• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • T-43 Days? Is the UN Secretary General Hitting the Reset button?

    Likes sands in an hour glass, these are the [remaining] days of our lives…43. At least that’s all that’s left according to remarks of UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. On August 11th of this year the Secretary-General told a gathering of the Global Environment Forum: “We must seal the deal in Copenhagen for the future of humanity. We have just four months. Four months to secure the future of our planet.” (emphasis added)

    The Secretary General then went on to say the deal that had to be sealed in Copenhagen “to secure the future of our plant” would need to incorporate four key points:

    • “First industrialized countries must lead by committing to binding mid-term reduction targets on the order of 25 to 40 per cent below 1990 levels.”
    • “Second, developing countries need to take nationally appropriate mitigation actions in order to reduce the growth in their emissions substantially below business as usual.”
    • “Third, developed countries must provide sufficient, measurable, reportable and verifiable financial and technological support to developing countries.”
    • “Fourth, we need an equitable and accountable mechanism for distributing these financial and technological resources, taking into account the views of all countries in decision-making.”

    These are fairly concise, unequivocal remarks for a UN diplomat, not exactly a group known for clarity even if it is histrionic. But that was then. More recently, the UN Secretary General said: “It may be realistic if we think Copenhagen will not be the final word on all these matters. But if we agree on a strong politically binding commitment that will be, I think, a reasonable success.”

    “A reasonable success?” He thinks? What happened to “[f]our months to secure the future of our planet”? How can such a critical date for the fate of humanity be as flexible as when one does a load of laundry? It doesn’t seem to make sense, unless of course, the never really was such a crisis.

    Posted in Energy [slideshow_deploy]

    3 Responses to T-43 Days? Is the UN Secretary General Hitting the Reset button?

    1. Freedom of Speech TX says:

      The UN should be worried about saving the world from Iran, N. Korea, and Islamic Jihadist Terrorists. Add the Somali pirates for good measure and other international punks.

      They will not get the most important countries onboard for this, except, God Forbid, us. This is nothing but another scheme to drain wealth from global Citizens especially the U.S.

      I sincerely hope we don't fall for this. We will be giving away more than we get.

      NO GLOBAL GOVERNMENT.

    2. Leon, Durango, CO says:

      That big old green alligator, Al Gore must be salivating at this Bell. His International Buddies are all going to get together and wreck the U.S. Economy by Treaty (just in case Cap and Trade fails). Copenhagen ought to be Obama's Waterloo, when he overextends his reach, well beyond what is Constitutional. So then it's "Hurry! Hurry! Hurry! The sky is falling!" and Al Gore (who lies with impunity in Congressional Testimony, 20 ft rise in Sea Level is impossible by the Laws of Physics). Maybe they should give Al Gore the Nobel Prize for Physics, how you can melt Greenland in no time at all.

      Now that we gave billions of money to the New One World Government, maybe they will buy up America on the cheap, too. Just like Obama's friends and Al Gore's friends, Al Gore himself probably. Yeah, I want to know who is getting all that Federal Reserve Trillions of our dollars. Are they buying up America with our money too?

      This is all illegal, the Supreme Court has not ruled that it is okay for government to enrich all their personal friends. Sue them.

    3. Roger S., Ma. says:

      First, what's "mid-term"? 10 – 20 – 30 – 50 years? Keeps it "loose", doesn't he?! Except for the start-date!? Would be funny if this whole thing were not an incipient tragedy.

      Next, 25 to 40 pct "below 1990"!? In other words, back to the 70's to 60's in terms of industrial output? What was this guy's profession before he joined the UN ("United Nihilists")? Couldn't have had much to do with technology, or even arithmetic! Let alone with science or philosophy of any sort!

      Then, “…developing countries need to take nationally appropriate mitigation actions in order to reduce the growth in their emissions substantially below business as usual.” — Here, an appropriate comment could not reach far beyond: "He's off his rocker!" — Why? These countries are still "developing" for a reason, namely in the past their "development" has been "not so hot"! That was while presumably pursuing "business as usual." Now they are apparently to be expected to stop developing any further at all?! Or, how else can they reduce emissions (for the poorest, what emissions?!) while working the energy intensive development they so desperately need? By employing technology they have not yet risen to producing themselves and which in part doesn't even exist yet anywhere? — Chairman Mao's "great leap forward comes to mind.

      Finally, because this is becoming tiresome: “…developed countries must provide sufficient, measurable, reportable and verifiable financial and technological support to developing countries.” — Say again?! How? — We (developed countries) can supply all we want. They (un-/underdeveloped countries) wouldn't know what to do with it. That's a big part of the reason for their lagging development.

      – Or, to put it another way, of what help would have been our trains, planes, cars, spaceships, computers, tractors, combines and power plants to the citizens of, say, 16th century London, Paris, Madrid, or Florence, if some miracle had suddenly dumped these things at their front doors? All these things consume vast amounts of energy, both in their creation and in their use. And, they take lots of finely tuned infrastructure (also of the social sort) to make them useful! Vast amounts of knowledge and skill are needed to organize their profitable employment! Barring this, their very presence becomes a bottomless pit for wasted effort.

      – In short, we can't afford it, especially not while returning our levels to the sixties or seventies, and they can't absorb it, certainly not until they reach those levels to which we are expected to retreat. These crazy schemes by the world's "social engineering theorist elites" will become an unmitigated disaster — for the whole world! The result of that will be… well, there goes another Nobel Peace Prize!

      – If "we need an equitable and accountable mechanism for distributing these financial and technological resources, taking into account the views of all countries in decision-making.”, then what would that be, the vote of the General Assembly? A committee of experts? Named by whom? Maybe by the countries furthest behind in development? Just to be "fair"? By their "rulers" intent on another fancy palace or fleet of jets? Haven't we seen enough of this already? Too much of it, in fact?!

      – How about trying free market capitalism, world wide? It has a proven track record – 200 years from simple, manual, farming tools in a hostile environment to landing the first man on another planet – right here in the USA! Which system has ever beat that? Which could? All that was needed were "the rights of man" of John Locke's original meaning, enshrined in the Constitution to support them. The rest took care of itself!

      I respectfully submit that Mr. Ban Ki-Moon was/is "nuts". He needs to be "relieved" by somebody who is, shall we say more "grounded", like: in reality! The century just passed saw enough "social and economic engineering" experiments to last another. –Over 100 million dead!– Any US official "deeding" American citizens' past or future "sweat" to such crazy schemes, be that from New York or from Copenhagen, needs to be impeached, sued, voted out, or otherwise hounded from office by the appropriate means. Ditto, any member of Congress ratifying such or similar "treaties". Beyond that, a precept of Common Law needs to be remembered, namely that contracts without "consideration" for one of the parties are void and unenforceable! Treaties are – or should be – of the same class!

      I only hope Mr. Ban WAS "hitting the reset button". Maybe he is, after all, not as dumb as many have come to think! Or, has this late-hour retreat to do more with some suddenly foreseeable snafus, sort of an a priori face-saving? Or, could it be the insight that, like the proverbial "frog-to-be-cooked", our "temperature" will have to be raised slowly? Soon we shall know. It is now T-42, and counting!

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×