THE CARBON WAR

The absurd thing is we know exactly what needs to be done 299
I don’t want to embarrass her by fishing for clues as to how hard the Saudis are
working behind closed doors to slow the process – I am told by many sources
that they are – or whether she thinks they will ever support a Paris agreement
that sends a strong signal to the world. But there is one question I can’t resist
asking. Back in London David Cameron is trying to persuade Parliament to
give him a mandate to bomb Syria alongside the French. Pictures of British
politicians braying, goading, and laughing are to be seen on news bulletins as
they “debate” the issue. Nobody would imagine they are contemplating action
that would inevitably involve the death of innocents as “collateral damage”,
even if they do succeed in killing existing terrorists. And how many surviving
innocents, and Muslim onlookers, will they radicalise? On October 4 th , after
President Putin began bombing those who seek to oust Assad – ISIS and anti-
ISIS alike – Cameron warned that the Kremlin’s action “will lead to further
radicalisation and increased terrorism.” Now, after the November 13 th terrorist
outrage in Paris, different rules evidently apply to British bombs.
I ask the young Arab woman whether she agrees with me that aerial
bombardment in Syria will only succeed in creating more terrorists.
Very much, she responds.
I reflect that if President Hollande is right that the Paris climate summit
is really a peace conference, and if it does somehow succeed in sending a
strong signal on fossil fuel phase-out this century, then a lot of quick thinking
will have to be done on how the transition to clean energy can also become a
transition to a more peaceful, or less violence-prone, world.
There are some obvious starting points, of course. If 100% of your energy
is being created at home by renewables, you are much less likely to want to
go to war for oil.