#COP20Lima: Climate Aid Isn’t Charity, But Reparations
But, don’t you dare say that “climate change” has nothing to do with Leftist politics
AMY GOODMAN: There are many in the United States, particularly Republicans in Congress, saying, “I mean, we just can’t afford this.” Would you call it altruism, U.S. helping poorer countries deal with climate change?
SALEEMUL HUQ: This is nothing to do with altruism. This is to do with reparations from polluters. The United States has risen as an economic power based on emissions over the last 150 years that have caused the damage that we are now seeing. They recognize that, and they have taken on the obligation to help the poorer victims of the impacts of climate change that is caused by human-induced pollution. This is a pollution treaty, and it’s about polluters and victims of pollution.
Say, how did Ms. Goodman and Mr. Huq get to Lima? Goodman is from the U.S., and Huq is from Bangladesh. They surely didn’t swim, did they? Or row a boat.
This is all about leftist politics. Shifting money from one to the other for no work.
SALEEMUL HUQ: We expect the negotiators and the governments who are here to come up with a good package that, on the one hand, is adequate to solve the problem. An inadequate package is simply not going to be acceptable. On the other hand, they should also galvanize and build on the momentum that is happening around the world in taking actions. So, we’re not sitting and waiting for the Lima negotiators to come to a deal. People all over the world are actually doing things on the ground. And we need that to be supported and enhanced.
Labeling the money as reparations (for some countries succeeding while others fail because they’re failures) rather than charity allows these “developing countries”, which never seem to take steps forward, to dictate the terms of how much money they will demand.