COP21 Terrorism Update #14.

On December 12th (12/12/15) the 21st Conference of Parties (COP21) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) ended in Paris, France.

Unfortunately the draft agreement it produced for consideration by national governments was so terrible I've got a nasty feeling that I'm going to be using this title designation right up until the COP22 Summit in Morocco at the end of 2016.

One of the main problems with the draft agreement produced in Paris is that it sets in stone what is known as the principle of binary differentiation for all eternity.

This means that under the agreement only the 38 nations listed in Annex I of the Kyoto Protocol (KP) are obligated to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions (ghg). Nations not included in that annex such as India and China are free to grow their ghg emissions as much as they please.

Despite all the claims at COP21 that nations would reduce their emissions even if they weren't obligated to - US President Obama's claim that he'd received such a guarantee from China for example - we got a clear indication of how China intends to proceed under the Paris draft.

On December 23rd (23/12/15) China announced that it was cutting the price of electricity produced by ghg emitting fossil fuels. They actually went so far as to claim that this move would reduce ghg emissions. However I'm not sure how making electricity produced by fossil fuels is going to discourage people from using more of it.

The comparative cost of green, renewable energy versus energy produced by fossil fuels has long been cited as a reason why it is economically impossible to cut ghg emissions. However this is rather a deceptive argument because fossil fuels aren't actually that cheap. What keeps the price down for the end user is vast government subsidies - USD500bn in 2011 alone.

Once you strip out these subsidies and consumers are left paying the true price the cost gap between fossil fuels and renewables isn't so large. In some cases the renewable sources actually work out cheaper.

Aside from the effort to draw up a new global agreement one of the main focus' in the run-up to COP21 has been to get governments to end these fossil fuel subsidies. By announcing that it is increasing its subsidies China is clearly signally that it has been going in the exact opposite direction.

Since COP21 a large part of the focus has been on Saudi Arabian led attempts to intimidate developing nations - particularly in East/Central Africa - to sign up to an agreement that will kill off all future attempts to combat climate change.

As such there has been renewed unrest in nations such as Burundi, Ethiopia, and the Central African Republic (CAR) alongside plenty of international discussion such as the Air France passenger jet from Mauritius to France that had to be diverted to Kenya amid a bomb hoax on December 20th (20/12/15).

Last Wednesday (23/12/15) the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) which for December is under the Presidency of the United States was forced to sit through a presentation by UN staffers on the effects of climate change on food security in East Africa.

The prospects are looking particularly grim with Ethiopia set for it's worst drought in 50 years - far worse then the drought which caused the 1984 famine that prompted then Band Aid single "Do They Know It's Christmas" which is now synonymous with Christmas in the UK. Already in Ethiopia some 350,000 children are classed as severely malnourished while the man-made famine in Yemen more then 530,000 children are severely malnourished.

On December 24th (24/12/15) Saudi Arabia responded to this apparent pressure from the UNSC with a fire at a maternity hospital in the southern city of Jazan which killed 24 and injured 123. Jazan sits right on Saudi Arabia's border with Yemen so this was a clear reference to Saudi Arabia's attempts to secure control of Yemen to use it as a launchpad against nations across East/Central Africa.

The fact that is was a maternity hospital and that many of the victims were infants in their cribs was a reference to a part of the Christmas story known as; "The Massacre of the Innocents."

Although we can dispute whether Jesus Christ is the son of God or not certainly at the time of his birth the middle-east region was under the control of King Herod the Great. Rather like Saudi Arabia's ruling al-Saud family Herod became King by doing a deal with the Roman Empire to keep the Jews in line in return for his fiefdom.

The story goes that upon being told that the new King of Kings had been born in Bethlehem Herod became intensely jealous and ordered all the baby boys born in Bethlehem during that month. Having been warned of this Jesus and his family were forced to flee as refugees to Egypt. There is some debate as to whether the Massacre of the Innocents actually happened but King Herod was that vicious and violent you certainly wouldn't put it past him. 

Therefore Saudi Arabia's recreation of the Massacre of the Innocents in Jazan was a clear threat that it would continue to use terrorism to prevent the al-Saud's rule being usurped.

What made Saudi Arabia's threat seem all the more sinister is that the following day (25/12/15) the UK Queen delivered her traditional Christmas Day speech to the nation and the Commonwealth including nations such as Ethiopia, Kenya and Rwanda.

Speaking about the refugee crisis that has gripped Europe this year the Queen reminded us that shortly after his birth Jesus himself had been forced to seek refuge. This was an oblique reference to the Massacre of the Innocents.

Also that day the Archbishop of Canterbury - the second in command of the Protestant Christian Church of England - gave his Christmas Day sermon. His reference to the Massacre of the Innocents was much more explicit with the Archbishop comparing the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) to a modern day King Herod.

The Queen's speech is of course pre-recorded and although he delivers it live I don't think the Archbishop of Canterbury simply knocks out his sermon the morning he delivers it.

Therefore through the Jazan fire Saudi Arabia was not only trying to sending the message that its terror campaign will continue it was also trying to send the message that the UK Commonwealth couldn't protect its members because Saudi Arabia is so powerful it had advance knowledge of both the UK Queen's and the Archbishop of Canterbury's Christmas messages.

I should point out then that although it is considered bad manners to report on the Queen's speech before it is broadcast it is far from a state secret. In fact the Monarchy doesn't actually produce the broadcast itself instead working with the UK's main news broadcasters on a rotating basis. This year it was Independent Television News (ITN).

As always when media-types involved there is always quite a bit of gossip. As a commercial broadcaster ITN doesn't have quite the same reverence for the Monarchy as the BBC is run under a Royal Charter and is part of the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) news pool. Plus all journalists in the UK get a preview copy of the speech at least a day in advance.

Therefore getting advance knowledge of either the UK Queen's or the Archbishop of Canterbury's Christmas messages is far from the intelligence coup that Saudi Arabia would like you to believe.

In response to the Jazan fire on Christmas morning (25/12/15) there was a fire at the birthplace of former US President Bill Clinton which is now a protected historical site in Hope, Arkansas. This was quickly confirmed as an act of arson which allowed the US to signal that the Jazan fire was also an arson and therefore a threat.

One of the main issues raised during recent discussions is that the US has become so detached from reality that it is unable to participate. Hence the UN feeling the need to give them a special briefing.

"Hope" was of course the big election campaign slogan of current US President Barack Obama while his first Secretary of State - dealing with foreign affairs - was Bill Clinton's wife Hillary. Hillary Clinton is now all but confirmed as the Democrat's 2016 Presidential Candidate and her unconventional running-mate Donald Trump is working hard to make sure she wins.

Alongside the arson the house was also daubed with some quite childish graffiti. For example the was a large "XX" which could well be a reference to the female chromosomal pairing. Hillary Clinton's seemingly only qualification to be President is that she is a woman.

There was also text-speak such as "55" which means "Ha Ha" and emoji such as the "Razz" symbol of a smiley face sticking its tongue out in mockery.

That could well be a reference to the fact that while the World is facing one of the greatest threats to its safety and stability since the second world war Obama and Hillary seem intent to continue behaving like sulky teenagers.

The biggest contribution to the climate debate over recent days though seems to have come from the climate itself.

As I've mentioned before the northern hemisphere is experiencing unseasonably warm, spring-like weather.

In the US this has caused cold weather to move further south causing intense snow storms over the north-west. This is meeting warmer weather that has been moving up from the Atlantic. Where the two weather systems have met they are producing violent storms, tornadoes and flooding.

In South America this warm Atlantic weather is causing violent storms around the border areas between Brazil, Uruguay, Paraguay and Argentina. This has produced some of the worst flooding in 15 years.

At the other side of the Atlantic this warming weather has brought violent storms and heavy rainfall to the Republic of Ireland and the UK.

On Christmas Eve (24/12/15) the appropriately named "Storm Eva" knocked out power to 6000 households in Ireland. By the time it reached the UK the following day (25/12/15) it caused widespread flooding that over-topped flood defences in large sections of the country. This included the Cumbria region which was previously flooded just two weeks ago during "Storm Desmond."

This of course was all entirely predictable amongst people who have accepted that global warming is manmade and it is causing the climate to change.

However people who refuse to accept the realities of climate change will instead try to blame it all on the "El Nino" weather phenomenon. This is really a redundant argument.

For reasons we don't really understand sea temperatures in the central/eastern Pacific Ocean go through a cycle from a warm peak to a cold trough and back again. El Nino describes the peak of this warming cycle and is defined by a three month period where sea temperatures are 0.5C above average. Sea temperatures are currently four times greater then the 0.5C El Nino rise at 2C and have been for quite some time.

Therefore the El Nino argument seems to be that this extreme weather is not being caused by global warming. Instead it is being caused by the globe being warmer than it should be.


18:05 on 28/12/15 (UK date).