Tag Archives: United States

Did you know?

Posted on by
Reply

The world needs a strong arms trade treaty

The world needs a strong Arms Trade Treaty!

  • Each year 8 million new small arms are produced?
  • Each year 12 billion rounds of ammunition are produced?
  •  (….that’s close to 2 bullets for every baby, every woman, every man).
  • United Nations Peacekeeping costs the world $7 billion per year?
  • The global annual burden of armed violence stands at $400 billion?
  • The only purpose of these things is to cause death or injury?
  • There is stricter global trade regulation of bananas than there is in the trade of A K-47s?

Do you know how many classrooms, how many clinics, how many wells or pipes to bring clean water into people’s lives could be bought by that $12 billion?

We need, the world needs a strong Arms Trade Treaty. And the governments of the world are negotiating such an enforceable treaty throughout the month of July.

As the governments met for the first days in the UN, across the street we met as representatives of many interfaith groups in the Chapel at the building called “Church Center” – to pray and petition that common sense will win. We stood and faced the UN building across First Avenue and together spoke aloud the Interfaith Declaration in Support of an Arms Trade Treaty. A beautiful young woman danced our hopes into a shared prayer. A Veteran reminded us of the stupidity and danger of weapons of violence.

Please pray that we will finally have such a Treaty, so that bananas are no longer considered more dangerous than guns!

- Kevin Dance C.P.

Read the Interfaith Declaration.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Rio +20 Report

Posted on by
Reply

Brittany Trilford, a seventeen-year-old youth representative from New Zealand, addresses the official opening session of the UN’s Rio+20 Conference on Sustainable Development in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Greetings from Rio de Janeiro! This is a lovely, lively city, with great music, crowds of people and incredible traffic. Brazil is working hard to tackle the cruel poverty of many of its people, but much remains to be done. The trip from our Passionist community to the conference centre can take two, sometime three hours. We see the rich and varied face of Brazil. But there is still too much poverty. And that is what this conference is about. How can we share our wealth more justly? How do we turn back the terrible damage done to the only earth we have to nourish us and gives us life? We are 9 people representing Passionists International here in Rio.

It is good to meet so many enthusiastic, committed people from NGOs who are passionate about working for a fairer world. But, after all our efforts to talk with governments in New York, it’s disappointing that the final document is so timid in looking at the great challenges we face. The title of this UN Conference on Sustainable Development is “The Future We Want.” But, the final negotiating sessions have shown deep divisions between countries as to what the document should say. There are three major differences: the concept of “green economy”. Many developing countries fear this is the way for corporations to take over the world. How do we define “sustainable development goals” so that there can be social justice for all, protection of the environment for now and future generations, and still encourage economic growth? What is the right institutional framework to build this right sort of development as we move into the future and who decides?

To make matters worse, some developed (rich) countries are trying every trick to water-down the Rio Principles agreed here twenty years ago. They want to get out of the commitments they made to assist developing countries with financial resource and by helping them to get the right sorts of modern technology to make the transition to a greener, healthier lifestyle and economy.  For example, the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities was one of the 21 Principles adopted in Rio in 1992.  This says that all countries share a common responsibility to protect the environment and the earth. But, since industrialized countries of the North have caused much most damage to the environment, they are the ones who should lead the way in cleaning up. The United States has made it clear that it does not accept this concept, and wants it deleted wherever it is mentioned in the text. Other wealthy countries – the US, along with Canada and New Zealand, among others – are don’t want any reference to “ new and additional funds” to help developing countries face the threats of climate change and make the shift to renewable sources of energy. They say that the private sector – that is business, that is corporations will make our new future possible. But they refuse to put any restrictions or supervision on these profit driven corporations! I think we know how the poor will make out in this arrangement.

President Roussef of Brazil, the host of the meeting, strongly urged her fellow heads of state to be more courageous and generous in shaping a new world where the common good of all is respected. Time is running out!

So we see narrow, national self-interest pushed by powerful countries crush commitment to the global common good every step of the way. Too many countries are using the excuse of hard times from the financial crisis to fail to meet their responsibilities in the community of the nations. So there is room for more work to call governments to their responsibilities. We must also remember that each and every one of us has a part to play by carefully examining how much we consume and how we can live more responsibly.

There is still time. There is still hope. There was a wonderful challenge from a 17 year old girl to all the Heads of State as the Conference opened. More later!

- Kevin Dance, C.P. 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Revoke the Papal Bull!

Posted on by
Reply

The enduring impact of the religious and secular policies, which provided the justification for colonization, upon the lives and wellbeing of indigenous peoples.

Indigenous peoples throughout the world are living representatives of the world’s oldest continuing cultures. They are also among the most dispossessed and disadvantaged of people. In more than 70 countries indigenous peoples are over-represented in all the categories used to measure poverty and social exclusion – life expectancy, decent housing, completion rates for education, health, levels of incarceration, joblessness and discrimination.

The phenomenon of colonization and settlement of lands in the “new world” from the fifteenth century onwards is marked by the expropriation of lands, territories and resources of the original inhabitants. Based on a racist mentality, and reinforced by religious edicts and secular policies, indigenous peoples were seen as inferior to the European settlers. This evaluation led to the violation of their cultural practices and spiritual expressions. It also enabled the practice of such abominations as the practice and institution of slavery.

The meridian to the right was defined by Inter caetera, the one to the left by the Treaty of Tordesillas. Modern boundaries and cities are shown for purposes of illustration.

Ongoing relationships between governments and traditional peoples in the Americas, Africa and Oceania have as their foundation the ‘doctrine of conquest’ or the ‘doctrine of discovery.’ These doctrines, readily taken up by governments, can be traced directly to the Papal Bulls: Dum Diversis, June 18, 1452; Romanus Pontifex, January 8th 1455 and Inter Caetera, May 4th 1493. Pope Alexander VI in Inter Caetera  says to Ferdinand and Isabella “this assuredly ranks highest, that in our times especially the Catholic faith and the Christian religion be exalted and be everywhere increased and spread, that the health of souls be cared for and that barbarous nations be overthrown and brought to the faith itself. You have purposed to bring under your sway the said mainlands and islands with their residents and inhabitants and to bring them to the Catholic faith.”

It is scarcely an afterthought that the Pope also mentions that “In the islands and countries already discovered are found gold, spices, and very many other precious things of divers kinds and qualities.” [1]

The Pope, at thas time, was not only the spiritual head of the Catholic Church, but also the political arbiter of the whole of Europe. The papal decrees gave Spain and Portugal dominion over lands that indigenous peoples occupied for thousands of years. It made the European age of “Discovery” possible and the theft of entire continents.

The Cantino planisphere of 1502 shows the line of the Treaty of Tordesillas.

As Columbus’ success in the New World became known, John Cabot in 1495 suggested to Henry VII a voyage to “the Indies”. Spain protested, as this would be in violation of the Tordisellas Line declared by the Pope in 1494. The King granted a patent to go “to all places, east, west and north“, but not south in Spanish waters. As agent of the English Crown Cabot was to investigate, claim and possess lands “which before this time were unknown to all Christians” – which meant he could not intrude on Spanish and Portuguese discoveries. [2]

More than 500 years later these papal decrees still shape the way people live, think and relate to one another. Like it or not, they still provide the legal and moral basis for states’ jurisdiction over traditional peoples. Decisions based on past racist notions of the superiority of one race or religion over others, continue to negatively affect indigenous lives.

Such attitudes became enshrined in law. The U.S. Supreme Court, in 1823, drawing on the notion of domination ruled in Johnson and Graham’s Lessee v. M’Intosh[3] that the United States, as rightful successor to various ‘potentates’, had “ultimate dominion” or “ultimate title” over all lands which fall within the claimed boundaries of the United States. This decision was directly linked to earlier documents that commissioned “Christian people” to “discover” and possess the lands of “heathens”. This has been used to limit Native Americans’ title to their traditional lands to “right of occupancy” which must bow to the “absolute title” of the United States.  The Johnson case has been used in the courts of English speaking countries – Australia, Canada, New Zealand – to justify the limitation of indigenous peoples’ title to their lands.

“The dominating mindset and interpretive framework expressed in those Vatican documents has been institutionalized in the world for more than five centuries.”[4]

In light of the above we call upon:

Pope Benedict XVI, to promote the inherent dignity of indigenous peoples, revoke the Papal Bulls that are seen as supporting the continued institutionalization in law of attitudes which prevent indigenous peoples from being treated as equals before the law in the matters of title to their lands, resources and territories.

The governments of European colonial powers to repudiate the policies that enabled them to benefit from the disadvantage and enslavement of indigenous peoples in their former colonies.

Governments to dismantle the legal structures and policies that are based upon the principles of dominance and racism which limit indigenous people in their capacity to enjoy full exercise of their right to self-determination in shaping the expression of their culture, education, spirituality and community.

Governments and churches to consider how they can provide opportunities for the indigenous people, within their membership or within their borders, to explore their needs for recompense in the face of five centuries of dispossession and alienation.

All citizens of states with indigenous members to seek ways to acknowledge the injustices that have brought prosperity to some and suffering to others and to explore, in dialogue with indigenous people,  steps towards mutual reconciliation.

- Kevin Dance, C.P.

NGO Committee on the United Nations International Decade of the World’s Indigenous Peoples.

 

[1] www.nativeweb.org/pages/legal/indig-inter-caetera.html

[2] Original document housed in the Public Record Office, London.

[3] supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/21/543/case.html

[4] Steven Newcomb, Shawnee and Lenape, is the author of “Pagans in the Promised Land: Decoding the Doctrine of Christian Discovery” (Fulcrum, 2008) 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Save the Earth and Free the People

Posted on by
Reply

The Commission for Social Development continues its work. Its priority theme is “Poverty Eradication”. Today we cannot think of eradicating poverty in our world if we ignore the impact of climate change on our efforts to lift people out of poverty. Where will the money come from?

Last week we had a fascinating event “Poverty and Climate Change: Lives in the Balance.” We were reminded that climate change affects all aspects of development – environmental, social and economic. The two greatest challenges facing our generation are how to lift up people trapped in poverty and how to stabilize Earth’s climate. Climate change is a fact. There is no way to stop it. What we can, and must do, is adapt to it and make every effort to lessen the disastrous effects it has and will continue to have on the world’s most vulnerable populations.

As always, women and children make up a majority of people living in poverty. Rural women are the backbone of agriculture in the developing world. They save the seeds, plant, harvest and market the produce. It is estimated that they are responsible for approximately one-half of the world’s food supply. But the traditional weather patterns they have come to rely on have been disastrously altered.

Stories from different countries underlined the disastrous impact of climate change. Sisters of Notre Dame de Namur from the Democratic Republic of Congo said they could always rely on a nine-month rainy season, followed by three dry months. Now the rainfall is uncertain; harvesting is unpredictable. “In Kenya, each year the rains would arrive in November… but, no more.” The Ambassador of the Maldives, a nation of 1,190 coral islands in the Indian Ocean, said climate change threatens his nation’s existence. The Maldives depend upon imported food. As climate change impacts food production, and prices begin to soar, the food security of the Maldivians will be at risk.

Last year the Pontifical Justice and Peace Council issued a statement urging major economic reform entitled “Towards Reforming the International Financial and Monetary Systems in the Context of a Global Public Authority.” One of its recommendations calls for the taxing of financial transactions. “Such taxation would be very useful in promoting global development and sustainability according to the principles of social justice and solidarity.”

The NGO Committee for Social Development, with civil society organizations worldwide, is advocating for a Financial Transaction Tax (FTT). This would be a small tax (e.g. 0.05 percent) on all financial market transactions. When we ordinary mortals make a purchase, we pay a tax on the amount. Meanwhile, billions of dollars are bought and sold each and every day in the world’s financial centres and stock exchanges. These are completely tax-free and make the rich ever-richer. It’s time to end the free ride for the speculators!

Many economists see a Financial Transaction Tax as an innovative source of financing for development, and a practical way to help developing countries achieve the Millennium Development Goals, eradicate poverty, protect the environment and shape development that can be sustained. It would also help to reduce the destabilizing effects of downturns in the financial markets, reduce speculative trading and the wild fluctuations of asset prices in stock markets as well as in commodity prices. Over the long term, a Financial Transaction Tax could become a steady, predictable funding stream for poverty eradication.

Another potential source of funding is a reduction in current levels of military spending. In the wake of the global financial and economic crisis of 2008-2009, public spending on social development shrank, but military spending increased. To achieve the eight Millennium Development Goals it would cost US$329 billion each year – a mere 20 percent spent of the world’s spending on military each year.

In 1967, Pope Paul VI suggested that a portion of global military budgets be channeled into a global humanitarian fund for development. He told us that “development is the new name for peace.” Imagine what the world would be like today if his advice had been heeded? There can be no serious commitment to poverty eradication without addressing this issue.

The outcome document currently under negotiation by the countries that make up the Commission for Social Development makes no mention of reducing military budgets, nor does it consider any concrete proposals to finance efforts aimed at poverty eradication. The one mention of climate change in the document is strongly opposed by the United States.

I offer you a very simple way to join your voice to ours in our advocacy efforts. I encourage you to sign the online petition for the Social Protection Floor Campaign, and pass it on to your friends and associates. For more information on the Social Protection Floor, click here.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Do we have a Future?

Posted on by
Reply

The number of people in the United States who deny that human behaviour has any effect on climate change has grown alarmingly in the past two years. It shows what money, vested interests and false advertising can do! Awareness of climate change keeps on growing in the rest of the world.

“We’re facing a planetary emergency” says Owen Gaffney of International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme

The frequent news reports with pictures of people whose lives are torn apart make it hard to avoid the reality. Deadly and violent weather – floods, earthquakes, mudslides, forest fires, hurricanes  and the sinister rising of sea levels  force us to take the warnings seriously, rather than dismiss or play them down as in the recent past.

Elimar Pinheiro do Nascimento, director of the University of Brasilia Sustainable Development Centre, states: “Democratic regimes don’t appear to be capable of adequately addressing the issue of climate change, because of the short-term political dynamic, since environmental problems take decades to solve. Democracy is about freedom, and protecting the environment is about survival.”

Our democratically elected governments cannot see beyond their own noses, or not beyond the next time they must face their electors. So where does that leave us?

In financial crises, specialist economists shape the decisions that governments make.  Central banks can adopt often unpopular monetary measures, even despite pressure from national governments. But in this deeper crisis which threatens the future of our entire planet, we don’t see environmentalists and climate experts called in to advise on what action should be taken.

If we are to have a future we will need statespersons, not bureaucrats. But dare we hope for leaders to emerge who are able to withstand the pressure from corporate driven political decisions, to ensure our survival?

We must find new mechanisms to create policies with a long-term focus to solve our environmental problems.

Prior to Rio+20, the world’s scientific community will give a comprehensive “state of the planet” assessment at the “Planet Under Pressure” conference in London Mar. 26-29. Nearly 3,000 experts from around the world will provide a report card on the health and threats to the Earth and make recommendations on what must be done to avoid disaster.

One of the first things a maturing human community must do is solve its international governance problems. Thirty leading experts on international governance are unanimous regarding the failure of the current United Nations approach of one country, one vote and the requirement of consensus before taking action or making significant decisions.  ”One country can hold the entire world hostage.”

The Montreal Protocol to protect the ozone layer is considered the world’s most successful environmental treaty. It doesn’t use the traditional U.N. system. Decisions are made only when the majority of both the industrialised and developing nations agree. The U.N. climate negotiations need such a decision making process.

Maurice Strong who led the Rio 1992 Earth Summit had this to say: “We must rise above the lesser concerns that preempt our attention and respond to the reality that the future of human life on Earth depends on what we do, or fail to do in this generation. What we have come to accept as normal is not normal…

We must deal with this as the most dangerous security issue humanity has ever faced, with the very conditions necessary to life on Earth at risk.

Rio+20 will require a degree of cooperation beyond anything we have yet experienced at a time when competition and conflict over scare resources is escalating….The decisions and policies which determine our impacts on sustainability are primarily motivated by economic and financial considerations. The importance of the actions to be taken at Rio + 20 requires that they be firmly rooted in our deepest moral and ethical principles. – UN General Assembly Rio +20 Event, New York, October 25th, 2011.

The world has seen major changes since 1992. Today more and more people think of themselves as ‘global or planetary citizens’. With knowledge comes responsibility. Remember, there is a voice that is stronger than the power of money or the force of corporations! That is the voice of truth and moral decency.
Rio + 20 will need all the prayer and our best efforts if it is to succeed in avoiding disaster for the earth and all who call the Earth “home”.  

It’s time to speak up and let our governments know what we expect of them to prevent the threat of global disaster.  Tell them not to play politics in Rio. Tell them to remember that we have only one planet and we are all involved! It’s time for us to speak up!

Passionists International hopes to have a significant presence in Rio.

Better to light one candle than to curse the darkness.

Kevin Dance, C.P. 

Enhanced by Zemanta

“The reform of the international monetary and financial system and its implications for development”

Posted on by
Reply

Statement made by the NGO Committee on Financing for Development

I represent the NGO Committee on Financing for Development. We place emphasis on “development” that is people-centred and pro-poor. We have members of our organizations in almost all countries of the world. As part of a global network we are concerned with economic justice. The message we hear from the ground is ‘we are in a dangerous situation´

As NGOs, part of civil society – the “We the Peoples” of the UN Charter – believe the United Nations must play a strong role in building a new future for an increasingly interconnected world.

The vision that brought this organization to birth was of a safe and secure world where all people could experience a modest level of prosperity where their basic rights would be protected and promoted.  The 3 pillars of the UN – security, development, and respect for human rights of all, are presently at risk.

This vision of a more equal and safer world is slipping away as rampant inequality divides us. The place of the UN in the world’s economic wellbeing is at risk.

The OECD report “Divided We Stand: Why Inequality Keeps Rising” shows the gap between rich and poor in OECD countries is at its highest level for over 30 years, in the US, for almost a century. This is true of almost all countries. Secretary-General Angel Gurría, launching the report, said “The social contract is starting to unravel in many countries. This study dispels the assumptions that the benefits of economic growth will automatically trickle down to the disadvantaged and that greater inequality fosters greater social mobility. Without a comprehensive strategy for inclusive growth, inequality will continue to rise.”

Despite numerous calls to recover the vision and the continuing validity of the principles of Monterrey and Doha, the reality seems to be different. The rhetoric that some institutions are “too big to fail” suggests underlying acceptance that inequality is natural and normal. We strongly challenge this paradigm. We need a new paradigm that recognizes the equal dignity of all people, elaborated within a human rights framework that is participative, and speaks to the real world we inhabit in an integrating manner. We call all member States of the UN to restore this organization to its proper place as the forum where real debate happens on how we can actually integrate all the policies needed to shape economic, human/social wellbeing and environmental protection.

Most global economic policies are formulated and implemented in groups operating independently of the UN, such as the G20, the Bretton Woods institutions. This is not how the global system was visualized over half a century ago.  The UN is increasingly marginalized as such decisions are made elsewhere. The level of representation at this High Level Dialogue seems to bear this out! We NGOs are deeply disappointed that it does not seem to be taken very seriously by you, Member States. ECOSOC deliberations and UN review meetings rarely attract the same level of presence by senior officials from finance, trade and economic ministries as do meetings of the BWI or WTO. Despite repeated statements calling for strengthening within the UN of the FfD follow-up mechanism, many influential Member States seem keen to promote coordination through such other groupings as the G20, where they have greater influence.

In a world that calls for coherence, the social impact and the equity issues are notable by their absence in diagnosing the current problem or creating policy to address the crisis. “Austerity measures” announced by many countries have led to savage reductions in “social spending” and fly in the face of strong consensus that increased public spending in a time of economic crisis, is needed to create a counter-cyclical direction for the economy. The very term ‘social’ is made to sound like a luxury that can’t be afforded at present, rather than an essential tool to create jobs as integral to addressing the crisis. Segmentation and compartmentalising have blocked an effective and integrated way forward.  Social/ equity dimensions are not optional extras, but essential pieces if an enduring solution is to emerge.

Social inclusion can no longer be seen as extraneous to building a functioning global economic system. They can no longer be left to be treated in another forum well isolated from financial and economic concerns. Issues of job creation and the provision of a social protection floor, not only make for more harmonious societies, but they also make for good investment and economic sense.

We strongly recommend that the General Assembly:

  • Start an open and truly inclusive dialogue on strengthening the international economic and financial system and architecture.
  • Hold a review conference on financing for development in 2013 that addresses the democratic deficit in the international financial architecture and that deals with the impact of the world financial crises on the financing of development.
  •  Acknowledge the changed reality of the world by strengthening UN engagement with civil society and other non-state actors through multi-stakeholder forums and other informal FfD initiatives.
  • Make better use of the special high-level ECOSOC meetings with the BWI, WTO and UNCTAD to enable more focused dialogue, with discussions that are outcome oriented.
  • Establish an adhoc panel of experts of the world economic and financial crisis and its impact on development.
  • We support the call of Barbados to replace the International Committee of Tax Experts with a UN intergovernmental body. This is vital if information on tax avoidance and tax evasion is to be shared among countries and so build tax systems needed to promote development.
  • Establish a Financing for Development Committee that is representative and multi-stakeholder in order to effectively oversee the implementation of the Monterrey and Doha commitments.
  • It is time to revisit and act on the idea of a Global Economic Coordination Council. This would be a small body with representation based on a constituency system. Sectional interests must be put aside in favour of the common good of us all. Inclusion is the catchcry of the many protest movements. It must also apply to the multilateral system. A more robust UN system able to offer effective oversight of policies affecting us all is long overdue.
  • Listen to the call from Africa to be fully included in the economic decision-making processes. We suggest that the motto of the UN could be “Nothing about us, without us!”

The agenda of Monterrey remains unfinished. We must rebuild momentum for the needed political will to act multilaterally once more.

Thank you Madame Chair
Kevin Dance, C.P., Passionists International
Chair, NGO Committee on Financing for Development

Enhanced by Zemanta

Social investments deserve priority in economic recovery schemes

Posted on by
Reply

The Report on the World Social Situation 2011: The Global Social Crisis, produced by the Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) of the United Nations, explores the ongoing adverse social consequences of the 2008-2009 financial and economic crisis – the worst since the Great Depression of the 1930s.

One consequence of the crisis is that unemployment rose sharply to 205 million people in 2009 from 178 million in 2007. The loss of jobs means not only a loss of incomes but also an increase in vulnerability, especially in developing countries without comprehensive social protection, notes the report.

Various estimates suggest that between 47 million and 84 million more people fell into, or were trapped in, extreme poverty because of the global crisis, which occurred immediately after food and fuel prices had risen sharply. So we have over a billion people living in hunger in the world, the highest on record.

The report states that the global economic downturn has had wide-ranging negative social outcomes for individuals, families, communities and societies, and its impact on social progress in areas such as education and health will only become fully evident over time.

“The increased levels of poverty, hunger and unemployment due to the global crisis will continue to affect billions of people in many developed and developing countries for years to come,” the report says.

It is essential that governments take into account the likely social implications of their economic policies. When economic policies are decided in isolation from their social outcomes there can be dire consequences for poverty, employment, nutrition, health and education.

“There is renewed realization that social policy considerations, especially productive employment, must be given greater importance within economic policy,” said Jomo Kwame Sundaram, Assistant Secretary-General for Economic Development. “Thedisconnect between economic policies and their social consequences can create a vicious cycle of slow growth and poor social progress.”

The economic crisis is a reminder that it is essential for people to be healthy, educated, with adequate housing and well fed if they are to be more productive and better able to contribute to society.

Whether we focus on climate change, or we work to wipe out the scourge of poverty, or we give our attention to protecting the human rights of the most abused and vulnerabl

Enhanced by Zemanta

United Nations Conference on Climate Change, Durban, South Africa,

Posted on by
Reply

The United Nations Framework Conference on Climate Change began yesterday, November 28th 2011 in Durban, South Africa. Nearly 10,000 people are expected to attend the conference which will continue until December 7th 2011. Those attending include representatives of the world’s governments, international organizations and civil society. The discussions will seek to advance, in a balanced fashion, the implementation of the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol, as well as the Bali Action Plan, agreed at COP 13 in 2007, and the Cancun Agreements, reached at the Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. (COP 16) last December.

Almost two decades ago, countries joined an international treaty, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, to cooperatively consider what they could do to limit average global temperature increases and the resulting climate change, and to cope with whatever impacts were, by then, inevitable. This was in 1992.

By 1995, countries realized that emission reductions provisions in the Convention were inadequate. They launched negotiations to strengthen the global response to climate change, and, two years later, adopted the Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto Protocol legally binds developed countries to emission reduction targets. The Protocol’s first commitment period started in 2008 and ends in 2012.

What happens beyond 2012 is one of the key issues governments of the 195 Parties to the Convention are currently negotiating. Climate change is a complex problem, which, although environmental in nature, has consequences for all spheres of existence on our planet. It either impacts on– or is impacted by– global issues, including poverty, economic development, population growth, sustainable development and resource management. It is not surprising, then, that solutions come from all disciplines and fields of research and development.

Important in this world conversation is the crisis in Africa with extreme heat and drought, issues of small island states disappearing into deep waters and shifts in extreme weather patterns throughout the world. At the very heart of the response to climate change, however, lies the need to reduce emissions. In 2010, governments agreed that emissions need to be reduced so that global temperature increases are limited to below 2 degrees Celsius.

The human-caused global-warming trend of climate change is scientifically established. Human beings are not distinct from nature, but are part of nature, and are now affecting nature in an alarmingly negative way. Impacts from global warming are now being felt and will soon become far worse. All countries will be increasingly affected in a myriad of severe, adverse ways: economically, environmentally, militarily, politically, medically, and psychologically. Global stability is threatened. There is no safe haven.

Action

Write to your country’s representative at Durban:

Canada:  Peter Kent, Environmental Minister;  email:  minister@ec.gc.ca

United States:  Todd Stern, Special Envoy for Climate Change; go to US.state.gov, go to contact-us and email your comment addressing Mr. Stern.

Sample Email Letter:

Dear ______

I am very concerned about Climate Change and how our country is contributing to Global Warming.  With many other colleagues, I highly recommend that you support the following important issues in the concluding document at Durban:

  1. Recognize that unmitigated global warming will produce widespread conflicts over food, water and resources, with consequent population displacements and other devastating effects.
  2. Adopt fair, ambitious, binding verifiable accords at by reducing greenhouse gas emissions to achieve sustainable safe cumulative levels, incorporating equitably differentiated responsibilities for developed and developing countries, and substantial penalties for excessive emissions.
  3. Adopt and implement adequate, equitable, and binding financial and technical commitments by developed countries to developing countries for mitigation and adaptation, with effective and gender-sensitive distribution of aid, and joint cooperative responsibility.  Priority goals are:
  • Security (peace and avoiding armed conflicts, avoiding mass migrations),
  • Social Justice, Intergenerational Equity, and Environment Preservation (achieving Millennium Development Goals with food, water, and energy security; sustainable economic development; extra support for women and children; education on climate change and environment to inform and change behavior; public health; mental health; gender-balanced; support for small farmers and non-intensive agriculture; rights of island and coastal peoples; sustainable forestry; conservation; humane treatment of animals, avoiding species extinction, maintaining biodiversity).

Sincerely,

___

Resources:

Adapted from UN resources, UN NGO Committee on Sustainable Development and Sean McDonagh, SSC’s first article on Durban.

www.unfccc.int

www.trunity.net

Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta

THE PRICE OF FOOD: FROM CRISIS TO STABILITY

Posted on by
Reply

This is the theme chosen to highlight World Food Day, October 16th this year. The Day invites us to think about what we can do to lessen the terrible impact that food price increases are having on the most vulnerable of our brothers and sisters around the world.

http://www.jpicpassionist.org/files/Food%202011_eng.doc

Enhanced by Zemanta