This article explains the necessity for our leaders, who will be representing us at Copenhagen, to not be selfish in their own country's interests but to function as one group to safe ourselves. Since the environment does not acknowledge the regional lines that we have drawn on the map, pollution will freely spread throughout the globe regardless of who created the toxins. For this reason, we need to be more cooperative in our methods of coming to an agreement. The major roadblocks for this meeting to be successful are the economic fairness that many countries fear that they would not be given. For example, the developing countries feel the need to come to the high level of living that many of the developed countries have enjoyed for years.
We need to come together, not as separate countries all self serving, but as open-minded individuals who realize of what is at stake if we continue our business as usual approach. Although politically, the United States is not obligated to help smaller countries to succeed environmentally, we should send aid to these struggling countries, not only for them, but for ourselves. Poorer countries are not able to adapt their environment to save themselves in the coming years, so they feel entitled to receive money from larger nations for the preparation of the global climate change. We should help these countries so that we can help ourselves. If we only think of the economic implications of our actions. Then our environment, with the global climate changes will have severe effects on our ways of live. In order to preserve our lifestyles in the future, we need to change our course of actions now. This proactive approach to the multitude of problems that we are faced with concerning the environment will ensure that we will effectively deal with the environmental problems. The long term approach is what is necessary to utilize in these environmental problems. The source of the problem needs to be solved, not something external that will only temporarily fix the symptoms. All of the widespread negative effects of global climate change are far greater than the lowering of carbon emissions. Hopefully, the politics that often clouds the real issue can be lifted in order for the best interest of every nation.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/cif-green/2009/dec/10/kofi-annan-climate-change
Annan, Kofi. "Climate change puts us all in the same boat. One hole will sink us all." The Guardian. 10 Dec 2009. Web. 10 Dec 2009.
In order to combat climate change every nation in the world needs to overcome political differences or any other problem between themselves at the time and confront the climate change that is impending for the world. The current administration is much better suited to do that compared to the Bush administration. Obama has been criticized for being too submissive to foreign countries by not promoting American dominance in all areas. This is true but the world must come together to confront climate change; you can't have one nation trying to go its own, independent way while the rest of the world is trying to be responsible in relation to emission of carbon dioxide. Although Obama has been criticized here in America for the policy he has chosen I believe it is the best policy for the world.
ReplyDeleteIt is necessary for larger countries to help those who can't help themselves, but those countries also need to do everything they can to fight global climate change. Chances are, larger countries are going to have their hands full battling emissions within their own boundaries. Helping out everybody else and their own country at the same time could be difficult. Larger countries can provide help, but a lot of work is going to be needed on behalf of those smaller countries. Developing nations need to do everything they can to fight global climate change, as do all other countries. Help can't be provided as abundantly as is needed.
ReplyDeleteJustin,
ReplyDeleteI agree with the idea that countries should think about the world as opposed to putting their country first.
Where I disagree is when you say that American should support these poor countries adapt to a green way of life. I think that, considering our national debt (which is 12 trillion dollars), we should refrain from just freely giving money out to these countries because in doing so we could be forced into a situation where they demand payments or they will use fossil fuels. Instead we need to put economic pressure and withhold aid already being given. While some might say that this would only make the situation worse because economic sanctions on these countries would completely destroy what is left of these countries, I believe that such pressure would cause immediacy of change in that country. On the other hand some countries many not even have the ability to change. While I do have these views, I do believe that this is not a black and white issue and that the situation is different with every country I believe that what we need to focus on is an underlying view to reduce debt. (12 trillion)