Security Council meeting 5663-Resu.1

The President

I should like to inform the Council that I have received letters from the representatives of Comoros and Mauritius, in which they request to be invited to participate in the discussion of the item on the Council's agenda. In conformity with the usual practice, I propose, with the consent of the Council, to invite those representatives to participate in the discussion, without the right to vote, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter and rule 37 of the Council's provisional rules of procedure.

There being no objection, it is so decided.

The President

I would like to remind all speakers, as was indicated at the morning meeting, that they should limit their statements to no more than five minutes in order to enable the Council to carry out its work expeditiously.

I now give the floor to the representative of Barbados.

Mr. Hackett (Barbados)

Madam President, on behalf of the Government of Barbados, I wish to convey to you our deepest appreciation for the important leadership role that the United Kingdom has played, and continues to play, in heightening global awareness of the imminent dangers posed by climate change, as well as your Government's efforts at forging an urgent and coordinated response to this looming global disaster.

We bear witness to one of the greatest and most serious environmental and development challenges in the history of humankind -- namely, controlling and coping with climate change. As a country caught squarely in the crosshairs of this global emergency, we are ever conscious of the enormous challenges posed to our sustainable development by climate change and its attendant impact.

Developing countries are most vulnerable to climate change, and we are the least able to protect ourselves. For small island developing States, the challenges are even more complex and profound and our needs more urgent. The adverse effects of climate change and associated phenomena, including sea-level rise, the change in behaviour and higher intensity of hurricanes, and the change in frequency and distribution of other extreme events, such as floods and droughts, threaten the very livelihoods and existence of small island developing States, despite the fact that we have contributed only negligibly to the genesis of the problem.

With the recent release of the contributions of Working Groups I and II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), there is now greater scientific certainty that dangerous climate change is already occurring and that the opportunity to avoid potentially irreversible, unimaginable damage to the climate system will be lost if urgent and ambitious global efforts are not made. As Sir Nicholas Stern puts it, if we continue to ignore climate change, the impact on the global economy will be "on a scale similar to those associated with the great wars and the economic depression of the first half of the twentieth century". And while we might differ on the issues of timing, location and scope, any economic, social, humanitarian and environmental crisis of this magnitude will likely have other unfortunate consequences, including for international peace and security. There is no excuse -- scientific or otherwise -- to delay immediate action.

As we confront this global crisis, a relevant consideration will be how future generations will judge our response. If we continue to delay action, we will be judged harshly, and deservedly so, for having callously placed their inheritance and future in great jeopardy. For today we might have choices; tomorrow, they will not. Yet despite these sobering realities, there is still a glimmer of hope that if we act rapidly we may soften the blow of this looming climate catastrophe, particularly with respect to the poorest and most vulnerable.

Those who have historically contributed most to the problem have a moral and legal obligation to assume primary responsibility. Developed countries must take the lead in significantly reducing harmful greenhouse gas emissions and in providing the necessary financial and technological assistance to support the adaptation efforts of developing countries. The Kyoto Protocol should not be abandoned. Those that continue to reject their agreed commitments under that agreement must exercise good judgement, demonstrate good global citizenship and show the type and quality of leadership exhibited at other seminal moments in history. They must simply do the right thing. For, as former United States President John F. Kennedy once said:

"Today the eyes of all people are truly upon us -- and our Governments, in every branch, at every level, national, state and local, must be as a city upon a hill -- constructed and inhabited by men [and women] aware of their great trust and their great responsibilities".

Barbados remains of the view that the international community must attach the highest priority to completing ongoing climate change negotiations within the Framework Convention on Climate Change on a post-2012 arrangement by the end of 2008. Any new global agreement must lead to the achievement of substantial emission reductions in the shortest time frame possible and significantly increase the level of resources available to vulnerable developing countries, particularly small island developing States and least developed countries, to help them adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change.

Barbados believes that this debate in the Security Council should inspire the other principal organs of the United Nations to assume fully their Charter responsibilities in addressing the many dimensions of this problem. While the Framework Convention on Climate Change remains the primary forum for addressing climate change, Barbados wishes to propose that, consistent with General Assembly resolution 61/16, the Economic and Social Council should convene a special session at the foreign-minister level in September this year, on the margins of the main part of the sixty-second session of the General Assembly, to discuss the impact of climate change on sustainable development. We believe that such a discussion at the ministerial level would provide much-needed impetus to the negotiations which will take place in Bali, Indonesia, in December.

In closing, I would like to emphasize the need for development partners to join Barbados and the other small island developing States in the full and rapid implementation of the Barbados Programme of Action and the Mauritius Strategy, of which the issues of climate change and energy are important components. Effective implementation of those two international agreements, along with the action taken within the Framework Convention on Climate Change, will significantly assist the small island developing States in coping with the adverse effects of climate change.

The time for rhetoric and gamesmanship is over. We must act boldly, and we must act together to protect our planet for the benefit of future generations.

The President

The next speaker is the representative of Ukraine, to whom I give the floor.

Mr. Kryzhanivskyi (Ukraine)

At the outset, I would like to thank the United Kingdom presidency for its very timely and well-prepared initiative to hold an open debate on energy, security and climate. My delegation fully associates itself with the statement made by the representative of Germany on behalf of the European Union.

I should now like to touch on some additional issues that are of importance to my country.

Our heads of State or Government, at the 2005 World Summit, reaffirmed the emerging common understanding that security and development are closely interlinked and that there can be no security without sound economic systems, fair trade regimes, social welfare and the rule of law. But how can all of these be achieved if forces of nature can easily undermine well-planned human achievements, change the shape of continents and lead to dramatic changes in human habitats?

Science has proved on many occasions that climate change, global warming and pollution may have sudden and dramatic consequences if they are not addressed urgently, properly and effectively. Recent studies on these subjects have provided clear evidence to the international community of their long-term consequences, calling for immediate and decisive action.

Ukraine is firmly committed to international agreements in the area of climate change, including the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and its Kyoto Protocol. For my Government, the sustainable use of energy and the protection of the environment are not just empty slogans. A few days from now, we will solemnly commemorate the twenty-first anniversary of the Chernobyl catastrophe, the worst technological disaster ever faced by humanity. After more than two decades, Ukraine is still dealing with the grave consequences of contaminated land, the displacement of the population from the exclusion zone, health issues and psychological trauma. All of this, of course, has caused a slowdown in economic development and created vulnerabilities, posing potential risks to society.

Modern industrial development, in particular energy production, is the main source of detrimental effects on the environment. Thus it is crucial that energy, climate change and security be tackled jointly in order to realize the objective of a sustainable environment. We therefore deem it imperative, among other policy prescriptions, to build on appropriate incentives, public-private partnerships, low-carbon-emitting technologies and innovative solutions.

In that respect, my delegation would like in particular to underscore the importance of the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, established under the auspices of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), in assessing, compiling and synthesizing scientific, technical and socio-economic data. We are also looking forward to the publication of the 2007 Human Development Report, devoted to the theme of "Climate change and human development -- rising to the challenge".

Energy policy and climate change are moving towards the centre of policy-making in many countries. The process implies a multilateral framework, and today's deliberations have corroborated that thesis. In order to achieve the collective objective of combating climate change, we have various extraordinary targets. Achieving those targets will be a significant challenge for a vast majority of countries. It will require the full implementation of domestic greenhouse gas reduction measures and effective use of the flexible mechanisms adopted by international agreements.

We call on all parties involved to contribute generously to the process and to spare no effort in providing assistance and responding with sound national strategies. Ukraine, for its part, is ready to commit itself to implementing and promoting sustainable development as part of our national priorities.

The President

I now give the floor to the representative of Egypt.

Mr. Elbakly (Egypt)

At the outset, I wish, on behalf of my delegation, to welcome the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the United Kingdom to New York, and to express our pleasure at seeing you, Sir, preside over this meeting. Today's open debate in the Security Council is one means to develop ways for the Council to address important issues, taking into account the views and interests of the entire membership of the United Nations.

While the delegation of Egypt would like to emphasize the importance and timeliness of the theme of today's discussion on energy, security and climate and the powerful and serious impact of climate change on our world, we share with many developing countries the surprise and concern clearly reflected in the letters addressed to the President of the Security Council by the Chairs of the Group of 77 and China and of the Non-Aligned Movement on behalf of the entire membership of both groups, and in the Sudanese statement to be delivered later on behalf of the African Group.

It is obvious that the subject of today's debate lies clearly and squarely within the mandate of other bodies in the United Nations system, in particular the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council, the Commission on Sustainable Development and the machinery of relevant United Nations treaties. This open Security Council debate also coincides with the preparations to address the same subject in the Commission on Sustainable Development later this month, as well as in other international treaty bodies, such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and its Kyoto Protocol, which are key instruments for addressing climate change.

What concerns us more is the deliberate encroachment of the Security Council on the mandates and primary responsibilities of other principal United Nations organs and subsidiary bodies, as defined by the Charter. This reflects clear and deliberate neglect of the provisions of the Charter. We are also concerned by the Council's indifference to the repeated demands of Member States to put an end to this dangerous and unjustified phenomenon. It is a clear challenge to the general membership of the United Nations to leave the way open for every President of the Security Council to decide a theme for an open debate, even if it lies totally beyond the Council's mandate. That makes it all the more important to reform the working methods of the Security Council and to expand its membership, as well as to ensure that the General Assembly takes more decisive measures to stop such infringement.

The claim that the issue of climate change and energy lies within the mandate of the Security Council, based on its impact on international peace and security, is an exaggerated claim which the Council presidency has sought to buttress through a concept paper (S/2007/186, annex) that seeks to emphasize that all subjects within the domain of the General Assembly and its subsidiary bodies have an impact on international peace and security, and hence may be seized by the Security Council. Such logic is unacceptable to the States Members of the Organization as it involves encroachment on the mandates and responsibilities of the General Assembly, which, as it represents the entire membership of the United Nations, is more universal and more democratic.

In the light of recent reports and scientific studies and the latest report of the Secretary-General on climate change, there is no room for doubting, arguing against or rejecting the dangers of climate change and its repercussions for humanity. But objectivity requires focusing on the circumstances which led us to this dangerous juncture, and on the proper and ideal manner in which to address it. I will not be saying anything new if I note that the developed countries are responsible for this phenomenon, because they have continued to pour emissions into the upper atmosphere and have failed to fulfil their obligation to rectify the situation and address it according to the provisions of the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol.

Thus, the developing countries, including Egypt, view this open Security Council debate as an attempt by the developed countries to shrug off their responsibilities in that regard. The right path to combat this dangerous phenomenon is clear and lies in the fulfilment by all parties -- developed and developing -- of their commitments according to the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, and not according to the principle of shared responsibilities which some countries are seeking to promote.

Needless to say, addressing this phenomenon effectively requires dealing with its causes and adapting to its adverse effects, especially when we know that the most affected States, in particular the African countries and the small island developing States, produce the smallest quantities of damaging greenhouse gas emissions and are at the same time the least capable of adapting to the negative impact.

In that context, Egypt, as one of the least significant emitters of greenhouse gases, emphasizes the need to address that serious problem from the perspective of the common interest of humanity -- and, again, in the proper forum in which all Member States participate -- not only from a security perspective, but from the perspective of the three pillars of sustainable development. If implemented in the framework of strong and active international cooperation, this would address the security impact referred to in the concept paper.

Finally, the Security Council has before it many other challenges which are more pertinent to the maintenance of international peace and security, which require more attention from the Council, and which lie within, not outside, its main mandate. There is no doubt that achieving a comprehensive and just peace in the Middle East lies at the heart of those challenges, along with the implementation of the comprehensive package agreed to at the 1995 Review and Extension Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, including the resolution on the Middle East. The importance of implementing the package and the 13 practical steps towards nuclear disarmament was stressed at the 2000 Review Conference.

We therefore look forward to the nuclear-weapon States -- including the United Kingdom -- implementing the package and seeking to include it in the agenda of the 2010 Review Conference. This process should begin with the first meetings of the Preparatory Committee this year. There should be no attempt to evade or to change the package in a way that would make it unsuccessful and would only adversely affect international peace and security by endangering the nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation regime.

Those are the issues that we wish to see the Security Council focus on, and that will be met with support from the general membership.

The President

I now give the floor to the representative of Australia.

Mr. Hill (Australia)

Climate change is a serious global challenge for the future. Over coming decades, climate change will progressively alter biospheres and sea levels, as well as add incrementally to the intensity of climate-related events such as cyclones and droughts. By moving early to address the risks, we could do much to reduce the potential threats to human well-being and security.

Australia is particularly vulnerable to climate change. We occupy the driest inhabited continent, with a highly variable climate and great susceptibility to drought. Shifting rainfall patterns in particular have severe environmental impacts in Australia and damage our agricultural industries.

Global action to mitigate climate change can temper its future impacts. The burden of responsibility falls particularly heavily on the major emitters. Twenty countries are responsible for 80 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions.

Australia is committed to playing its part. We have already dedicated billions of dollars to develop, prove and deploy low-emissions technologies in Australia. We are supporting more efficient energy use, the uptake of renewable energy and reductions in land clearing. As a result of those and other policies and measures, Australia is tracking well to meet the target it agreed to at Kyoto.

Australia is a founder and major contributor to the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate, which aims to develop and spread low-emissions technologies and practices through practical public-private action. We will work with others, through our recently announced Global Initiative on Forests and Climate, to reduce deforestation, which is a source of some 20 per cent of global greenhouse emissions. Australia has pledged $200 million as part of that Initiative.

Australia will also look to other global opportunities to make progress. Our Prime Minister has written to his counterparts in the Asia-Pacific region to put clean development and climate change at the top of the agenda for this year's meeting of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation forum (APEC) leaders in September in Sydney. The APEC economies account for 60 per cent of global energy demand and include the world's four largest energy consumers. And we will do more in the future, working internationally in the interests of more effective global mitigation action on climate change. That action must involve all of the major economies. In the actions we take, we must avoid disruption to energy supply, as reliable energy trade is vital to energy security and political security more generally.

A degree of climate change is already inevitable. Action to adapt to the impacts of global warming in the coming years is therefore vital if we are to reduce our exposure to the risks implicit in a changing climate. The anticipated regional variations in those impacts demand that adaptation measures be tailored and localized. For example, Australia has already committed $10 billion to improving the sustainability of water use in Australia and, just last week, the Prime Minister announced an initiative to establish a national centre for climate change adaptation, primarily to study the coastal, regional and atmospheric impacts of climate change in our country.

We will also help others to adapt to the future impacts of climate change, cognizant that the least developed among us are likely to be less able to respond to the impacts of a changing climate. Australia therefore welcomes the multilateral support that the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change brings to adaptation.

Our world is dynamic and challenging. Natural disasters have the potential to devastate communities and can threaten the very viability of countries, particularly small island States. Each year, more than 200 million people are affected by disasters, such as earthquakes, tsunami and pandemics. Those disasters are unrelated to climate change, but they do highlight the vulnerability to environmental impacts that all countries face. For that reason, improving resilience to climate-related and other natural disasters must form an integral part of national development strategies.

We encourage all countries to further strengthen their support to disaster mitigation, preparedness and response. We commend the work of the United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction in coordinating the implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action. The Framework represents a global blueprint for building the resilience of nations and their communities to the impacts of disasters.

This is a different sort of threat to that usually debated in this place. Nevertheless, a failure to act now on climate change would exacerbate the risks in the future, and so a concerted and intensified commitment to both mitigation and adaptation is warranted. The challenge is to find ways to achieve those goals in a manner that supports economic growth, that is fair and effective, and that recognizes economic disparities. It is in all our interests that we meet this challenge together.

The President

I now call on the representative of New Zealand.

Ms. Banks (New Zealand)

New Zealand welcomes this opportunity to address the Security Council on the important issues of energy, security and climate. We thank the United Kingdom for its initiative in hosting the debate, which in our view is a useful way of drawing further attention to those challenging issues.

New Zealand also welcomes the United Kingdom's concept paper. We urgently need to focus the attention of the international community on some of the most serious implications of climate change. Governments are becoming more aware that the effects of climate change are much more than threats to the environment alone. They also threaten some of the most fundamental needs of our citizens: a safe place to live, access to water, health care and food, and the ability to earn a living. When those needs are threatened, whole societies are at risk of instability. So it is entirely appropriate that we are discussing the security dimensions of climate change in this forum.

New Zealand would like to highlight two themes that are important for us and for our Pacific region.

First, sustainable development, including responses to climate change, and energy security need to be considered together. In New Zealand, we are developing our energy and climate change policies in tandem, including focusing on ways to maximize New Zealand's energy derived from renewable sources and promoting diversity in our energy supply. That will help us to secure a low-emissions energy supply. We recognize that the use of low-emissions technologies and improving energy efficiency are fundamental to industrialized and developing countries alike in reducing carbon emissions and maintaining a secure energy supply for the future. Energy issues are also a major challenge for the Pacific. In recognition of that, Pacific energy ministers will be meeting at the end of April to discuss how the region might address those challenges, particularly in the renewable energy sector.

Secondly, many of the countries in our part of the world, the Pacific, are amongst the most vulnerable to climate change impacts. That is likely to exacerbate issues such as access to fresh water and vulnerability to cyclones, drought or flooding. The Mauritius Implementation Strategy speaks of the existential risks that climate change and sea-level rise pose to small island developing States. It also notes the ongoing threats posed to the sustainable development of those nations and the priority that should be given to adaptation. Those threats, alongside limitations on the capacity of small island developing States to respond, mean that we are already talking about the viability of some societies.

There is an important role for other nations in providing assistance to Pacific and other small island developing States, as well as other vulnerable countries, in evaluating the impacts of and adapting to climate change. Assistance provided by the international community, however, does need to be tailored to different risk and development circumstances and to various national contexts. It should also support the objectives of recipient States themselves in order to ensure local ownership and practical results. For example, the Government of Kiribati has made climate change adaptation a central priority, and New Zealand is pleased to help support its adaptation programme.

While climate change presents all of us with daunting challenges, there are solutions. Above all, this debate is a timely reminder of the need for effective concerted international action within the United Nations framework. We need a process that brings the major emitters of greenhouse gases together in the United Nations to forge a truly global response to climate change.

The President

I now give the floor to the representative of Tuvalu.

Mr. Pita (Tuvalu)

Tuvalu fully aligns itself with the statement made by the Permanent Representative of Papua New Guinea on behalf of the Pacific island countries and Pacific small island developing States.

Tuvalu is greatly honoured to have been given this golden opportunity to speak in the Security Council. First, I must thank you, Mr. President, and your Government, for your wisdom in calling for this special open debate of the Council on the theme of energy, security and climate.

At the sixtieth anniversary General Assembly in 2005, as on many other occasions here at the United Nations, the Government of Tuvalu highlighted the issue of environmental security, particularly in relation to climate change. We are extremely grateful to see that this concern is now on the agenda of the Security Council. We strongly believe that the Security Council should permanently place the issue of climate change and environmental security on its agenda, just as it wisely decided to do in 2000 with regard to the issue of the security threat posed by HIV/AIDS.

As is well known, this is a topic of extreme importance to a small, atoll nation like Tuvalu. The recent report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change further highlighted the extreme vulnerability of island countries like Tuvalu to the impact of climate change and the urgent necessity for global actions to address their vulnerability.

We face many threats associated with climate change. Ocean warming is changing the very nature of our island nation. Our coral reefs are slowly dying through coral bleaching, we are witnessing changes to fish stocks and we face the increasing threat of more severe cyclones. Given that our highest point is four metres above sea level, the threat of severe cyclones is extremely disturbing to us, and severe water shortages will further threaten the livelihood of people in many islands.

Our livelihood is already threatened by sea-level rise, and the implications for our long-term security are very disturbing. Many have spoken about the possibility of migrating from our homeland. If that becomes a reality, then we will be faced with an unprecedented threat to our nationhood; it would be an infringement of our fundamental rights to nationality and statehood as constituted under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international conventions.

But Tuvalu is not alone in facing the threat of climate change. Many millions of people will suffer the effects. The world has moved from a global threat called the cold war to what should now be considered the "warming war". Our conflict is not being fought with guns and missiles but with weapons from everyday life -- chimney stacks and exhaust pipes.

We are confronted with a chemical war of immense proportions. As the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs of the United Kingdom correctly underscored during the most recent general debate in the General Assembly, "if we all try to freeride, we will all end up in free fall" (A/61/PV.16, p. 20) as a result of the impact of climate change.

With regard to energy, it is clear from the ongoing world crisis that the security dimensions of access to and use of sources of energy must be addressed. The world needs a mix of energy sources that is easily accessible for all countries and communities. Tuvalu's own security is also threatened by the high cost of its energy supply. Importing fossil fuels into Tuvalu to provide fuel for electricity generation and inter-island transport is one of the greatest drains on our economy, using funds which could otherwise have been saved for climate change adaptation. Our economic sustainability is contingent on our acquiring self-sustaining and reliable renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies. We humbly call upon the Security Council to understand and respond to these new concepts of security and conflict.

Tuvalu joined the United Nations on 5 September 2000, firmly believing in its noble pillars of development, security and human rights as the source of security against the very threat of climate change. By virtue of this membership, our security concerns relating to climate change cannot be simply ignored. The Security Council must consider the threat to our national security and, ultimately, to global security, from a new perspective. We are a peace-loving nation and have no army. We will pose no security threat even if we face the full consequences of climate change; but we must not disappear from the Security Council radar screen. As the great Martin Luther King said, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere".

Through you, Mr. President, we therefore beseech the Security Council to act urgently to address the threats to our national security. We would respectfully like to make four concrete suggestions. First, we believe that the real and serious threat posed by climate change demands that solutions and decisions be taken at the highest level of Government. As in General Assembly debates, we strongly encourage the Security Council to adopt a resolution to urge the Secretary-General to convene a world leaders' summit on climate change as soon as possible.

Secondly, such a summit should create the impetus to establish a new economic forum to dramatically boost access to environmentally friendly energy security options for all the nations of the world. In this context, however, nuclear and clean fossil fuel cannot be part of the solution for Tuvalu and many small island developing States, considering the security risks to our fragile environments. It is our humble view that the rapid development and deployment of renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies must be the primary focus of an energy security agenda. These have the benefits of creating energy self-sufficiency, reducing poverty and making a major contribution to mitigating climate change.

Thirdly, there is an urgent need to build strong institutional arrangements to protect and restore vulnerable countries like Tuvalu from the impact of climate change. We need a global strategy on adaptation and disaster-risk reduction, which should include new insurance facilities. Those could be key themes for consideration at the proposed summit on climate change.

Finally, we strongly encourage the Security Council to review its Charter obligations and to fully embrace the concept of environmental security within its mandate. This is not simply a matter of identifying trouble spots where armed conflict may be linked to environmental decline. We believe that the Security Council should address environmental decline as a security issue in itself.

As former Secretary-General Mr. Kofi Annan stated at the twelfth session of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Nairobi, "The question is not whether climate change is happening or not, but whether [...] we ourselves can change fast enough".

The Security Council must provide the much-needed impetus for that timely change to address climate change. Tuvalu looks forward to the ongoing considerations of this agenda item and sincerely hopes that the Security Council can find a meaningful way to address the security concerns of extremely vulnerable countries like Tuvalu. My delegation fully supports the United Kingdom's proposal on climate change before the Security Council.

The President

I give the floor to the representative of Bangladesh.

Mr. Sorcar (Bangladesh)

Allow me to congratulate you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Council.

My delegation broadly associates itself with the statements made by the representatives of Pakistan on behalf of the Group of 77 and China and of Cuba on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement.

The issues of energy and the environment are of critical importance in the context of sustainable development -- even more so for developing countries. The development aspect has been thoroughly deliberated on by an extensive range of actors, particularly within the United Nations. The security implications of global climate change, however, have not merited consideration by intergovernmental bodies like the United Nations, although they have, for more than a decade now, been considered outside the Organization. They have been the subject of research, using a variety of scenarios and models, by a wide range of institutions from academia to think tanks and beyond. The United Kingdom presidency has definitely taken a bold step in attempting to explore whether the energy-climate-security nexus is mature enough for intergovernmental deliberations. We believe, however, that this is still primarily an issue of development, although the security ramifications can no longer be dismissed. It is becoming increasingly apparent that global climate change has the potential to turn out to be a major security concern only if we, through our apathy and inaction, fail to deal with climate change as a sustainable development issue.

While the interrelationship among energy, climate and security is being examined, there is little doubt that the global climate is changing, relentlessly and inexorably. The fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change shows that, unless very drastic measures are taken, humanity will have to face unprecedented challenges of an inconceivable magnitude. No country will be spared from the adverse effects of climate change, though some will be disproportionately affected. Populous and underdeveloped countries, particularly those that are geographically disadvantaged, will be the hardest hit.

The projection for Bangladesh is ominous, to say the least. The country is basically a vast river delta, indeed the largest in the world. It is cleaved by two of the mightiest rivers -- the Ganges and the Brahmaputra. These rivers and their thousands of distributaries shape the destiny of Bangladesh's 147 million people. With warming weather, the Himalayan snow will melt and torrential waters will flow down from the north, inundating the flat alluvial plain. With a rising sea level, saline water will flow up from the south, and meet the melting mountains. Millions of people will be caught in between with nowhere to go.

What might come next will need some imagination. But even the mere possibility of such an unthinkable event is sufficient reason to seriously look for ways to prevent a future that none of us will be able to handle.

Bangladesh will not be the only country affected by global climate change, although it will be one of the worst affected. The increasing surface and ocean temperature will lead to evaporation and more rainfall around the world, thereby giving rise to widespread floods. Extreme weather events, such as droughts, hurricanes and tornadoes, will occur more frequently and with increased intensity. No one can fight the wrath of nature, however much he may be endowed with resources. But human wisdom and action can perhaps prevent some extreme weather events, particularly if the instability of nature is man-made.

We already know what action we need to take to prevent the looming global catastrophe. We have examined this situation in the context of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and its 1997 Kyoto Protocol. Regrettably, we have not moved into timely action and have failed to meet the deadline. We now need to urgently look for mechanisms, institutions and consensus-building processes that will motivate us to combine our forces to avoid a horrendous future of our own creation. We hope that the recent report of the IPCC will be instrumental in overcoming our inertia and will trigger a cascade of actions that is long overdue.

We welcome the proposed world summit on climate change and encourage the Secretary-General to explore its possibilities. A world summit will give us opportunity to take a fresh look at what our common and differentiated responsibilities are. Demonstrable progress and leadership is required from industrialized countries, particularly in providing reassurance that low carbon emissions will not be obtained at the cost of development. We stand ready to join in a global consensus which will shape the destiny of our present and future generations.

The President

I give the floor to the representative of Venezuela.

Ms. Leong (Venezuela)

Our delegation would like to wish the United Kingdom every success in its delicate mission of chairing the Security Council during this month of April. Our delegation would also like to associate itself with the statement made by Pakistan on behalf of the Group of 77 and China as well as the statement that will be made by Cuba on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement.

The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela is aware of the serious implications for humanity of the problem of climate change, given its economic, social and political repercussions, particularly for the developing countries, which are the most vulnerable. However, we feel that the Security Council is not the appropriate body to deal with the subject of climate change, just as it is not the appropriate body to deal with energy.

The Security Council should frame its actions in accordance with the spirit and letter of the Charter of the United Nations, by adopting the strictest interpretation of what really constitutes a threat to international peace and security, in accordance with Article 39 of the Charter. Venezuela considers the multidimensional character of security to mean that each sovereign and legitimate State defines its priorities in this area on the basis of its own national needs and interests, as has been recognized in various international instruments. Additionally, we feel that the subject of energy is an area falling strictly under the sovereignty of States as part of their national development policies. Venezuela reaffirms that every country, on the basis of its sovereignty, has the authority to decide on the use of its natural resources and to set its own environmental and energy policy.

The interference of the Security Council in areas that are not part of its mandate could have adverse effects, since the measures that may be suggested in this body would not be the most appropriate to provide solutions to problems of an economic, social and environmental kind affecting all Member States.

Bringing before this body matters that are not part of its specific remit in the area of international peace and security could give rise to the illusion that this body is a democratic one, discussing subjects of global interest, when that is far from the case. Venezuela would advocate a real democratization of this body, but this exercise is not the best way to achieve that objective, especially when the subjects are not part of the agenda of the Council but, on the contrary, already have their own forums in which they can be discussed.

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and its Kyoto Protocol, to both of which the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela is a contracting party, have the proper mechanisms for examining the issue of climate change. Dealing with that group of problems outside the proper bodies for discussion of them could diffuse and complicate international efforts. Doing so could also be understood as an effort to dilute the responsibilities of developed countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere. The search for appropriate solutions to the problem of global warming requires that the principal emitters of these gases meet their obligations in accordance with relevant international instruments.

Here, the committed cooperation of the United States -- a permanent member of the Security Council -- whose economy produces the greatest quantity of greenhouse gas emissions, is indispensable if a real contribution is to be made to the objectives of the Convention and its Protocol.

The threats posed by climate change are indubitably associated with the neoliberal model of development that some societies of the industrialized world have tried to promote as a paradigm across the planet without measuring the environmental consequences of the consumption patters arising from that model. Climate change is a problem that affects all countries, small and large, rich and poor.

However, bearing in mind Principle 7 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development of 1992, Venezuela considers that, while there is a joint responsibility relating to the agreements and arrangements of an inclusive nature to mitigate the impact of climate change, there is also a differentiated responsibility to take into account the factors that since the Industrial Revolution have led to such degradation of the environment, as well as States' response capability to face the challenge of the problems.

To Venezuela, it is a source of concern that we are trying to promote partial solutions or stereotypes on the causes of the problem, which end up distorting its nature and scope, including possible measures to mitigate its real effects. It is therefore essential that studies are carried out through the mechanisms of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and its Protocol, in order to make it possible to determine the real dimensions of the problem and the possible measures to counteract its impact on all States, particularly on the developing and more vulnerable countries, such as the small island developing States.

Dealing with the problem of climate change requires that the countries that produce the greatest amount of greenhouse gas emissions fully assume their responsibilities with regard to the need to reduce those concentrations of gases in the atmosphere to a level that will prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system, in conformity with article 2 of the Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Although Venezuela does not have reduction commitments and its emissions account for only 0.48 per cent of global emissions, the national authorities of Venezuela, as part of an integrated environmental policy, have adopted a series of initiatives in this area

In June 2006, President Hugo Chávez Frías launched a programme known as Misión Arbol -- the tree mission -- which aims to promote the reforestation of 150,000 hectares by planting 100 million trees within the space of five years. As part of this environmental effort, in November 2006 the Government of Venezuela began another initiative called Misión Energía -- the energy mission -- with the aim of promoting rational use of energy in Venezuela over the next five years.

Both the phenomenon of climate change and the energy issue should be considered in the context of the mechanisms established in accordance with the appropriate arrangements or forums. Venezuela reserves its position as to the appropriateness of the Security Council becoming involved in the consideration of these matters and considers it to be of fundamental importance that this body keeps strictly to the matters conferred to it under the United Nations Charter.

The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela is convinced that the strengthening of multilateralism as a mechanism to implement effective cooperation for development will be able to promote an international system that is transparent, inclusive and showing solidarity and which offers greater well-being and social justice to the peoples of the world.

The President

I now give the floor to the representative of the Sudan.

Mr. Mohamad (Sudan)

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the African Group in the Security Council's open debate on energy, security and climate change. The African Group aligns itself with the statements made by the representatives of the Group of 77 and China and the Non-Aligned Movement.

The African Group expresses its concern regarding the decision of the Security Council to hold an open debate on issues that do not fall within the Council's mandate. The United Nations Charter has made it explicitly clear that issues related to social and economic development remain the domain of the Economic and Social Council and the General Assembly.

The Group also stresses that the increasing and alarming encroachment of the Security Council on the mandates of other United Nations bodies -- which the Security Council tries to justify by linking all issues to the question of security -- compromises the principles and purposes of the United Nations Charter and is also undermining the relevant bodies. This situation is even more alarming, since it is taking place at a time when the process of system-wide coherence is gaining momentum within the Organization.

The African Group cautions against attempts to shift matters of interest of all Member States to a body where a few members of the United Nations have been vested with the power to take final decisions.

The African Group's statement today serves to underscore that those issues do not fall within the mandate of the Security Council. Energy and climate change are both development issues and, as such, should be tackled within the parameters of development and the impediments to its achievement, and should be addressed by the relevant specialized mandated organs of the United Nations, not the Security Council.

The African Group considers that if concerns and challenges arising from climate change and energy are more profound now than before, particularly in Africa, the fundamental reason for it is the lack of fulfilment of commitments and the absence of concrete actions, in particular on the part of developed countries, to tackle the adverse effects related to these respective issues. Developed countries should honour the commitments they have made during the major United Nations conferences and summits in economic and related fields by providing, especially to Africa, the most vulnerable continent, adequate and predictable resources and environmentally sound technology and by providing access to energy, including through the promotion of foreign direct investments in the energy sector in Africa.

The African Group emphasizes that the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol are binding multilateral agreements and offer sufficient provisions for actions needed to address risks associated with climate change on a global level. Thus, the solution to such constraints resides in a broader adherence to those agreements and, most importantly, in the fulfilment, especially by developed countries, of all commitments, in accordance with the principles enshrined in the Convention, particularly the Rio Principles specifying common but differentiated responsibilities.

Finally, the African Group hopes that the decision by the Council to hold this debate on the issue of energy and climate change does not constitute a precedent, since the Council is not the appropriate body to deal with such themes.

The President

I now give the floor to the representative of Solomon Islands.

Mr. Beck (Solomon Islands)

Mr. President, my delegation first of all wishes to associate itself with the statement presented by the representative of Papua New Guinea on behalf of the Pacific Island small island developing States. Solomon Islands, a small island developing State with least developed country status, thanks you most sincerely for organizing this meeting. This action alone demonstrates how seriously your country is in taking the lead to address the adverse effects of climate change.

Countries such as mine, located in a disaster-prone region, bear the brunt of climate change on a daily basis. Climate change has redefined our subsistence economy and our traditional lifestyle; it has caused irreversible damage to our fragile ecosystem and the mainstay of our economies in agriculture and fisheries. It has pushed back the gains in development by 10 years. Schools and clinics that were painstakingly built over the years can be washed away by a tsunami in a matter of minutes, thus increasing the insecurity of our children and future generations.

Solomon Islands views climate change not only as a development issue but also as one of security. We feel that all principal organs of the United Nations should be seized of the issue, given this phenomenon's growing threat to the globe. It is an issue of survival, especially for small island developing States. In this regard, we are participating in this debate, and we look to the United Nations for leadership to garner the necessary international support in order to act collectively to address environmental issues on all fronts. Today we are aware of the acceleration of environmental degradation and its effect on climate change, although their correction is a much slower process.

More people die from the effects of climate change than from domestic and international wars put together. The frequency and intensity of cyclones, floods, earthquakes, tsunamis and droughts have increased globally. The 2004 Asian tsunami claimed too many lives in just a few hours. Two weeks ago, my country, Solomon Islands, was not spared. A tsunami claimed more than 50 lives, environmentally displaced 5,000 people and forever restructured the geography of the affected areas. All this occurred within minutes. As I speak, Solomon Islands is dealing with environmental refugees who are fleeing their locations, because portions of the islands have sunk. On other islands, reefs and coasts have risen up to 3 to 10 metres -- not centimetres, but metres. Fishing grounds have shifted, reefs have been lost, coastal infrastructure has been damaged and water and agriculture have been disrupted, which could well be fanning the flames for future conflicts?

For a country in which more than 80 per cent of the land is owned under a customary regime, any relocation has an impact on the land-tenure system; if not handled well, the changes could fuel future conflicts. Today we are accommodating the internal movement of people. Soon it will spill over into the international scene, where environmental victims will not be refugees, but survivors. That fact will redefine the pattern and push factors of migration. We should not wait for that day to happen.

Solomon Islands, as delegates are aware, just came out of an ethnic conflict some five years ago. This is a complex situation for half a million people who speak 80 different languages and are successfully going through a nation-building process with regional and international support.

Addressing climate change is a conflict prevention imperative, given the aforementioned argument.

The United Nations and its Member States exist for one another. But, unfortunately, on the issue of climate change -- despite its global impact -- we remain divided on adopting a common approach to addressing it as a development or security issue. Currently the issue of climate change is discussed -- like a comet -- in a substantial way once every four to five years through a conference; and annually through the Commission on Sustainable Development process, for two weeks. After that, the issue is revisited after a 12-month period. No organ deals with it year-round. That is because, since the inception of the United Nations climate change process, the issue has received divided attention from the global community. Conferences had to be organized to get the issue of the environment on the radar screen; as soon as such conferences come to a close, it disappears again.

If we are indeed serious in addressing our environmental challenges, we must give climate change as much attention and commitment as we give to issues such as terrorism. The wider United Nations system must structurally respond to the call -- not only the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council, but the Security Council as well. The issue of the environment needs to be depoliticized; we need to close the divide that exists; we must build bridges and streamline our common commitment in implementing agreed international climate change frameworks. These agreements have not been matched by resources for the small island developing States. The Mauritius Strategy will remain a strategy unless it is financially supported.

Energy remains an important link to today's debate. It could provide some answers in terms of cleaning up our atmosphere and addressing our security concerns. In the case of Solomon Islands, fossil-fuel imports account for a third of our national budget -- just to provide energy to 20 per cent of the population. We are aware of the potential of renewable energy. With the transfer of environmentally friendly technologies, especially community-based hydro schemes, we will be in a position to reach the wider population and, most important, free up resources from the national budget to meet our other commitments related to the Millennium Development Goals, including empowering ourselves to adapt to our environment.

We need to establish a renewable energy trust fund targeting the small island developing States if we are to make any meaningful changes. More important, the United Nations will be able successfully to impose environmental governance only if it changes and adopts an economically based, people-centred rural community approach, because the resources, the coasts and everything else belongs to the people. The concept of carbon credits must receive international support.

Mr. President, I will close by thanking your Government for the assistance it has rendered in connection with the recent tsunami in Solomon Islands. I extend my gratitude also to two other permanent members of the Council, France and the United States. I also thank other Members, including Turkey and Singapore. I include also my own immediate neighbours Australia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Fiji and Vanuatu, which have also bilaterally supported us, and our Pacific neighbours in general.

The President

I call on the representative of Palau.

Mr. Beck (Palau)

We wish to associate ourselves with the statement made by the representative of Papua New Guinea on behalf of the Pacific Islands Forum.

We salute the United Kingdom for having proposed this open debate on the security implications of climate change. As a small island State, Palau is particularly challenged by sea-level rise. Furthermore, Palau wishes to call to the attention of this body an equally daunting risk posed by warming which is not specifically identified in the concept paper and which requires the urgent attention of the world community.

Stated plainly, global warming threatens to destroy the world's coral reefs. In 1998, the warming incident known as El Niño caused the bleaching and death of almost one third of Palau's corals. Certain particularly sensitive species were virtually eliminated.

The destruction of the coral reefs is tantamount to the destruction of the country. The reefs are central to Palau's economy, which relies almost exclusively on tourism. The reefs are vital to Palau's food security. Without them, the people will not have the fish to feed themselves or the money to buy food. For over 3,000 years, Palauans have survived by fishing on and around their coral reefs. Climate change now threatens those reefs with increased acidification, rising temperatures, fiercer storms and accelerating sea-level rise. The destruction of the reefs will lead, inevitably, to the migration of the people and to the end of their culture.

Coral reef ecosystems are vital not only to Palau but to scores of States. The reefs provide one quarter of the fish catch in developing countries and feed more than one billion people. Their destruction will pose a threat to every country to which former fishermen and their families will migrate.

We applaud the United Kingdom for having convened this proceeding and for raising the profile of this issue, as well as for its support of the influential Stern review, among other things. We are grateful to the United States and the European Union for their efforts to ensure that coral bleaching was addressed during recent deliberations on the General Assembly's important oceans resolution. We applaud the Government of France for its leadership in creating the Coral Reef Initiative for the South Pacific, and all other nations which have addressed the threats to coral reefs.

We call upon the international community to squarely address reef destruction and ameliorate the damage already done, as a matter of great urgency.

The President

I call on the representative of Denmark.

Mr. Staur (Denmark)

Let me first of all fully align Denmark with the European Union statement delivered this morning by the German presidency of the European Union.

Denmark sees today's discussion as a very welcome opportunity to consider the link between security and climate change. Climate-related resource shortages are well-recognized and powerful drivers of conflict, the situation in Darfur being a forceful reminder thereof. We are also beginning to realize how climate change in the broader sense threatens to undermine some Governments' ability to ensure security and stability.

We would like to commend the Security Council for having taken on the responsibility of discussing this wider concept of security early on. We trust that this debate will serve to attract much-needed attention to the issue and that by no means will it preclude discussion -- and, more important, of course, action -- in a wide range of forums outside the Council.

Denmark will host the fifteenth session of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, to take place in 2009. It is our aim to work with all our international partners to ensure that agreement is reached on a future climate agreement at that meeting. If we miss this goal, it will be difficult to launch a successor to the Kyoto Protocol in 2012, when its first commitment period comes to an end.

For a future climate agreement to be effective, we must take a comprehensive look at the climate challenge. Here the link between climate, energy and security is crucial.

In a recent study prepared for the Danish Minister for Foreign Affairs, these links are clearly highlighted. The study makes it clear that the issue of climate change is still a low priority compared to other global challenges such as terrorism, poverty and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

Climate change must be treated in line with other major global threats in order to prevent very serious consequences from occurring. Climate change may undermine the carrying capacity of many developing countries, exacerbate tensions over scarce water resources and fertile land, lead to an increasing number of environmental refugees, drive conflict over strategic trade routes and newly accessible resources, and lead to territorial loss. It is therefore crucial to acknowledge the security implications of climate change. That will allow us to raise awareness and to mobilize the political will to address this challenge. Like others, we very much welcome the decision of the Secretary-General to make climate change one of his priorities.

Climate change is a complex issue, and there is no silver bullet to fix it. Traditional security policy instruments cannot mitigate climate change, therefore we must take quick and decisive action to mitigate it while at the same time adapting to it in developed as well as in developing countries. In particular, we must assist developing countries to build capacity to deal with security threats from climate-induced degradation and potential tension over scarce resources.

The challenge to change from carbon-based economies to something still unknown is a tremendous one. But we all have to accept this challenge. The recent reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change provide a strong basis for action, and the international community must respond accordingly. The direction is given. We all have to muster the political will to make the tough decisions necessary. The debate today is part of this process.

The President

I call next on the representative of Iceland.

Mr. Hannesson (Iceland)

Thank you, Mr. President, for organizing this important and relevant open debate on energy, security and climate. I thank you also for your concept paper (S/2007/186), and I will try to focus on the issues raised in the questions for discussion.

The fact that development and the fight against poverty are important aspects of security has been recognized globally. It is clear to all that there will be no security without development and there will be no development without security.

Increasingly, we have become aware of the seriousness of climate change with regard to the security and well-being of mankind. The latest evidence was presented in the report "Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability", released in Brussels earlier this month by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). From that report it is clear that climate change will hit the poorest hardest. We can expect more extreme weather events, glaciers will melt and the sea level will rise. There will be more severe droughts, and floods and desertification will increase. We have clear evidence of climate change in my own country, where glaciers in the highlands are shrinking fast.

Prior to taking up my post here in New York I was Ambassador to Canada and had the good fortune to travel widely in Canada's high north. The Inuit in Nunavut complained about the melting of the ice in places where they used to travel. Now there is open water there, and they have to go great distances on land instead of being able to take the direct routes on ice across fjords.

One does not need to be posted a long time here at the United Nations before it becomes abundantly clear that for a number of Member States, especially small island States, climate change with rising sea levels is the greatest threat to their security.

Mr. President, Iceland agrees with your analysis that climate change is a serious security issue. In the longer run, increased migration and diminishing natural resources, especially food and fresh water, will bring increased risks of border disputes and regional, national and ethnic power struggles. In the shorter run, the highest risks are related to access to secure supplies of energy.

If climate change is to be effectively slowed and eventually halted, and if its effects, particularly in developing countries, are to be mitigated, then wide-ranging and long-term international cooperation is the only course open. But we are not fully succeeding through our international cooperation. Perhaps it is because we have been treating climate change principally as an environmental issue. At best we recognize its socio-economic implications. But with this open debate in the Security Council, climate change is finally being recognized for what it is: climate change is a significant security issue that requires the highest attention of world leaders.

I would like to thank Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon for giving this issue the prominence it deserves on his list of priorities. We share the view that it is not too late to take concrete action to avoid the worst consequences. The next 20 years are crucial. If we act quickly and effectively to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, we will have taken significant steps towards saving millions from suffering and conflict in the future.

The scale of the problem is such that a solution will need the commitment of every Member State. Iceland, as a party to the Kyoto Protocol, is fully committed to doing its part. Our view is that we need to negotiate further commitments for the years beyond 2012. Iceland has recently adopted a new climate-change strategy, with a vision to reduce net greenhouse gas emissions by 50 to 75 per cent by 2050. That vision will be realized only through dedicated domestic action in all major sectors and in the context of a comprehensive international agreement.

However, mitigation measures should not hinder development, for which increased energy consumption is crucial. The focus must be on alternative energy resources. Renewable energy resources have an important role to play. Within the lifetime of one generation, my country has moved from being largely dependent on coal and oil to fulfilling 70 per cent of our total energy needs from renewable resources, and a remarkable 100 per cent of our electricity production is based on clean and sustainable energy. We can do even more, and we are exploring new technologies, including the use of hydrogen in transportation, to increase still further the share of renewable energy in our energy profile.

Today, many developing countries rely heavily on imported fossil fuels. By increasing their use of renewable energy, developing countries will be in a position to use their own resources, which will provide secure access to energy. We strongly believe that our experience with alternative energy sources is transferable. Indeed, hundreds of experts from developing countries in all continents have graduated from the United Nations Geothermal Training Programme, which was established in Iceland three decades ago, and most of them are now playing leading roles in the exploitation of geothermal resources in their home countries. Iceland has built up a leading position in the harnessing of geothermal energy, and our energy companies are now involved in various projects in Europe, Asia, the United States and other parts of the world.

There are many possibilities to be developed to ensure a sustainable energy supply. Through our development cooperation strategy, we will continue to focus on sustainable development and on the sustainable utilization of natural resources, including through strengthening the United Nations University Geothermal Training Programme by enabling it to admit more students and by setting up training courses in developing countries. We have also strengthened collaboration with international institutions, including the Food and Agriculture Organization and the World Bank, in the field of renewable energy and in increased emphasis on development cooperation with small island developing States.

We thank the United Kingdom again for its initiative in holding this timely open debate to explore the relationship between energy, security and climate in the Security Council.

The President

I now give the floor to the representative of the Marshall Islands.

Mr. Capelle (Marshall Islands)

My island nation wishes to align itself with the statement delivered by Papua New Guinea on behalf of the Pacific Island developing States.

It is well known to the global community that small island developing States such as the Marshall Islands are already experiencing the earliest ecological impacts of climate change. The fate of my nation is not merely an isolated moral concern, but part of the first chapter of a complex chain of events which will weaken the structure of global peace. In addition to consideration by other forums, the issue of climate change deserves the ongoing attention of this body as a continuing agenda item.

Population relocation due to rising sea levels is already a reality in my region; with limited available land, this issue will quickly reach critical mass. Certain low-lying island nations, including the Marshall Islands, are at serious risk of becoming an entirely new class of global environmental refugees. The vanishing of entire nations is simply without historical precedent; with an average height of only two metres above sea level, my nation is among the most vulnerable in the world. Faced as we are with the foreseeable loss of our islands, our struggle to redefine our Marshallese identity and homeland will compound existing political and social stresses already prevalent in the Pacific region.

The threat of climate change to security is very much a stark reality, not a theoretical possibility. Recent research indicates that two impacts associated with climate change -- ocean acidification and increased water temperatures -- are already affecting marine ecosystems. While my nation's land mass and population may be small, our large exclusive economic zone is home to some of the world's richest fisheries. As our coral reefs continue to vanish due to bleaching and our marine ecology is altered by increasing greenhouse gas emissions, we must emphasize to the Security Council the severe and growing threat posed by climate change to our fish stocks -- a critical global food source. The diminishment of food supplies in the face of rising populations not only threatens our own national subsistence, but will also intensify international competition for increasingly scarce essential resources. Such future rivalries will create an invitation to global conflict.

We have the opportunity still before us to reduce the threat that climate change poses to regional and global security. While much lip service has been paid to climate change, the global community has too often disregarded the severity and broad reach of its impacts. International action in both developing critical adaptation strategies and in successfully implementing greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals has been a sad and grave disappointment.

My nation realizes the complex challenges and costs that face the global community in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and in adapting to climate change impacts. However, the challenges and cost of inaction or of inadequate action will be far greater. Climate change will undermine our regional and global stability, in addition to threatening the very survival of certain small island developing States, such as the Marshall Islands.

The President

I now call on the representative of the Philippines.

Mr. Davide (Philippines)

I thank you, Sir, for this opportunity to address the Council and congratulate the presidency of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, now in the midst of a successful leadership of the Council this month.

In view of time constraints, I will deliver a condensed version of my delegation's statement, copies of which will be made available in the Chamber.

At the outset, my delegation associates itself broadly with the views of the Chairs of the Non-Aligned Movement and the Group of 77 and China as regards the principle that the competencies of each organ of the United Nations should be respected in order to uphold and maintain the clear delineation of their functions and responsibilities.

My delegation is participating in today's open debate because of the importance of the issues of energy, security and climate change to my country. As to the latter, which is linked to the environment, the Constitution of the Philippines expressly provides that the State shall protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology, in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature. In a landmark decision -- Oposa et al. vs Secretary of Environment Factoran -- the Supreme Court of the Philippines allowed children, on their own behalf and on behalf of the children of succeeding generations, to sue the Government to enforce that right, thereby enunciating the doctrine of intergenerational responsibility and intergenerational justice.

There is a need to focus on United Nations system-wide attention to those issues. More importantly, there is an extreme urgency for international community-wide prioritization, including at the regional and national levels, to address the challenges posed by energy security and climate change. My delegation therefore hopes that this debate will help raise awareness that will lead to a much-needed international consensus for speedy cooperation and action on energy and climate change.

Mankind's survival on our fragile planet faces a serious threat posed by our fast-deteriorating climate. In the landmark decision I mentioned earlier, the Supreme Court declared that, unless something is done today, humankind may inherit a parched earth incapable of sustaining life. It is undeniable that inordinate consumption and production patterns, especially in developed countries, have led to the current climatic situation. Let us not, however, be diverted by finger-pointing; instead, we should examine how each of our countries can contribute to the mitigation of climate change, in keeping with the moral doctrine of intergenerational justice, equity, responsibility and burden-sharing.

The abatement of climate change was one of the main issues addressed at the Second East Asia Summit held on 15 January 2007 in the Philippines. In the Cebu Declaration on East Asian Energy Security adopted at the Summit, the 10 South-East Asian countries, together with Australia, China, India, Japan, New Zealand and the Republic of Korea, agreed to work closely together to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions through effective policies and measures.

The environment ministers of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) issued in November 2006 the Cebu Declaration on Sustainable Development, wherein they expressed their concern over the impact of climate change on ecosystems. They reiterated their commitment to addressing global environmental issues through national and regional cooperation, and called upon the international community to continue to work with ASEAN in that regard.

Climate change is also built into the ASEAN Plan of Action for Energy Cooperation 2004-2009. The Plan mandates the inclusion of environmental and sustainable development concerns in regional energy policy formulation.

Climate change was also discussed last month during the sixteenth ASEAN and European Union Foreign Ministers Meeting. The ministers noted with particular interest the Cebu Declaration on East Asian Energy Security and agreed to promote cooperation on climate change, energy security, sustainable energy and multilateral measures for stable, effective and transparent energy markets.

The Philippines itself has made climate change a priority issue. Recognizing the urgent need to confront the issue and address its adverse effects, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo established, in February this year, the Presidential Task Force on Climate Change. The Task Force is mandated to conduct a rapid assessment of the impact of climate change, ensure strict compliance with air emission standards, combat deforestation and apprehend violators.

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change recognizes, among other things, that poverty eradication and economic development are the first and overriding priorities of developing countries. Under the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, developed countries have to take the lead in modifying longer-term trends in anthropogenic emissions, such as changes in consumption and production lifestyles, to address climate change. In view of this, the Philippines would like to stress a number of points.

First, all of the risks are of equal significance and are equally applicable to all parts of the world. However, developed countries are better equipped than developing countries to respond and manage the risks, and there is therefore a need for truly global cooperation, with developed countries -- given their historical responsibilities -- taking the lead.

Secondly, there is a need to further improve our understanding of technological responses in addressing climate change -- and particularly its adverse effects -- through adaptation, recognizing that developing countries remain most vulnerable to those adverse effects. What is needed is cooperative development of technology, which would ensure that there are no barriers to effective technology transfer and that such technology is adapted to the needs of user countries. Cooperative development of technology would address the needs of both developed and developing countries, all of which are affected by climate change.

Thirdly, all countries should comply with their legally binding obligations under the Framework Convention, in particular on the provision of financial resources and the transfer of technology. Greater resources should be provided for concrete adaptation measures.

Fourthly, the pursuit of sustainable development is fundamental for all countries. All countries should thus make climate change considerations an integral part of their development plans.

In conclusion, my delegation wishes to point out that the years 2007 to 2009 will be critical in testing the resolve of Member States to take bold and decisive steps to mitigate climate change. As long as the approach involves all stakeholders -- Governments, parliaments, non-governmental and civil society organizations, the private sector, faith communities and, above all, the people themselves -- and as long as there is the determination and political will to make and fulfil commitments, we will be able to save mankind and make this planet a beautiful place to live in.

The President

I give the floor to the representative of Mexico.

Mr. Heller (Mexico)

My delegation would like to thank you, Mr. President, for having including this public debate in the Council's April programme of work. The issues of security, energy and climate change have usually been dealt with separately. However, a comprehensive analysis of the linkages between those subjects must be undertaken if we are to forge a global understanding and formulate policies that allow us to confront the threat posed to international peace and stability. The United Nations system, as it is a reflection of the will of Member States, is the proper forum for the discussion of these challenges confronting the international community.

The development and well-being of all nations can be guaranteed only if well-founded measures are taken in a multilateral and concerted manner in the relevant forums. Throughout history, energy has been a strategic resource for human progress. The use of fossil fuels, including coal, as the principal sources of energy has allowed us to increase our capacity for development. However, today we know that it also endangers our common future. The most recent scientific consensus confirms that a significant number of natural systems have been affected by climate change and that global warming has undoubtedly had an influence on physical and biological systems. Climate change represents a serious and growing threat to the sustainable development and life of the planet. Its impact will have direct repercussions on energy supply and demand.

With regard to the issue of supply, climate change would result in a shortage of natural resources, since there would be a reduction in the quality and quantity of water available for human consumption, agriculture and electric energy generation, as well as in the amount of arable land, along with a deterioration in biodiversity and bioenergy in most of the tropics.

Furthermore, such a trend would coincide with a historic decline in the availability of fossil fuels and an increase in the difficulty of gaining access to them. That could lead to an increase in the number of conflicts in unstable areas as a result of the rush to gain access to available reserves. That would create a geopolitical environment shaped by the availability of alternative sources of energy and by the capacity to access appropriate technologies for their use.

Likewise, the envisioned impact of climate change would put at risk the existing oil and electrical industry infrastructure. Failing to factor the climatic variable into energy management in the future would reduce our ability to mitigate and adapt to the phenomenon in the years to come.

With regard to demand, climate change would alter our energy requirements and patterns of production and consumption of various goods and services, leading to distortions in the productive sectors, with a consequent impact on the global economy. Such considerations make clear the need to adapt climate change models and scenarios to future socio-economic and energy requirements.

Moreover, current challenges require us to redouble our efforts to reduce reliance on coal in the global economy. According to current estimates, by 2030 global energy consumption will have increased by more than 50 per cent from today's levels. To satisfy such increased needs while maintaining global security, we must move to a sustainable energy base that includes a growing share of renewable energy sources and promote the development of cleaner and more efficient energy technologies.

Furthermore, as has been said, climate change would continue to intensify extreme weather phenomena -- cyclones, hurricanes, heat waves and droughts -- creating humanitarian emergencies in many of our countries and increasing the human and economic costs associated with them.

The increase in the global population, which by mid-century will stabilize at almost 9 billion, will aggravate the current situation of poverty in which one third of humanity lives, while also increasing pressure on the biosphere and its capacity for biomass renewal and environmental services.

The spread of poverty and inequality, if not reversed, will inevitably lead to more social conflicts and to migratory pressures that are more pronounced than those we know today. Such migration will be from the zones of the planet that are the poorest and the most affected by climate change towards the most developed areas, with the resulting tensions and risks for millions of people living in conditions of extreme vulnerability.

There will be no genuine security if we do not promote common solutions to the challenges we face on energy and climate change. It will not be possible to avoid the economic and human costs of the adverse effects of global warming or its potential impact in the form of conflicts of a new nature. The urgency of the situation demands increased international cooperation on the formation of a new political consensus on a coordinated response to the inherent challenges to global security.

Today's meeting constitutes a valuable exercise that undoubtedly contributes to generating increased awareness and a comprehensive vision of the threats that could appear if the international community does not act in a timely manner. States and international and regional organizations must be able to shoulder their responsibilities in their respective spheres. The Government of Mexico has taken the institutional decisions necessary to confront the consequences of climate change and to fulfil the international obligations it has undertaken.

However, in our deliberations, we must be clear about the role that the various institutions of the United Nations system should play. When identifying the risks in the three areas under consideration -- energy, security and climate -- it is also appropriate to identify the competent forums and bodies that should deal with them. We should not forget that, when it comes to energy, the international community lacks an organization in which all States can reconcile their divergent interests.

In the Mexican delegation's view, although the threats under review are urgent, the possibility of conferring on the Security Council the responsibility to adopt preventive measures that are the province of the specialized forums and other entities, would confuse the content and scope of the duties adopted under the various international legal instruments to which we are signatories, while also eroding the Council's efficiency regarding the maintenance of international peace and security. In any case, the action of the Security Council could be oriented towards buttressing the call for the fulfilment of the political commitment that each Member State has assumed on this matter, and towards ensuring that the organs and other entities of the system are mobilized with greater determination.

In the present United Nations reform process, we have agreed on the objective of ensuring the coherence of actions taken within the Organization. Consistent with that spirit, we should strengthen the operation of the bodies of the system that affect or could affect these matters, such as the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council, the conferences of States parties to the relevant international conventions and other instruments and mechanisms. The delegation of Mexico is prepared to make a contribution in that regard.

The President

The next speaker is the representative of Brazil, to whom I have pleasure in giving the floor.

Mr. Tarragô (Brazil)

My delegation wishes to associate itself with the views expressed by the Chairman of the Group of 77 earlier in this meeting. We would also like to acknowledge the United Kingdom's initiative to convene an open debate in the Security Council to examine the interrelationships among energy, security and climate.

Climate change is an extremely important issue with multiple dimensions. However, utmost caution must be exercised in establishing links between conflicts and the utilization of natural resources or the evolution of climate on our planet. To determine whether any particular environmental phenomenon represents a threat to international peace and security remains a very complex task. Not only should conflicts not be traced back to a single cause, but the matter is also invariably loaded with many political connotations that might impair an objective analysis.

My delegation considers that there is a more relevant, stronger link between climate change and development as opposed to security. Droughts or floods can ravage the economies of many countries, especially in the developing world, and can aggravate poverty and underdevelopment. But the effects of climatic phenomena per se do not necessarily result in conflicts.

The social and economic consequences of extreme events related to climate change may arguably impact international security. Should the countries listed in annex I of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which are historically responsible for global warming, not fulfil their commitments regarding the reduction in the emission of greenhouse gases in a timely manner, scientists have agreed that there is a high probability that the world climate will be seriously affected, thereby becoming another factor of social and economic instability in many areas of the world.

My Government firmly supports the strengthening of the international regime on climate change, that is, the UNFCCC and its Kyoto Protocol. We remain convinced that the negotiating process should continue to take place exclusively in the context of the international regime and that it should be guided by the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities. That principle -- according to which the contribution one country can make to the solution of the problem must be proportional to its contribution to the creation of that problem -- is of vital importance for equitable and balanced international cooperation among countries.

The global nature of climate change and its multiple dimensions suggest that any relevant international debate on the issue should take place at a forum of universal representation, such as the General Assembly. The increasing importance of issues related to world climate would warrant serious consideration of the possibility of convening a special session of the General Assembly to discuss the matter.

The debate at the United Nations should not seek to be a substitute for negotiations undertaken in the context of the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol. It may nonetheless add to the political perspective on the debate. It could also serve to underline such issues as the recognition of the historical responsibility for the accumulation of greenhouse gases and the funding of adaptation measures.

The strategic nature of issues related to climate change and energy requires stronger and more effective cooperation frameworks that recognize the role of developing countries in the search for solutions that take into account the challenges of global warming while contributing to economic growth and social justice.

My Government favours diversification of energy sources, both as a way to provide new development prospects and new sources of income for many developing countries and as a means to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

We recognize the strategic importance of renewable energy as a driver of sustainable development. Renewable fuels, such as ethanol and biodiesel, can play a major role in the world's energy matrix. We are indeed convinced that biofuels can help to address four important challenges of our century: energy supply; environmental sustainability; employment and income generation in rural areas; and technological development.

In conclusion, the delegation of Brazil recognizes the importance of the international debate on climate change and energy, with special emphasis on renewable energies. The General Assembly would provide the appropriate venue for addressing these issues in a comprehensive manner and with the participation of all Member States.

The President

The next speaker is the representative of India, to whom I have the pleasure of giving the floor.

Mr. Sen (India)

Please, Madam, accept our warmest congratulations to a fellow Commonwealth country on holding the presidency of the Council and our appreciation of the manner in which your delegation is conducting the proceedings.

Climate change issues loom large in today's global environment agenda. The international community needs to be vigilant about moves that would, so to speak, make global warming cool again.

We have read with interest and attention the United Kingdom concept paper on energy, security and climate (S/2007/186, annex). We must confess, with all respect, that we have some major conceptual difficulties. We of course know the obvious: climate change is not a threat in the context of Article 39 of the Charter; nor can we contemplate Article-41 measures. High per capita carbon emitters are in debt to those with low per capita carbon emissions because they are exploiting much more than their share of the environmental space: space in the carbon sink that does not belong to them. An international economic system that has historically been based on externalizing the consequences of pollution is both unjust and impracticable. The main responsibility to take action to reduce the threat of climate change rests with the developed countries, in accordance with the principle of common but differentiated responsibility, as enshrined in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

In this topsy-turvy world, just as the Swiss linear formula in the World Trade Organization demands more than full reciprocity from developing countries, so also a careful reading of the Stern report on the economics of climate change suggests that between now and 2050, all the greenhouse gas abatements proposed would take place in developing countries, with developed countries taking credit for greenhouse gas reductions effected solely by commercial investments, with the increased cost of the energy service being borne by the developing countries and Clean Development Mechanism-type transfers of credits. This would negate the present global compact on climate change, affect growth in developing countries and increase insecurity.

The Stern report has been read with interest in India. It cites Richard Nordhaus extensively. Neither Nordhaus nor Professor Stern have overcome the uncertainty and difficulty of calibrating catastrophic scenarios. In fact, strong uncertainty is ignored. The result is thus to present a political argument as the outcome of an objective scientific modelling process. Nordhaus himself has concluded that the Stern review is a political document. That this objection applies equally to Nordhaus's work only makes it more telling. These catastrophic scenarios therefore cannot be treated as threshold events that are known in the real meaning of the word. Hence, their possible consequences in terms of border disputes, migration, energy supplies, societal stress and the like can hardly be discussed in any meaningful manner.

In marked contrast, a more immediate and quantifiable threat is from possible conflicts arising out of inadequate resources for development and poverty eradication, as well as out of competition for energy. By mitigating the potential for conflict, poverty eradication has positive implications for global peace and security. Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in developed countries also has a potentially significant positive impact on security, by moderating the impetus for privileged access to energy markets. Efforts to impose greenhouse gas commitments on developing countries would simply have an adverse impact upon the prospects of growth in developing countries. On the other hand, cooperation by developing countries through the carbon market would be conducive to their growth. However, a prerequisite for greenhouse gas abatement in the carbon market is enhanced, legally binding commitments by developed countries.

Considered solely in the context of climate change, poverty alleviation is dependent on climate change adaptation measures. Far more important than an uncertain international security threat is the existential threat to many small island developing States, and it is, therefore, crucial to mobilize resources and technology for immediate adaptation measures there.

To tackle the problems that may lead to conflict, action is required on resource flow, adaptation and technology. Diversion of official development assistance resources from economic growth and poverty eradication in developing countries is not the answer.

Energy is a critical input for development. For developing countries, a rapid increase in energy use per capita is imperative if national development goals and the Millennium Development Goals are to be realized. It is essential that developing countries have the policy space to address their energy needs in the light of their individual circumstances. At a conference in New Delhi earlier this year on Mahatma Gandhi's idea of non-violent resistance, one of our leaders said that to be equitable, economic growth has to be sustainable. To be sustainable, economic growth has, in turn, to be all-inclusive. It is actually sarvodaya, or the rise of all. Mahatma Gandhi insisted that such a rise must be respectful of land and in harmony with nature and the Earth's long-term future. For those delegations who are interested, I am appending to my written text some facts on India's implementation of sustainable development.

The appropriate forum for discussing issues relating to climate change is the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Insofar as international peace and security are concerned, developed countries reducing their greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption will considerably reduce such threats through a reduction in the need for privileged access to energy markets. Nothing in the greenhouse gas profile of developing countries even remotely reflects a threat to international peace and security, yet their taking on greenhouse gas mitigation targets will adversely impact their development -- development being the best adaptation to the adverse impact of climate change -- and thereby increase insecurity. Conceptually and logically, even if one assumes that catastrophic scenarios are certain, which is not the case, the only context in which to discuss what can be done about the physical effects of climate change is, again, the Framework Convention. The Security Council does not have the expertise and may not have the mandate: to make an uncertain long-term prospect a security threat amounts to an informal amendment of the Charter. That can be done only through procedures outlined in Articles 108 and 109. While preventing a far-reaching adverse change in the climate of the world we have to promote a far-reaching change for the better in the climate of the Security Council. This too requires procedures under Articles 108 and 109.

The President

The next speaker is the representative of the Republic of Korea, to whom I have the pleasure of giving the floor.

Mr. Choi Young-jin (Republic of Korea)

The tragic mass shooting at Virginia Tech yesterday was shocking news to all of us. I would like to take this opportunity to express our deepest condolences and sympathy to the victims and their families.

Madam President, my delegation appreciates your timely initiative in drawing our attention to the important issue of the security aspects of climate change. I also appreciate your delegation's concept paper (S/2007/186, annex), which concisely shows the potential implications of climate change for international peace and security.

As well documented in the recent reports by Sir Nicolas Stern and by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), it is increasingly clear that climate catastrophes caused by global warming will gravely affect the entirety of the world if not checked by immediate joint action by all of us. As the globe warms, it is more likely that extreme weather events, including severe floods, droughts and a variety of storms, will intensify in their impact. Floods and heavy downpours associated with rising sea levels will inundate cities and other habitats at or below sea level. Moreover, the newly published report of IPCC Working Group II depicts an acceleration of changes to the ecosystem, in particular in its patterns and diversity.

These phenomena would not only have a devastating impact on global economies at all levels but would also have serious security implications, as the concept paper poignantly recognizes. Among other factors, competition over scarce resources, in particular energy and water, is the most likely factor that might induce or facilitate conflicts among nations.

Another grave security aspect of climate change is that its impact will not be equally distributed. It has been reasonably predicted that the effects of climate change will be more severe in unstable States and among poorer, more vulnerable populations. The small island developing States might be on the front lines of these effects, which could produce receding coastlines and the possible future submergence of entire land masses.

Understanding this security dimension of climate change should therefore bring us together in tackling this global issue urgently and collectively. Climate change certainly demands fundamental rethinking in many policy areas, as well as in individual ways of living. It forces us to make painful but rational decisions within a limited amount of time. It leads us to answer fundamental questions on how humankind created the problem and what human factors may produce solutions.

We may revisit a classical but still illustrative thesis of "the tragedy of the commons." If we abuse or misuse our public goods -- in this case, our planet -- our generation as well as future generations will lose them. With a view to escaping that trap, I strongly believe that we should explore common solutions based on enlightened national interests instead of being bound by the narrow and immediate concerns of each country. At the level of the individual living within national borders, we have learned that enlightened self-interest, which balances individual needs with the common good, best serves each citizen in the long term.

In the same vein, it is time for us to learn and accept the same logic at the level of the global village. As our era of globalization ushers in a new set of transnational problems, of which climate change is a prime case, traditional national interests may need to expand to encompass enlightened national interest -- the interests of each nation in tune with a global perspective. Once nations adopt enlightened national interest, a corollary leadership by example may also be required as another guiding principle. We must mobilize our powers of reasoning and abstract thought, which are unique to humankind. Those new concepts may best ensure long-term national interests by enabling us to better respond to global problems.

I hope that today's debate will jump-start our search for wise solutions to this far-reaching problem, and lead to meaningful progress towards a breakthrough at the Bali conference in December 2007.

The President

The next speaker on the list is the representative of Norway, to whom I have the pleasure of giving the floor.

Mr. Løvald (Norway)

Let me start by thanking the United Kingdom for providing a very useful and timely paper as the point of departure for our debate here today.

The General Assembly stated in the 2005 World Summit Outcome that "We recognize that climate change is a serious and long-term challenge that has the potential to affect every part of the globe" (resolution 60/1, para. 51). The Heads of State and Government went on to

"acknowledge that we are living in an interdependent and global world and that many of today's threats recognize no national boundaries, are interlinked and must be tackled at the global, regional and national levels in accordance with the Charter and international law." (ibid., para. 71)

Against that background, we welcome the fact that for the first time the Security Council is addressing the security aspects of climate change. While climate change and energy are broad issues that are also being addressed in other United Nations forums, there is no doubt that the implications of climate change also pose a number of threats to our collective security. The many powerful messages delivered here today clearly testify to that.

The subject of the interlinkages between environmental sustainability and peace and security was put on the international agenda in 2004, when Wangari Maathai received the Nobel Peace Prize for her efforts to counter environmental degradation. Today, climate change is our main environmental challenge. But it is a threat that reaches far beyond the environment. It affects economic development, threatens the livelihood and resource base of whole societies and affects health and the spread of infectious diseases. It is likely to reduce the world's food security through droughts and unstable weather conditions. Through rising sea levels it endangers the very ground on which nearly half of the world's population lives. And it is likely to lead to increased humanitarian emergencies. For all those reasons climate change also represents a security threat that needs to be considered and addressed.

Climate change, as part of the peace and security agenda, should and must be addressed by the Security Council. The Council could become less effective in preventing and resolving conflict if it was to ignore the environmental dimension when analyzing the underlying causes of conflicts. To be able to address this issue effectively, the Council needs to base its decisions on facts and specific knowledge. We need to fill the current knowledge gap on how climate change and changing energy needs may impact on specific conflict situations on the Council's agenda. Such improved knowledge will help prevent and deal more effectively with future conflicts.

Such knowledge may also prove vital in preparing a coherent response to the risks of climate change among the United Nations membership and across the United Nations organizations. We would suggest that the Department of Political Affairs, in cooperation with the United Nations Environment Programme and other relevant United Nations institutions, be requested to look into how the current knowledge base on the interlinkages between climate change and security could be improved and made more readily available. I was very pleased, therefore, to hear this morning that the Secretary-General has so clearly committed himself to assisting in that important task.

Climate change is truly global a problem that can be solved only through global cooperation and joint action. It is therefore essential to reach a greatly improved and broader agreement on the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible. Norway supports all efforts to focus attention on the issue of climate change at the highest political level. While the Security Council should address the implications of climate change for the maintenance of international peace