Climate Peace in Our Time

As Paul explains below, Barack Obama is clearly angling to be the Neville Chamberlain of our time by obtaining a “peace of paper” with Iran declaring “peace in our time.” It is amazing that the Iranians haven’t grasped their opening, or perhaps they realize how desperate Obama is and as such will wait for another year and get even better terms than are on offer now.

Likewise, as everyone knows Obama has declared that he is intent on achieving “climate peace in our time” at the next UN climate summit meeting later this year in Paris. It is amazing how desperate the climatistas are for a “peace of paper” that declares the problem of climate changed solved by international agreement! That the Kyoto Protocol achieved mediocre results seems not to slow them down at all. Even more important than the piece of paper is that the “process” continues ad infinitum. Because United Nations.

Yesterday the new head of the UN’s climate bureau, Christiana Figueres, said in a press conference in Brussels:

“This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model, for the first time in human history. This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time to change the economic development model that has been reigning for the, at least, 150 years, since the industrial revolution.” (Emphasis added.)

Gosh—why has no one ever thought of this before? Wait: didn’t that Marx guy talk about transforming the economic development model? I’m sure a piece of paper will do the trick. Just better not call it the “Climate Manifesto.”  That might be too transparent.

To continue:

“That will not happen overnight and it will not happen at a single conference on climate change, be it COP 15, 21, 40 you choose the number even 41. It just does not occur like that. It is a process, because of the depth of the transformation.“

We are currently working up toward COP (which stands for “Council of Parties,” heh) number 21. So when Figueres talks about thinking ahead to COP 41, you can tell that it is in the interest of the international bureaucracy for climate change to continue to be a problem in exactly its current terms and framework. Because to try a different approach would put them all out of work. Can’t have that.

Responses