On September 23, 2019, the Climate Summit was held. And the central theme of it was “Nature“: that great concern of the 21st century. A summit that was led by Antonio Guterres, Secretary General. This leader, who is in charge of ensuring compliance with the Paris Agreement. Ask world leaders to establish strategies that really contribute to reducing the effect of greenhouse gases.
It is estimated that it is necessary to reduce the effect of such gases by at least 45%. In order to favor the recovery of nature. And this reduction is intended to be done year after year. Until reaching a stage with a level of gases practically zero in 2050. The big issue of controversy is how the activity of each State affects nature. That is, there is talk of a question of the sovereignty of each country.
What is about differentiating, is how the actions of a country affect only its territory. Or they really have effects outside their borders and affect globally. It is a phenomenon similar to what happened recently with the Amazon fires. A situation that generated a lot of diplomatic tension. So we find 2 possible paths. Each to his own or create a common front.
Does each country follow its own destiny?
What happens is that the sovereignty of each state, supposes at the same time a strong limitation when it comes to saving nature. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change states that everything that happens in the life and nature of the planet is a problem that must be assumed by all mankind.
However, the interests of the states delimit ecological activities. An evident proof of this was what the president of Brazil himself indicated. Mr. Bolsonaro pointed out at the General Assembly on September 24 that the United Nations must respect the sovereignty of Brazil over the entire Amazon region.
The bottom line is that sovereignty is established in favor of natural resources. Behind the requirement of Bolsonaro it is clear that there is an interest in the economic exploitation of the territories. And all the benefit that the exploitation of the Amazon rainforest can have for the development of the country.
Take responsibility among all?
Allowing other nations to intervene in an issue such as the Amazon fires would question the country’s sovereignty. And if a problem is assumed by other nations of the planet, they would surely defend that they have certain rights over that territory and that is where the problem is unleashed.
According to the General Assembly of the United Nations of 1952. It was established that the sovereignty of each country gives it the power to use natural resources according to the same purposes and strategies in favor of their development. But at the same time, the issue of the “common concern of humanity” should leave aside the limitations of other states to favor nature.
In the year of 1972, at the United Nations Summit on Human Environment. That was celebrated in Stockholm. It was concluded that the sovereignty of the States must be committed so that the whole life of nature and the exploitation of resources does not then impact the boundaries of their sister nations.
Respect limits and assume indifference?
This is how at the moment there is a strong reflection on the attitude that states should undertake towards the sovereignty of other countries. In favor of saving the nature of the planet. Is it necessary to respect international agreements and let each country take responsibility for its portion of nature?
Or, it is more than reasonable to set aside the issue of sovereignty and political boundaries. In this way, among all, a job is assumed in favor of the planet when situations as crucial as what happened in the Amazon are presented.
Scientists insist that the planet represents a unique system. And that everything that happens in a country affects the rest of the global nature and the destiny of humanity.