Guest essay by Eric Worrall
UNFCCC Executive Secretary Patricia Espinosa has complained in public that Rex Tillerson, President Trump’s Secretary of State, hasn’t responded to her request for a meeting.
UN Climate Chief’s Request to Meet Tillerson Goes Unanswered
by Joe Ryan
2 March 2017, 12:31 GMT+10 3 March 2017, 04:21 GMT+10
The top United Nations climate change official continues to wait for a response to her request to meet with U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson over whether the U.S. will remain in the landmark Paris environmental accord.
Patricia Espinosa, executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, asked for a sitdown with Tillerson before leaving for a visit to the U.S. this week. In an interview Wednesday, she said she’d heard nothing from the State Department in return.
“I have not heard back. It is understandable at the beginning of an administration,’’ Espinosa said after speaking at a climate change conference in Chicago “They are a very important partner to us, and I’m looking forward to working together.’’
A State Department spokesman didn’t respond to a request for comment.
…
“It is unfortunate that Secretary Tillerson was unwilling to meet with Executive Secretary Espinosa,” Alden Meyer, director of policy at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in an emailed statement Thursday. “Climate change represents a clear and present danger to the prosperity, security and quality of life of all Americans, and threatens the development prospects and stability of other countries. Addressing the climate threat is thus mission-critical for Secretary Tillerson and his State Department.”
…
Oh the horror – UN climate bureaucrats taking a back seat to issues like international terrorism, badly designed job destroying trade agreements, dangerous global flash points, rogue states attempting to arm themselves with nuclear weapons…
The highlight of President Trump’s address the other night: Not a peep out of him on global warming/climate change. Not a single word.
The new silent spring
At what point does not unifying the base and denouncing the UN globalist climate agenda become a problem for you?
It’s going to take “yuge” leadership to rip the cultural left in particular off the climate teat. I don’t fault him for going slow on the issue, it’s not officially on the 100 day list. Still he should be laying more ground work.
Tillerson is looking weaker then many of the other team members and it’s as high profile an appointment there is next to Sessions.
Risk of selling out the base? It certainly isn’t zero where it should be.
Climateers very seldom meets with sceptics to discuss the matter, so why should she want to meet Tillerson.
It is fine she herself can feel how it is when the other side wont turn up.
Well said.
Tillerson is a known skeptic? This looks murky at best. He supported the UN climate process at the confirmation hearing. He proposed a carbon tax.
This is the wrong kind of skepticism. The kind that avoids the largest points of the debate.
UN who?
Union of Concerned who?
Union of Concerned Socialists
Kenji is not a socialist, !
He performs no work and is supported by others.
Sounds like a socialist to me.
The IPCC is being given the same consideration they give the skeptics. So what’s the problem?
The tight rope Mark is being blamed for the next recession that is after all inevitable. Two million green jobs, the fastest growing sector in the Obama years. Many climate driven items.
Can soft landing be framed if you destroy the basic IPCC facade?
Culturally, do think fracking jobs are going to pick up some of this displacement? Yes, that’s sarcasm.
Frankly, end the IPCC and give them the WPA back which in a way what the “infrastructure” trillion is anyway. It’s still not going to work socially no matter what the GDP rises to.
Trump has nothing to lose by ditching the Paris ‘agreement’ – for the simple reason his enemies won’t become his friends if he doesn’t ditch Paris but they’ll STILL do everything they can to obstruct his administration. He may as well do it because that’s how he’ll be judged. Either blaze a trail or go down fighting on your own terms rather than theirs.
PS. Not getting a phone call accepted to try and arrange a meeting doesn’t auger well for Patricia Espinosa. Very encouraging!
“PS. Not getting a phone call accepted to try and arrange a meeting doesn’t auger well for Patricia Espinosa. Very encouraging!”
I have to agree. It shouldn’t be that hard to set up a meeting with someone who wants to meet with you.
1+
I hope so.
Does it not have to go through the Senate for conformation anyway?
Paris? It’s structured not to be a treaty.
It’s really another step along the way. Next step is to make it enforceable but the whole sketchy process remains intact. All the time the social brainwashing continues in earnest.
Trump could claim it a treaty and send it the Senate, a huge mistake of course. Look at the ACA repeal. Leadership Is required so it’s Trump or nothing nearterm.
If they keep Climate agenda alive and resume authority it could be even worse then before. Then again anti authoritarianism is in the DNA as well, maybe more dissent will emerge soon. Still this is great opportunity if it isn’t flitted away.
‘I put a nickel in the telephone
and dialed my baby’s number,
– got a brr, brr brr brr, busy line.’
It all depends on what Trump is doing it for?
Money, position, or at 70 yrs old, with money,
position, maybe patriotism? We will see. If the
latter, he’s got no need to ditch promises.
– Scott Pruitt fails to even mention Climate Change in his first All-hands speech to the EPA he runs.
– President Trump did not mention climate change even once in his speech Tuesday to Congress.
– SecState Tillerson not responding to UNFCCC calls re:climate change positions.
Does anyone see a pattern?
Death by neglect is the best way (for now) to completely kill the non-binding Paris Treaty and its Nationally-declared carbon emissions goals.
Supporters want the UN climate process withdrawal.
We’re a rowdy lot it shouldn’t be forgotten. Now is the time and form a rationalized policy to reject global climate management based on emissions mythology. Trump can only win by fighting, there is no reward for pandering.
The best approach politically for Trump-Tillerson-Pruitt to take a Passive-Agressive strategy to neutralize both the operative effects of the UNFCCC and the Paris Protocols, while simultaneously not providing easy political targets for the Green Blob to attack.
The problem with the Paris Agreement is that it is not legitimate.
The Paris Protocol is illegitimate as an enforceable agreement for the US govt under the US constitution. That serious infirmity aside, if Trump seeks to withdraw from the Paris Agreement via its withdrawal protocol, he would be legitimizing the very thing held illegitimate. Best thing is to let it die by neglect. And Perfectly legal. No econut group can sue the EPA or US government for not adhering to a non-binding agreement.
The issue of the UNFCCC is different. Formally Withdrawing from the UNFCCC requires positive action and notifications by the Secretary of State to the UN. Again, the nod your head, smile, and then refuse to do anything, a passive-aggressive strategy, is the best way to not give your political enemies easy targets to attack in the press or by Democrats in Congress.
This method preserves the underlying authority of the UN Climate process.
At some point the President must take the lead. It goes beyond short term tactics, the broad public is against the AGW agenda and even the supporters know the inherent deception of the movement.
Offense wins, defense losses. Label the agenda politically and attack it. If not it will simply incubate when it must be discredited and marginalized.
As I read it, the Paris Climate Agreement has no force of law. The language “requests” and “invites” the parties to do a bunch of things but “requires” them to do nothing at all.
Here’s the language from Article II (INTENDED NATIONALLY DETERMINED CONTRIBUTIONS):
The US INDC was submitted just under two years ago (2015-03-31) and can be viewed here. The money quote is:
You can find all the INDCs submitted to date here.
Note these are all statements of intentions, not commitments to actual achievements.
So the US has already complied with the Paris agreement, except for:
Oh good, another “facilitative dialog”.
IMHO, President Trump should go to the 2018 “facilitative dialog” in Paris. He should take a “Yuge” delegation — a bunch of Cabinet secretaries and under-secretaries and hundreds of other diplomats and agency staff. He should encourage all the usual climate-hypocrites (Gore, DiCaprio, etc., ) to attend in their private jets with their own retinues of sycophants. He should aim to set a record for travel-induced carbon emissions to get the entire Green Blob to Paris for an “important policy speech on US commitment to climate change policy”.
When the entire Parisitic mob is assembled, Trump should take the podium to address them and say:
and walk out and return immediately to Air Force One for the flight back to Mar-a-Lago for a well-deserved round of golf.
It’s not what Tillerson or Ivanka or Jared think about the climate change issue, it is what Trump thinks about the issue.
We have the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal insinuating that Ivanka and Jerad are lobbying Trump to go easy on the climate change issue.
My question is: Has anyone ever seen a public statement by Ivanka or Jerad about climate change, pro or con?
Exactly, TA. And Trump is, whatever else might be said for (or against) him, his own man.
*******************
No. The NYT and the WSJ (sadly) are simply doing their best to shore up the investment value of Big Wind, Big Solar, Big Disaster Insurance, Big Battery Cars, etc. by putting false info. out for the market to respond to. They can only huff and puff like that for so long….. they are fast running out of breath.
“SELL.”
Bwah, ha, ha, ha, haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
Has there been any market instability in those sectors immediately post-election and ongoing?
There’s only market stability in those sectors because of heavy subsidies.
Ivanka is pro-climate gruel, here’s a sample;
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/12/why-did-al-gore-go-to-trump-tower/509771/
Yeah, The Atlantic, quoting Politico. It brings up the big chunks after lunch for sure.
Being super rich assures knowing all the wrong kind of people. No, she’s on the Team no doubt about it.
It would be Learian in scale if it goes further then this. Caving to his daughters climate delusions isn’t my first worry. Deal making with the deep green money and employer sources is problem #1. There is huge short term gamble cutting the climate establishment down and not getting a quick return on political capital.
This culture war worthy.
With regard to what Trump is going to do with the Paris Agreement, here is a link:
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Trump-Global-Warming/2017/03/03/id/776722/
“The Times report said that next week Trump is planning to sign an executive order for Environmental Protection Agency administrator Scott Pruitt to reverse President Barack Obama’s EPA regulations, which met the U.S.’ obligations to the Paris accord. . .
Those in favor of exiting, such as Bannon, say it would show Trump fulfills his campaign promises.”
end excerpts
I think that is the heart of the matter. As Steve Bannon says, Trump made a campaign promise and I don’t think he is going to go back on it. Bannon is for exiting, why shouldn’t we assume Trump is too, especially since Trump campaigned on exiting. Trump has kept his campaign promises so far, and I personally expect he will keep this one, too. I will be very surprised if he does not.
Patricia Espinosa does not represent any Nation, Country or State. Therefore, why would the U. S. Secretary of State have any reason to meet with her.
Climate change is not ‘a clear and present danger’ to Americans or to anybody else. It’s just what nature does on her own account and the message is: just live with it.
It is a very clear and present danger to UN budgets and hangers on.
The lady obviously knows perfectly well what the Trump administration’s position is on this but she is nevertheless phishing for the next OMG Trump!!! story to hit the maniac stream media.
Between this and global warming there seems to be an awful lot of melting snowflakes theses days.
And now US citizens need a visa to travel within the EU. I guess the shelf life on “saving your arse” is approximately 70 years.
Not sure I understand your point, RW.
We need permission from USA to travel there, why not the other way round as well?
Oldseadog
Frankly it’s because EU knowingly & willing keeps bad company.
If EU didn’t do that and actually paid to defend itself (not depending on USA), we wouldn’t be having this discussion. The Marshall plan enabout 65 years ago.
Not only 70 years ago but at least once before and several since since. How quickly we forget about Lend Lease, the Marshall Plan and NATO.
“And now US citizens need a visa to travel within the EU.”
They are just doing that to protest Trump’s crackdown on unvetted people coming into the U.S.
No problem. Getting a visa to go to Europe is a small price to pay to make the USA safer. Petty little Eurocrats.
An unelected bureaucrat complaining about not getting an audience with the Leader of one of the greatest Democracies in the world?
UN bureaucrats and other non representative bureaucrats had better get used to it in a hurry.
Go hard Donald. UN is one of the biggest swamps you need to drain.
Oh dear. How sad
Never Mind
🙂
“
Through-the-looking-glass-batsh!t-crazy talk. 100% opposite from what actual evidence suggests.
I’m concerned for that “Concerned Scientist’s ” mental condition.
Nincompoop is a synonym for non compus mentis.
I must fix it.
“
aah!
Back on planet Earth.
Applause! Applause! 🙂
You have to smile at the hyperbole of warmistas: Alden Meyer, director of policy at the Union of Concerned Scientists said there is a “clear and present danger.” Wow, everyone, stop what you are doing and listen. Stop driving, stop flying, turn off those heaters and save us now.
Just be thankful they UNFCCC doesn’t have guns:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/canadians-join-campaigners-calling-for-end-to-un-peacekeeper-sex-abuse/article24420285/
“Your call is important to us. Please leave a message at the tone. An assistant deputy under-secretary will contact you at the appropriate time. Please have a Merry Christmas and a happy New Year 2025.”
lol — and then….
(youtube — Seeburg background Christmas music)
Finally, about 14 minutes later: “beeeep!” (the tone)
hahahaha — ho, ho , ho, hooooooooh!
A clear and present danger????? Hell no it isn’t. While your CO2 has risen I took over management of a run down ranch. It was blood, sweat and tears that brought it back to life in spite of your CO2 boogeyman (and maybe in part because there was more abundant plant food available). Through judicious use of water, revamping water ditches, selective herd rotations by those who rented the pastures, weed control, reversal of previous over grazing damage, and additional over seeding, the ranch sprang back to life. Individual initiative rought by individual hard work and good sense is the way forward, not silly carbon taxes or income redistribution or Paris agreements.
I am willing to bet that this Patricia has never dug a rock out of the ground with her bare hands, nor cleaned out a reed canary grass infested irrigation ditch with a dull shovel, or mended a fence, or struggled to raise a rusted water gate, in her life to bring back a drought stricken plot of ground once again able to fill the bellies of cow/calf units. Until she has done such a thing, used her own muscles to mitigate lack of water, she has NO right to tell me that what I should have done is sit idle and let some UN body save my bacon and the ranch I worried and fussed over. No right!
This kind of UN nonsense must be allowed to let die! Else I stop voting entirely and live by my own ability to survive against the malevolent machinations of the “Paris Agreement To Be Stupid”
Actually this round of UN butt-hurt conceptually looks exactly like MSM crying because The Donald won’t call on them in the press meetings.
Who cares (I mean except these whining weenies & their immediate families)?
I’m impressed with your pioneer skills and work ethic. City dwellers have no concept of real “sustainability”.
Tillerson, of all people! Seems he’s seen through the climate scam after all.
That’s just dumb. The best time for returning calls is when one has a “trump” card in hand. Imagine what could be negotiated!
No, James. Next comes the begging. Then the grovelling. Get some popcorn and enjoy.
In the summer of 1945, Stalin refused to meet with Japanese envoys who hoped he would help negotiate a peace deal between them and the US. Maybe it was because on Aug. 9 of that year, the day of the Nagasaki attacks, the Soviet army sent 1.6 million troops into Japanese-held Manchuria to seize as much territory as possible. The facts that the US will greatly scale back its climate initiatives or withdraw from the Paris agreement entirely might be signified by Tillerson’s refusal to meet any UN representatives also.
I hope you’re right, Edward. If so, presumably Trump must have worked on Tillerson’s ambivalence, to put it mildly.
http://time.com/4631614/rex-tillerson-climate-change-paris-agreement/
Not sure if 1.6 million troops will be necessary to drain the swamp, though!
What’s eating Espinoza –
https://www.google.at/amp/www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/01/19/trump-asks-dozens-senior-obama-appointees-to-stay-on.amp.html
Oh the horror – UN climate bureaucrats taking a back seat to issues like international terrorism, badly designed job destroying trade agreements, dangerous global flash points, rogue states attempting to arm themselves with nuclear weapons…, Investmentbankers.
No one from the U.N anything deserves a call back.
Just a bullet to the head!
Ha ha