mechanism. When this question was put to Hillary Clinton, she said that they hadn’t figured that out yet, and that’s why this is really about blackmail. It’s really about, “Sign to our deal, or you won’t get the money.” So countries realize that they could lose a lot.


    AMY GOODMAN: Let’s talk about civil society for a minute. Naomi, you walked out, along with more than a hundred other people yesterday, from the talks here. That group joined thousands of people outside. I was just saying earlier, the only thing worse than these incredibly long lines that have been here for the last week and a half are no lines. And that’s today.


    NAOMI KLEIN: Yes.


    AMY GOODMAN: The place is, well, not exactly empty, but close. Why did you walk out?


    NAOMI KLEIN: I thought that the symbolism of civil society—and I think there were hundreds of people who walked out—really turning their back on this process, that, as Jade has just broken here on this news program, it has failed. I mean, even if they get a deal according to these figures, they can’t call that a success, because the science tells us that that’s a catastrophe. Three degrees is a catastrophe. So people symbolically turned their backs on this process, and I thought that was very, very significant.


    But, to me, what the image that will stick with me—I know you had this on the show yesterday—is Nnimmo Bassey being refused entry. This is a man who has devoted his life to fighting the oil companies that are devastating the Niger Delta, a close friend of Ken Saro-Wiwa. He’s been imprisoned, himself, for his activism. And he has physically been kept out of this Center, even though he’s accredited. And meanwhile, the oil executives are walking free in the hallways. It’s the world upside down in the Bella Center.


    AMY GOODMAN: The leaders of the climate justice movement, a number of them, have been arrested, from all different sectors, like Tadzio Mueller. You knew him well.


    NAOMI KLEIN: I think Jade has been following this.


    AMY GOODMAN: Jade?


    JADE LINDGAARD: Yeah. Yeah, he’s been arrested, you know, according to a new Danish law that allows the police to arrest people before they actually do something that could be condemned by the state.


    AMY GOODMAN: A kind of pre-crime.


    JADE LINDGAARD: Yeah, like a pre-crime. Like, yeah, I don’t know, the science fiction justice, in a way. So the pressure on the protesters have been very strong. A very good friend of mine was arrested yesterday during a very peaceful demonstration, and he was taken by five policemen and thrown into a van, and they were not dressed as policemen. So, for a few seconds, he thought he was being taken out by fascist people. And I mean, these methods, these police methods, are not acceptable. They’re not democratic.


    NAOMI KLEIN: It does feel very strange in the hallways today, because civil society is totally absent. As you said, there were no lines. And this is why I say that my horrible voice that I’m subjecting your listeners to is a metaphor for what’s going on at the Bella Center, because the NGOs have totally lost their voices. And, of course, the developing countries are saying that they feel like they’re in the matrix, where they think they’re in reality, but actually reality is being decided in an alternate reality in the greenrooms, where the power is.


    AMY GOODMAN: What do you mean, the "greenrooms”?


    NAOMI KLEIN: Well, the greenrooms are what they call these selective meetings where a few powerful countries get together and strike a deal, rather than the open process of back-and-forth, coming up with a text together. And, you know, it comes down in the end to these power plays of using aid really as a weapon. And we saw that this morning with Hillary Clinton.


    full article;
    http://www.democracynow.org/2009/12/17/a_naked_form_of_blackmail_naomi
     
  2. HyperKill

    HyperKill Banned MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Messages:
    837
    Likes Received:
    319
    Ratings:
    +319
    Yep, I watch Democracy Now loyally and contribute when I can. Truth is this, this planet is ran by big bizz. Those corporate giants are only gonna agree to something that will allow them access to a country's resources. They may replace a forrest but they will plant 100s of miles of rubber trees or palm trees for oil. This is monocultural farming, which is no good and the main thing they are trying to play off as a climate deal. If these countrys resist or rise up against corporate advance, the corps will simply sanction them thru the government and support anti government malitias in their midst, subjecting the entire population to misery because we cant get our hands on something as simple beechwood for beer destilling barrells. Unluckilly people dont pay these issues much attn and claim to be pro African .If you pro African try letting your cell phone last until it goes kaput instead of getting an I phone or Blackberry every 6-8 months as many do. You may save a Congolese woman's vajina in the process if any1 cares.
     
  3. Ankhur

    Ankhur Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,710
    Likes Received:
    3,006
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    owner of various real estate concerns
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Ratings:
    +3,014
    The Hyper kill and death of Ignoarance/ and opression

    :toast::toast::toast::toast::toast::toast::toast::toast::toast::toast:

    We do not stop to realize or understand the collective need to end our economic opression by gadgets of the Motherland as much as we understand it being done by white supremacy and globalism.

    with at least 5 of our 800 billion, we should lobby against the atrocities in the Congo over Coltan
     
  4. Ankhur

    Ankhur Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,710
    Likes Received:
    3,006
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    owner of various real estate concerns
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Ratings:
    +3,014
    Chief G-77 Negotiator Lumumba Stanislaus Di-Aping: US-Backed Proposals Mean Death for Millions of Africans
    With the talks entering the final twenty-four hours, a leaked UN document—exposed yesterday on Democracy Now! with French news website Mediapart—has created a firestorm of controversy here at the summit. The UN memo determines that global temperatures would rise by an alarming three degrees Celsius, or 5.4 degrees Fahrenheit, under the current emissions targets being discussed. We speak to Lumumba Stanislaus Di-Aping, the chief negotiator for the G-77, the largest developing country bloc represented at the COP15. Guest:

    Lumumba Stanislaus Di-Aping, chief negotiator for the G-77, the largest developing country bloc represented at the COP15.



    AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!’s Climate Countdown. While President Obama joined nearly 120 other world leaders inside the summit, civil society has been locked out, and the large crowds both inside and outside the Bella Center have disappeared.


    With the talks entering the final twenty-four hours, a leaked UN document, exposed yesterday on Democracy Now! with French news website Mediapart, has created a firestorm of controversy here at the summit. The UN memo determines that global temperatures would rise by an alarming three degrees Celsius, or 5.4 degrees Fahrenheit, under the current emissions targets being discussed.


    Developing nations suffer the most from climate change. The G-77 is the largest developing country bloc represented at the climate summit here in Copenhagen, representing more than 130 nations. Lumumba Stanislaus Di-Aping is the chief negotiator for the G-77, which is currently chaired by Sudan.


    I spoke with Ambassador Di-Aping yesterday here at the Bella Center. I began by asking him to outline the requirements of an acceptable climate treaty.


    LUMUMBA STANISLAUS DI-APING: The first criteria is that—is it must be upon the trajectory of 1.5 degrees Celsius, 350 ppm, and 60 percent reductions by 2020. It will be a deal that is based on Kyoto and where United States will have comparable reduction targets, economy-wide and domestic. And it would be a deal where non-Kyoto—Kyoto Protocol signatories who are noncompliant must be—must get their act together and do their part, by a full implementation of their reduction targets.


    AMY GOODMAN: The US has proposed $100 billion by 2020 of various countries, though not clear what they are committing to this, private and public. What is your response to that, and saying that it will not be on the table after tomorrow if a deal isn’t struck?


    LUMUMBA STANISLAUS DI-APING: Well, I do believe that $100 billion on the table today and off the table tomorrow is simply a negotiation tactic. That’s not how you negotiate as a state in a responsible matter that is concerned life and death, to start with.


    Second thing, United States, more than any other country, knows the implications of climate change. Louisiana was hit by Katrina. And until today, we know how much—it’s almost trillions of money—is being spent in order to resuscitate and rebuild Louisiana.


    United States knows very well that it is better to look at this from a comprehensive manner. In other words, short-term finance and long-term finance are inseparable.


    Fourth, or fifth, the required financing for short term must exceed $100 billion by huge margins. We do believe that we need about $400 to $500 billion in the short term on annual basis in order to address climate change.


    AMY GOODMAN: What does climate debt mean? I mean, today Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said we have to look forward, not back. What do you mean by climate debt? What do countries like the United States, do you feel, they owe?


    LUMUMBA STANISLAUS DI-APING: Climate debt is basically the damage or the price on the damage that industrialized nation has caused the world. It is a fact of life. We need to look at the future. They are right, we need to look at the future. Future emissions are equally dangerous and could destroy the world. So, how you deal with the two?


    We deal with the two according to the balance of obligations that we have accepted, that developed countries have a historical responsibility, have abilities, technology and know-how that can help the world. And these two factors mean the following: one, provision of finance and technology and diffusion of technology to developing countries; and equally, as far as the future is concerned, the major emitters, or emerging markets, reduction targets need to be accelerated through supported actions.


    Supported actions means two things: finance to help them do what is necessary, but more importantly, transfer of technology, because for economies like India, like China and other middle-income countries that have reached that, [inaudible] what is necessary is to have the right technology to help them take a greener pathway.


    AMY GOODMAN: Lumumba Di-Aping, you have called two degree increase a suicide pact, yet we see these leaked UNFCCC documents that indicate current negotiations would lead to three degree increase. What do you mean by “suicide pact”? And what’s your reaction to these latest documents? Did you know about them?


    LUMUMBA STANISLAUS DI-APING: Let me read to you what I mean and why it’s not only me who is opposing and rejecting this. And I read from the IPCC report. “In all four regions of Africa, and in all seasons, the median temperature [increase] lies between 3 degrees C and 4 degrees C, roughly 1.5 times the global mean response.” One hundred and fifty times, so a two degrees is not three; it’s actually 3.5 and above.


    So, for me, it means simply I will accept the total destruction of my continent, her people, in Copenhagen. That, I would not do. That should not be asked of Africa, because it is effectively saying Africa is not the part of the human family.


    AMY GOODMAN: And yet, Prime Minister Meles of Ethiopia has now just made a deal with France. What is that deal, and what’s your response?


    LUMUMBA STANISLAUS DI-APING: He made a deal with France, perhaps in his capacity as the Prime Minister of Ethiopia, and he’s entitled to do that. But that’s not the African deal. I will read to you what exactly Africa said on what are the critical features necessary for the deal: a 1.5 degrees Celsius, a minimum of 45—minus-45 percent reduction, and one percent—and I repeat—one percent of the GDP of developed countries for short-term finance. And that will be—will include about $200 billion in Special Drawing Rights. It will equally include rapid transfer of technology for developing countries.


    AMY GOODMAN: What is your message for President Obama?


    LUMUMBA STANISLAUS DI-APING: My message for President Obama: leadership requires taking very bold stands. Leadership is a set of elements including moral, ethical, economic, political. That’s what is necessary.


    AMY GOODMAN: Do you think he’s acting as a leader in global climate change issues?


    LUMUMBA STANISLAUS DI-APING: He must rise to that challenge.


    AMY GOODMAN: Who do you represent, the G-77? Explain, for especially an American audience, and especially because it’s not seventy-seven countries, G-77 and China.


    LUMUMBA STANISLAUS DI-APING: In the ‘60s, in the early ’60s, when we were struggling for independence, in the United Nations there were about seventy-seven developing countries who came together. And that’s what brought the Group of 77 into being. Group of 77 is very representative of developing countries, and it focuses on the economic and the climate change agenda for developing countries. It has a membership of 134 countries. Effectively, it represents 80 percent of the world population.


    AMY GOODMAN: And for China, for those who are charging—and the US government might be in this—saying you’re doing China’s bidding here, what would be your response?


    LUMUMBA STANISLAUS DI-APING: My response is a simple one. The world is not divided into an Occident and the Orient. This is what is central. China, Brazil, South Africa, India are developing countries with huge numbers of very, very poor people. Some are poorer than Africans. It is our responsibility, as one human family, not to think that any of us does not matter. The one billion poor Chinese as are important to me as the 100, or over that, in other parts of United States who are poor. We have to address this issue with the sense of morality and the sense of leadership necessary

    fullarticle:
    http://www.democracynow.org/2009/12/18/chief_g77_negotiator_lumumba_stanislaus_di
     
Loading...