Russia is right, there is no link between Climate, National Security and UN Mission – Interested in that?
Via H. Sterling Burnett -December 16, 2021
Russia recently vetoed a United Nations Security Council resolution that views climate change as a threat to international peace and security. They were right to block the United Nations’ efforts to expand its mission.
As described in an Associated Press (AP) story, titled “Russia vetoes UN resolutions on climate change and security,” The resolution will make combating climate change a core and assigned task of the United Nations in order to maintain international peace and security, develop friendly relations among nations, and achieve international cooperation. economic. Russia joined this effort by India, which also voted no and China, despite abstaining, opposed the resolution.
Led by Ireland and Niger, the proposal calls for ‘incorporating information on the security impacts of climate change’ into council strategies for conflict management and into conservation activities, the AP said. peacekeeping and political missions, at least occasionally,” wrote the AP. of conflict prevention efforts and to report on how to address those risks in specific hotspots.”
Russia, India and China are right to reject the climate/conflict solution. There is no evidence that climate change is causing or exacerbating global armed conflicts, nor is it shown on Climate Realism, here, here, and herefor example, it has not caused the mass migration that in some regions has led to or from conflict. Also, as discovered here, here, and hereFor example, there is no evidence that climate change is hindering military preparedness in the United States or elsewhere in the world.
According to the AP report, the UN special envoys of China, India and Russia expressed concern that “adding climate change to the Security Council’s goals will only deepen divisions”. Global”.
The AP reported that Russian Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia said the proposed resolution would turn “a scientific and economic issue into a politicized question”, diverting the council’s attention away from sources of conflict. … ‘genuine’ in many places and gave the council an excuse to intervene. in almost every country on the planet. This approach would be a positive ticking time bomb, says Nebenzia.
Chinese Ambassador Zhang Jun agreed, saying, “What the Security Council needs to do is not a political show.”
Geopolitical moves by China and Russia are often opposed. But their actions to prevent the UN from seeing global warming as an international security issue and a threat to peace are justifiable. There are many sources of conflict within and between countries. There is no evidence of climate change in either of them. The UN has more than enough at its heart in its efforts to reduce conflict and ensure peace around the world without going in the wrong direction and making climate change a central concern.
H. Sterling Burnett, Ph.D. is managing editor of Environment & Climate News and a research fellow in environmental and energy policy at the Heartland Institute. Burnett has worked at the National Center for Policy Analysis for 18 years, most recently as a senior fellow in charge of the NCPA’s environmental policy program. He has held various positions in public and professional policy organizations, including serving as a member of the Environmental and Natural Resources Task Force on the Texas e-Texas committee. Comptroller.
Related
