Monday, October 19, 2009

Would the international, global warming treaty, the Copenhagen Treaty, be a threat to American sovereignty?

Here's a link to a posting of an excerpt of a talk on global warming given by British Lord Monckton in the Twin Cities last week. (The full talk is posted here.)

He asserts that the United Nations Climate Change Treaty which is scheduled to be signed in Copenhagen in December 2009
will establish an international government entity designed to enforce provisions of the treaty which would then place enormous restrictions on developed countries regarding CO2 omissions. In turn this would have significant negative consequences for our economy.

Here's a link to a draft of the treaty being negotiated.

Here are a couple of the controversial provisions in the treaty. The first provision would
establish a world governmental entity to enforce the provisions of the treaty.

38. The scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention will be based on three basic pillars: government; facilitative mechanism; and financial mechanism, and the basic organization of which will include the following:

World Government (heading added)
a) The government will be ruled by the COP with the support of a new subsidiary body on adaptation, and of an Executive Board responsible for the management of the new funds and the related facilitative processes and bodies. The current Convention secretariat will operate as such, as appropriate.

To Redistribute Wealth (heading added)
b) The Convention’s financial mechanism will include a multilateral climate change fund including five windows: (a) an Adaptation window, (b) a Compensation window, to address loss and damage from climate change impacts [read: the "climate debt" Monckton refers to], including insurance, rehabilitation and compensatory components, © a Technology window; (d) a Mitigation window; and (e) a REDD window, to support a multi-phases process for positive forest incentives relating to REDD actions.

With Enforcement Authority (heading added)
c) The Convention’s facilitative mechanism will include: (a) work programmes for adaptation and mitigation; (b) a long-term REDD process; © a short-term technology action plan; (d) an expert group on adaptation established by the subsidiary body on adaptation, and expert groups on mitigation, technologies and on monitoring, reporting and verification; and (e) an international registry for the monitoring, reporting and verification of compliance of emission reduction commitments, and the transfer of technical and financial resources from developed countries to developing countries. The secretariat will provide technical and administrative support, including a new centre for information exchange [read; enforcement].

A second would mean the compensation of third world countries by the West:
17. [[Developed [and developing] countries] [Developed and developing country Parties] [All Parties] [shall] [should]:]
(a) Compensate for damage to the LDCs’ economy and also compensate for lost opportunities, resources, lives, land and dignity, as many will become environmental refugees;

(b) Africa, in the context of environmental justice, should be equitably compensated for environmental, social and economic losses arising from the implementation of response measures.
I'm told the site had over 120,000 hits as of Monday morning despite being posted only last Thursday.

Certainly Obama signing and then the Senate ratifying the treaty would have a major impact on our economy. This has the makings of a battle royale.

1 comment:

Unknown said...

The only thing that is a threat to American sovereignty is the radical extremist groups that offer only one view to life.