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
A "diplomatic standoff" at COP24 in Katowice, Poland over a key U.N. climate report has left world leaders, climate activists, and experts concerned. (Photo: COP24/Twitter)
US, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait Launch 'Ludicrous' Effort to 'Sabotage' Support for Key UN Climate Study
Politicians, activists, and experts sharply condemned the move, emphasizing that "we are talking about the future of the world."
Dec 08, 2018
The COP24 talks in Katowice, Poland have led to a "diplomatic standoff" that has world leaders, climate activists, and experts alarmed as four "oil allies"--the United States, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait--have banded together to "water down" worldwide support for a landmark United Nations climate study released in October.
"It's really an embarrassment for the world's leading scientific superpower to be in this position of having to disbelieve a report that was written by the world's scientific community including a large number of pre-eminent U.S. scientists."
--Alden Meyer, UCS
Most world leaders gathered in Poland to discuss how to meet the goals of the Paris agreement seemed eager to heed the warnings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) special report on what the world could look like if the global temperature rises to 1.5degC versus 2degC (2.7degF versus 3.6degF)--which has elicited demands for "rapid, far-reaching, and unprecedented" reforms to avert climate catastrophe.
The four-nation coalition of oil-exporting nations, however, wasn't having it--and aimed to make it easier for governments to ignore such calls for urgent action to address the climate crisis by fighting against a motion to "welcome" the study. Instead, they suggested, it should merely be "noted."
"The United States was willing to note the report and express appreciation to the scientists who developed it, but not to welcome it, as that would denote endorsement of the report," the U.S. State Department said. "As we have made clear in the IPCC and other bodies, the United States has not endorsed the findings of the report."
Last year, President Donald Trump revealed his intention to withdraw from the Paris agreement, provoking immediate condemnation across the United States and the rest of the world. Within a few months of that announcement, all other countries had signed on to the accord, leaving the U.S. as the sole nation opposed to it.
Efforts by the U.S. and others on Saturday to block global support for the IPCC report raised immediate concern and frustration among climate experts.
"It's very frustrating that we are not able to take into account the report's findings: we are talking about the future of the world--it sounds like hyperbole when I say it, but that's how serious it is."
--Rueanna Haynes, St. Kitts and Nevis delegate
"I think it was a key moment," Alden Meyer of the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) told the Associated Press. "The fact that a group of four countries were trying to diminish the value and importance of a scientific report they themselves, with all other countries, requested three years ago in Paris is pretty remarkable."
"It's really an embarrassment for the world's leading scientific superpower to be in this position of having to disbelieve a report that was written by the world's scientific community including a large number of pre-eminent U.S. scientists," he said.
Meyer, who has tracked climate negotiations for many years, didn't just lay blame on the U.S. though. He also noted that "the Saudis with their sidekicks the Kuwaitis have long been troublemakers in this in this process."
"We've seen this story before--a small number of bad actors who, in essence, are conspiring to prevent the implementation of an agreement where there's otherwise support among the rest of the world's nations--in this case, the conclusion that we need to keep warming below one-and-a-half degrees Celsius, and that requires substantial reductions in carbon emissions over the next 10 or 12 years," Penn State climate scientist Michael Mann said in an interview with BBC News.
Acknowledging that unfortunately, the small group of countries sabotaging the motion to welcome the study seem to be "focused on their own short-term financial interests at the expense of the larger interests of this planet," Mann reiterated the need for, among other changes, a swift global transition to renewable energy to stabilize warming "below catastrophic levels."
"Deliberately ignoring the IPCC report would be wholly irresponsible," declared May Boeve, executive director of 350.org, vowing that her group "stands with the rest of world in condemning these climate deniers...and the vested fossil fuel interests behind them."
The sabotage efforts also infuriated some of those participating in the talks in Poland--including Rueanna Haynes, a delegate for St. Kitts and Nevis, who reportedly told her fellow diplomatic representatives during the plenary that it was "ludicrous" to not welcome the IPCC's warnings.
"It's very frustrating that we are not able to take into account the report's findings: we are talking about the future of the world--it sounds like hyperbole when I say it, but that's how serious it is," she told the Guardian. "I would say that this issue has to be resolved. This is going to drag out and the success of the COP is going to hang on this as well as other issues."
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.
350.orgbig oilchinacop24ipcckuwaitmichael mannparis agreementrussiaunion of concerned scientistsunited nations
The COP24 talks in Katowice, Poland have led to a "diplomatic standoff" that has world leaders, climate activists, and experts alarmed as four "oil allies"--the United States, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait--have banded together to "water down" worldwide support for a landmark United Nations climate study released in October.
"It's really an embarrassment for the world's leading scientific superpower to be in this position of having to disbelieve a report that was written by the world's scientific community including a large number of pre-eminent U.S. scientists."
--Alden Meyer, UCS
Most world leaders gathered in Poland to discuss how to meet the goals of the Paris agreement seemed eager to heed the warnings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) special report on what the world could look like if the global temperature rises to 1.5degC versus 2degC (2.7degF versus 3.6degF)--which has elicited demands for "rapid, far-reaching, and unprecedented" reforms to avert climate catastrophe.
The four-nation coalition of oil-exporting nations, however, wasn't having it--and aimed to make it easier for governments to ignore such calls for urgent action to address the climate crisis by fighting against a motion to "welcome" the study. Instead, they suggested, it should merely be "noted."
"The United States was willing to note the report and express appreciation to the scientists who developed it, but not to welcome it, as that would denote endorsement of the report," the U.S. State Department said. "As we have made clear in the IPCC and other bodies, the United States has not endorsed the findings of the report."
Last year, President Donald Trump revealed his intention to withdraw from the Paris agreement, provoking immediate condemnation across the United States and the rest of the world. Within a few months of that announcement, all other countries had signed on to the accord, leaving the U.S. as the sole nation opposed to it.
Efforts by the U.S. and others on Saturday to block global support for the IPCC report raised immediate concern and frustration among climate experts.
"It's very frustrating that we are not able to take into account the report's findings: we are talking about the future of the world--it sounds like hyperbole when I say it, but that's how serious it is."
--Rueanna Haynes, St. Kitts and Nevis delegate
"I think it was a key moment," Alden Meyer of the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) told the Associated Press. "The fact that a group of four countries were trying to diminish the value and importance of a scientific report they themselves, with all other countries, requested three years ago in Paris is pretty remarkable."
"It's really an embarrassment for the world's leading scientific superpower to be in this position of having to disbelieve a report that was written by the world's scientific community including a large number of pre-eminent U.S. scientists," he said.
Meyer, who has tracked climate negotiations for many years, didn't just lay blame on the U.S. though. He also noted that "the Saudis with their sidekicks the Kuwaitis have long been troublemakers in this in this process."
"We've seen this story before--a small number of bad actors who, in essence, are conspiring to prevent the implementation of an agreement where there's otherwise support among the rest of the world's nations--in this case, the conclusion that we need to keep warming below one-and-a-half degrees Celsius, and that requires substantial reductions in carbon emissions over the next 10 or 12 years," Penn State climate scientist Michael Mann said in an interview with BBC News.
Acknowledging that unfortunately, the small group of countries sabotaging the motion to welcome the study seem to be "focused on their own short-term financial interests at the expense of the larger interests of this planet," Mann reiterated the need for, among other changes, a swift global transition to renewable energy to stabilize warming "below catastrophic levels."
"Deliberately ignoring the IPCC report would be wholly irresponsible," declared May Boeve, executive director of 350.org, vowing that her group "stands with the rest of world in condemning these climate deniers...and the vested fossil fuel interests behind them."
The sabotage efforts also infuriated some of those participating in the talks in Poland--including Rueanna Haynes, a delegate for St. Kitts and Nevis, who reportedly told her fellow diplomatic representatives during the plenary that it was "ludicrous" to not welcome the IPCC's warnings.
"It's very frustrating that we are not able to take into account the report's findings: we are talking about the future of the world--it sounds like hyperbole when I say it, but that's how serious it is," she told the Guardian. "I would say that this issue has to be resolved. This is going to drag out and the success of the COP is going to hang on this as well as other issues."
The COP24 talks in Katowice, Poland have led to a "diplomatic standoff" that has world leaders, climate activists, and experts alarmed as four "oil allies"--the United States, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait--have banded together to "water down" worldwide support for a landmark United Nations climate study released in October.
"It's really an embarrassment for the world's leading scientific superpower to be in this position of having to disbelieve a report that was written by the world's scientific community including a large number of pre-eminent U.S. scientists."
--Alden Meyer, UCS
Most world leaders gathered in Poland to discuss how to meet the goals of the Paris agreement seemed eager to heed the warnings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) special report on what the world could look like if the global temperature rises to 1.5degC versus 2degC (2.7degF versus 3.6degF)--which has elicited demands for "rapid, far-reaching, and unprecedented" reforms to avert climate catastrophe.
The four-nation coalition of oil-exporting nations, however, wasn't having it--and aimed to make it easier for governments to ignore such calls for urgent action to address the climate crisis by fighting against a motion to "welcome" the study. Instead, they suggested, it should merely be "noted."
"The United States was willing to note the report and express appreciation to the scientists who developed it, but not to welcome it, as that would denote endorsement of the report," the U.S. State Department said. "As we have made clear in the IPCC and other bodies, the United States has not endorsed the findings of the report."
Last year, President Donald Trump revealed his intention to withdraw from the Paris agreement, provoking immediate condemnation across the United States and the rest of the world. Within a few months of that announcement, all other countries had signed on to the accord, leaving the U.S. as the sole nation opposed to it.
Efforts by the U.S. and others on Saturday to block global support for the IPCC report raised immediate concern and frustration among climate experts.
"It's very frustrating that we are not able to take into account the report's findings: we are talking about the future of the world--it sounds like hyperbole when I say it, but that's how serious it is."
--Rueanna Haynes, St. Kitts and Nevis delegate
"I think it was a key moment," Alden Meyer of the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) told the Associated Press. "The fact that a group of four countries were trying to diminish the value and importance of a scientific report they themselves, with all other countries, requested three years ago in Paris is pretty remarkable."
"It's really an embarrassment for the world's leading scientific superpower to be in this position of having to disbelieve a report that was written by the world's scientific community including a large number of pre-eminent U.S. scientists," he said.
Meyer, who has tracked climate negotiations for many years, didn't just lay blame on the U.S. though. He also noted that "the Saudis with their sidekicks the Kuwaitis have long been troublemakers in this in this process."
"We've seen this story before--a small number of bad actors who, in essence, are conspiring to prevent the implementation of an agreement where there's otherwise support among the rest of the world's nations--in this case, the conclusion that we need to keep warming below one-and-a-half degrees Celsius, and that requires substantial reductions in carbon emissions over the next 10 or 12 years," Penn State climate scientist Michael Mann said in an interview with BBC News.
Acknowledging that unfortunately, the small group of countries sabotaging the motion to welcome the study seem to be "focused on their own short-term financial interests at the expense of the larger interests of this planet," Mann reiterated the need for, among other changes, a swift global transition to renewable energy to stabilize warming "below catastrophic levels."
"Deliberately ignoring the IPCC report would be wholly irresponsible," declared May Boeve, executive director of 350.org, vowing that her group "stands with the rest of world in condemning these climate deniers...and the vested fossil fuel interests behind them."
The sabotage efforts also infuriated some of those participating in the talks in Poland--including Rueanna Haynes, a delegate for St. Kitts and Nevis, who reportedly told her fellow diplomatic representatives during the plenary that it was "ludicrous" to not welcome the IPCC's warnings.
"It's very frustrating that we are not able to take into account the report's findings: we are talking about the future of the world--it sounds like hyperbole when I say it, but that's how serious it is," she told the Guardian. "I would say that this issue has to be resolved. This is going to drag out and the success of the COP is going to hang on this as well as other issues."
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.