Solving the Ukraine war:
Global Crisis Information Network (GCINET) has been active after the Russian Invasion in providing solutions to a peaceful resolution of the Ukraine War
The President of GCINET, Dr Tapio Kanninen, and the Executive Director of the Foundation for Global Governance and Sustainability (FOGGS), Dr Georgios Kostakos, published an article on solving the crisis in “Katoikos” on 25 March 2022. On 26 May 2022 Kanninen and Kostakos published another article in “Other News” on establishing a new confidence-building architecture and a full UN reform as a response to the Ukraine war and it is republished below. On the 6th of July 2022, Tapio Kanninen published an op-ed piece in “Helsingin Sanomat” stressing the need to seek negotiations to solve the crisis (see https://www.hs.fi/mielipide/art-2000008921203.html). On the 23rd of September 2022, a high-level discussion was organized in New York on the solutions to the crisis and the UN reform (see details in “Events” on this website).
Is a new confidence-building architecture and fundamental UN reform possible as a response to the Ukraine Crisis?
by Tapio Kanninen and Georgios Kostakos (*), 26 May, 2022
Condemnation of the Russian invasion of Ukraine is rightly aimed at President Vladimir Putin. As if starting a war against a sovereign country was not enough, there is the added shock of the atrocities committed by Russian troops against Ukrainian civilians. However, an overblown Western reaction will have dangerous consequences for the future of the whole international order, increasing greatly the likelihood of a generalized war even with the use of nuclear weapons, a nuclear accident, and runaway global threats, notably climate change.
The West has imposed severe sanctions on Russia inflicting maximum pain on the Russian leadership, the oligarchs and the population at large. While this is understandable as an initial response, ideally to prevent rogue behaviour, it is questionable whether it will have the intended impact after a certain time has passed, or it may make the Russian behaviour even more rogue and unhinged. The Western sanctions rekindle the sense of persecution and victimhood that goes deep into the Russian psyche. There are some good reasons for that, as historically Russia has suffered at the hands of powerful invaders like the Mongols, Poland, Napoleon and Hitler.
George F. Kennan, the architect of US containment policy and the Marshall Plan, expressed Russian fears of invasion in this way: “At the bottom of the Kremlin’s neurotic view of world affairs is the traditional and instinctive Russian sense of insecurity.” During the Soviet Union era Eastern European and Baltic States gave Russia a buffer zone against potential invaders, but when the Soviet Union broke up that buffer was lost. Successive US governments used this situation to the West’s military advantage expanding NATO. Kennan strongly objected to that, as he thought it would start a new Cold War with Russia. NATO expansion was in his mind “Strategic blunder of potentially epic proportions”. Whether such a reaction seems irrational or not from a Western point of view, NATO expansion is perceived as an existential threat by those sitting in the Kremlin.
The effects of the Ukraine war have already been catastrophic. Tens of thousands have been killed or wounded with millions of refugees, increased inflation and rising food prices. Inside Russia too, sanctions and isolation are increasing poverty, misery, humiliation, resentment, and hatred against the West. Despite apparent setbacks on the ground, the Russians have the means to exact revenge if relations between Russia and the West continue to deteriorate: nuclear, biological and chemical weapons and cyber-attacks. We have to remember how the bitterness felt by the Germans after the Versailles Treaty’s harsh peace terms in 1919 made possible Hitler’s path to power.
After two world wars, humankind has learned that large-scale carnage and humanitarian suffering need to be followed by a sincere effort to build a new international architecture based on collective security and cooperation. In his strong address to the UN Security Council on 5 April, 2022 President Zelensky called for a fundamental reform (or dissolution) of the UN as collective security does not work. Indeed, Article 109 of the UN Charter provides for a General Conference of the Members of the United Nations to review the Charter at the latest ten years after it entered into force, that is by 1955, which did not happen. 77 years letter, such a review of the UN Charter is long overdue and urgently needed, even if politically fraught with difficulties. A much more practical, parallel effort would be to start a confidence-building process in Europe and the world, to (re)establish the required minimum level of mutual trust for peace and cooperation to take hold. History shows us how that kind of process could be initiated.
The Finnish-Soviet Winter War of 1939-40 bears a significant resemblance to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Finland has a long border with Russia. Historically, Russia has feared an attack from the Baltic Sea. After the German invasion of Poland, Stalin asked Finland to give some areas to the Soviet Union to ensure protection of Russian strategic interests but Finland refused. Stalin started a war, which led to Finland losing parts of its territory but the Soviet Army could not occupy the whole country.
After WWII two Finnish Presidents, Juho Paasikivi and Urho Kekkonen developed a doctrine of cooperation and friendship with the old enemy, for geopolitical reasons. The key was to cultivate good personal relations with Kremlin to undermine any coup attempt by Finnish communists and exercise some self-censorship to avoid provoking the Soviet Union. “Finlandization” was condemned and ridiculed in the West but has made the Finns feel secure for decades – in fact the World Happiness Report 2022 ranks them the happiest people in the world for a fifth consecutive year – even if they now feel unhappy enough with Russian aggression to be seeking NATO membership.
President Zelensky of Ukraine did not have at all a mindset of Finlandization before the Russian invasion and some observers have characterized his prior behavior as provocative. President Macron reportedly raised Finlandization as one model for Ukraine. In 2014 Henry Kissinger had already publicly suggested Finlandization as a viable option for Ukraine. Former UK Foreign Secretary Lord Owen and his colleagues responded to Kissinger at the start of the Russian invasion, stating that permanent Finlandization of Ukraine is unrealistic but a military confidence-building treaty should be established between NATO and Russia with the help of Ukraine. Finland is indeed only an example, a useful precedent that should be kept in mind. We all should do our best to ensure that Ukraine becomes the new model of peace and prosperity for itself and the world, and “Ukrainization” the new success story one will be referring to. Some further history lessons and confidence-building measures offered below aim to contribute to that.
Another lesson from history is how a visionary foreign policy of a country can turn a security threat into a confidence-building process. After the tensions created by the invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968, the Soviet Union suggested in 1969 to European countries that a Conference on Security should be convened. Preempting a rejection of the Soviet initiative, Finland put forward a counter initiative suggesting Helsinki as venue for the Conference with expanded agenda and inviting also the US and Canada to participate.
There was strong criticism of the Finnish proposal but it gradually gathered strength and the Conference was held in Helsinki in 1975. The result was reduced tension in Europe and between the US and the Soviet Union. The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) grew out of this to become the world’s largest security-oriented regional organization active in peace missions, electoral and human rights monitoring.
It is high time for a country, a group of countries and/or an international organization or a group of international organizations to propose a new process for peace and cooperation in Europe and beyond, as Finland did in 1969. And this time China should be part of it as well. The UN Secretary-General, the President of the UN General Assembly and world leaders have key roles to play in the process, if they are up to it. The process could start by examining elements for a lasting ceasefire in the Ukraine – Russia war, or could come after a ceasefire has been established with a view to strengthening the possibilities for long-term peace.
Even before a long-term process is put in place, a short-term confidence-building measure could include setting up a panel with experts from all sides to evaluate how the risks of accidental nuclear war may have increased as part of the Ukraine crisis, including delivery, early warning, and command-and-control systems, and propose new safeguards. Another confidence-building measure could involve a similar panel of experts on catastrophic climate change that already affects all sides and which could focus their energies on more constructive, win-win projects.
Eventually, a new treaty between NATO and Russia will have to be negotiated, as per the proposal by Lord Owen and his colleagues. Such a treaty has already been put forward by the Putin government in December 2021. Although the sincerity and acceptability of the Russian proposals are seriously doubted especially by Western commentators, one cannot but recognize the importance of keeping the parties, Russia and Ukraine on one hand and the US, NATO, and Russia on the other, engaged by means other than war. Having Russia itself engaged in multilateral processes that recognize its major power status and pay attention to its concerns is also something one should not dismiss lightly if there is a sincere will to avoid a nuclear exchange, the likelihood of which will just increase if the war continues and escalates.
………………….
(*) –Tapio Kanninen is President of New York-based Global Crisis Information Network Inc and former Chief of Policy Planning at the UN Department of Political Affairs. He is also co-founder of Climate Leadership Coalition, the largest non-profit climate business network in Europe. While at the UN he was Head of Secretariat of Kofi Annan’s five Summits with Heads of Regional Organizations that also included military alliances like NATO. Kanninen was a Secretary and Research Focal Point of the High-level Drafting Group of “An Agenda Peace”, Boutros Boutros Ghali’s proposals for the prevention of conflicts, building peace, and strengthening peacekeeping in response to the request of the first Summit of the Security Council at the level of Heads of State or Government in 1992. Kanninen was also a Convener of the Interdepartmental Working Group to implement the recommendations of An Agenda for Peace.
On UN reforms, he was Secretary of the General Assembly Working Group on the reform of the Security Council and an author of “Leadership and Reform” (Kluwer 1995) analyzing Perez de Cuellar’s reform process of the UN in the late 1980s.
After joining the UN in 1979 Kanninen organized with the UN Secretary-General’s Office, Yale, MIT, and other international partners a number of seminars and workshops on preventing accidental nuclear war, a serious issue already in the 1980s. His latest book is Crisis of Global Sustainability (Routledge, 2013). He holds an MA in economics from the University of Helsinki and a Ph.D. in political science from the Graduate School of the City University of New York
— Georgios Kostakos is the Co-founder and Executive Director of the Foundation for Global Governance and Sustainability ( FOGGS).
About half of his thirty-year work experience Georgios spent with the United Nations (UN), including with the Executive Office UN Secretaries-General Kofi Annan and Ban Ki-moon, the High-level Panel on Global Sustainability, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and field missions for political affairs and human rights.
Outside the UN he has held various positions at the Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP), organized postgraduate courses at the University of Athens, was a visiting lecturer at the Brussels School of International Studies / University of Kent, and served as LIFE Climate Action Sector Coordinator at NEEMO EEIG. Georgios is also the Publisher of Katoikos.world, the online magazine and community-building project of FOGGS, where he and Tapio Kanninen have also recently published on the Ukraine crisis.
The Community and the US Election:
Potential scenarios: negative and positive
By Dr Tapio Kanninen, Oct 26, 2020
Dr Tapio Kanninen
Dr Tapio Kanninen is President of the Global Crisis Information Network Inc. and founding member of Climate Leadership Coalition Inc. He used to work for some 30 years at the UN in New York including as Chief of Policy Planning Unit in the Department of Political Affairs (2008-2005). His latest book is ‘Crisis of Global Sustainability’ (2013).
Back in May, Georgios Kostakos and I published two columns on the global and national responses to Covid-19, and its implications for global governance (part I, part II). The biggest impact, we said, will be determined by the responses of China and the US.
In this column, I analyse the United States itself – in the midst of both the pandemic and elections. What global implications might these developments have?
My conclusion: while the US has been the leader of the world order created after WWII, its leadership role is now deteriorating. But there are positive and well as negative scenarios.
US exceptionalism: some worrisome trends
1. Failure of the US pandemic response
The fact that the US has been the worst in the world in dealing with the pandemic is surprising and indicates a possible gradual decline of the US’s role in the international system. Five reasons for the US failures:
- Political leadership has sent conflicting messages and has been unable to create a national plan for testing, supplying protective equipment and how the states could consistently follow CDC guidelines. President Trump challenges and disagrees with his own scientific epidemiologists, does not mask up at his rallies, failing to show an example to America in general, and does not condemn the fact that his supporters are neither social distancing nor wearing masks in his own rallies. The fact that he contracted the virus himself with several top officials in the White House is a striking demonstration of failed leadership.
- The US is decentralized in terms of decisions on mask mandates, lockdowns and enforcing guarantees. State governors rule; they can overturn the intentions of local mayors who want to apply more stringently the CDC guidelines on lockdowns, mask-use, permitted gatherings and school openings. The political divisiveness inside states and between the blue and red states creates confusion and social disharmony, leading potentially to violence and instability.
- The US has for decades downplayed the role of public health services and agencies. This meant that the preparedness of public health agencies at the federal, state, and local levels was in imperfect shape when the pandemic hit. With no federal funding, the situation is just getting worse.
- The protection of ‘American individualism’ has become a central issue in terms of masks and lockdowns. Certain right-wing segments of the media, but also Attorney General Barr, see lockdowns and mask mandates as violating the basic rights of Americans to choose their destiny, warning of attempts by the opposition to pave the way for socialism and ‘dictatorship of big government’.
- The emergence of super-emotional commentary, and vitriolic hate speech at its worst, as well as conspiracy allegations between Democrats and Republicans and between the news media and social media supporting each side, with President Trump strongly encouraging such divisiveness, is a new feature of contemporary US politics. This thwarts a unified national strategy to combat the Covid-19 threat based on joint values and narratives.
2. Pandemic’s contribution to US political instability
Covid-19 has also intensified other new trends in American politics and culture. The racial divide has become a renewed focus of the American political discussion after a number of cases of police brutality. This divide is used by both right-wing and left-wing extremists to create violence and instability. Law and order has become a new campaign issue. Both the protests and counter-protests, mostly without masks and no social distancing intensify the spread of the virus and create more divisiveness and allegations of hypocrisy and lawlessness behavior by both sides.
Prof Lawrence Douglas’ book “Will He Go? Trump and Looming Election Meltdown in 2020″ and Barton Gellman’s 23 September online article in The Atlantic ”The Election that Could Break America” – among other similar accounts – have revealed the so far hidden truth that the US Constitution does not provide a path for a peaceful succession in case a sitting president campaigning for a second term does not want to leave the office whether or not he wins or loses the elections.
The US Constitution assumes that a loser of the presidential election is willing to concede the electoral loss. But it has no clear provisions when the loser is unwilling to make such a concession. Barton Gellman offers evidence that Trump will never concede and his strategy is to delegitimize the elections as Biden’s win has seemed likely already months before the elections. Covid-19 is a contributor to this dangerous situation.
3. Nightmare scenario: Imperfect constitutional provisions for succession
The nightmare scenario would be the outcome of two basic factors.
- First, the Democrats vote usually overwhelmingly more often by mail than Republicans and now, because of Covid-19, they are expected to vote many times more by mail than in earlier elections. Polls have found that Republicans are much less worried about the pandemic and might mostly vote in person in polling places like in earlier elections.
- Secondly, President Trump and his supporters see these facts as an opening for delegitimizing elections because of mail voting – in case Biden is on the path to victory – and actively discouraging mail-in voting in key states as well (e.g. the Republican Governor of Texas decreed that there should be only one drop-in mailbox site in each county of the state meaning in some cases one box site for millions of residents).
- This nightmare scenario might not be realized if Biden is able to win by a landslide on Election Day. But it is important to consider this scenario as it reveals the vulnerability of the US constitution in case of a future ruthless president seeking re-election or any future populist presidential candidate understanding the constitutional loopholes and using them to his or her advantage. In Gellman’s nightmare scenario, Donal Trump leads on Election Day while Biden wins after all voting is counted. Trump’s strategy is to declare himself a winner on the 3rd of November and to seek both the courts, including the Supreme Court and the assistance of Trump’s sympathetic Republican legislators and governors in swing states to stop any further vote-counting. So far this kind of situation has not happened in the US for some 150 years. But in 1876, in key swing states at that time, the situation was similar to now in swing states of Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan. The legislature was Republican, but the governors were Democrats. In 1876 the Republican legislatures certified a Republican candidate (Rutherford Hayes) as a winner but Democratic governors a Democratic candidate (Samuel Tilden) as a winner. When Congress met in early January to declare a new president there were two contradicting results from key swing states. This can happen in a worst-case scenario on January 6th, 2021, as well.
In January 1877 the leaders of the Congress (and others who were involved) were able to negotiate a winner (Hayes) but the process was difficult. Two days before Inauguration, the sitting president, Ulysses Grant, was so concerned that he considered declaring martial law and naming fellow Republican Hayes as the winner. In 2021, Trump may welcome this kind of scenario. His friend and fixer, Richard Stone, has already suggested to Trump the use of martial law for his benefit.
Prof Bruce Ackerman, in a Slate article, refers to a related scenario. The declaration of the winner is supposed to happen in a joint session of Congress on 6 January 2021. Ackerman continues:
“Mike Pence, as president of the Senate, will chair the joint session of Congress that decides who won the election. Before the session begins, Trump announces that Pence will disqualify close Biden victories as plainly fraudulent, while upholding close Republican victories as entirely legitimate—making it mathematically impossible for Congress to select Biden. The president’s lawyers claim that precedents from the founding era authoritatively establish Pence’s unilateral authority on such matters. To counter this threat, Nancy Pelosi refuses to allow the joint session to take place and asserts that the plain language of the President Succession Act makes her, as a speaker, ‘acting president’ on Jan. 20. This conflict on Capitol Hill provokes an escalating wave of street protests across America, and violent police measures, as Inauguration Day approaches.”
If the above scenarios prove to be true then either the Congressional leaders (with covert assistance from generals, state governors and others) will reach compromise before Inauguration Day, or they just cannot. Then, if Trump declares martial law, and himself as President for four more years, the US will become an ‘unstable democracy.
This is not such a far-fetched scenario as it might look in the first instance as some see already a possibility of civil war situations when we approach late 2020 and thereafter. One such scenario was studied in the summer of 2020 in four days of simulations of the Transition Integrity Project modeling the election and its aftermath in an effect to find out the worst-case scenarios. Gellman describes one such worst-case scenario as follows:
“John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chair in 2016 led a Biden team in another scenario that was prepared to follow Trump to the edge of civil war, encouraging three blue states threatening a secession.”
The strongly ingrained attitudes and ideological rigidity of both Democrats and Republicans regarding the Trump victory have just intensified recently auguring badly for the election aftermath. Hillary Clinton jumped the bandwagon saying: “Joe Biden should not concede under any circumstances.”
Implications for the global community: A question of values
The pandemic has hit the world hard – increasing poverty, inequality, and economic and social hardships everywhere. Its impact on the environment and climate change is not yet clear. But its impact on our values is maybe the strongest.
The US has been a champion of the stable and globalized liberal world order with free trade and support for international organizations and coalitions. But since Trump’s election, we have seen a clear erosion of US leadership in these areas. The US has also been a champion of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the world but Trump has shown little interest in following US presidential tradition.
The US reputation in the world was already hit hard by its poor initial Covid-19 response. Any election instability will further erode its potential leadership role particularly in furthering democratic values and setting an example to new or restored democracies that are struggling to maintain such principles and practices amidst the pandemic and deepening economic and social calamities.
Worse, US electoral instability might inspire a new wave of ruthless leaders to resort blindly to national interests and ‘survival of the fittest’ away from globalism and internationalism as strong global values that grew out of the tragic experiences of WWII, and the idealism of the victorious states. Populist leaders, and of course dictators, can use the vulnerabilities in democratic constitutions and practices, and sudden openings for power crab created by Covid-19, for their own political benefits.
But perhaps the most dangerous trend inspired by the current US politics is the effort at undermining the value of truth. Honesty and integrity are under attack by populists, dictators and conspiracy theorists who want to create a strong feeling of divide between ‘us and them’ – the ‘evil’ and the ‘patriotic’. Strong emotions dominate when ‘fake news’ is a new political slogan and truth is losing its impact as a uniting force in national and global politics. The culture of ‘lying without shame’ might become the new normal. Prof Joseph Nye calls this trend a ‘1930-like authoritarian challenge’.
The international governance system is also under attack and might see major changes. Trump’s isolationist strategy will probably continue whether Trump or Biden is the next US president, albeit less so with Biden. But Biden as a new president might face so wide street violence and instability by Trump supporters that he might not have the luxury to devote much time to international affairs as he is trying to save the US from civil war-like conditions.
As a consequence, both China and Europe are likely to become more influential players on the world scene. Because of Covid and election instability, US leadership and exceptionalism in the world is bound to decrease. China’s growing role might be inevitable. That might not bode well for global democratic values and transparency in global governance. The EU, however, might offer a balancing counterpoint.
The above trends are mostly negative currents in the world governance system of today. But not all possible future trends are negative. Joseph Nye saw a possibility for a greener planetary future. Public opinion in many democracies is beginning to place a higher priority on climate change and environmental conservation. Some governments and companies are re-organizing to deal with such issues. Even before Covid-19, one could foresee an international agenda in 2030 defined by each country’s focus on green issues. By highlighting the links between human and planetary health, the pandemic accelerates the adoption of this agenda.
Trump’s re-election might not further greener global trends but it might not stop them either. Biden’s win might accelerate the international focus to stop global warming as an existential threat to all of us.
The future will show if the goal of a sustainable planet will unite us all amidst the aftermath of the pandemic. Such a new unifying global value is, in fact, badly needed.
This blog was originally published on the website of the New Zealand Centre for Global Studies on 25 October 2020.
Rotaries at Hanko in Finland Signing Citizens Climate Pledge
Video by Ari Heinila
Citizen’s Climate Pledge by Howard Adelman
By Prof. Howard Adelman, Jun 4, 2017
Howard Adelman
Prof. Howard Adelman is a major Canadian scholar and former Professor at York University and Princeton. He writes a popular blog on current issues and here is his blog on June 4, 2017, where he urged his readers to sign “Citizens Climate Pledge”. He is also referring to President Sauli Niinistö’s Citizen Climate Pledge which you can find here: President Niinistö makes climate pledge. Against the background of Donald Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Accord, it was disappointing to wake up … Earlier we had nightmares, now daymares.
Climate change proceeds at an alarming pace. In addition to countries, others can do their part to help. Citizens, cities, and companies could speed up the momentum for an effective response. Today, I signed the Citizens Climate Pledge initiated by the President of Finland, Sauli Niinistö. I would encourage you to join.
There are many actions ordinary citizens can take. This may be one of the easiest. And it is very timely. Please sign and promote the Citizens Climate Pledge. Encourage key civil society and political leaders to join.
Here is how to join.
Go to: http://climateneutralnow.org/Pages/Individuals.aspx
A picture of the actor, Edward Norton, appears. You may listen to the video by tapping the arrow. To join, press the box in green below Edward Norton’s picture. After reading the pledge, if you agree, press “Sign now! At the bottom of the page, you will have to authenticate either through Google or Facebook.There are three other relevant sites you can read for background:
http://climateneutralnow.org/Pages/Individuals.aspx
http://www4.unfccc.int/ndcregistry/Pages/Home.aspx
Please pledge now.
Engaging athletes and fans in support of the fight against climate change at 2017 FIS Nordic World Ski Championships in Lahti, Finland
By Michael Pedersen, Project Lead and Founder of M INC. > change the game, May 8, 2017
Watch a 45-second edited video statement of professional athletes participating at 2017 FIS Nordic World Ski Championships in Lahti, Finland:
Michael Pedersen and Teemu Kalliojärvi
I recently coordinated a pilot project on athlete and fan engagement in support of the fight against climate change at 2017 FIS Nordic World Ski Championships in Lahti, Finland. The pilot project took place on 22-25 February 2017. It was carried out in collaboration with Protect Our Winters Finland and forms part of a global project under the umbrella of the Global Crisis Information Network.
In the context of the pilot project, professional athletes participating in the Championships were offered an opportunity to give video statements to their fans. These statements were focused on why it is important to care about climate change and how we all easily can help fight climate change in terms of changing specific behaviors. Subsequently, random fans coming to watch the Championships were asked to view a 45-second edited athlete video statement and fill in a short questionnaire to measure what they thought of it.
The pilot project generated two main findings: - Professional athletes in skiing are able and willing to give powerful video statements to their fans about climate change – across nationality, gender and disciplines.
- Skiing fans are very receptive to climate change statements from professional athletes in skiing – across age, gender, nationality, and whether they ski themselves or not.
- As for the latter, it was particularly noteworthy that skiing fans self-assessed that they felt much more motivated to change some of their habits in support of the fight against climate change after having watched the 45-second edited video statement of professional athletes in skiing (8.12 on average on a scale from 1-10). Despite the very high average, the test data also indicated demographic variations in fan motivations to change behavior:
- 31-40-year-old fans were the most motivated to change behavior (8.40 on average), whereas 21-30-year-old fans were the least motivated to change behavior (7.83 on average).
- Female fans were more motivated to change behavior (8.32 on average) than male fans (7.83 on average).
- Fans of other nationalities than Finnish were slightly more motivated to change behavior (8.16 on average) than fans of Finnish nationality (7.83 on average).
- Fans skiing themselves were slightly more motivated to change behavior (8.14 on average) than fans not skiing themselves (8.00 on average).
- The 2017 FIS Nordic World Ski Championships in Lahti, Finland took place from 22 February 2017 to 5 March 2017. The Championships brought together 700 professional athletes from 60 countries in 21 competitions. 250,000 fans went to the Championships along with 2,000 volunteers. 600 million fans watched the Championships on TV. Protect Our Winters Finland is the national chapter of the global organization Protect Our Winters (POW). The organization was founded in the USA in 2007. It is a non-profit environmental organization, involving individuals in the global winter sport community. POW’s goal is to bring awareness to and fight against climate change by means of community-based projects, advocacy and educational initiatives. The pilot project formed part of a global project, which is to build a common platform for encouraging sport fans to adopt environmentally responsible behavior in the support of fighting catastrophic climate change; across sports and countries, inside and outside the stadium, through the development and dissemination of common guidelines for sport event organizers, with a particular focus on developing mechanisms for enlisting sport celebrities and professional athletes to take prominent advocacy roles.
For further information, see the following links:
- Report with summary of pilot project findings
- Global project documentation
- Summary of presentation at the International Olympic Academy in Ancient Olympia, Greece
- Summary of Finnish sport community event in Helsinki, Finland
- Summary of COP20 side event in Lima, Peru
- Website of Protect Our Winters (POW) Finland (in Finnish)
- Website of Protect Our Winters (POW) (in English)
- Website of 2017 FIS Nordic World Ski Championships
-
Ecological housing – a bold but sustainable choice to make
By Timothy Teh, Board Member of Global Crisis Information Network Inc, January 8, 2017
Timothy Teh and his wife Mia
Timothy Teh is an Australian-born traveler, yoga teacher and healer. As a board member of GCINET (Global Crisis Information Network Inc), he has a continuous interest in the health and longevity of this planet. Timothy writes regularly for our climate change blog about his first-hand personal experiences regarding the impact climate change is having on our environment. He has traveled extensively throughout the world spending most of his time in Costa Rica and is currently residing in Sedona, Arizona in the USA.
Dear readers,
In my last blog, I talked about your choices as a consumer in making a big impact on our mother earth. This year I’m happy to say that my wife and I are going to be able to put down some roots and move into our own home. We have put a lot of thought into what makes a perfect home. To us, it should be a place of health, healing, and nurturing of our hopes and dreams for creating a better planet.
We have decided to buy some land and build our own Earthen House, some may know it as a cob house or mud brick and adobe. See here what Wikipedia says about Earthern House or Earth House: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_house.An Earthen home is the oldest form of housing known to man and today it houses over 50% of the planet’s population. My wife and I have never done anything like this before so as you can imagine the idea may come as a bit of a challenge. We have started educating ourselves on this process with online courses and by watching numerous YouTube videos.
How to build an Eathern HouseAs it turns out there is a massive movement in Earthen buildings and as the home builder you can invite people from your community to come help build your home saving you money in labor. This is sounding better by the minute, right? Making friends and the whole community coming together to help you construct your home so they in turn learn to do the same for themselves and pass on knowledge to their children.
Over the years I have met a few people in the middle of constructing their homes and they seem a bit stressed going it alone in their building process. I am not saying that Earthen home won’t have its fair share of ups and downs but there is nothing more pure than the heart of a volunteer.
That’s good energy for your home, I’d say. A great way to start a new home.
Ingredients in making Earthen homes are:
1. Clay-rich earth
2. Sand
3. Straw
4. Water
These ingredients are available almost everywhere on this planet right under your feet.
An Earthen home has a low carbon footprint as there are little to no shipping costs on moving materials. Indeed main advantages to building in Earthen homes are:
1. Low material cost
2. Low carbon footprint
3. Energy efficiency (low-cost heating and cooling).
These three reasons were more than enough to sway our decision to move in this direction when it comes to contracting our own home. Ancient peoples lived in harmony with our mother earth and did so by working with natural, nontoxic materials. Indeed conventional building material contains toxic chemicals and a very large carbon footprint. The toxins can cause allergens and health problems.
The feeling inside the Earthen homes that I have visited is quite simply put: earthy, grounded, and wholesome and this is exactly what is needed in moving us to a sustainable future.In my next blog, we hope to be well on our way in constructing our own home and can give tips on how you could do the same for your new home. Our choices do make a difference in this world and as we move towards a harmonious and in every way better coexistence with this planet I plan to educate my family and our community here and around the world about what we have learned.
Till next time. Thank you for reading and I will keep you posted on our next step in making a brighter future for our planet.
Many BlessingsTimothy Teh
World governance solutions to climate change and other global crises: a book review
Miriam Aczel
The Academic Council on the UN System (ACUNS) published on 11 October 2016 a book review of the “Crisis of Global Sustainability” (Routledge, 2013) by Dr Tapio Kanninen, President of Global Crisis Information Network Inc (GCINET). The book’s message is still very valid, as the author of the review Miriam Aczel from Imperial College London’s Centre for Environment Policy, also recognized: “ In 2016, Kanninen’s analysis is more relevant than ever.” The review focuses much on the governance solutions Kanninen has offered in his book to solve and manage catastrophic climate change and other intertwined global crises, issues that have not received much attention recently as the world has focussed on short-term political issues such as Brexit and US elections. But now is a good time to pay more attention to long-term solutions to our global crisis.
Tapio Kanninen – Crisis of Global Sustainability
Tapio Kanninen. Crisis of Global Sustainability, (The Global Institutions Series, New York: Routledge, 2013), pp. 208.
Reviewed by: Miriam Aczel (Imperial College London)
Crisis of Global Sustainability by Tapio Kanninen, published in 2013 as part of the Global Institutions Series, is a valuable historical introduction to global sustainability and survivability. It analyzes the role of organizations and institutions in solving complex problems that threaten our future. After analyzing the global state of affairs and existing institutional mechanisms for remedying crises, Kanninen concludes with the tempered but hopeful message that while we face a global existential crisis, we can transform how we as institutions and individuals respond. This transformation, however, will require new ways of thinking and a commitment to change at the local, regional, national, and global levels.
The book is scholarly in its depth of analysis, yet manages to be approachable to a general audience. Because of its emphasis on developing policy solutions, it is best suited to policymakers, scholars, and students. Kanninen uses pertinent examples and case studies to illustrate past failings in how individuals and institutions have responded to dire warnings about the Earth’s future. For example, he illustrates how the scientific community may criticize — and reject—innovative solutions or approaches to problems because they run counter to accepted beliefs or methodologies.
In 2016, Kanninen’s analysis is more relevant than ever. Recent events, such as the United Kingdom’s populist vote to leave the European Union, referred to colloquially as ‘Brexit’, arguably point to the loss of confidence in international institutions and in their ability to handle critical issues such as climate change and growing economic inequality and instability. Kanninen identifies key reasons that have prevented international institutions from solving these problems, but, most importantly, he provides thoughtful recommendations on how to address deficiencies in these institutions that have impeded their success.
Aurelio Peccei, 1976 Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons / Koen Suyk / Anefo
In the first few chapters of the book, Kanninen walks the readers through the history of attempts to define and address the crisis of sustainability. He begins by describing the formation of the Club of Rome in 1968—now a global think tank that began as a collection of 30 scientists concerned about our common global future—and then summarizes intergovernmental actions taken to promote sustainability from the 1970s to 2012. He says that 45 years after the first warnings regarding the unsustainability of pace and mode of our development, and exploitation of resources, we are still talking about the same crises and approaching them with the same perspective and tools. Underlying the message of the book is the disturbing question: are we too late? Is it still possible to bring about the transformations needed to create a sustainable future or at least a survivable one?
The story of the founding of the Club of Rome, is a compelling model for what Kanninen believes a new generation of visionary leaders can accomplish. Led by the charismatic entrepreneur Aurelio Peccei, this small group of committed individuals with diverse viewpoints came together with a shared goal of tackling pressing world problems. In 1972, they commissioned Limits to Growth, a groundbreaking study that applied a system dynamics approach to simulate interactions between the Earth, with its finite resources, and exponential economic and population growth. The methodology of the study was widely criticized at the time of its publication because, according to Kanninen, the approach was in conflict with the “mainstream paradigm in economics” (p. 40). Kanninen uses this example to illustrate that the intractable problems, associated with creating a sustainable future, need radically new paradigms because our conventional methods have not worked. He says that “new competing paradigms are attacked, ignored, even demonized”, and sometimes may only be accepted when a subsequent generation of new scientists arises (p. 40).
Kanninen says that one of the problems that have led to the failure of international bodies to act is that people still rely on the conventional definition of sustainable development promulgated by the Brundtland Commission Report in 1987. The Report defined sustainable development as a “development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Despite “intentions, declarations, and resolutions to change the nature of conventional growth”, environmental degradation has persisted (pp. 44-45). Kanninen says that we need a stronger and more comprehensive definition of global sustainability that reflects new realities: global survivability. Another issue he identifies is how we currently think about growth. He quotes Penetti Malaska for whom “growth” is an “innate part of our thinking.” Yet, we measure economic growth through GDP, which does not accurately account for sustainability metrics, such as environmental quality or quality of life. One proposal is that a new definition of growth, “neogrowth, might keep growth in our vocabulary but give it a positive, optimistic, and environmentally sustainable meaning” (p. 57).
The final few chapters of the book are particularly valuable for policymakers. In these chapters, Kanninen examines the United Nations, its early warning mechanisms, policy planning, and response capacity to interrelated issues. He then asks if the UN could be reformed to help address future issues. Kanninen concludes that, although UN agencies have developed threat-specific systems, there is no “comprehensive early warning mechanism on interrelated global challenges…with the necessary information gathering, scenario building, and modeling capabilities” (p. 111). If such a system were to exist, it still would be necessary to move from “warning to action.” Kanninen encourages a more centralized approach. One possibility is to create a central UN body to respond to “multifaceted and interconnected crises” (p. 112). However, he thinks this will be unlikely because of “political difficulties.” Another possibility is to create “analytical and research capacity for independent long-range thinking and planning outside the U.N. system” (p. 112). This new body will work in close cooperation with the Secretary General’s staff. He calls this possibility “promising” (p. 112) and provides more detail in the book’s last two chapters.
In the Epilogue, Kanninen concludes that “understanding the issues is the first step; the second is action” (p. 144). He proposes that we need an Agenda for the Survival of Mankind, which will act as an enthusiastic and rapidly evolving plan to implement a radical change. The role of cutting-edge analysis and tools is increasingly significant today and we need to be able to better understand their application. This will be the first step in confronting the global crisis currently facing us. Only after seeking to understand these interrelated problems, we can begin to develop a worldwide response to the crisis of global sustainability.
Useful resources:
From Costa Rica to Sedona, Arizona – climate change is felt everywhere
By Timothy Teh, Board Member of Global Crisis Information Network Inc
Timothy Teh
Timothy Teh is an Australian-born traveler, yoga teacher and healer. As a board member of GCINET (Global Crisis Information Network Inc) he has a continuous interest in the health and longevity of this planet. Timothy will write regularly for our climate change blog about his first-hand personal experiences regarding the impact climate change is having on our environment. He has traveled extensively throughout the world spending most of his time in Costa Rica and is currently residing in Sedona, Arizona.
My family and I recently moved from Costa Rica to Sedona, AZ. One thing I am seeing in the world today is a massive increase of cars on the road everywhere I go. A trip from the city Alajuela, Costa Rica that 10 years ago would have taken 35 mins, is now taking 1hr and 30 mins due to traffic and the increase of the cars on the road. As Costa Rica gets wealthier, the ability to buy the latest and greatest gas guzzler cars increases with very little consideration to the impact on the consumption of fossil fuels.
I see this throughout the world over and over. It is my belief that in order for us to make a real difference to the environment we need to stop thinking about the flash and the fastest and move towards what’s going to be best for our home, mother earth. Seeing her (mother Earth) as our first concern in this consumer age is what is going to be most important in the years to come.
Recently my family and I bought a new car. My main concern was gas consumption and balancing the needs of my family. We bought a 2011 Toyota Highlander Hybrid. This choice is one way of showing big corporations that we are wanting to move towards a vehicle that uses less fuel and meets the needs of the family.
Dear readers,
As we consider climate change and realize that ultimately it is up to us to make the biggest impact as we are the consumers and have the ability to shift trends throughout the world. It comes down to choices and the effects they have on the footprint that we leave for generations to come. In this modern world where most of us have cars (sometimes more than one), it’s our choices that are going to affect our consumption of fossil fuels.
The car marketplace is full of different vehicles, some hybrid, some mostly electric, and some full electric. This transition is at it’s early phase right now and is the time to get very excited about these choices. There are some vehicles that can travel 101 miles per gallon which is a massive leap forward from the big SUVs that will sometimes use 14 to 17 miles per gallon.
With the massive deforestation of the Amazon rainforest due to oil companies destroying this planet’s lungs, these are the choices that are most important right now. I understand that buying an electric vehicle might not be within your budget right now but if you think of the amount that you spend on gas and what it cost to the planet you see that the savings is more than comparable. In 2015 the average price per year spent on gasoline was $8683. If you own that vehicle for five years you will quickly see that you are paying more for the gas-guzzling than the car you own.Choices you make at the supermarket can also affect the amount of oil/gas you consume. Decisions like what fruits and vegetables you buy, buying in season and local have a far less carbon footprint than apples from Chile or New Zealand if you live in the places where apples do not grow.
It is great to have variety and choose exotic fruits and vegetables but it comes at the cost of this planet and how much resources we use is it really worth it?
Going to supermarkets that have a bulk buy section and bringing your own packaging or jars also reduces the amount of plastic waste that you could use at your home.
A compost pile is also an amazing way to reduce the amount of methane gas that is released into the atmosphere. Not many people are aware that when you mix household vegetable waste with plastic or trash that you put out for collection when it goes to the landfills it causes a more toxic methane gas that is released into the atmosphere and which is very harmful to the environment.
I’m a strong believer in sourcing food locally but also sourcing from the wild which has amazing health benefits for you and your family. Every time you step out into nature you are passing many different plants that can be used for medicines and food.
Unfortunately, we have lost a lot of our knowledge about the local plant species that we have around us that can benefit us in a great way and also have fun in the process.
We do have the power to sway the way consumption is managed on this planet.
And it is up to each one of us to make the right choices.
Be thoughtful and be grateful for this amazing planet, our mother Earth.
Second blog on the importance to mobilize the sports world to fight against catastrophic climate change
ENGAGING PROFESSIONAL ATHLETES IN THE FIGHT AGAINST CATASTROPHIC CLIMATE CHANGE
By Michael Pedersen, Project Lead, Project to Utilize the Unique Power of Sport Events and Athletes in Motivating Behavioral Change among Fans in Support of the Fight against Catastrophic Climate Change
Michael Pedersen
This blog post reflects the key messages of a speech given at the annual conference of the British Association for Sustainable Sport in London, United Kingdom on 14 September 2016.
Summary
Climate change is the most pressing issue of our time. It is dramatically threatening the sustainability of outdoor sports such as water, beach and winter sports as we know them. Professional athletes are uniquely placed for making a difference in addressing the issue, inasmuch as their voices are heard across traditional societal dividing lines such as political belief, culture, religion, race and gender. There is a lot of inspiration to get from other celebrities already engaged in the fight against climate change, for instance, Prince Ea and Leonardo Di Caprio. One opportunity to make a difference is by supporting the project to utilize the unique power of sport events and professional athletes in motivating behavioral change among fans in support of the fight against catastrophic climate change.
Why we all ought to care
Not only is climate change the most pressing issue of our time. It is an existential threat to our life and development. Climate change is real. It is happening, right here, right now. Much more rapidly and with much more impact than previously anticipated. While governments have proven that they cannot be trusted to effectively solve the challenge, we are the first generation to feel the effect of climate change and the last generation who can do something about it.
Why sport organizations ought to care
Climate change is dramatically threatening the sustainability of outdoor sports such as water, beach, and winter sports as we know them. At the same time, trust in sport has been severely damaged in the wake of current scandals related to corruption, doping and match-fixing in major sports around the world. An important and powerful way of rebuilding trust is to show, again and again, the unique power of sport in generating positive societal change. That is not least the case for the issue of climate change.
Why professional athletes ought to care
By demonstrating leadership and motivating behavioral change among fans in support of the fight against catastrophic climate change, professional athletes boost their reputation and brand value to existing and potential sponsors, inasmuch as they place themselves in a strong position of deeper and more positive fan engagement than their peer athletes. Professional athletes are uniquely placed for making a difference in the world, as their voices are heard across traditional societal dividing lines such as political belief, culture, religion, race and gender. While doing so, they also acquire skills, experience and expertise that set them up for a post-professional career in the sport for the development sector.
Imagine how athletes could show leadership with high impact
The current engagement of some celebrities in the fight against catastrophic climate change serves as a great source of inspiration in terms of what professional athletes could be doing too. Here are two of such examples for inspiration:
1. Motivational Speech by Prince Ea, an amazing 28-year old rapper from the USA. At the time of writing, 4.1 million people had viewed Prince Ea’s speech on YouTube, while 112 million people had viewed it on Facebook. On Facebook, the speech also had 1.3 million likes, 2.9 million shares and 63,000 comments.
2. Oscar Award Thank You Speech by Leonardo Di Caprio, an amazing 41-year-old actor from the USA. The Oscar Award ceremony had 34 million viewers in real-time. At the time of writing, 1.4 million people had viewed Leonardo Di Caprio’s speech on YouTube.
Opportunity to support project linking sport events and professional athletes and fight against catastrophic climate change
There are many useful ways of engaging professional athletes in the fight against catastrophic climate change. The opportunity to be highlighted here is the project to utilize the unique power of sport events and professional athletes in motivating behavioral change among fans in support of the fight against catastrophic climate change.
The first project is to build a common platform for encouraging sport fans to adopt environmentally responsible behavior in the support of fighting catastrophic climate change; across sports and countries, inside and outside the stadium, through the development and dissemination of common guidelines for sport event organizers, with a particular focus on developing mechanisms for enlisting sport celebrities and professional athletes to take prominent advocacy roles.
Sport organizations have the opportunity to become project partners and engage in the following activities:
1) Educating professional athletes about:
• Catastrophic climate change, including its causes and effects
• How they are uniquely placed to make a positive societal contribution
• How to engage with high impact; before, during and after sport events; and especially through social media
2) Developing and testing the effectiveness of different kinds of messaging to fans
3) Enlisting, supporting, and recognizing athletes, who are able and willing to show leadershipFurther project documentation is available through the following link.
ADDRESSING ENVIRONMENTAL CHALLENGES THROUGH SPORT
By Michael Pedersen, Founder of M INC. > change the game http://minc.ch.
Michael Pedersen
This blog highlights and recognises some of the work that is already being done to utilise the unique power of sport to address environmental challenges.
Sport is uniquely placed to address societal challenges. It attracts unprecedented attention and unites people across traditional societal dividing lines such as religion, ethnicity, political observation, wealth, social class and cultures.Greening sports events vs. greening fan behaviours
There are generally two ways for sport to address environmental challenges. One is to reduce the environmental footprint of sport. The other one is to motivate behavioral change among fans, inside as well as outside the stadium.
While most of the current work focuses on greening sport, there is a big potential in also utilising sport to motivate behavioural change among fans in support of addressing environmental challenges.The environmental footprint of sport
Sport negatively impacts the environment in several ways. Its environmental footprint is primarily caused by (no particular order):
A campaign for greener sport.
- The production and distribution of sports wear and sport equipment, including usage (washing clothe) and disposal (garbage).
- Construction of new sport venues for the hosting of sport events (or renovation of existing facilities).
- Construction of new public infrastructure for the hosting of very big sport events (or renovation of existing infrastructure).
- Fans engaging in sport tourism.
- Board members and professional staff of sport organisations traveling around the world to attend annual meetings, board meetings and other meetings of national and international sport governing bodies, leagues and clubs.
- Professional athletes traveling around the world to participate in training and to compete at sport events.
Emerging solutions in the world of sport
While the International Olympic Committee and FIFA are integrating environmental sustainability into their evaluation criteria for bidders to host their events, other international sport bodies, for instance, International Ski Federation, Badminton World Federation, and International Motorcycling Federation are putting in place environmental policies to guide events in their sports.In sports like for instance golf, surfing, and sailing, specific organisations are being established to develop standards for greening sport-specific events and/or sport-specific equipment, i.e. Sustainable Surf, Sailors for the Sea and Golf Environment Organization.
Also, in countries such as the USA, United Kingdom, and Australia, specific organizations that focus on sport and the environment across sports are being established,i.e. Green Sports Alliance, British Association for Sustainable Sport and Sports Environmental Alliance. Last but not least, international standards and tools for greening of sport events are being created, i.e. by Académie Internationale des Sciences et Techniques du Sport (AISTS).
Evolving good practice: Environmental stewardship at the US Open in tennis
United States Tennis Association (USTA), which is the sport governing body that organises the US Open, initiated its environmental work in the context of the US Open Tournament in 2008. Among other things, USTA’s strategic decision to do so reflected increasing fan expectations of green initiatives and burgeoning energy costs.
In recent years, USTA has further increased and diversified its initiatives to minimize the environmental impact of US Open. Today, the Association is showcasing environmental stewardship in the context of its annual premier Tournament in at least four ways:
Minimizing direct environmental impact
Initiatives to minimize the direct environmental impact of the US Open include:
- Matching the electricity generated during the tournament through Green-e certified wind renewable energy certificates
- Using napkins and other paper material composed of 40-100 percent recycled material
- Diverting waste through recycling and composting
- Collecting tennis balls used during matches and practices to be donated to community and youth organisations
Off-setting the environmental impact of player travel
Player travel to US Open is offset through Green-e Climate certified Sterling Planet carbon offsets. That is the case for both travel by air as well as travel on the ground.
Encouraging fans to adopt environmentally responsible behaviour
Each year, USTA hosts more than 700,000 fans during the two weeks of US Open at The Billie Jean King National Tennis Center in New York City, USA. Initiatives to encourage tennis fans to adopt environmentally responsible behaviour include a campaign for them to take public transportation to the tournament venue.
Initiatives to encourage fans to adopt environmentally responsible behaviour beyond the US Open include a 30-second public service announcement titled “Impact”. Broadcasted regularly during the tournament, the announcement encourages fans to reduce their paper, water and energy use.
An important aspect is a message from Billie Jean King, the tennis legend whose name the stadium carries. Her message is: “To solve the serious environmental problems facing our planet, we need to shift our culture toward more sustainable practices.”
Other similar initiatives include environmental tips for smarter living that are featured in the ‘Daily Draw sheet’ as well as through US Open social media channels.
Shaping evolving good environmental practices in sport in partnership with others
Besides working closely with the Natural Resources Defense Council, USTA is a member of the Green Sports Alliance.
Evolving good practice: International Cycling Union Eco Cyclo Patrol
An Eco Cyclo group
The Eco Cyclo Patrol was created in 2006 in France by a passionate cyclist named Patrick François.
After too many negative experiences in seeing what participants leave behind at cycling events, Patrick decided to recruit volunteer cyclists to teach good environmental manners to their fellow participants.
The easily recognizable Eco Cyclo Patrol group of volunteer cyclists participate in targeted cycling events with the mission of advising and encouraging their fellow cyclists to adopt a responsible attitude to the environment.
Dressed in easily recognizable green harlequin jerseys, the volunteers in the Eco Cyclo Patrol ride alongside their fellow cycling fans and encourage green behavior. Not only do they fight against rubbish left behind by participants after major cycling events, but they also work with organizers to encourage the use of renewable energy and recyclable infrastructures.
In 2013, the Eco Cyclo Patrol gained support from the International Cycling Union and is now expanding to offer cyclists and event organisers all around the world the opportunity to join in adopting environmentally friendly practices too.
Conclusion
Sport is uniquely placed to address societal challenges such as environmental issues. It can reduce its environmental footprint, not least from sport events.
it is in a position to motivate behavioral change among fans in support of the environment, inside as well as outside the stadium.
Emerging solutions include integrating environmental sustainability into the evaluation criteria for bidders to host sport events as well as establishing sport or country-specific organisations, offering guidance and standards to reduce the environmental impact of sport.
Cases of emerging good practice include the US Open in tennis and the International Cycling Union’s Eco Cyclo Patrol.
The evidence provided within this text reflects information as of 22 September 2015.
PRESIDENT’S BLOG
Dr. Tapio Kanninen
Dr. Tapio Kanninen, President, Global Crisis Information Network, Inc.
December 10, 2014 – I have been giving talks on climate change and global sustainability over the years to many audiences. On September 17, 2014, I spoke at the United Nations Association for the USA (UNA-USA Southern New York State Division), at an event, “Climate and Energy Policy in the Global Context.” Some 30 people attended. Former EPA official Dr. George Garland also spoke. The President of the Association, Jeanne Betsock Stillman, opened the meeting and my former UN colleague Dr. David Stillman was the moderator. Below this blog is a video of the talk, and the Powerpoint presentation.
During this talk, I was particularly struck by the enthusiasm and intelligence of the audience, mostly young professionals, who were attending the talk. They came from the best universities and were in the first years of challenging careers. Most were Americans but a few came from Europe and some came from elsewhere, and from the developing world, as well. They were all very engaged in what I and George were saying about the problems climate change is causing. They were all very animated in their questions after our talk. All seemed to care very deeply about the problem of climate change, and the future of the planet we live on. And they all wanted to do something about it and spoke of making changes to the world. Many offered ideas on how to do this. Their ideas were innovative, and imaginative, and gave me hope this new generation might be up to the challenges presented by climate change.
After some 30 years of working at the United Nations, and seeing its limitations while working there, it was refreshing on that night to see there are many Americans and other nationalities who still truly believe in the ideals of the United Nations. In my book “Crisis of Global Sustainability”, I tried to make a case that the establishment of the League of Nations and the UN marked turning points in the evolution of human consciousness. I said it was a move from purely national or tribal interests to the common good. I also said our evolution is far from complete.
After speaking to those young people that night, and hearing what they had to say, I now believe humanity is evolving, once again, for the better. Although this group was just a small sample of our younger generation, it still augurs well for the future. It showed me that at least part of this new generation is thinking differently than their parents and grandparents did. They are thinking of the Earth and humanity as one. And they are thinking in the holistic way required of the daunting and seemingly impossible climate change problems now facing us. They are, for me, perhaps the most important solution to the climate change crisis. Because it is their hope and determination, their honesty and intelligence, and energy that may be able to save us in the future from the problems we have created in the past and continue to create in the present.
In my view, the climate change crisis will eventually lead to a rebirth of the United Nations, because it is only through the UN, through a global organization belonging to all of humanity that the problem can be solved. The rebirth of the UN may take a long time, however. Because for this to occur, we may need a complete overhaul of the United Nations and its Charter, and the creation of a new kind of organization that is better able to meet the challenges of today and tomorrow. However, if the voices I heard that night are indeed the voices of tomorrow, then it might be possible for us to remake the UN. Those people and those of their generation like them may lead the way in the future to an enlightened internationalism, one brimming with enthusiasm and imagination, that takes us from the state we are in now to a higher plane of global and international consciousness that could save us from the problems we have created for ourselves. Until I heard those young people speak that night, I felt such ideas might be fanciful and not based on the reality of the world we currently live in. But now I am a little bit more optimistic that many among the young are very aware of the climate change problems we face. And I believe they are ready to face these problems and help solve them. But to do this, they must be sure their voices are heard.
The younger generation must now speak out, on social media, about climate change. Their message should be addressed to the older generation, the ones now in charge of governments and businesses. Their message should be something like this: “The world you are about to hand over to us, to live in, may be unlivable by the time we are in charge of it, due to climate change. Those who preceded you gave you a livable world. We insist you do the same with us. You must act to stop climate change, now.”
As they speak out, we should add our voices to theirs. Together, we can form a critical mass of global public opinion that government and business leaders will listen to. They will work with urgency and seriousness of purpose to solve the climate change crisis.
And the young will have led the way.
Dr. Tapio Kanninen, President of the Global Crisis Information Network, is Co-Director of the Global Sustainability Project at the Ralph Bunche Institute for International Studies at the City University of New York Graduate Center. He was Chief of the Policy Planning Unit in the UN Department of Political Affairs (1998-2005) and Head of the Secretariat of Kofi Annan’s five Summits with Regional Organizations. Kanninen has worked on several UN reforms: as secretary and research focal point of the high-level drafting group of Boutros-Boutros Ghali’s An Agenda for Peace and convener of the interdepartmental task force to implement its recommendations; secretary of General Assembly Working Groups on An Agenda for Peace; of Strengthening of the UN System; and of Security Council reform. He also worked as a team member of the UNEP-funded project in the UN Statistical Office to develop a global framework for environmental statistics. In January 2013, Dr. Kanninen published the book “Crisis of Global Sustainability” (Routledge, 2013). This website, “Global Crisis Now”, is one of the follow-up projects to the book. More information about the book can be found on the Crisis of Global Sustainability website.
