Change Alley

information, opinion, conversation

Climate 101

with 2 comments

Un US flags pinQuestion 1

In 2003 the United States used the United Nations to legitimise its invasion of Iraq on the grounds of Iraq’s threat to global security.

(a) Discuss the proposition that the United States’ response to climate change poses as significant a threat to global security as Iraq’s “weapons of mass destruction”.

(b) Assess the practicality and effectiveness of the international community using the United Nations to enforce the United States’ acceptance of hard emissions targets.

Do not write on more than one side of the paper at once.

Advertisements

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. The US has little respect for the UN even though or, because of the fact that it contributes approx 25% of its funding. The only thing the US understands is power over the rest of the world via its currency.

    Maybe if the US starts losing dominance with its currency it will experiment with the idea of being a team player on the world stage rather than bully boy.

    Still, if the US loses its dollar dominance another currency will take its place, giving that country similar power. If that currency happens to be the Euro at least an institution such as the EU might temper the ability of all those European countries to dominate the rest of the world.

    The US at this point has the power to put a spear into the heart of UNFCCC negotiations. It will continue to do so until something puts a spear through its economic erection.

    matt

    December 16, 2007 at 2:21 pm

  2. A cynic might say that at the highest levels the US government has been well aware of climate change all along, as well as the oncoming depletion of oil resources -and understand how important it will be for one single country in a world undergoing a climate shift (water resources, food resources, weather extremes, population relocation, economic refugees) to have unobstructed access to energy resources- and know that at some point in the near future it might be a very smart move to have strong military control over the source and route of an energy resource that’s in decline while demand will skyrocket. Now THAT would be almost unopposable power on a global scale… That same cynic would say that they knew darn well that there were no weapons of mass destruction, and needed a pretext that people would accept.

    If one were a cynic, that is.

    Oh, as for question B, that’s never going to happen. N.e.v.e.r. The rest of the world should not include the USA in their plans at all, but go full steam ahead. With or without them, I expect the outcome to be rather dim in any case. But hey, we do try, don’t we.

    Anja

    December 30, 2007 at 5:17 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: