Rio+20: A conference to propagate Imperilist's agenda on climate

The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, also known as Rio 2012 or Rio+20, hosted from 13 to 22 June 2012 by Brazil in Rio de Janeiro failed completely to address the looming climate crisis that the planet is facing. The climate conference was dubbed Rio+20 because it was a 20-year follow-up to the historic 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) also held in the same city in which broad goals were negotiated to control greenhouse gas emissions, protect ecosystems and biodiversity, and prevent desertification. Two decades on, the planet’s ecosystems are still degrading fast. Any green gains have been wiped out by soaring consumption. Humanity’s annual requirement for natural resources is about double what it was then. The rate of species extinctions is undiminished. Carbon dioxide emissions are up 40 percent, and the concentration of the heat-trapping gas this year for the first time hit 400 parts per million (ppm) in the Arctic air — up about 40 ppm from 1992. Rio+20 summit achieved nothing more than a weak affirmation of the 1992 document. The 58-page document it published, titled “The Future We Want,” is nothing but a demonstration of the massive political power of the world’s financial and military superpowers. As US President Barack Obama declined to attend the summit, Hillary Clinton only showed in Rio for a few hours there. That clearly underscores the low priority the US Government has given to addressing climate change. Mrs. Clinton suggested that any effort to address pollution and climate change is subservient to the interests of the corporate elite, particularly that of the United States. She advised the delegates to think about “harnessing the power of the market,” and claimed that “private sector investments, using targeted resources and smart policies, have catalyzed more balanced, inclusive, sustainable growth.” Her comments again exposed the imperialist climate policy of the Obama administration which is nothing but a corporate conspiracy under the guise of supporting the “green economy.” She went on to support the big corporate houses by suggesting the people of the to “use the private sector, particularly the consumer goods companies, as they have agreed to do, to make sure they have sustainable supply chains, the right kind of packaging and marketing.” It seemed she was addressing an investment forum rather than a climate summit! She concluded her speech by calling for a new type of cooperation between “the nonprofits, the civil society organizations, faith groups and individuals, all of us.” Her call to shift responsibility for dealing with the global ecological crisis to regional organizations and individuals represents a rejection of any responsibility on the part of the US ruling classes. The reality is that the American government has not merely failed to advance and strengthen solutions to climate change, but has actively undermined any serious attempt to address the pending ecological crisis if it cuts across corporate interests. Their climate policy and all other considerations are subordinated to the interests of America’s corporate and financial aristocracy.
Environment organizations like Oxfam and Greenpeace denounced the summit as a “hoax” and “an epic failure”. But these organizations are also paralyzed by the pro-capitalist politics of the upper class “green” movement that can offer no solution to the real crisis. In the context of a capitalist world economy dominated by the big corporate and financial houses, no progressive solution to the climate crisis is possible. Faced with national governments reluctant to engage in its grand plans, the UN is increasingly turning to corporations to make a difference. This too is seen as part of the brave new world of green economics. Tim Wirth, the former U.S. senator who now heads the UN Foundation, which fosters UN links with business, told journalists that “magic” public-private partnerships were more important than any conference declaration. As long as the big multinational corporate houses have control over all the political and economic decisions, no fundamental issue, from unemployment to climate change, can be addressed by any government. Making them party in any process of development, as deserved by Mrs. Hilary Clinton only exacerbate the crisis. If the political monopoly of the wealthy class, which is the main characteristic of capitalist economy, is broken by a unified and politically conscious movement of the common people of the world then the problems of pollution and climate change will only be dealt with seriously. The director of the UN Environment Programme Achim Steiner has rightly said “If we do not go into the heart of economic policy, we will meet here at Rio+40 even more culpable. Markets are social constructs. They are not a force like gravity. They can be governed.”