democracynow.org
Stories:
The U.S.-led bombing of militant targets inside Syria has intensified as Pentagon officials acknowledge the military mission could take years. On Tuesday, U.S. and other coalition forces launched more than 200 strikes on Islamic State targets. The latest round of airstrikes in Syria hit targets near the Turkish border, close to an area where tens of thousands of Kurds have fled to escape from militants tied to the Islamic State group. Activists report the strikes have killed civilians. To discuss the latest news, we are joined by Patrick Cockburn, Middle East correspondent for The Independent and author of "The Jihadis Return: ISIS and the New Sunni Uprising."
TRANSCRIPT
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Pentagon officials are openly acknowledging that the military campaign in Syria and Iraq could take years to succeed. This comes as the latest round of airstrikes in Syria hit targets near the Turkish border close to an area where tens of thousands of Kurds have fled to escape from militants tied to the Islamic State group. On Tuesday, President Obama made his first public remarks about the strikes inside Syria.
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: And because of the almost unprecedented effort of this coalition, I think we now have an opportunity to send a very clear message that the world is united, that all of us are committed to making sure that we degrade and ultimately destroy not only ISIL, but also the kinds of extremist ideologies that would lead to so much bloodshed. This is not going to be something that is quick, and it is not something that is going to be easy. It will take time, and it’s not only a military effort.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: President Obama also met on Tuesday with leaders from Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Bahrain, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates in New York. Despite claims that the strikes targeted only militant sites, some residents of Idlib province in Syria said civilian areas had been hit.
ABU OSSAMAH: [translated] The military headquarters are far from the city, in the mountains. There are no military headquarters inside the city. All the people who were killed today were displaced civilians from Aleppo fearing the bombs of Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president.
AMY GOODMAN: We go now to London, where we’re joined by Patrick Cockburn, Middle East correspondent for The Independent. His new book is called The Jihadis Return: ISIS and the New Sunni Uprising.
Patrick, welcome back to Democracy Now! So, President Obama says we must degrade and destroy the Islamic State. Is this the new line in the sand? Do you see echoes of 2003? Is this going to deal with this violence in the Middle East with this group and the related group, Khorasan?
PATRICK COCKBURN: No, it’s not. I mean, it’s—as he said himself, it’s going to take years. But I don’t think it’s going to work. You know, the first day of bombings like this, or bombardments, are usually the best, and there are pictures on television of large buildings being blown up, and it all looks very effective, but usually the buildings have nobody in them. Remember that this didn’t work when the U.S. had 150,000 soldiers in Iraq in 2006 and 2007, so I doubt if it’s going to work now. It’s going to make it more difficult for the Islamic State to put its gunmen into convoys and launch blitzkrieg attacks on bases and on towns, but otherwise it’s not going to have a decisive effect. And you can see that in Iraq, where they’ve been bombing since the beginning of August, and ISIS, the Islamic State, is still on the offensive.
AMY GOODMAN: Will it have a recruiting effect?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Yes. I think they’re probably not short of recruits anyway. You know, in Iraq and Syria, you have a vast body of unemployed, bitter young men who will look to the Islamic State as somebody who will employ them, somebody who has—shows religious leadership. So, I don’t think that they’ll have any problem with recruitment.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: And, Patrick Cockburn, one of the things that’s quite striking about what’s occurred in Syria since the strikes began is that they’re targeting a group, Khorasan, which Obama never mentioned. The focus of the administration has consistently been the Islamic State, or ISIS or ISIL, but the first that we heard of Khorasan was yesterday. Could you explain who this group is and why it is that they are said to constitute a threat to the United States, an argument that has not been made with as much specificity about ISIS?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Well, I think that it is a bit mysterious, this group. One’s a little suspicious that the administration, those who are carrying out the bombing, may want to say to its audience in America that here are people we’re attacking who are about to attack you in the homeland, which ISIS didn’t show much sign of doing. So that might be one reason why this obscure group is suddenly given such publicity.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, didn’t President Obama need this threat to the so-called homeland, that the criticism when he was attacking ISIS was precisely what you just said, while it might be threatening people there and the region overall, that that wasn’t the justification? And again, following up on that question, who is Khorasan? Who is this group that they’re calling the "al-Qaeda all-stars"?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Well, they remain obscure. And also, al-Qaeda is kind of a back number, you know. For years, the administration has gone on, going on about al-Qaeda core, al-Qaeda central, in the mountains of Pakistan, as if this was an influential group. And they had announced great victories over them. Killing bin Laden was one, but also killing officers of this tiny group also in Yemen. But all the time, a much larger group, larger by factors of several hundred, was growing up in Iraq and Syria, which is the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. So I think they still rather yearn to connect the jihadi movement to the old al-Qaeda, which was pretty small, just had a few camps, and avoid the much more serious question of confronting the Islamic State, which controls an area larger than Britain, with five or six million people in it. So I think it’s diversionary and an attempt really to show that ISIS is a direct threat to the homeland.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Well, there have even been some reports suggesting that Khorasan is fighting ISIS. I don’t know whether that’s accurate, but it says that—there are some reports that say that the leader of Khorasan had been tasked with fighting ISIS in Syria.
PATRICK COCKBURN: Well, he’d have his work cut out. You know, you have Jabhat al-Nusra, which is the official affiliate of al-Qaeda central, so-called, which was originally set up by ISIS and then broke away from it. But that’s been on the retreat. It lost the whole of eastern Syria to ISIS over the summer. It has some strength in Idlib province, and then again in the south near the border with Jordan, but otherwise is very much on the back foot. So, I mean, ISIS holds about one-third of Syria and about one-quarter of Iraq, so to try to equate some tiny group that suddenly emerges with ISIS, I think, is to blur what’s really going on.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: I want to turn to comments made by Secretary of State John Kerry. He met with his Iraqi counterpart, Ibrahim al-Jaafari, and Iraqi President Fouad Massoum on Tuesday. Kerry addressed a joint news conference after the meeting.
SECRETARY OF STATE JOHN KERRY: I want to just say a few words about our decision to conduct strikes against ISIL targets in Syria and also against seasoned al-Qaeda operatives in Syria who are known as the Khorasan group. We have been very clear from the beginning: We will not allow geography or borders to prevent us from being able to take action against ISIL, and we will not allow them to have a safe haven where they think they can have sanctuary against accountability. We will hold them responsible for their grotesque atrocities, and we will not allow these terrorists to find a safe haven anywhere. That is President Obama’s resolve. If left unchecked, ISIL is not only a threat to the stability of Iraq and to the region, but it is a threat to countries elsewhere, including here.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: That was Secretary of State John Kerry. Patrick Cockburn, could you respond to what he said? And also, the argument that you’ve made repeatedly in your pieces is that ISIS, both in Syria and Iraq, given the opposition to the regimes in both those places, may be viewed as the lesser of two evils.
PATRICK COCKBURN: By the Sunni community, certainly, it is often regarded as the lesser of two evils. I mean, you know, I have friends in Mosul, which ISIL has controlled for the last three months, and they don’t like ISIS, but they’re truly terrified of the Iraqi army and the Shia militias coming back. The same is true in Syria in towns north of Aleppo that ISIS control and in Raqqa, that they—assuming they’re Sunni. Of course, it’s different if you’re Christian or another religion. If you’re Sunni, then ISIS is difficult to live with, but you stand a better chance of staying alive. And I think that the whole sort of strategy, which has been to try to separate part, at least, of the Sunni community from ISIS by getting the tribes to revolt and so forth, I think, just isn’t going to work. It worked in 2007 in Iraq to a degree, but I don’t think it will work now. ISIS is too big, too violent, and is expecting a stab in the back.
AMY GOODMAN: We have to break, but when we come back, Patrick Cockburn, a couple quick questions. Is the U.S. now working with Syria, the country President Obama wanted to bomb—or, destabilize the government of Syria? Is he now working with that country? And also, what about the allies that the U.S. says they are working with, the Arab countries? What are they doing in these airstrikes? Patrick Cockburn is Middle East correspondent for The Independent. His new book, The Jihadis Return: ISIS and the New Sunni Uprising. Stay with us.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: "Is It for Freedom," Sara Thomsen, here on Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman, with Nermeen Shaikh.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: As we continue our conversation on the U.S. military strikes in Syria and Iraq, I want to turn to comments made by the leader of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah.
HASSAN NASRALLAH: [translated] We are against American military intervention and international coalition in Syria, whether that action is against the regime, as it was about to happen a year or so ago, or against Islamic State or other. It is a matter of principle. This American administration is not ethically qualified to present itself as a fighter of terrorism or as a leader of an international coalition targeting terrorism. It has nothing to do with fighting terrorism. It has other motivations. This coalition, as Obama declares in all his speeches, is defending American interests.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: That was Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah. Patrick Cockburn, could you respond to what he said, and also the suggestion that you’ve made in a recent piece that any prolonged air campaign in Syria by the U.S. and its allies will have to rely on those fighting ISIS on the ground—among them, Hezbollah?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Yes. I mean, you know, it’s a very messy situation, because there’s no doubt those who are fighting ISIS in Syria are the Syrian army, Hezbollah, the Syrian Kurds, whose parent organization is labeled as a terrorist by the U.S. and European Union. So, if the U.S. and others are bombing ISIS and trying to degrade, as they say, ISIS, they are obviously helping these groups. Also, at a certain point, if there’s a battle between these two groups, between the Syrian army and ISIS, is the U.S. going to not do anything, or is it going to effectively engage on the side of the Syrian government? So this is an extraordinarily messy situation. I think that Hezbollah is clearly very—and the Syrian government, is very suspicious and wary of what is happening, because if the U.S. can unilaterally bomb Syria against ISIS, it could bomb Syria against them. So, they’re worried about the precedent that’s been set, even though they may be pleased that the U.S. is attacking their main enemy.
AMY GOODMAN: And is the U.S. working with President Assad right now, the president of Syria, who President Obama was going to attack last year? We know that they gave them warning, ahead of time, of these bombings.
PATRICK COCKBURN: Yeah, it becomes sort of—you know, it’s very weird. They keep on saying, "We’re not doing that," but, of course, governments hate announcing a U-turn. But effectively, they have U-turned, because they wanted Assad out. They said this was their priority. Now their priority is getting rid of ISIS, and ISIS is the main enemy of Assad. So, I mean, ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra dominate the Syrian opposition. So, they are effectively assisting Assad in a very significant way, though they don’t want to admit this. Then they say—
AMY GOODMAN: And the Arab countries they are working with right now, that they say—this kind of coalition of the willing that they have—Saudi Arabia and Qatar, United Arab Emirates and Jordan—in fact, what are they doing? Are they engaging in these strikes? Is the U.S. succeeding in getting Saudi Arabia not to fund ISIS?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Well, I think so. I think, you know, all the publicity given that these people are joining in—Jordan may have sent some planes—is, I think, to commit them to being against ISIS very publicly and against jihadis in Syria, when in fact, of course, that they played a role, according to all U.S. inquiries, in funding and setting up these jihadi movements over the last 10 years. However, I do think that they’re genuinely frightened of ISIS, because although they may have had a role in establishing it originally, or the circumstances in which it grew, it’s rather a Frankenstein monster that they don’t control, so I think they are genuinely opposed to it for their own reasons.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Do you think it’s possible, Patrick Cockburn, as some reports have suggested, that in focusing exclusively on these extremist groups and militant groups in Syria, and not on the Assad regime, the moderate rebel groups that the U.S. is supporting may actually be weakened?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Well, these moderate groups are a bit difficult to find on the map. And it’s also a question of how moderate are they. There are supposedly going to be 5,000 moderates that are to go to Saudi Arabia to be trained, after they’ve been vetted to show that they are not jihadis. But, you know, they’re not a significant force. I think there’s a sort of pretense that there’s a third force in Syria which could supposedly fight both the Assad government and ISIS simultaneously, but it doesn’t really exist. It’s a political convenience, but really nothing more.
AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to turn to Medea Benjamin for a moment. On Tuesday, Democracy Now! spoke to her, the founder of CodePink. She questioned the timing of the strikes on Syria.
MEDEA BENJAMIN: Well, isn’t it sad, Amy, that the day that the world should be coming together to say, "How do we address the climate chaos that can really destroy our entire planet?" instead, the eyes will now be on the U.S. bombing campaign in Syria?
AMY GOODMAN: That was Medea Benjamin. Your thoughts, Patrick Cockburn?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Well, I think that—I doubt it, really. I think that they were always going to do it, because, as the chief of staff, U.S. chief of staff, said, you know, it was absurd to bomb ISIS in Iraq and not in Syria, since they could just disappear across the border and launch offensives there. Secondly, the sort of ritual murder of U.S. journalists and a British aid worker, obviously they felt they had to respond to that. So, I think that there’s probably a simpler explanation as to why they did it now.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: One of the problems, before we conclude, Patrick Cockburn, has to do with the anxieties that the Sunni population in both Iraq and Syria feel regarding the Shia governments. To what extent is Iraq’s new government, under Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi, is less sectarian than Nouri al-Maliki’s?
PATRICK COCKBURN: It’s less sort of vigorously and aggressively sectarian as Maliki’s government was. But, you know, will this trickle down to the front line? If I’m a Sunni young man in some Sunni village or town outside Fallujah or Mosul, and I’m picked up by the army or by Shia militias, what are my chances of staying alive? What are my chances of not being tortured? Unless it affects that, it’s really not going to change the attitude of the Sunni community in Iraq. And I think that the sort of Sunni leaders who have joined this government, they don’t have much clout within their community. They can’t really go back to their own cities or towns in any safety.
AMY GOODMAN: Is President Obama doing just what ISIS asked for—to attack, to engage?
PATRICK COCKBURN: I don’t think he’s necessarily fallen into a trap doing that. It’s difficult to know how far—how sophisticated politically ISIS is. After all, it’s a movement which believes it’s inspired by God. It attributed victories over the summer to a divine intervention on its behalf. So it may have overplayed its hand. On the other hand, it can see the advantage of being the standard-bearer of the Muslims, of the Arabs, against what they will describe as crusader intervention.
AMY GOODMAN: Patrick Cockburn, if war was not possible, if it was not an option on the table, how could this be resolved diplomatically?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Well, I think, that the sort of tremendously messy situation in Syria should be resolved partly by, let’s say, organizing a truce between the Assad government—not a political solution, but a truce—and the non-ISIS opposition, so they can both effectively oppose ISIS. I think that would have an enormous effect. And it could also be an enormous benefit of people able to go back, the millions of Syrians go back to their cities. I think you have to do things at that level, so that there is an effective on-the-ground opposition to ISIS. I think that this present bombing, it looks good for a few days. In some ways, it cramps the style of the ISIS military attacks, but it’s not really going to change anything very much.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Do you think a truce like that is still possible, given that the airstrikes have begun?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Between the non-ISIS groups and Damascus, the Syrian army, yes, I think it is, because it sort of exists de facto in many areas already, that both the Assad government and the opposition, the non-ISIS opposition, are susceptible to pressure from the U.S., from Iran, from Russia and Saudi Arabia. You’d have to have pressure for this from the outside, but it could be done, definitely.
AMY GOODMAN: Patrick Cockburn, Middle East correspondent for The Independent. His new book, The Jihadis Return: ISIS and the New Sunni Uprising.
|
|
"We Can't Rely on Our Leaders": Inaction at Climate Summit
Fuels Call for Movements to Take the Helm
Two days after the largest People’s Climate March in history, more than 120 world leaders gathered in New York City for a one-day United Nations climate summit. Tuesday’s meeting took place ahead of the larger, 200-nation summit in Paris in 2015, when delegates will attempt to finalize an agreement to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions. In a series of speeches, world leaders made nonbinding agreements to slow global warming and keep the rise in ocean temperatures below two degrees. Several leaders from the most carbon-polluting nations skipped the climate summit, including China, India and Russia. In one commitment to come out of the summit, more than 30 countries set a deadline to end deforestation by 2030. If successful, this could reduce carbon emissions by an estimated eight billion tons per year — the equivalent of emissions by all of the world’s one billion cars. But Brazil, which has the largest continuous rainforest in the world, refused to sign on, saying the plan conflicts with its own laws and targets. We are joined by two guests: Bianca Jagger, the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s Ambassador for the Bonn Challenge, which seeks restore 150 million hectares of the world’s degraded and deforested lands by 2020, and founder and chair of the Bianca Jagger Human Rights Foundation; and Asad Rehman, head of international climate for Friends of the Earth.
TRANSCRIPT
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: We turn right now to the historic moment on Sunday, the moment that could change the world, or not, depending on whether the march marches on. Nermeen?
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Two days after the largest climate change march in history, more than 120 world leaders gathered here in New York for a one-day United Nations climate summit. Tuesday’s meeting took place ahead of the larger 200-nation summit in Paris in 2015, when delegates will attempt to finalize an agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon hosted Tuesday’s summit.
SECRETARY-GENERAL BAN KI-MOON: Today was a great day, a historic day. Never before have so many leaders gathered to commit to action on climate change. I thank every one of you who came to New York with ambition and commitment. A new coalition of governments, business, finance, multilateral development banks and civil society leaders announced their commitment to mobilize upwards of $200 billion for financing low-carbon and climate-resilient development. As we walk together on the road to Lima and Paris in December 2015—December 2014 and 2015, let us look back on today as the day we decided, as a human family, to put our house in order to make it livable for future generations. Today’s summit has shown that we can rise to the climate challenge.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Hollywood actor and environmental activist Leonardo DiCaprio also addressed the U.N. summit on climate change on Tuesday. He was recently named a United Nations Messenger of Peace.
LEONARDO DICAPRIO: Now must be our moment for action. We need to put a price tag on carbon emissions, and eliminate government subsidies for oil, coal and gas companies. We need to end the free ride that industrial polluters have been given in the name of a free market economy. They do not deserve our tax dollars. They deserve our scrutiny, for the economy itself will die if our ecosystems collapse.
This is the most urgent of times and the most urgent of messages. Honored delegates, leaders of the world, I pretend for a living, but you do not. The people made their voices heard on Sunday around the world, and the momentum will not stop. But now it is your turn. The time to answer humankind’s greatest challenge is now. We beg of you to face it with courage and honesty.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: While 120 leaders took part in the U.N. climate summit, the leaders of several key nations, including China, India and Russia, opted not to attend. President Obama addressed the summit.
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: Because of the almost unprecedented effort of this coalition, I think we now have an opportunity to send a very clear message that the world is united, that all of us are committed to making sure that we degrade and ultimately destroy not only ISIL, but also the kinds of extremist ideologies that would lead to so much bloodshed.
AMY GOODMAN: We turn back to President Obama.
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: As one of America’s governors has said, we are the first generation to feel the impact of climate change and the last generation that can do something about it. So today I’m here personally, as the leader of the world’s largest economy and its second-largest emitter, to say that we have begun to do something about it. The United States has made ambitious investments in clean energy and ambitious reductions in our carbon emissions. We now harness three times as much electricity from the wind and 10 times as much from the sun as we did when I came into office. Within a decade, our cars will go twice as far on a gallon of gas, and already every major automaker offers electric vehicles. We’ve made unprecedented investments to cut energy waste in our homes, in our buildings, in our appliances, all of which will save consumers billions of dollars. And we are committed to helping communities build climate-resilient infrastructure. So, all told, these advances have helped create jobs, grow our economy, and drive our carbon pollution to its lowest levels in nearly two decades, proving that there does not have to be a conflict between a sound environment and strong economic growth.
AMY GOODMAN: Also on Tuesday, more than 30 countries set a deadline to end deforestation by 2030. But Brazil, which has the largest continuous rainforest in the world, refused to sign on, saying the plan conflicts with its own laws and targets. If successful, the plan could reduce carbon emissions by an estimated eight billion tons per year—the equivalent of emissions by all of the world’s one billion cars.
For more, we’re joined by two guests here in New York. Bianca Jagger is with us, the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s ambassador for the Bonn Challenge. Their goal, to restore 150 million hectares of the world’s degraded and deforested lands by 2020. Bianca Jagger joined the people’s march Sunday with the indigenous bloc. She’s also founder and chair of the Bianca Jagger Human Rights Foundation.
And Asad Rehman is with us, head of international climate for Friends of the Earth. We last spoke with him at the U.N. limate summit in Doha in 2012.
We welcome you both to Democracy Now! The significance, Asad, of the people’s march on Sunday, 400,000 people marching, flooding Wall Street, thousands on Monday, and then the U.N. people’s summit on Tuesday?
ASAD REHMAN: Absolutely. I think it’s a pivotal moment, an historic moment. Over the last few years, we have seen the climate movement growing again. We see it at the local level in the resistance we see to fracking, to oil exploration, to even the solutions, in terms of community energy, around the world. But this was a moment where we could bring all of those voices together, to express them, to make sure that we were calling for the kind of action that people not only require, but that the planet requires. So, it’s a beginning, and it’s a start, but it’s a long history. And I think anybody who went on that demonstration could only walk away energized and more committed that the power lies in our hands and not in that building here in New York, in the U.N. summit.
AMY GOODMAN: Bianca Jagger, your feelings? You’ve been working on this issue for years.
BIANCA JAGGER: I feel that we cannot rely upon the leaders of the world. Climate change is the greatest challenge that we are facing in this century. And I feel that the reason why people’s attention was galvanized and that people came out in the street, and you saw at least 400,000 people in that march, is that we understand clearly that it’s not going to be the leaders of the world who will make the decision to have a globally binding treaty by the time that we have the UNFCCC or the U.N. conference on climate change, but that unfortunately will have to be us. And that is the reason why I accepted to be the IUCN ambassador for the Bonn Challenge.
And what is the Bonn Challenge? The Bonn Challenge is the largest commitment for restoration of land in the world. It’s a hundred—the objective is 150 million hectares of land by 2020, and 350 [million] by 2030. So, what is the difference between reforestation and restoration is that restoration, you know, includes and works together with communities. And it is to improve the livelihood, to improve security, to improve water, to improve—so, each one of those communities in those different countries will have a say as to what it is.
And what we did is that, in Brazil, at the Rio+20, we had 20 million hectares that were pledged. Among those were 15 [million] by the U.S., and President Obama spoke about it in his speech yesterday. But yesterday we had countries like the Congo, Niger, Colombia, Ethiopia, Guatemala and Uganda, and it amounted to 35 million hectares of land that they have pledged to restore. That comes to 55 million hectares of land that we already have the pledge. Now, if we are able to achieve the 150 million hectares of land, restore that land, what it will amount to is to—we will remove one billion tons of carbon from the atmosphere, which will reduce the emission gap by 11 to 17 percent. That is enormous.
But what is really important to understand about restoration, because a lot of people understand what is reforestation but don’t understand what is restoration, is that it is working together with communities, with the people. They are the ones that are being consulted as to how they want to do it.
And you were asking about, for example, Brazil, even though the government has not done. That is, in the Rio+20, we had the Mata, the Mata Atlântica of Brazil, that made a pledge, and it is a combination of government, business and private sector. So, it’s not only governments that can make a pledge. You can have a pledge, as well, by landowners and by businesses and people who are owners of land. And I think that it is a hope, because we cannot really rely upon leaders to do what is necessary. I don’t believe anymore that they have the will to do what is necessary to prevent catastrophic climate change; therefore, we need initiatives like the initiative of the Bonn Challenge.
AMY GOODMAN: And, by the way, a hectare is about two-and-a-half acres.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: And, Bianca Jagger, could you explain how it is that the Bonn Challenge will feed into, if at all, whatever possible U.N. climate agreement might be reached, and specifically on this question of restoration?
BIANCA JAGGER: Well, I don’t know how it will. It will, of course, because it has to do with the reduction of CO2 emissions. But it is an initiative that is outside of, you know, the U.N. agreement. It may be that by the time we come to Paris, it will be part of it, but it is an initiative that—
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Does the IUCN not work with the U.N. on these questions?
BIANCA JAGGER: Yes, of course it works. In fact, let me maybe explain a little bit about how it came about. It was in Bonn, and it was a meeting of governments, of civil society, of grassroot organization, of business, together came up with the idea that it was important to have the Bonn Challenge to restore 150 million hectares of land. Of course, that is, you know, it’s always working with the U.N. But I don’t know if this will be part of the treaty, on all the negotiations that we will have in the U.N..
AMY GOODMAN: We’re going to break and then come back to this discussion, also talk about the issue of fracking, a concern of people all over the United States. Prime Minister Cameron had words about fracking, certainly not against it, as President Obama has spoken in the past. Our guests are Bianca Jagger, who is the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s ambassador for the Bonn Challenge, as well as Asad Rehman, who is head of international climate for Friends of the Earth. There’s also a controversy around whether Friends of the Earth has endorsed—changed its position on nuclear power, and we want to ask him about that. Stay with us.
[break]
NERMEEN SHAIKH: As we continue our coverage of the U.N. climate summit, we turn to British Prime Minister David Cameron, who spoke on Tuesday.
PRIME MINISTER DAVID CAMERON: We have created the world’s first Climate Change Act. And as prime minister, I pledged that the world I lead would be the greenest government ever. And I believe we’ve kept that promise. We’ve more than doubled our capacity in renewable electricity in the last four years alone. We now have enough solar power to power almost a million U.K. homes. We have the world’s leading financial center in carbon trading. And we have established the world’s first Green Investment Bank. We’ve invested a billion pounds, one-and-a-half billion dollars, in carbon capture and storage, and we’ve said no to any new coal without carbon capture and storage. We’re investing in all forms of lower-carbon energy, including shale gas and nuclear, with the first new nuclear plant coming on stream for a generation. Now, as a result of all that we are doing, we are on track to cut emissions by 80 percent by 2050.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: In his address, British Prime Minister David Cameron also called for technologies like fracking and nuclear energy to reduce the dependence on fossil fuels. So, Asad Rehman, Friends of the Earth, could you respond to what Prime Minister David Cameron had to say?
ASAD REHMAN: Well, David Cameron’s speech, like many other speeches made in the U.N., was very high on rhetoric, but very low in terms of actual, real ambition. To have a prime minister come to here to make a statement on the climate summit, when we know what the science is telling us—we know, from our own realities, from our own experiences now, when we look at the impacts around the world that are happening—we know 80 percent of fossil fuels, of known fossil fuels, have to be kept in the ground if we want to keep temperatures well below two degrees or at 1.5—for a government then to give a green light to unconventional gas, oil exploration, I think is not only criminal, I mean, it is like selling cigarettes in a cancer hospital. It’s at that kind of level.
And so, what we have argued and very involved at a grassroots level in, in the U.K., like many other places around the world, is mobilizing people to say no to fracking. It’s a false solution. What we really need is investment in clean, renewable energy, community energy. We need to harness our solar, our wind and our tides. And we can both be much more efficient, we can transform our energy sector, and we need to transform the energy sector now, within the next 10 to 15 years. Having never-never goals in 2050 will do nothing to tackle the climate crisis, and in fact will lead to definitely a breaching of the two-degree target.
So, our message to David Cameron, who claimed that he was leading the greenest government, when last week MPs in the British Parliament gave him a red card for the greenest government, for a prime minister who came here, who talked about and lectured governments about tax subsidies to dirty energy corporations, when his government has given over $2 billion in tax subsidies to fracking and oil exploration, I think, is deeply hypocritical. And what we should have come here is real concrete demands in terms of—and commitments to energy efficiency, to renewable energy and to the ambitious kind of targets that are required to keep temperatures well below two degrees.
AMY GOODMAN: Bianca Jagger, this issue of fracking, Prime Minister David Cameron is not alone. President Obama has talked about it as a means to energy self-sufficiency in the United States.
BIANCA JAGGER: What is shocking to me is that Prime Minister David Cameron has in his advisory—in an advisory position, the head of one of the most important fracking companies in the U.K. He has come out openly to support fracking, despite the fact that we have, you know, very conclusive evidence, scientific evidence, that it is affecting people’s water, the environment, their health. How is it possible that we can continue to have governments and presidents and prime ministers who are advocating fracking, when we know that it is in violations of people’s right and that it will affect their lives and their health? The Bianca Jagger Human Rights Foundation is going to put out a report calling for an assessment of the effect that it will have on people’s human rights in the U.K.
And what I want to say is, the other night I heard an empowering speech by Al Gore about the need—the fact that we need to embark—and this is my word—upon a renewable energy revolution. The time has come for us to move away from fossil fuels, from coal and from nuclear power. And all this rubbish about carbon storage, and all the funds that the U.K. government have spent in trying to find carbon storage for coal, we know so far that it hasn’t worked. Why hasn’t he put all that money into renewable energy, is the question that I have for David Cameron. He is an embarrassment. And this is not going to be one of the great greenest government, as he pretends.
AMY GOODMAN: Bianca mentioned nuclear. The BBC recently made news when it said Friends of the Earth has dropped its opposition to nuclear power in a major policy shift. Friends of the Earth said that’s not true. Asad Rehman, you’re with FOE, what’s going on?
ASAD REHMAN: Let me say categorically that Friends of the Earth opposes nuclear power. We, as an environmental organization, an environmental justice organization, with a long and proud tradition of being involved in the anti-nuclear movement, have always said that we base our positions on robust policy, and we always re-examine all of our policies in light of the planetary emergency. And what we came—we did an analysis, and we came out and said, absolutely, on every single ground, whether it’s on health, on safety, on pollution, and also on cost, and on—is it an actual solution in terms of the time frame that we’ve got? Well, it actually says no. The amount of billions that you need to subsidize the nuclear industry, the time it takes to build nuclear, even if you could deal with all of the other issues about the nuclear waste, the health issues, the pollution issues, it’s still a no-go. What is much better, is cleaner, is safer, is better, is to invest in renewable energy, energy that ordinary people can own.
And that’s why, you know, out of this demonstration, I would think what was very clear in terms of the demonstration on Sunday, all around the world, where people were saying no to dirty energy, yes to community power, they were saying yes to the right to food, no to some of the proposals that have been put in terms of attacking the right to food, and they were talking about justice, justice in terms of the impacts for people, like the people who have suffered here in New York in terms of Hurricane Sandy, or in the Philippines, but also justice for the people in terms of just transition, good clean jobs that are required. All of those voices are coming together in the coming months, over a week of action, between October 10th and 18th, around the world, saying, "We are calling for no to dirty energy," a reclaim power week. And that, I think, is, as Bianca said, is where the next part of this movement is going—back onto the ground, back building and making sure that our leaders, when they come here, actually come here with concrete proposals, concrete commitments, that actually train the trajectory away and ensure that we actually have the real climate solutions, because at the moment, we heard a lot of hot air at the United Nations over the last day and very little in terms of real commitment.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you think that that contributed to global warming, the hot air?
ASAD REHMAN: I think it did, because what it does is it creates an illusion that those governments are actually taking action, where what they’re doing is delaying and delaying. It’s like Nero fiddling while Rome is burning.
BIANCA JAGGER: Some countries—if I may say, some countries are willing and came up with some pledges that were important during the summit. But countries, such as the U.K., the U.S.—and the pledge that President Obama did is nothing. It cannot, in any way, keep the climate change increase by two degrees. That is the most important sign. You know, the World Bank issued a very important report at the last COP that was "Turn Down the Heat." And in this report, they talked about the possibility of an increase by three to four degrees by the end of the century. That is what we are facing. That is the reality that we have to confront, and that these presidents and prime ministers and world leaders are not confronting. And that’s why I feel that the time has come to give power to the people. And we need to be in power to understand that it’s up to us to avoid catastrophic climate change.
AMY GOODMAN: Very quickly, your home country, Bianca, is Nicaragua. Asad, your home country, though you live in Britain, is Pakistan. In 20 seconds, what’s happening in Pakistan as a result of climate change?
ASAD REHMAN: Well, at this very moment, large sections of Pakistan, in Kashmir, in Indian Kashmir and in Pakistan part of Kashmir, are huge floods. Over the last couple of years, 30 percent of Pakistan was underwater. We’re seeing a huge increase in temperature. We’re seeing threats in terms of agricultural output. And we’re seeing the adverse weather impacts that are happening, that are devastating people’s lives and livelihoods. It is a very, very clear example that climate is happening, that we need a kind of action, and that the real energy solutions are out there.
AMY GOODMAN: And, Bianca Jagger, Nicaragua?
BIANCA JAGGER: Well, Nicaragua, of course, is suffering, as well, from climate change. But if I may just mention, President Daniel Ortega has a plan to build a canal across Nicaragua, which will be an environmental crime, which will cause terrible—a terrible impact, an irreversible impact on the environment, and that will affect communities and indigenous peoples, because they will try to confiscate or to pay for that land. And it’s something that I am fighting against in Nicaragua.
AMY GOODMAN: We want to thank you for being with us. Of course, this conversation continues. Bianca Jagger, International Union for Conservation of Nature’s ambassador for the Bonn Challenge. Their goal, to restore 150 million hectares of the world’s degraded and deforested lands by 2020. Also, Asad Rehman, thanks so much for being with us, head of international climate for Friends of the Earth. And if you want to see our three-hour exclusive live coverage from the People’s Climate March Sunday, go to democracynow.org.
|
•U.S.-Led Bombing Hits Over 200 Syria Targets as Obama Vows Sustained Attack
The U.S.-led bombing of militant targets inside Syria has intensified as Pentagon officials acknowledge a military mission that could take years. On Tuesday, American and other coalition forces launched more than 200 strikes on Islamic State targets. Speaking from the White House, President Obama vowed to "take the fight" to ISIS.
President Obama: "Once again, it must be clear to anyone who would plot against America and try to do Americans harm that we will not tolerate safe havens for terrorists who threaten our people. The overall effort will take time. There will be challenges ahead. But we’re going to do what’s necessary to take the fight to this terrorist group for the security of the country and the region and for the entire world."
Later in the day, President Obama met with leaders of the Arab countries taking part in the strikes — Bahrain, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar — on the sidelines of a one-day U.N. climate summit in New York City.
President Obama: "I just want to say thank you to all of you. This is obviously not the end of an effort, but is rather a beginning. But I’m confident we’ve got a partnership that’s represented here that will be able to be successful."
Despite talk of an international coalition, The New York Times reports the United States is carrying out the vast majority of airstrikes from its warplanes and naval carriers.
•U.S.: Al-Qaeda Cell in Syria Neared "Execution Phase" of Attack on West
In addition to targeting the Islamic State, the United States has launched attacks on the al-Qaeda-linked Khorasan group in Syria, saying it was "nearing the execution phase" of an attack on the United States or Europe, most likely an attempt to blow up a commercial plane in flight. Meanwhile, the Syrian al-Qaeda affiliate, the al-Nusra Front, says its leader, Abu Yousef al-Turki, has been killed in the strikes.
•Activists: U.S.-Led Strikes Kill Civilians in Several Towns
Activists on the ground also report the strikes have killed civilians. In Raqqa, the first wave of strikes reportedly killed 30 people, mostly local residents. In Aleppo, another unconfirmed report said 11 people were killed, including four children. Video footage showed bodies being pulled from the rubble of a destroyed building. In the town of Kfar Daryan, a resident said the U.S.-led strikes had killed displaced civilians who had fled the Assad regime.
Abu Ossamah: "The military headquarters are far from the city, in the mountains. There are no military headquarters inside the city. All the people who were killed today were displaced civilians from Aleppo fearing the bombs of Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president."
•Leaders Push Nonbinding Emissions Targets at U.N. Climate Summit
World leaders have wrapped up a one-day day United Nations summit on climate change with pledges to tackle global warming but no binding commitments. On Tuesday, world leaders set goals including stopping tropical deforestation by 2030, improving food production and increasing the number of electric cars on the roads. Yet no movement was made on how to slow global warming and keep the rise in ocean temperatures below two degrees. In his remarks, President Obama called for a "global compact" to fight climate change.
President Obama: "Five years ago, I pledged America would reduce our carbon emissions in the range of 17 percent below 2005 levels by the year 2020. America will meet that target. And by early next year, we will put forward our next emission target reflecting our confidence in the ability of our technological entrepreneurs and scientific innovators to lead the way. So today I call on all major economies to do the same, for I believe in the words of Dr. King, that there is such a thing as being too late. And for the sake of future generations, our generation must move toward a global compact to confront a changing climate while we still can."
•Brazil Rejects Global Deforestation Pact
More than 30 countries set a deadline to end deforestation by 2030. But Brazil, which has the largest continuous rainforest in the world, refused to sign on, saying the plan conflicts with its own laws and targets. The gathering comes as part of talks ahead of a 200-nation summit in Paris in 2015 aimed at finalizing an agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
•CDC: Worst-Case Scenario Sees 1.4 Million Ebola Cases by January
A new warning says the Ebola outbreak in West Africa could reach as many as 21,000 people by the end of the month. A worst-case scenario from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says the epidemic could hit up to 1.4 million people by January 20. A best-case scenario predicts the epidemic almost wiped out by January, if drastic action is taken today. The CDC says there is likely around 2.5 times as many cases today as are being reported.
•Thousands Rally in Tokyo to Oppose Nuclear Resumption
Thousands of people have rallied in Tokyo to protest the Japanese government’s plan to restart two nuclear power plants. The plants are among dozens slated for resumption after being shut down in the wake of the Fukushima disaster three years ago.
•Spain Drops Anti-Abortion Measures Following Outcry
Spain has abandoned plans to impose some of the harshest anti-choice restrictions in Europe. While Spain currently allows abortion up to 14 weeks —– or 22 weeks in cases of fetal abnormalities –— the new measure would have allowed abortions only when the pregnancy resulted from rape or posed a serious threat to the pregnant person’s health. Following mass protests and polls which showed up to 80 percent of Spaniards opposed the new restrictions, Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy withdrew the proposal on Tuesday. The bill’s chief architect, Spain’s justice minister, resigned following the move. Rajoy is now vowing to pursue requirements that 16- and 17-year-olds obtain parental consent before an abortion; similar restrictions are in place in many U.S. states.
•Michael Brown Memorial Burnt in Fire; Protests Follow Council Meeting
Residents of Ferguson, Missouri, have rebuilt a memorial for Michael Brown after it was burned to the ground overnight. The site is just feet away from the main memorial for Brown in the middle of the street where he was shot by police officer Darren Wilson. The cause of the fire is unclear. Protesters marched in Ferguson late Tuesday night after the City Council voted to table a proposal for a citizen police review board. At least three people were arrested after a clash with police.
•3 Killed in Alabama Workplace Shooting
Three people have died in a shooting at the postal company UPS in Birmingham, Alabama. Police say the shooter was a former UPS employee who recently lost his job. He opened fire on two of his supervisors before turning the gun on himself.
•Denver-Area High School Students Stage Walkout over History Course Censorship
Hundreds of Denver-area high school students have staged a walkout over an attempt to censor their history curriculum. A right-wing majority on the Jefferson County school board has pushed extensive changes to AP history courses to promote corporatism and deference to authority. Their proposed changes include the removal of all mentions of civil disobedience from textbooks and materials. The student walkout on Tuesday followed a similar action by teachers that shut down two high schools for a day last week.
•Chelsea Manning Sues Pentagon for Denial of Gender Transition Care
U.S. Army whistleblower Chelsea Manning, previously known as Bradley, is suing the Pentagon for failing to treat her gender transition. A year ago, Manning announced she identified as a woman and planned to seek hormone replacement treatment. On Tuesday, the American Civil Liberties Union followed through on a vow to sue the Pentagon for denying gender-transition medical care and failing to follow other protocols for treating gender dysphoria.
•Bin Laden Son-in-Law Given Life Sentence
The son-in-law of Osama bin Laden has been sentenced to life in prison following a conviction for conspiring to kill Americans. Sulaiman Abu Ghaith is the most senior al-Qaeda member to be tried in a U.S. civilian court in the years since 9/11. During trial, Ghaith described meeting with bin Laden inside a cave in Afghanistan just hours after the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, but denied having prior knowledge. The court rejected testimony from alleged 9/11 plotter Khalid Sheikh Mohammed that Abu Ghaith had no role in al-Qaeda’s violent operations.
•NYC Mayor on Flood Wall Street Protest: "1st Amendment More Important Than Traffic"
New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio has voiced words of support for the climate activists arrested in Monday’s mass protest in the heart of Wall Street. More than 100 people were detained as part of the "Flood Wall Street" action targeting the financial sector’s role in the extractive industries fueling global warming. On Tuesday, Mayor de Blasio said the demonstrators called attention to an urgent issue.
New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio: "I can’t say they’re going too far. I think, first of all, the issue is one of tremendous urgency, and whenever you have an urgent issue, people utilize civil disobedience. It’s not a new phenomenon. I thought, clearly, we had a situation where it was civil disobedience as it’s supposed to be. … First of all, I think the First Amendment is a little more important than traffic. The right of people to make their voices heard, regardless of their views, is a fundamental American value, and we’ll protect that value."
_____________________________
207 W 25th Street, 11th Floor
New York, New York 10001 United States
_____________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment