Taking a significant stand on the global platform, Russia on Monday vetoed United Nations Security Council’s first-of-its-kind, climate change draft resolution, which ostensibly connected climate change to global peace. The resolution would have required the top UN body to consider climate change as a possible cause of conflicts. In nutshell, the resolution attempted to “securitise” climate action — an ominous term whose implications are still unclear.
According to Russia, the resolution politicized the issue of climate change and could have been used as a pretext for foreign interventions in the future. India shared a similar view and voted against the motion. Meanwhile, China abstained from voting.
The draft resolution was co-sponsored by Niger and Ireland while 12 out of the 15 members of the security council supported it. Despite the overwhelming odds, Russia remained defiant.
The Russian mission to the UN said in a statement that the resolution was aimed at “coercing” the council to examine conflicts and threats to international peace and security through a one-dimensional “climate lens.”
“It was a generic proposal to establish this automatic link while neglecting all other aspects of situations in countries in conflict or countries lagging behind in their socioeconomic development,” the mission said.
India will speak for the interests of the developing world:
Meanwhile, India’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations TS Tirumurti said, “India had no option but to vote against” before adding, “We will always speak up for the interests of the developing world, including Africa and the Sahel region. And we will do so at the right place, the UNFCCC,”
Today, India🇮🇳 voted against a #UNSC draft resolution that attempted to securitize climate action and undermine the hard-won consensual agreements in Glasgow.
— India at UN, NY (@IndiaUNNewYork) December 13, 2021
With the planet, and in turn, countries facing climate change in some shape or form, belligerent western nations like the USA would have had the perfect ammo in their arsenal to launch an assault on any nation (particularly developing and enemy nations) in the garb of climate policing, if the resolution was passed.
Given the track record of the US in invading nations, the climate change argument was intertwined with global peace, to install a backdoor entry for the country’s future armed rendezvous in foreign territories.
The hypocrisy of the Western world in tackling ‘climate change’:
The major cause of pollution on planet Earth has been the Western nations, who have employed double standards when it has come to tackling the root problem.
Earlier, the bunch of developed nations wanted developing nations like India to completely give up on fossil fuels and join their pledge of net zero by 2050, knowing well and truly that India has barely witnessed any industrial revolution in its history so far.
Why sign unnecessary resolutions instead of releasing the $100 billion funding?
If the western nations did care about world peace, they would have released the funding instead of signing such resolutions that do more harm and breed acrimony between nations.
The money would have been used for projects that reduce emissions and help countries adapt to global warming and yet they haven’t been able to fulfill their promise. However, to this date, only $90 billion has been released.
This money could have been used to protect the environment which may have automatically lowered the probability of disruption to global peace. And yet, the seemingly prosperous countries will continue to shift the goal posts instead of holding their end of the bargain,