October 21, 2009
Email Friend | Print Article | | Share Share

October 21, 2009

U.S. sovereignty and the Climate Summit

By James Simpson
Not content with his humiliation at Copenhagen this past September, President Obama will be traveling again to the Danish capital in December to attend the U.N. COP15 Climate Change Conference. This agreement would commit the United States to punitive and expensive greenhouse gas regulations dictated by the United Nations without recourse.

COP stands for "Conference of the Parties" and the December Copenhagen conference will be the 15th under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), hence COP15. According to their website, it will be one of the largest conferences ever held outside the New York or Geneva headquarters, with an anticipated attendance of over 10,000 people, including governmental representatives from 189 countries, industry groups, and other non-governmental organizations.

The theme of the December 7 - 18 conference is "Hope," so perhaps Mr. Obama will have more luck this time. Instead of soliciting the International Olympic Committee with trite cliché and no payoffs, he will be doing something much easier: selling out our country. After all, ceding power, relinquishing billions in U.S. tax dollars and destroying U.S. economic competitiveness is a pretty easy sell to the countries that will benefit, and he has had a lot of practice doing the same thing here at home. He will have a hard time screwing this one up.

The Hope site optimistically pronounces:

On 7 December, leaders from 192 countries gather for U.N. Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen and decide the fate of our planet...

Decide the fate of our planet... Do these people have any idea how mindlessly grandiose they sound? Of course not. They are out to save the planet, just like Nancy Pelosi! It is hard for a normal person to imagine making such proclamations without embarrassment. But this is today's political class

This agreement will cede U.S. sovereignty permanently and irrevocably to the United Nations. So said British Lord Christopher Monckton at an event at Bethel University in St Paul, Minnesota this past Wednesday, October 14th.

Lord Monckton was former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's science advisor. He has lectured and written extensively on the issue, including an in-depth scientific critique to the 50,000 member American Physical Society, a serious side-by-side comparison slap-down of Al Gore's global warming assertions, and a recent summary of the global warming issue. In introducing his topic at Bethel University, he states unequivocally:

...and I am going to show you the latest science, which now doesn't leave the question unsettled any more, this is now settled science, it is now settled science that there is not a problem with our influence over the climate. The science is in, the truth is out, and the scare is over.

You can watch his entire 1 hour 35 minute presentation here - well worth the time if you can spare it. The slideshow he frequently points to in this presentation can be viewed along with the video, here. Lord Monckton presents a series of statistics, charts and studies making a compelling case that not only is global warming insignificant - if it exists at all - but is likely not manmade, and more importantly, that the global warming alarmists have repeatedly, blatantly, deliberately lied, suppressing the facts to promote the myth.

Despite his effective refutation of manmade global warming, his closing remarks about the Copenhagen treaty are chilling:

I read that treaty. And what it says is this, that a world government is going to be created. The word "government" actually appears as the first of three purposes of the new entity. The second purpose is the transfer of wealth from the countries of the West to third world countries, in satisfication of what is called, coyly, "climate debt" because we've been burning CO2 and they haven't. We've been screwing up the climate and they haven't. And the third purpose of this new entity, this government, is enforcement.

So, thank you, America. You were the beacon of freedom to the world. It is a privilege merely to stand on this soil of freedom while it is still free. But, in the next few weeks, unless you stop it, your president will sign your freedom, your democracy, and your humanity away forever. And neither you nor any subsequent government you may elect will have any power whatsoever to take it back. That is how serious it is. I've read the treaty. I've seen this stuff about [world] government and climate debt and enforcement. They are going to do this to you whether you like it or not.

Watch him make his powerful concluding remarks in this Youtube video. (4 mins.)

You might call it a bit of rhetorical overkill, but given everthing else this administration and Congress have already done, only a bit. As Monckton later stated in a Q & A session, for such a treaty to be ratified requires a positive vote from a two-thirds majority in the U.S. Senate.

It seems difficult to imagine Democrats convincing seven Republicans to assist them in committing national suicide that way. Indeed, a recent Wall Street Journal article quoted Senate Republicans as saying that whatever deal Obama cut at Copenhagen would be dead on arrival:

Wisconsin Rep. James Sensenbrenner, the top Republican on the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, predicts "a repeat of Kyoto -- namely an environmentally ineffective agreement that cannot be ratified" by the Senate.

However, perhaps an easier option would be for Democrats to pass legislation enacting some or all of the proposals. The House has already passed the Waxman-Markey (Cap and Trade) bill. This onerous legislation calls for an 83 percent reduction in greenhouse gasses from 2005 levels by 2050. That means almost complete elimination of carbon based fuels, and parallels the goals identified in COP15, which asks participating countries to reduce global emmissions 50-85% by 2050.

Such reductions would essentially bring our economy to a screeching halt, as Lord Monckton states in his speech. Even the more modest goal for 2020 of a 17 percent reduction will force radical changes in how we do business and conduct our daily lives.

Senators John Kerry (D-MA) and the increasingly addled Lindsay Graham (R-SC), put out an Op-Ed in the New York Times last week, under the frighteningly Obamanoid title "Yes We Can," indicating that perhaps Senate Republicans shouldn't be so sanguine either. Their article concludes thusly (emphasis added):

We are confident that a legitimate bipartisan effort can put America back in the lead again and can empower our negotiators to sit down at the table in Copenhagen in December and insist that the rest of the world join us in producing a new international agreement on global warming.

So if Kerry and Graham get their way, not only is America going to agree to U.N. global warming regulations, we are going to lead the charge in getting them imposed!

And the U.N. panel is fully anticipating a more conciliatory approach from the U.S. Recognizing Kerry's efforts, as UNFCCC Executive Secretary Yvo de Boer, stated:

I think that a major shortcoming of Kyoto was that the official delegation came back with a treaty they knew was never going to make it through the Senate. And this time I have the feeling that the communication is much stronger, that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, through John Kerry, is really expressing strongly what they feel needs to be done in Copenhagen.

Thank you, John Kerry.

The U.N. website states the following about COP15 (emphasis added):

This [the 2009 Bangkok climate change talks] was the penultimate negotiating session before COP15 in Copenhagen in December, at which an ambitious and effective international climate change deal is to be clinched.

Before COP15, there will be a final round of negotiations November 2-6 in Barcelona, Spain at the Barcelona Convention Center.

The most recent UNFCCC Working Group report (181 pages) can be accessed here in PDF format. Much of it references earlier documents, of which there are many. To fully assess the ramifications of this proposal would likely require referencing these earlier documents as well.

While the prospects for Senate ratification of this treaty are probably in doubt, it seems likely the U.S. Congress may try to pass Waxman - Markey or some other hybrid legislation using the same underhanded tactics now in play on healthcare. All the more reason to redouble our efforts at getting them out in 2010.

Suffice it to say that if the carbon reduction targets already discussed are adapted by this country, never mind whatever other onerous provisions are in this treaty, we might as well all buy a horse and buggy - sorry, rickshaw; horses create methane - because we will be headed back into the 18th century.

Additional Resources:

UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol: Guide to Climate Change Negotiations (2008)

SourceWatch: UNFCCC summary, listing all participating parties, all COP meetings past and scheduled, and other useful information

Businessman and Examiner.com columnist Jim Simpson is a former White House staff economist and budget analyst.. You may read more of his articles on his blog, Truth and Consequences.
on "U.S. sovereignty and the Climate Summit"
ATsupport2.jpg