SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
US Denies Climate Aid to Countries Opposing Copenhagen Accord
Bolivia and Ecuador will be denied aid after both opposed the accord
Apr 09, 2010
The US State Department is denying climate change assistance to countries opposing the Copenhagen accord, it emerged today.
The new policy, first reported by The Washington Post,
suggests the Obama administration is ready to play hardball, using aid
as well as diplomacy, to bring developing countries into conformity
with its efforts to reach an international deal to tackle global
warming.
The Post reported today that Bolivia and Ecuador
would now be denied aid after both countries opposed the accord. The
accord is the short document that emerged from the chaos of the Copenhagen climate change summit and is now supported by 110 of the 192 nations that are members of the UN climate change convention.
"There's
funding that was agreed to as part of the Copenhagen accord, and as a
general matter, the US is going to use its funds to go to countries
that have indicated an interest to be part of the accord," the state
department envoy, Todd Stern, told the Washington Post. He said the
decision was not "categorical", suggesting that other countries that
opposed the accord could still get aid. Bolivia had originally been in
line for $3m (PS1.95m) in climate assistance and Ecuador for $2.5m under
the State Department's original request to Congress for international
climate aid, the Post reported.
Environmental
organisations in Washington said they had been briefed that the State
Department was contemplating such a step. According to their
understanding, the Obama administration sees the Copenhagen accord and
the promise of $30bn in climate aid for poor countries as combined
package. Countries that oppose the deal, therefore, do not qualify for
such funds.
However, Alden Meyer, the climate change director for the Union of Concerned Scientists,
warned that such a policy risked further inflaming the tensions between
the industrialised world and developing countries that have been a
major obstacle to getting a deal.
"They are playing a
pretty hard line," he said. "But it has the potential to be a
counterproductive strategy. To cut off adaptation aid to countries
suffering the impacts of climate change that are largely the result of
past emissions from the US and other industrial countries risks making
them look like the bad guys in a morality play. It is not a strategy
that is going to play well in the developing world."
It
could also expose America to further criticism that it is not doing
enough to shoulder its share of climate aid. America has contributed
slightly more than a billion to the fund, below its share.
At the Copenhagen summit last December, Bolivia had cast itself as a champion for the concerns of developing countries
that they were being railroaded into an international agreement that
would not do enough to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or protect the
African and small island nations that will bear the brunt of climate
change.
Bolivia joined Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua in
formally opposing the accord. Ecuador did not issue such a statement
but it is among the countries that have yet to formally endorse the
accord. Some of those hold-outs are acutely vulnerable to climate
change - such as the island state of Tuvalu which was outspoken in its
opposition to the process of negotiation at Copenhagen. Others are
fairly large emitters, such as Argentina.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
The US State Department is denying climate change assistance to countries opposing the Copenhagen accord, it emerged today.
The new policy, first reported by The Washington Post,
suggests the Obama administration is ready to play hardball, using aid
as well as diplomacy, to bring developing countries into conformity
with its efforts to reach an international deal to tackle global
warming.
The Post reported today that Bolivia and Ecuador
would now be denied aid after both countries opposed the accord. The
accord is the short document that emerged from the chaos of the Copenhagen climate change summit and is now supported by 110 of the 192 nations that are members of the UN climate change convention.
"There's
funding that was agreed to as part of the Copenhagen accord, and as a
general matter, the US is going to use its funds to go to countries
that have indicated an interest to be part of the accord," the state
department envoy, Todd Stern, told the Washington Post. He said the
decision was not "categorical", suggesting that other countries that
opposed the accord could still get aid. Bolivia had originally been in
line for $3m (PS1.95m) in climate assistance and Ecuador for $2.5m under
the State Department's original request to Congress for international
climate aid, the Post reported.
Environmental
organisations in Washington said they had been briefed that the State
Department was contemplating such a step. According to their
understanding, the Obama administration sees the Copenhagen accord and
the promise of $30bn in climate aid for poor countries as combined
package. Countries that oppose the deal, therefore, do not qualify for
such funds.
However, Alden Meyer, the climate change director for the Union of Concerned Scientists,
warned that such a policy risked further inflaming the tensions between
the industrialised world and developing countries that have been a
major obstacle to getting a deal.
"They are playing a
pretty hard line," he said. "But it has the potential to be a
counterproductive strategy. To cut off adaptation aid to countries
suffering the impacts of climate change that are largely the result of
past emissions from the US and other industrial countries risks making
them look like the bad guys in a morality play. It is not a strategy
that is going to play well in the developing world."
It
could also expose America to further criticism that it is not doing
enough to shoulder its share of climate aid. America has contributed
slightly more than a billion to the fund, below its share.
At the Copenhagen summit last December, Bolivia had cast itself as a champion for the concerns of developing countries
that they were being railroaded into an international agreement that
would not do enough to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or protect the
African and small island nations that will bear the brunt of climate
change.
Bolivia joined Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua in
formally opposing the accord. Ecuador did not issue such a statement
but it is among the countries that have yet to formally endorse the
accord. Some of those hold-outs are acutely vulnerable to climate
change - such as the island state of Tuvalu which was outspoken in its
opposition to the process of negotiation at Copenhagen. Others are
fairly large emitters, such as Argentina.
The US State Department is denying climate change assistance to countries opposing the Copenhagen accord, it emerged today.
The new policy, first reported by The Washington Post,
suggests the Obama administration is ready to play hardball, using aid
as well as diplomacy, to bring developing countries into conformity
with its efforts to reach an international deal to tackle global
warming.
The Post reported today that Bolivia and Ecuador
would now be denied aid after both countries opposed the accord. The
accord is the short document that emerged from the chaos of the Copenhagen climate change summit and is now supported by 110 of the 192 nations that are members of the UN climate change convention.
"There's
funding that was agreed to as part of the Copenhagen accord, and as a
general matter, the US is going to use its funds to go to countries
that have indicated an interest to be part of the accord," the state
department envoy, Todd Stern, told the Washington Post. He said the
decision was not "categorical", suggesting that other countries that
opposed the accord could still get aid. Bolivia had originally been in
line for $3m (PS1.95m) in climate assistance and Ecuador for $2.5m under
the State Department's original request to Congress for international
climate aid, the Post reported.
Environmental
organisations in Washington said they had been briefed that the State
Department was contemplating such a step. According to their
understanding, the Obama administration sees the Copenhagen accord and
the promise of $30bn in climate aid for poor countries as combined
package. Countries that oppose the deal, therefore, do not qualify for
such funds.
However, Alden Meyer, the climate change director for the Union of Concerned Scientists,
warned that such a policy risked further inflaming the tensions between
the industrialised world and developing countries that have been a
major obstacle to getting a deal.
"They are playing a
pretty hard line," he said. "But it has the potential to be a
counterproductive strategy. To cut off adaptation aid to countries
suffering the impacts of climate change that are largely the result of
past emissions from the US and other industrial countries risks making
them look like the bad guys in a morality play. It is not a strategy
that is going to play well in the developing world."
It
could also expose America to further criticism that it is not doing
enough to shoulder its share of climate aid. America has contributed
slightly more than a billion to the fund, below its share.
At the Copenhagen summit last December, Bolivia had cast itself as a champion for the concerns of developing countries
that they were being railroaded into an international agreement that
would not do enough to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or protect the
African and small island nations that will bear the brunt of climate
change.
Bolivia joined Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua in
formally opposing the accord. Ecuador did not issue such a statement
but it is among the countries that have yet to formally endorse the
accord. Some of those hold-outs are acutely vulnerable to climate
change - such as the island state of Tuvalu which was outspoken in its
opposition to the process of negotiation at Copenhagen. Others are
fairly large emitters, such as Argentina.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.