United Nations Resolution Demands the USA Pay Everyone Elses Climate Damage Claims

Essay by Eric Worrall

They didn’t actually say “USA”, but we all know what they meant.

General Assembly backs historic World Court climate crisis ruling

20 May 2026 Climate and Environment

The Secretary-General said it makes clear Member States’ responsibility to protect their own people from what is an “escalating climate crisis”.

The resolution drawn up by Vanuatu – a Pacific island nation on the frontline of the climate crisis, and several other countries – was adopted after intense discussion including multiple proposed amendments with 141 votes in favour, eight against and 28 abstentions.

The Court also ruled that if States breach these obligations, they are legally responsible and may be legally required to stop the wrongful conduct, offer guarantees that it won’t happen again, and make full reparation, depending on the circumstances.

Although the ICJ’s advisory opinions are not binding, they carry significant legal and moral authority – helping to clarify and develop international law by defining States’ legal obligations.

The resolution calls on all UN Member States to take all possible steps to avoid causing significant damage to the climate and environment, including emissions produced within their borders, and to follow through on their existing climate pledges under the Paris Agreement.

In a statement released after the General Assembly vote, Mr. Guterres declared that those least responsible for climate change are paying the highest price, and that the path to climate justice “runs through a rapid, just, and equitable transition away from fossil fuels towards renewable energy.”

Read more: https://news.un.org/en/story/2026/05/1167561

Consulting my UN gibberish translator, “carry significant legal and moral authority” = receive money next time a climate activist is in charge of the United States. Because nobody else is going to put up the money to pay for this nonsense.

I was hoping the whole climate movement was on the brink of death, especially with the collapse of the RCP 8.5 narrative, but climate activism may be finding a new lease of life by hitching itself to the anti-data center movement.

The sad thing is the data center issue is entirely solvable – data centers don’t have to be located near where people currently live. A new data center park in some frozen wilderness, to make cooling the high capacity computer servers easier, powered by as many adjacent coal plants or nuclear reactors as were required, would deliver all the AI capacity the USA needs to stay competitive, without messing up everyone elses day.

A quick search suggests there are unexploited or under-exploited regions on the Colorado Plateau which have abundant energy resources and plenty of cold to help keep the data centers running efficiently. Much of the Colorado Plateau is sparsely inhabited, 90% of the Colorado Plateau is federal or tribal land. Places like Page (Arizona) and Green River in Utah might be a good starting point for such a project. Make Data City a federalised special tax zone, and provide Michigan style heated pavements for the cafe district, a fast track approval process for new nuclear plants, and silicon valley would be emptied overnight – billions of dollars and thousands of tech startups would pour in. The USA would have a new innovation center, and a resolution to the growing data center standoff.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
4.9 16 votes
Article Rating
68 Comments
Neil Pryke
May 23, 2026 10:20 pm

Underdog Day Afternoon…

gyan1
May 23, 2026 10:32 pm

Trump is making the UN irrelevant. We should pull out. It would fold like a cheap suit.

The climate crisis propaganda slogan is absurd nonsense.

Bryan A
Reply to  gyan1
May 23, 2026 10:56 pm

If we are no longer a “Member State” then the Member State rules don’t apply to US.
We are already a non-signatory to the Paris Agreement so that in itself should nullify the situation even without giving up Member State Status. No body can hold us responsible for the Precepts of an agreement to which we are not a participating party.

MarkW
Reply to  Bryan A
May 24, 2026 7:55 am

No sane person can hold us responsible. There is little evidence of sanity regarding those on the left.

Mr.
Reply to  gyan1
May 24, 2026 2:27 am

Yep.
If ever there was a shining example of “mission creep”, look no further than the UN.

Reply to  Mr.
May 24, 2026 8:22 am

Including creeping away from the original mission.

gyan1
Reply to  Mr.
May 24, 2026 9:33 am

The “mission” always was about the subjugation of nation’s sovereignty to facilitate global governance. The EU a prime example of that.

Gregory Woods
Reply to  gyan1
May 24, 2026 3:11 am

Elections have consequences – undeclared immoral and illegal wars have consequences. Republicans will pay the price and the Demorats will be back in…

Reply to  Gregory Woods
May 24, 2026 4:25 am

Wishful thinking.

SxyxS
Reply to  Tom Abbott
May 24, 2026 5:36 am

It actually isn’t.

In terms of votes Republican are absolutely paying the price and overall Americans are paying the price at gas stations, grocery stores.
Trumps approvals are bad.
Maga lost many people after turning Miga.
The democrats have a 10 point midterm advantage now (quite remarkable shift within just 18 month).

And the fact that Mr Woods is a shameless hypocrit (Trump is just finalizing the Deep States 7 countries in 5 years plan Obama was so greatly executing)
doesn’t nullify his correct conclusion.

Democrats have still 90% of big tech and MSM on their side
and on top of that they are better at stealing elections –
and republicans have a shitty economy and 1000 lies, a sack full of new wars and broken promises and almost half of them believe in AGW.

Only a huge “event” can turn this tendency around –
and once Democrats are in they’ll go full Milliband,
and Mr Woods will start to love those wars he opposed under Trump,
just as Republicans started to love the wars and regime changes they hated under Obama the moment Trump started to sell them.

Robertvd
Reply to  SxyxS
May 24, 2026 7:47 am

indeed most Americans have a very short memory. And prices at the gas stations and grocery stores would have been much higher now if democrats would have won the last elections, with or without war . Inflation is about money printing and both parties know how to do that to kick the can just a little bit further down the road. It is the only product the US is good in producing.

Trying to Play Nice
Reply to  Robertvd
May 25, 2026 10:44 am

That short memory is why gas prices don’t matter. Trump will have them down soon.

Bryan A
Reply to  SxyxS
May 24, 2026 8:39 am

Really … A sack full of new wars … Name more than 1 new war beyond Iran!

DipChip
Reply to  Bryan A
May 25, 2026 5:44 am

IRAN IS NOT A NEW WAR Iran is the longest war the USA has ever been involved with by a factor of ten.

Trying to Play Nice
Reply to  SxyxS
May 25, 2026 10:43 am

You pay too much attention to MSM and podcasters. What happened in the last few primary elections? Who is leading the polls in California? Look at facts, not BS.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
May 24, 2026 8:24 am

Dangerous thinking there, Tom. GOP has a long record of throwing away certain victory.

Some Like It Hot
Reply to  Tony_G
May 24, 2026 8:36 am

Please hold for Senator Thune…

Reply to  Tony_G
May 24, 2026 10:28 am

It’s true, Republicans do shoot themselves in the foot sometimes. This usually happens when a Republican politician puts his/her own ego ahead of the national interests.

And they end up voting with the Democrats!

Decaf
Reply to  Gregory Woods
May 24, 2026 4:28 am

If there is a “moral debt” owed, how about the damage done to this country by the cultural Marxists and their willing Democrat and liberal cohorts? Trump may have made mistakes along the way, but he is trying—a lot harder than any president has dared for a long time—to set this country on a better path, including a more sensible path regarding the climate nonsense.

Reply to  Gregory Woods
May 24, 2026 5:12 am

undeclared immoral and illegal wars have consequences.

You mean like the one started by Iran 47 years ago ??

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  bnice2000
May 24, 2026 7:44 am

Right. It’s immoral to prevent someone from attaining powerful weapons who has declared your death a thousand times over.

MarkW
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
May 24, 2026 7:59 am

As long as Iran and the other Muslim groups limit themselves to killing Jews, the left will never object.

MarkW
Reply to  Gregory Woods
May 24, 2026 7:57 am

Funny how undeclared wars started by Democrats are never a problem, and fighting back is only illegal when the left doesn’t like the person being attacked.

Bryan A
Reply to  Gregory Woods
May 24, 2026 8:36 am

Proof beyond deniability that Democrats are deluded and bent so far left that even the left extremists seem Right to them

gyan1
Reply to  Gregory Woods
May 24, 2026 9:29 am

Democrats are even less popular than Trump. The move hard left in blue cities demonstrating Dems are clueless will ensure Republican majorities in the midterms. If that doesn’t happen America is lost.

gezza1298
Reply to  gyan1
May 25, 2026 8:50 am

If it doesn’t happen then they have failed to get to grips with the Democrat election fraud.

Trying to Play Nice
Reply to  gezza1298
May 25, 2026 10:46 am

They did a pretty good job in 2024. What happened to the 15 million new Democrat voters Joe Biden found in 2020 when you could just mail a ballot in?

tedbear
Reply to  Gregory Woods
May 24, 2026 6:06 pm

If you mean the war between Iran, Israel and the USA is illegal, take it up with Iran as one of their proxies started it.
For the Democrats to get back in I imagine a good starting point is to find a non-corrupt presidential candidate. I haven’t read one has been found.

Victor
May 23, 2026 11:21 pm

If deforestation in poor countries causes climate change for the poor countries.
Why should rich countries pay for climate change in the poor countries that the poor countries themselves have caused?

In tropical land regions—like the Amazon, Central Africa, and Southeast Asia—temperature spikes are frequently exacerbated by local deforestation. Deforested areas in the tropics have experienced up to 0.7 degrees Celsius of additional warming strictly from the loss of trees and moisture-regulating mechanisms.

Robertvd
Reply to  Victor
May 24, 2026 3:56 am

 If windmill and solar cause damage to the environment why are they in favour of it?

Victor
Reply to  Robertvd
May 24, 2026 6:06 am

Sociopaths believe they are good and environmentally friendly because they do not see and understand the negative climate effects of windmills and solar energy.

KevinM
Reply to  Victor
May 24, 2026 2:16 pm

I don’t back this answer, but the way Victor frames it:

Because one of the benefits (incentives) for deforestation in the poor countries is revenue gained by selling forest products to rich countries.

I know what slash-and-burn is, and I know that balsa is harvested illegally, etc. The question was “why should”.

Victor
Reply to  KevinM
May 26, 2026 10:10 pm

Poor countries are poor because of how the distribution of income is done by the government.
Deforestation does not make poor countries rich.
Forests must be cleared so that the forest can grow back.

The laureates have shown that one explanation for differences in countries’ prosperity is the societal institutions that were introduced during colonisation. Inclusive institutions were often introduced in countries that were poor when they were colonised, over time resulting in a generally prosperous population. This is an important reason for why former colonies that were once rich are now poor, and vice versa.

Some countries become trapped in a situation with extractive institutions and low economic growth. The introduction of inclusive institutions would create long-term benefits for everyone, but extractive institutions provide short-term gains for the people in power. As long as the political system guarantees they will remain in control, no one will trust their promises of future economic reforms. According to the laureates, this is why no improvement occurs.

However, this inability to make credible promises of positive change can also explain why democratisation sometimes occurs. When there is a threat of revolution, the people in power face a dilemma. They would prefer to remain in power and try to placate the masses by promising economic reforms, but the population are unlikely to believe that they will not return to the old system as soon as the situation settles down. In the end, the only option may be to transfer power and establish democracy.

“Reducing the vast differences in income between countries is one of our time’s greatest challenges. The laureates have demonstrated the importance of societal institutions for achieving this,” says Jakob Svensson, Chair of the Committee for the Prize in Economic Sciences.

https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/2024/press-release/

Bill Toland
May 23, 2026 11:25 pm

Since Earth’s climate has improved over the last century, does this mean that other countries should pay the USA for helping to improve the climate?

KevinM
Reply to  Bill Toland
May 24, 2026 2:17 pm

Yes! They can start by funding UN.

John the Econ
May 23, 2026 11:37 pm

How about “No”. It’s what adults say to absurd requests/demands.

30+ years ago not long after “global warming” officially became a thing, it was already was obvious that it was little more than a shakedown, or what Ayn Rand would have called a “sanction of the victim”. I don’t see the people of these countries making these silly demands rolling back their lifestyles to the 18th century. Otherwise, they wouldn’t need money at all.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  John the Econ
May 24, 2026 1:01 pm

I usually respond with a raucous belly laugh. I have the belly to do it!

magesox
May 23, 2026 11:40 pm

“Because nobody else is going to put up the money to pay for this nonsense.”
Oh do not worry, Starmer, Milliband and friends will be first in the queue, regardless of whether Britain has the cash or indeed whether there is any legal imperative so to do.

Reply to  magesox
May 24, 2026 12:43 am

I so wish your comment had a /sarc tag but it’s bang on

Robertvd
Reply to  magesox
May 24, 2026 3:58 am

They can’t even keep the Red Arrows flying.

Richard Rude
May 24, 2026 1:48 am

Remember when the American people voted for this? Well, I don’t either.

KevinM
Reply to  Richard Rude
May 24, 2026 2:19 pm

One hand: I don’t remember either.
Other hand: “Sitting U.S. Senators running for reelection historically have an immense advantage, winning about 80% to 90% of their races on average.” -Because they are doing a great job?

May 24, 2026 4:32 am

The UN should not be telling Trump to “pay up”, otherwise Trump may decide the UN needs to be relocated.

The UN is more of a trouble causer than a trouble solver. Their hysteria about the Earth’s climate is over the top, and not based in fact. Climate change for the UN is a strategy for them to acquire more political power. We don’t want that.

George Thompson
May 24, 2026 5:02 am

Why is Vanautu crying? It’s a known fact that it’s not sinking-or whatever its claiming today. And why in the Hell hasn’t the US left that stinking piece of sh.. called the UN? Vanautu, as I recall, is building an airport on its coast-so besides free (US) cash-what does it really want. Or is it simply greed? Or have then imported American Demeocrats?

George Thompson
Reply to  Eric Worrall
May 24, 2026 6:37 am

Who do we blame, then, for Americans dropping the ball? A particular party comes to mind, esp. where greed and graft are in play, but that’s probably unfair because, let’s face it, China has bought damned near everybody of any influence in the world, not to mention the US Congress. What next, I wonder?

MarkW
Reply to  George Thompson
May 24, 2026 8:03 am

Maybe we should have Swalwell ask Fang Fang.

George Thompson
Reply to  MarkW
May 24, 2026 9:15 am

Ah, yes…good old Swallowswell. I rest my case.

ResourceGuy
May 24, 2026 5:43 am

Follow the money again

George Thompson
Reply to  ResourceGuy
May 24, 2026 6:38 am

Yep, but good luck with that…the crooks are getting smarter, and bolder.

Robertvd
Reply to  George Thompson
May 24, 2026 7:55 am

The crooks behind the curtain have never been caught. They control the puppet governments.

George Thompson
Reply to  Robertvd
May 24, 2026 9:16 am

Unfortunate, but true.

MarkW
May 24, 2026 7:54 am

“Member States’ responsibility”

Simple solution, leave the UN, then the US is no longer a “member state”.

Leon de Boer
May 24, 2026 8:16 am

It’s a funny joke, how would you enforce that garbage 🙂

Trump should do what he did to the ICJ .. sanction the UN just based on stupidity but the UN will likely be bankrupt by august/september anyhow.
https://genevasolutions.news/sustainable-business-finance/how-serious-is-the-un-s-warning-of-imminent-bankruptcy

George Thompson
Reply to  Leon de Boer
May 24, 2026 9:17 am

We should be so lucky.

May 24, 2026 9:11 am

From the news.un.org blurb quoted in the above article:

“The resolution drawn up by Vanuatu – a Pacific island nation on the frontline of the climate crisis, and several other countries, . . .”

Duhhhh . . . exactly how is Vanuatu “on the frontline of the climate crises”, other than perhaps being the lead grifter nation trying to extort money from wealthier nations?

All of Vanuatu’s public claims of suffering damage from “climate change”, predominately that from:
— rapidly rising sea levels,
— intensifying Category 5 cyclones, and
— devastating coral bleaching
have been scientifically and thoroughly debunked.

Therefore, I release my resolution that the UN, due to its ignorance of science and obvious bias, get the hell out of the United States of America.

I am confident that the future will show that my resolution carries just as much weight as that drawn up by Vanuatu and its fellow grifter nations.

George Thompson
Reply to  ToldYouSo
May 24, 2026 9:19 am

Probably less, but hope springs eternal.

May 24, 2026 12:06 pm

The world owes the USA many $trillions! Just a quick list WWI. WWII, Cold War, Marshall Plan, Foreign Aid, etc

KevinM
Reply to  MIke McHenry
May 24, 2026 2:26 pm

Did the world ask for it? USA spent trillions on those products, the rest benefitted from those products, but did the rest get a vote as to what would happen or when or how?

Reply to  KevinM
May 24, 2026 5:17 pm

WWI and WII yes they did. NATO was formed as wall against the USSR in Europe

Reply to  KevinM
May 25, 2026 7:44 am

When it comes to the ethics of fighting back against unjustified aggression, genocide and ruthless dictators, that is either a fundamental principle of a nation, or isn’t.

In either case, the world does not “get a vote as to what would happen or when or how”.

Did the world vote for Russia’s invasion of, and war against, Ukraine?

Edward Katz
May 24, 2026 2:18 pm

Who’s going to force this to happen, and who’s even listening? The UN’s proclamations on climate change have become every bit as far-fetched and asinine as The Guardian’s and the BBC’s. So it’s a safe bet that nothing will get done on this issue because why should taxpayers have to pay an unelected body to take action on an unproven theory?

KevinM
May 24, 2026 2:24 pm

“The United Nations (UN) was originally established in 1945 to save succeeding generations from the devastation of World War II. Its primary purpose was to maintain global peace and security, prevent future conflicts by replacing the League of Nations, develop friendly relations among nations, and foster international cooperation.”

ResourceGuy
May 24, 2026 4:14 pm

I want my reparations payments from the manipulated UN, cold war soviets still invading countries, and agenda science environmentalists who gleefully wrecked science and a whole host of institutions.

George Kaplan
May 24, 2026 6:07 pm

Logically it should be Communist China pays given they emit more than a third of all CO2 emissions, but of course that will never happen – the UN is highly unlikely to censor the CCP, and even if they did, Beijing would refuse to obey. Democrat America however is only too eager to give taxpayer funds to Communist China et al. as reparations for ‘wrongdoing’ plus embrace such legislative measures as entail national suicide.

Bob
May 24, 2026 6:20 pm

In my view the only obligation the US has to the UN is to leave it and kick the UN out of the US. The UN has become a useless and corrupt organization, we need to wash our hands of it now.

May 24, 2026 9:46 pm

But to be held responsible for the damages, wouldn’t one have to actually prove damage, not just assert it?

ResourceGuy
May 25, 2026 9:05 am

My tally for reparations payments to the US from Europe and Asia for all their world wars and aggression is $10 trillion dollars. That includes interest and surcharges on UN schemes.