[WSMDiscuss] (Fwd) Sign on for climate reparations: to drain the world's most fossil-polluted swamp ("Foggy Bottom"), please endorse this call by two brave politicians, for a "fair shares Nationally Determined Contribution"
Patrick Bond
pbond at mail.ngo.za
Thu Apr 15 13:17:02 CEST 2021
(Waow, I never expected such cheeky words would be uttered in the
hallowed halls of imperial power
<https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSddlqLjMmjyvqmj3xxyS34ACZDJKWfk9mlFynX1Gdio5lp44w/viewform>:
/the United States has a unique responsibility to take urgent
climate action at a massive scale. Nothing less would be acceptable
to our international partners, or to our constituents here at home,
for whom the shift to a new economy is a matter of life and death...
the 50% reduction by 2030 target that is being floated by some is
insufficient to meet the 1.5 degree goal. It would also place an
unfair burden on other countries, including developing countries
that have neither emitted as much greenhouse gases as the United
States nor benefited from the “cheaper,” fossil fuel-intensive
development that has fueled the wealth of so many countries in the
global North... //Additional funds will also be needed to support
adaptation and respond to loss and damage in poorer countries. We
emphasize the crucial importance of this finance... International
climate finance contributions of at least $800 billion between
2021-2030, as a good-faith down payment toward our fair share,
equally split among finance for mitigation, adaptation, and for the
loss and damage caused by irreversible climate change...
/
So, back on the agenda, finally, is the U.S. "/climate debt/" - two
explicit words that cannot be spoken in Washington, DC polite company,
it seems, even in the otherwise excellent document below.
This call deserves all Climate Justice groups' endorsement,
especially if "International climate finance contributions" means
/grants /not loans or private-sector investments requiring repayment,
and if the dangerous concept of negative emissions can be urgently
clarified, given how many "Net Zero" scams are emerging in state and
corporate boardrooms via dubious carbon offsets and chaotic emissions
markets <https://vimeo.com/469434201>, in the context of a
super-financialised world economy where such "privatisation of the air"
invariably entails worse speculative turmoil ... than even an NFT - as
South African Trevor Noah eloquently explains
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHawTtY4dFE>.
The chart on the right tracks five years of average carbon prices -
the top line - above the main Wall Street stock market index. It's a
quite uncanny correlation of financial bubbling, unrelated to either the
political will to cut emissions, aside from the 2018 European Union
tightening of trading-credit supply; or the real economy. Both reflect
global-bankster frothing, especially over the past year.
Oh, there is one other reasonable quibble about the phrasing below.
This over-financialisation process, conjoined with extreme inequality,
could well be /amplified/ by this document's proposed International
Monetary Fund $3 trillion Special Drawing Rights SDR issuance, /as
happened the last time/ the world financial elites bailed themselves out
of trouble by degrading the genuine 'underlying value' of paper assets -
i.e. by bubbling up stock markets and tycoons' wealth portfolios through
various emergency forms of 'Quantitative Easing' artificial monetary
subsidisation of the rentier class, /including SDR issuance/ - just a
decade ago. The lead financial architect of the day, the perpetually
Viagra-overdosing Dominique Strauss-Kahn, is still happy to explain -
e.g. to /Forbes /last year
<https://www.forbes.com/sites/afontevecchia/2020/05/28/dominique-strauss-kahn-this-crisis-is-harder-to-handle-than-the-great-depression/?sh=5a5c49cc1dfe>
- that the SDR strategy now co-opts the Chinese /"without jeopardising,
for the moment, the supremacy of the dollar. That was a stabilising
element for the system." /
Stabilising? Au contraire, ultra-zany carbon trading - the
financial markets' "best performing commodity" in 2018
<https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-20/this-year-s-best-performing-commodity-is-seen-doubling-in-2018>,
2019
<https://www.fortum.com/about-us/blog-podcast/forthedoers-podcast/carbon-best-performing-commodity-world>
and now
<https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2021/02/24/prices-in-the-worlds-biggest-carbon-market-are-soaring>
- and the terribly-suboptimal SDRs are /destabilising /forces... but are
topics for another day.
Most importantly, the document below attacks the complacent
climate-debt denialism that remains prevalent among elites in the West,
the BRICS and other fossil-extracting or over-consuming economies. The
Washington version of this irresponsible, ethically-degenerate,
America-First-and-Only philosophy was best articulated by Obama-era
chief climate negotiator Todd Stern: during the 2009 Copenhagen Accord
negotiations he insisted
<https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2009-12-11-Todd-Stern-US-Copenhagen-good-cop-bad-cop-climate-traffic-cop/>
that although the U.S. was obviously responsible for massive greenhouse
gas pollution, which he could /not /deny, "/the sense of guilt or
culpability or reparations, I just categorically reject that/.”
And in spite of vigorous protest led by Africans
<https://copac.org.za/african-climate-justice-articulations-and-activism/>
- except those from Pretoria - at Copenhagen, climate-debt denialism was
successfully imposed by Stern and his State Department thugs
<https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/nov/26/climate-change-talks-durban>
into the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement, which holds that there /are no
legal liabilities for causing poor-country Loss & Damage /or for Western
elites having/over-consumed their fair share of greenhouse gas emissions
- /leaving next-to-none to be safely emitted by other economies and the
world's majority/. /When it comes to addressing ecocide, apparently
everyone starts from a blank slate. Who dunnit? /Nothing to see here at
Foggy Bottom - /the U.S. State Department's criminal lair.
Indeed when in June 2017 Donald Trump pulled the U.S. out of Paris,
/USA Today /rebutted
<https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/06/02/fact-checking-trump-speech-paris-climate-agreement/102399674/>:/
/
/Trump said the U.S. would be exposed to “massive legal liability if
we stay in” the Paris Agreement. But there is no liability mechanism
in the Paris Agreement. International environmental law experts tell
us that pulling out of the agreement won’t reduce U.S. exposure to
liability claims and, in fact, may increase it./
Could that double dose of Yankee arrogance be backed by fact?
Sadly, the world climate movement has been so terribly weak that not
only were long-overdue sanctions against artificially-cheap late-2010s
U.S. products - sanctions relabeled "border adjustment taxes" in techie
talk, or "BDS USA!" in pro-accountability punishment language - never
proposed by competing world leaders, notwithstanding appeals
<https://theconversation.com/the-case-for-a-peoples-smart-sanctions-campaign-against-trumps-america-71501>
to do so by Naomi Klein, Joe Stiglitz and disgraced former rightwing
French president Nicolas Sarkozy.
Nor were high-profile legal tort claims advanced against
Washington, so as to pursue a "polluter-pays" principle that even
rudimentary /neoliberal/ environmental-economics logic would entail.
So Washington's scofflaw status has been effectively codified by
all the pathetic global-scale climate diplomacy dating to 1992 when
George H.W. Bush announced
<http://www.ipsnews.net/2012/05/us-lifestyle-is-not-up-for-negotiation/>
to the first Rio Earth Summit, "/The American way of life is not up for
negotiations. Period/."
The current quagmire exists mainly thanks to the climate policy
regime imposed by Obama-Clinton-Kerry-Stern. In December 2009, the U.S.
leaders used National Security Agency bugging powers
<https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jan/30/snowden-nsa-spying-copenhagen-climate-talks>
to invade the secret meeting of BASIC - i.e., Brazil-South
Africa-India-China - to create a "league of super-polluters," as Bill
McKibben properly described them. In this convention centre room, these
climate scoundrels agreed that a Copenhagen Accord would have merely
voluntary emissions cuts. Naturally, there was no clarity on Clinton's
promised $100 bn/year in climate finance, which was ultimately reduced
to yet another UNFCCC scam.
Now it's certainly good that Biden-Kerry are back in the global
climate debate - in contrast to Trump - and that they acknowledge the
Paris-mandated voluntary emission cuts are inadequate, although again,
all countries' National Determined Contributions - jargon for
emissions-cut commitments - are also /reversible/ thanks to Stern's
negotiating prowess
<https://www.brookings.edu/blog/planetpolicy/2017/06/07/why-the-paris-agreement-works/>,
he brags <countries can adjust their emissions targets downward. The
agreement permits it,>: "/countries can adjust their emissions targets
downward. The agreement permits it, and I know because I helped
negotiate //that flexibility." /
After all, he continued
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/president-trump-stay-in-the-paris-agreement-youll-regret-it-if-you-dont/2017/05/08/c2cc9f78-337d-11e7-b412-62beef8121f7_story.html>,
Paris is blatantly pro-corporate/imperialist: "/Recognizing that
negotiations on guidelines and rules will continue and that their
interests on matters such as intellectual property, trade and
transparency could be affected, business leaders care — a lot — about
having U.S. negotiators at the table to protect those interests." /
Even one notional environmental journalist, David Roberts, endorsed
<https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/5/7/15554286/paris-climate-accord-exit-bannon>
the Paris Climate Agreement, but so that it could serve the most
despicable corporate/imperialist interests:
/Staying at least notionally signed on to the Paris framework would
allow the U.S. visibility into what other countries are doing — the
policies they are adopting, their progress on emission reductions,
and the deals they are making with one another. It would give the
U.S., as Tillerson says, a “//seat at the table
<https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/1/13/14250076/trump-tillerson-paris-climate-deal>//,”
and open up opportunities for the US to make side deals on things
that are climate-related but also serve other, more proximate goals
— say, //cuts in HFCs
<https://www.vox.com/2016/10/15/13292878/montreal-protocol-cut-hfcs>//or
//cooperation on carbon capture and sequestration
<http://www.chinafaqs.org/blog-posts/us-china-clean-energy-cooperation-and-ccs>//(which
could //help the US coal industry
<https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/4/12/15269628/carbon-capture-trump>//).
/
Sick.
So that's the toxic terrain that anyone trying to change U.S.
policy must contend with, and we have to wish them luck, given how few
hard bits of land there are, within the Washington corporate swamp, to
safely stand on. Sure, I've recently argued
<https://theanalysis.news/interviews/will-the-biden-plan-prevent-climate-catastrophe-patrick-bond/>
and written
<https://www.counterpunch.org/2021/02/01/biden-kerry-international-climate-politricks/>
that the Biden regime has a uniquely powerful capacity to renew their
planetary-destructive climate politricks, and so must be foiled at every
step within the UNFCCC, such as Glasgow later this year or next
depending upon Covid-19.
Alternatively, Biden-Kerry climate-debt denialism and ongoing
pressure to make the Paris Climate Agreement as pro-corporate as it can
be, helps those aiming to delegitimise imperial/subimperial climate
policy; which is fine by me, given the adverse balance of forces.
But finally, thank goodness, at least two Members of Congress won't
give support to Washington's unethical, paleo-diplomatic and
/pre/-neoliberal stance: i.e. failing to /even acknowledge/ that a
market externality must be redressed. This is one of the most vital ways
to stand up to a U.S. State Department now prepping for wars with China
and Russia.
So good luck to these two brave Representatives, and if you can
sign on, please do. I'll be amazed if there are co-sponsors aside from
the Squad, but even raising a green-red anti-imperial flag like this is
an encouragement for future morality and climate sanity.)
***
*Endorse the Fair Shares NDC Congressional Letter*
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSddlqLjMmjyvqmj3xxyS34ACZDJKWfk9mlFynX1Gdio5lp44w/viewform
Please complete the following fields below if your organization would
like to endorse this letter sent to the Biden Administration
Please contact David Kimelman (David.Kimelman at mail.house.gov
<mailto:David.Kimelman at mail.house.gov>) with any questions.
*Required
Organization Name*
Contact Name*
Contact Title*
Contact Email Address*
Fair Shares NDC Letter
Dear President Biden, National Climate Advisor McCarthy and Special
Presidential Envoy Kerry:
With the approach of the April 22-23 Leaders’ Summit on Climate, we urge
you to produce the most ambitious and equitable U.S. Nationally
Determined Contribution (NDC) possible under the Paris Agreement. The
NDC should address the enormity of the climate emergency and make a fair
U.S. contribution to the global effort to keep temperature rise under
1.5 degrees Celsius. The U.S. NDC must also include measures to swiftly
end the fossil fuel era, launch a just transition to 100% renewable
energy, ensure climate resilience throughout the economy, and provide
significant finance to address mitigation, adaptation, and loss and
damage in developing countries.
To that end, we call your attention to the “Fair Shares NDC,” a model
NDC presented by U.S. climate justice organizations. The Fair Shares
NDC, based on a widely accepted analysis of the U.S. responsibility and
capacity to contribute our “fair share” of global climate action to meet
the 1.5 degree goal, indicates that the United States should commit to
the equivalent of 195% emissions reductions from 2005 levels by 2030, or
14 gigatonnes (billion metric tons) of greenhouse gas emissions.
The United States can achieve this by cutting domestic emissions 70% by
2030 (5 gigatonnes), and providing international finance to enable the
equivalent of an additional 125% reductions in developing countries (9
gigatonnes). Additional funds will also be needed to support adaptation
and respond to loss and damage in poorer countries. We emphasize the
crucial importance of this finance: focusing on domestic emissions
reductions alone, without significantly ramping up international
support, would see the United States fall well short of its fair share
and put the 1.5 degree goal out of reach.
We acknowledge the daunting size of these targets, but we also recognize
that this level of ambition is necessary to meet the 1.5 degree goal and
prevent global climate catastrophe. Given our status as the wealthiest
nation on earth, and the largest historical carbon polluter in the world
(responsible for almost 20% of global greenhouse gas emissions since
1950, with only 4% of the world’s population), the United States has a
unique responsibility to take urgent climate action at a massive scale.
Nothing less would be acceptable to our international partners, or to
our constituents here at home, for whom the shift to a new economy is a
matter of life and death.
Beyond setting the top-line target of 195% reductions below 2005 levels
by 2030, split between domestic action and international support, the
Fair Shares NDC includes a number of additional measures, summarized as
follows:
• “Regulatory measures to stop fossil fuel expansion and phase down
production, including limiting emissions from power plants and
electrifying motor vehicles, planes, ships, trains and pipelines; and
supporting a just and equitable transition away from fossil fuel use
consistent with the 1.5°C climate goal;
• “International climate finance contributions of at least $800 billion
between 2021-2030, as a good-faith down payment toward our fair share,
equally split among finance for mitigation, adaptation, and for the loss
and damage caused by irreversible climate change ($267 billion each);
• “An international debt relief and green recovery package, including
U.S. support for the issuance of up to $3 trillion in Special Drawing
Rights (SDRs) to help developing countries implement SDGs and Paris
Agreement goals;
• “Substantial investment in climate-resilient infrastructure in the
U.S., including a $40 billion resilience fund, alongside the
reformulation of disaster recovery programs to better support the most
vulnerable communities and protect ecosystems and imperiled species; and
• “Interagency, participatory planning processes to ensure that
transitioning away from fossil-fuel-based economies and building climate
resilience ultimately combat systemic, structural, and institutional
racism and guarantee respect for human rights and the rights of
Indigenous Peoples, gender equality, a just transition,
intergenerational equity, food security and sovereignty, and poverty
eradication.”
Overall, the Fair Shares NDC captures the ambition level and the
holistic approach required to achieve climate justice, though it should
not be assumed that we endorse every single component.
Finally, we would note that the 50% reduction by 2030 target that is
being floated by some is insufficient to meet the 1.5 degree goal. It
would also place an unfair burden on other countries, including
developing countries that have neither emitted as much greenhouse gases
as the United States nor benefited from the “cheaper,” fossil
fuel-intensive development that has fueled the wealth of so many
countries in the global North. The studies cited to justify the 50%
target indicate that much greater levels of domestic reductions are
possible. In crafting the revised U.S. NDC, we urge your administration
not to arbitrarily limit our ambition and in turn keep the world on a
trajectory toward an unlivable future.
A Fair Shares NDC would send the essential signal that the United States
recognizes our special responsibility to lead on climate action, and is
willing to work in solidarity with the global community to solve this
crisis together. We hope that your administration will announce a
revised U.S. NDC that is on the scale and in the spirit of the Fair
Shares NDC. We look forward to working with you to make it a reality and
implement it in law.
Sincerely,
___________________ ___________________
Jamaal Bowman, Ed.D. Adriano Espaillat
Member of Congress Member of Congress
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.openspaceforum.net/pipermail/wsm-discuss/attachments/20210415/3140f586/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: lknibaobagjikeln.png
Type: image/png
Size: 71441 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.openspaceforum.net/pipermail/wsm-discuss/attachments/20210415/3140f586/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Copenhagen Accord December 2009.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 200814 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.openspaceforum.net/pipermail/wsm-discuss/attachments/20210415/3140f586/attachment.jpg>
More information about the WSM-Discuss
mailing list