UN Climate Summit September 23 the contribution of militarism to Climate change Print
Earth News
Written by Joan Russow
Friday, 19 September 2014 17:29

Climate Change Advice; Curb Your Militarism and Abandon Spurious Solutions; Seven years of inaction since the September 7, 2007 DPI-NGO Summit

By Joan Russow Global Compliance Research Project

 

NO OIL FOR WAR /NO WAR FOR OIL

 

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has not taken into consideration the contribution of militarism in all its aspect to greenhouse gas emissions. Even though the Chair, Rajendra K. Pachauri, was a co-recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, the Panel has not yet agreed to consider the impact of militarism on climate change. The military budgets of members has substantially increased to about 1 trillion per year (not including the 800 Billion of US additional funds allocated since 2001 for US-led invasions in Afghanistan and Iraq). (See enclosed charts). For years, every member state in the United Nations has made commitments to reallocate military budgets.


If citizens are willing to do their part in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, member states of the the Global community  must substantially reduce their military budgets and be prepared to release relevant military budget information to the Panel so that the Panel can estimate the full impact of militarism not only on all aspect of society, but also on greenhouse gas emissions.

MILITARISM: THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM. DPI/NGO CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE AT THE UNITED NATIONS

Excerpts from the September 7, 2007 Declaration, prepared by the NGO military nuclear matters and the NGO Peace Caucus was presented to the Chair, Rajendra K. Pachauri, of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

We call upon the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to investigate and estimate the full impact on greenhouse gas emissions by the military and demand that each state release information related to the greenhouse gas emissions from the production of all weapons systems, military exercises, from war games, weapons testing, military aviation, environmental warfare, troop transfer, military operations, waste generation, reconstruction after acts of violent interventions etc.;

We support the call for the disbanding of NATO, whose collective activities have contributed to not only the perpetuation of the scourge of war and the violation of international peremptory norms, but also the substantial release of greenhouse gas emissions:

(ii) call upon the member states of the United Nations to act on the commitment in Chapter 33 of Agenda 21, to reallocate military expenses;
(iii) call upon the United Nations General Assembly UNGA to acknowledge the inextricable link between climate change and conflict over resources such as oil, water etc.;
(v) call upon the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to investigate and estimate the full impact on greenhouse gas emissions by the military. and demand that each state release information related to the greenhouse gas emissions from the production of all weapons systems, military exercises, from war games, weapons testing, military aviation, environmental warfare, troop transfer, military operations, waste generation, reconstruction after acts of violent interventions etc.;
(vi) support the call for the disbanding of NATO, whose collective activities have contributed to not only the perpetuation of the scourge of war and the violation of international peremptory norms, but also the substantial release of greenhouse gas emissions.

CURRENT ESTIMATION OF GLOBAL MILITARY BUDGETS 

INTERNATIONAL COMMITMENTS TO REDUCE THE MILITARY BUDGET

"The reduction of the military budget and disarmament are necessary conditions of security and development." (Anatole Rapapport, presentation at the World Order Conference, 2001).

Throughout the years, through international agreements, member states of the United Nations have recognized that the military budget has been a waste and misuse of resources. Unfortunately, institutional memory is either short or member states ignore precedents.

In 1976 at Habitat 1, member states of the United Nations affirmed the following in relation to the military budget:

"The waste and misuse of resources in war and armaments should be prevented. All countries should make a firm commitment to promote general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control, in particular in the field of nuclear disarmament. Part of the resources thus released should be utilized so as to achieve a better quality of life for humanity and particularly the peoples of developing countries." (II, 12 Habitat 1).

In 1981, in the General Assembly Resolution entitled Resolution on the Reduction of the Military Budget, the member states:
(i) reaffirmed "the urgent need to reduce the military budget, and agreed to freeze and reduce the military budget";
(ii) recognised that "the military budget constitutes a heavy burden for the economies of all nations, and has extremely harmful consequences on international peace and security";
(iii) reiterated the appeal "to all states, in particular the most heavily armed states, pending the conclusion of agreements on the reduction of military expenditures, to exercise self-restraint in their military expenditures with a view to reallocating the funds thus saved to economic and social development, particularly for the benefit of developing countries." (Resolution on the Reduction of Military budgets, 1981).

These appeals were further reinforced in a 1983 General Assembly Resolution on the Relationship between Disarmament and Development, that "curbing the arms build-up would make it possible to release additional resources for use in economic and social development, particularly for the benefit of the developing countries." Also in the 1993 Resolution, member states considered that "the magnitude of military expenditures is now such that their various implications can no longer be ignored in the efforts pursued in the international community to secure the recovery of the world economy and the establishment of a new international economic order."

Also in 1992, all member states recognized that "Warfare is inherently destructive of sustainable development." ( Rio Declarations Principle 24, UNCED, 1992), and in Chapter 33, of Agenda 21, member states of the United Nations made a commitment to the "the reallocation of resources presently committed to military purposes." (33.18e).

In 1994, in adopting the statement from the International Conference on Population and Development, the member states of the United Nations concurred that the attainment of "quantitative and qualitative goals of the present Programme of Action clearly require additional resources, some of which could become available from a reordering of priorities at the individual, national and international levels. However, none of the actions required, nor all of them combined, is expensive in the context of either current global development or military expenditures." (Article 1.19).

In 1995, similarly, states in adopting the statement from the Social Development Summit endorsed the calling for the reallocation of military spending to ensure a greater pocket of resources to expand public services. Again, in 1995, member states of the United Nations reconfirmed these commitments by adopting the Platform of Action at the UN Conference on Women, Equality, Development and Peace. In the Platform of Action, states have made a commitment to maintain

Last Updated on Sunday, 06 July 2008 05:29

 

21/9/2014 International Day of Peace; CHALLENGING MILITARIZED SECURITY: DELEGITIMIZATION OF WAR

https://pejnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=9922:2014-international-day-of-peace-219-challenging-militarized-security-delegitimization-of-war&catid=104:i-peace-news&Itemid=204

Last Updated on Saturday, 20 September 2014 12:36