Move
to ICJ of
Transboundary
Harm Was
Questioned by
US, Grenada
Says; No
Comment on
"Concern" by
Rice
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
February 3 --
With the
climate change
battle veering
into a
push for an
International
Court of
Justice
advisory
opinion on
"transboundary
harm," largely
by Pacific and
Caribbean
islands, what
is the United
States'
position?
Palau's
President Johnson
Toribiong
in September
2011 detailed
"three
pernicious
types of
'transboundary
harms' -- the
state of the
global
fisheries;
nuclear
radiation; and
especially
climate
change. Click
here
for his
speech.
Inner
City Press
has been told
that when a
group of
representatives
of such island
states met
with Susan
Rice, US
Ambassador to
the UN, Rice
expressed
concern about
the push to
the ICJ, which
the islands
say is a
matter
of the "rule
of law."
Grenada's
articulate
Ambassador to
the UN Dessima
Williams on
Friday told
Inner City
Press
that after the
islands'
meeting with
Rice, which
she did not
attend,
Grenada
received a
"demarche"
from the US
asking
questions
about the
proposal.
She and
Palau's
President
Toribiong and
UN Ambassador
Stuart Beck
all said the
goal is to
work in
collaboration
with the big
polluters. But
how will this
work?
Inner
City Press
asked the US
Mission to the
UN a few
questions, for
example to
simply
confirm that
Rice met with
a group of
other
Permanent
Representatives
and expressed
concern about
their plan to
take the
Transboundary
Harm
issue to the
International
Court of
Justice for an
advisory
opinion,
and that US
State
Department
sent a
communication
to Grenada
asking
questions
about the push
to take the
Transboundary
Harm issue to
the
ICJ.
The
US Mission to
the UN through
its spokesman
responded, "No
comment-
especially on
private
diplomatic
discussions."
The
panel at UN
Feb 4: Palau,
Grenada, DPI;
Ambassador
Rice not shown
So
what is
the US'
position on
Transboundary
Harm? In
fairness,
Palau's
Permanent
Representative
quoted Rice as
having called
the failure to
address
climate change
"pathetic," in
connection
with a UN
Security
Council debate
on climate
change.
Inner
City Press
asked Palau's
representative
Stuart Beck,
an able New
York lawyer,
about what
some call a
split in the
developing
world
groupings at
the
UN about
whether
climate change
should be
pursued
through the
Security
Council, where
the US and
others have
veto power, or
the
General
Assembly where
they don't.
Beck said the
strategy is to
get the
General
Assembly to
request the
advisory
opinion.
There
is a growing
group of
lawyers
working on the
proposal,
including
longtime
environmental
and
administrative
law expert
Michael
Gerard, known
as
"Mister
Environmental
Impact
Statement,"
conferring
only by
e-mail to save
costs.
"E-mails
against the
Empire," one
wag
dubbed it. How
will it work?
Watch this
site.
Footnote:
many
of the
Permanent
Representative
who have
previously
spoken of
their
encounter with
US Ambassador
Rice are, as
of this
writing, in
Australia
hearing first
hand that
country's case
to be voted
onto the
UN Security
Council next
year. For this
travel, are
there carbon
offsets? We'll
see.
, 
