Activists Aren’t Mourning Obama’s Absence at Rio Summit
Samantha
2012/06/15 17:29:35
When a reluctant George H.W. Bush, Sr., then U.S. president, changed his mind and decided at the eleventh hour to address the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio, he sounded defensive in his strong response to charges that the United States was one of the major powers responsible for the some of the world’s worst environmental ills – from greenhouse gases to conspicuous consumption.
Additional excerpts:
But according to the White House, the U.S. delegation to the summit will be led not by Obama but by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Meena Raman of the Malaysia-based Third World Network told IPS, “Given the stance of the United States thus far in the Rio+20 negotiations and the position they have taken in the climate change negotiations in Durban, it may perhaps be a blessing that President Obama is not coming to Rio."
“They are also backtracking on technology transfer, where they do not even want the word ‘transfer’ referred to,” Raman said.
Funding remains a contentious issue. On Thursday, delegates from the G77 bloc of developing countries walked out of negotiations on a green economy until commitments on “means of implementation” were made.
At the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development in Durban, South Africa, the U.S. refused to acknowledge its historic responsibility as the biggest emitter of greenhouse gases, said Raman.
“Given the U.S. stance, we do not want President Obama or any U.S. leader to come to Rio to bury what was agreed in 1992 in Rio. We cannot expect the U.S. to show any leadership in truly wanting to save the planet and the poor. So it is better for President Obama to stay at home,” she said.
Phil Kline, senior campaigner at Greenpeace USA, told IPS, “We are disappointed President Obama did not show leadership by coming to Rio, but much worse than that is the U.S. standing in the way of ending the plunder of the High Seas at Rio+20.”
Additional excerpts:
But according to the White House, the U.S. delegation to the summit will be led not by Obama but by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Meena Raman of the Malaysia-based Third World Network told IPS, “Given the stance of the United States thus far in the Rio+20 negotiations and the position they have taken in the climate change negotiations in Durban, it may perhaps be a blessing that President Obama is not coming to Rio."
“They are also backtracking on technology transfer, where they do not even want the word ‘transfer’ referred to,” Raman said.
Funding remains a contentious issue. On Thursday, delegates from the G77 bloc of developing countries walked out of negotiations on a green economy until commitments on “means of implementation” were made.
At the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development in Durban, South Africa, the U.S. refused to acknowledge its historic responsibility as the biggest emitter of greenhouse gases, said Raman.
“Given the U.S. stance, we do not want President Obama or any U.S. leader to come to Rio to bury what was agreed in 1992 in Rio. We cannot expect the U.S. to show any leadership in truly wanting to save the planet and the poor. So it is better for President Obama to stay at home,” she said.
Phil Kline, senior campaigner at Greenpeace USA, told IPS, “We are disappointed President Obama did not show leadership by coming to Rio, but much worse than that is the U.S. standing in the way of ending the plunder of the High Seas at Rio+20.”
Gimme, gimme, gimme.
Selfishness, selfishness, selfishness!
From my profile:
Name: Samantha Eleanor (my mother loved the name Samantha). My middle name is in honor of Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt. One of my relatives was a diplomat and was present at the creation of the United Nations and later helped write the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.