Topic: Assistance for Nations Facing Total Territory Loss
Country: Egypt
Delegate Name: Mark Hensel
School: Forest Hills Eastern High School
Many low-lying nations such as the Netherlands and Bangladesh, and islands such as Tuvalu, Maldives, and Kiribati, face the prospect of partial to total territory loss in the coming decades as a consequence of rising sea levels and increased extreme weather events e.g. hurricanes, typhoons and floods. Even without such catastrophic events, gradual salinization of soil, corruption of the water tables and low flooding of crops, and already, in just one example of the harm, 75 Tuvaluans each year are allowed to flee as “environmental refugees” to New Zealand. Most science suggests that climate change is a significant cause of these issues, and that climate change in turn has been caused by high levels of CO2 and other greenhouse gases being released by societies into the air, with rich countries, and their fifteen percent of global population, adding 45 percent of emissions, and the explosion of the middle class in the developing world, especially China, presaging future growth in consumption of resources and creation of greenhouse gases. There have been many international conferences, those in Rio in 1992, Kyoto in 1997, and Copenhagen in 2009being the most prominent, that have established guidelines for international efforts to retrofit older, inefficient systems and products as well as implement more sustainable practices and products as they arise, but many countries, developed and developing, have not hewed to these frameworks. Egypt, in contrast, has been a leader in the Arab region and beyond in the fight against climate change, dedicating government resources to official ecological projects and putting funds in the hands of private entrepreneurs/businesses, especially in the fields of infrastructure, renewable energy and green construction, such as population relocation, using heartier crops, constructing barriers around low lands, using solar water heaters, and alternative fuels, not to mention all the more localized efforts of community leaders and NGOs. Egypt has been a large donor and recipient of humanitarian aid, and in recent times has helped Ethiopian flood victims, and would expect similar aid from other countries should the threat to Egyptian territory become more grave. All these have been essential, as Egypt, reliant as it is on the Nile delta and banks for agriculture, and rainfall for crops, is among the countries most threatened by climate change, according to the United Nations, and rising sea levels and changing rainfall are especially concerning.
Egypt’s strategy is one of “integration and implementation;” namely, that there must be integration of economic, political, and ecological goals, and implementation of existing laws, without adding new obligations, especially to developing countries, who, as Egypt has done, must find their own ways of advancing national economic interests while preserving their own resources and those of the rest of the world. The UN has stated that impoverished nations are affected more drastically than wealthy ones, and yet Egypt, like many other developing nations, contributes relatively little to global warming but it will receive some of the worst consequences. For this reason, Egypt believes that developed nations, who in general are less susceptible to climate change, must reaffirm, at Rio+20 or earlier, their commitment to the Kyoto Protocol inter alia, and share their greater wealth and technology with the rest of the world, as an egalitarian and humanitarian action. The guidelines are there for progress on climate change, but they must be followed.
Most developing nations support similar ideals, some of the most prominent being India, China, Brazil, and Indonesia, and they will use their own political capital to help influence policy, to ensure that all international agreements are conformed to, and that any new agreements, should they be necessary, not impede the development of any nation.
Developed countries such as the United States, Australia, Russia, and others continue to contribute more than their fair share of greenhouse gases and have not upheld their commitments to other countries. They are likely to continue to advocate whatever plan best convenes their economic interest, be it a new, more lax requirement for conservation or emissions, or a push for so-called “green business,” a way of binding less-developed nations to them, and avoiding legal, binding restrictions. Their superior clout poses a great danger to international frameworks for ecological progress, domestically and globally.
Sources:
http://www.escwa.un.org/divisions/projects/ifsd/index.asp
http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/csd/csd_pdfs/csd-19/backgrounder.pdf
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89660898
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89956754
http://www.eeaa.gov.eg/English/main/env_ozone_ecc_neg.asp
http://itotd.com/articles/499/disappearing-island-nations
http://www.moyak.com/papers/tuvalu-climate-change.html
http://www.uncsd2012.org/rio20/index.php?page=view&type=510&nr=572&menu=115
http://www.sis.gov.eg/En/FourStTemplate.aspx?Category_ID=864