This article appears in the September 17, 2021 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
Real Reasons To Cancel the Brits’ COP26 Global Malthusfest
EDITOR’S NOTE: This article was first published in EIR, June 26, 2015.
Sept. 11—The planned world summit conference in November for the Malthusian Climate Accord and its worldwide cuts in energy use and living standards, known as the 26th Conference of the Parties or COP26, is a British-planned and British-run affair. The CEO of COP26 is a British MP, Cabinet minister, and corporate financial advisor, Alok Sharma. Its top United Nations figure, aside from the Secretary General, is the former Governor of the Bank of England, Mark Carney. Its number-one objective is to get hard commitments from scores of nations, especially developing nations, completely to stop using coal or oil for energy. Sharma says, “Unless we get all countries to sign up for a coal phase-out, it will be really hard to keep 1.5°C within reach,” meaning keeping the global temperature average from going more than 1.5°C above the 1850 level——something that is supposed by environmentalists to be possible by severe human sacrifices. The anti-coal crusade is led by Sir Michael Bloomberg, the multi-billionaire Democrat now a British subject and knighted by the Queen. The number-two objective of COP26 is to get those underdeveloped nations to commit to do without high energy-flux technologies like blast furnace steel production, air conditioning, etc. and to do without mechanized and fertilized agriculture and livestock raising.
This human sacrifice to save the forests and jungles, or now “the planet,” is a very long-term preoccupation of the British elite. So it would serve the development of mankind to see the COP26 gathering of Malthusian-axis powers cancelled.
On Sept. 8 a large international gaggle of environmentalist groups called the Climate Action Network publicly urged that COP26 be postponed for some time, due to COVID being likely to keep delegates from all over the developing world from attending. This seemed a very surprising development, but does not advance the needed cancellation of this affair and Prince Charles’ entire Green New Deal with it.
The COVID problem for COP26 is quite real and has been festering for some time. The meeting is scheduled for Glasgow, Scotland; the UK government has more than 60 of these countries designated as “red zones” for COVID, another 30 as “amber-red” or “amber”; and by the UK’s regulations (the great majority of) delegates from those countries, who are unvaccinated, will have to show up early and be quarantined for 10 days in very expensive Glasgow hotels. Recent British promises somehow to get these delegates vaccinated before November at UK expense, have not been carried out, with less than two months before the world Malthus Mash is to start.
So the “vaccine apartheid” of the G7 and a few other developed nations, resulting in a vaccination rate of 2% currently across the entire underdeveloped sector, is coming back to bite the British Privy Council elite and World Economic Forum billionaires who are really running this show. And the environmentalist groups, who have been determined that the developing countries should not have coal-fired electricity or inter-basin water transport systems for irrigated agriculture, have suddenly displayed their great concern that their delegates can’t afford Glasgow hotel rooms.
COVID Is But a Cover
But it must be remembered that COP26 has already been postponed for a year due to COVID-19, and that postponement in no way slowed down the onslaught of demands for a Malthusian “Great Reset” of the world economy. Instead, the drive by London and Wall Street finance to “shift the trillions” of global investment funds out of all fossil fuel-related production or processing, has galloped ahead; demands to take farmland permanently out of agriculture have come from the UN, G7 governments, and the biggest multinationals under formulae like “30[%] by 30,” “half-Earth” or “50 by ’50.”
A new postponement, even for another year, will in itself make no difference to the top-down drive of the global “1%” to sacrifice human economic activity to build their giant new “green finance” bubble——and to “save the planet,” of course, from the human race. The “COVID concern” of the Climate Action Network groups is rather a matter of optics, obscuring the real concern of the World Economic Forum princes and billionaires. That concern is a growing worldwide anti-Malthusian resistance to the Green New Deal itself, of nations, scientific networks, constituency organizations and industrial companies. The Schiller Institute held several international conferences this summer to expand that resistance and make it more cohesive.
The resistance to the British-run global Green New Deal—from developing countries led by China and India, and joined by Russia—is so strong that COP26, if held now, will demonstrably fail to proclaim the obedience of nations to what the Paris Climate Accords demand. India did not show up at the preparatory meeting for COP26 in London July 30, and like Russia and Australia, it is continuing to develop its coal industry and coal-fired electric power. India and China did show up at a Naples climate ministerial meeting July 22 and made sure there was no agreement to phase out all coal subsidies by 2025, nor any target date set to phase out coal-fired electric power. China told U.S. President Biden’s climate envoy John Kerry on Sept. 5 that it refused to separate “climate” from overall U.S.-China relations and therefore would not promise to cooperate on the strictures of Paris while being confronted on everything else. These nations are self-consciously speaking for all the developing countries’ need for much more electric power and industry—meaning coal and nuclear power—modernized agriculture, and general economic development.
Up to now, several thousand Europe- and U.S.-based physicists and meteorologists, with public statements that “there is no climate crisis,” have been attacking the alleged “scientific consensus.” The leaders of these scientific networks took part in the Schiller Institute conferences this summer. In June they were supported by another group of scientists who issued a reflecting their own review of the science, a review just published in a peer-reviewed journal, the journal of the National Astronomical Observatories of China and the Chinese Astronomical Society. It debunked, as the scientists of the Climate Intelligence (Clintel) network had, the five-alarmist report put out by the Inter���governmental Panel on Climate Change to stir climate panic for COP26.
This resistance to the Malthusfest, by nations and by experts, is what has the potential actually to defeat the Green New Deal and replace it with a new paradigm of global industrial and economic development. Against that worldwide anti-Malthusian resistance, here is what the World Economic Forum Great Resetters are doing, to try to force unwilling compliance by the beginning of November, or a couple of months later if COP26 gets put off.
The IMF’s Big Bribery Scheme
Since 2015 the “advanced economies” have been pledged to provide $100 billion per year in concessionary loans or grants to the developing nations in exchange for those nations’ agreement to abandon economic development of various kinds, from fossil fuel-based electricity to mechanized agriculture. But these “advanced economies” have never since come up with the committed funds. This fuels resistance to the Paris Accords and the Green New Deal, since the advanced economies generate most carbon “emissions” while the underdeveloped nations get whipped to give up carbon fuels and economic sectors.
On Aug. 23 the IMF stepped in on this broken promise, announcing the release of $650 billion in new IMF Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) to more than 200 member countries. The IMF had not issued SDRs since 1972. Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva bragged that these rights to borrow would include $270 billion for all the developing nations—although only $21 billion for low-income countries. Against tens of trillions in needed new infrastructure investment in the underdeveloped nations this is a pittance; and the fact that the borrowers are constrained to keep the funds in major-country hard currencies, will earmark them for repaying existing foreign debts, and otherwise for flight capital and corruption.
But Georgieva, in announcing the SDRs, claimed to have a solution: The 22 “advanced” nations, which have the right to borrow nearly $400 billion of these SDRs, should put them into an IMF “Resilience and Sustainability Trust,” which could “use channeled SDRs to help the most vulnerable countries with … confronting climate-related challenges.” Thus, bribe the poorer nations with IMF money with a new kind of “conditionalities”: climate conditionalities. Let the 22 industrialized nations—which would otherwise have had no interest in using their SDRs—claim this as the aid they promised in 2015 to the underdeveloped countries for abandoning their own industrialization. COP26 CEO Alok Sharma followed up immediately Aug. 31 with an editorial on the IMF site, “The Golden Opportunity”:
“The world needs to redirect the sums … toward climate action: to secure the trillions of dollars required to protect people and nature…. That’s why I support the IMF’s $650 billion allocation of special drawing rights (SDRs). This move will help generate crucial liquidity and give countries the breathing space to invest in tackling climate change.”
With Argentine President Alberto Fernández, for example, the blackmail/bribery has worked. With unpayable debts left him by a right-wing misgovernment, and trying to get a real IMF loan in addition to Argentina’s SDRs, Fernández organized a Latin American Climate Change Summit Sept. 7-8. There, he obediently offered to trade development for a debt rollover:
The lessons learned with vaccines have to be applied to the next pandemic that we already suffer, that of climate change, and we need to apply the issuance of special drawing rights of the International Monetary Fund to a great pact of environmental solidarity … to extend the terms to meet the debt payments and the application of lower rates�than the current ones, due to … ecological stress. [emphasis on President Fernández’ site]
The Carney Man
Mr. Carney, the world’s most powerful central banker of the last decade, and “a real climate warrior” as the British media describe him, has seldom worn fewer than three global finance hats since taking over the Bank of England in 2012. He is now both UN Ambassador for climate change matters and advisor on COP26 to CEO Alok Sharma and host Boris Johnson, the UK Prime Minister. Carney has taken as his particular crusade, getting developing countries to sell “carbon credits” to multinationals like Amazon and Facebook. This means the multinational pays the poorer nation to give up carbon-emitting economic activity, so that the multinational doesn’t have to. In the most notorious such deal, Norwegian companies paid Gabon the pitiful sum of $15 million (over 10 years!) to forego any kind of development in or near its rainforests. Carney is very insistent that some London-centered agency or institution must guarantee that these pledges to abandon development are adhered to; British foreign intelligence MI6 has actually been suggested to resume its colonial policing role for a new, old British Privy Council cause: “nature conservancy.”
Now Carney—who also heads the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD, with co-chair Sir Mike Bloomberg) and the International Financial Reporting Standards Foundation—is leading a crackdown on the companies to join the crusade against carbon-related investments, or be shut out of the “shifting trillions” and fail. Carney calls his COP26 scheme the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ). He was quoted Aug. 31 claiming it now has “over 250 financial institutions responsible for $80 trillion in assets and anchored in COP’s race to zero” carbon emissions. He added in his customary threatening tone when addressing companies or developing countries: “By Glasgow, all major financial firms should decide whether they too will be part of this solution to climate change. GFANZ is a big tent, but it will be the only tent in Glasgow.” And Carney particularly named the IMF as “combating this biodiversity crisis.”
Except for China’s and India’s calibrated insults to such economy-wrecker emissaries as John Kerry, the important nations resisting Green New Deal economic suicide and human sacrifice have done it behind the scenes, at scores of meetings of UN bodies, the IPCC, the Food and Agriculture Organization, etc.—merely trying to prevent conclusions from being reached at these preparatory sessions.
Scientific networks and constituency leaders now truly have to mobilize and organize others to this worldwide anti-Malthusian resistance, in particular in the United States. There the Biden Administration is aiming to sacrifice coal and agriculture while flailing with spectacular, impossible announcements about hundreds of millions of electric vehicles and 50% solar energy by 2050. The potential to defeat the Green New Deal is strong. The LaRouche Organization’s mass (The Great Leap Backwards: LaRouche Crushes the Green New Deal) and Saturday afternoon national panel presentations on the Internet remain the leading mobilization channels.