While the resolution that was recently passed in the General Assembly was in progress, the United States expressed their terms for donating to support climate change refugees: all funds would need to be returned by 2034. In previous sessions the United States had also expressed their belief that the issue of climate change is “natural” and will “resolve itself.”
Counter-Productive to the Goal of the Committee
Many nations found that the United States’ demands were inhibiting their ability to move forward with their working paper. Micronesia challenged the USA directly in moderated debate, saying that the committee should be working for the sake of preserving human rights without expecting anything in return. The United States dodged the claim in their response.
Loans are for the World Bank and International Monetary Fund
New Zealand and the United Kingdom, both of whom were heavily involved in the construction of the resolution, expressed intentions to remove the United States from the document because they so strongly disagreed with the United States’ terms for donation. New Zealand stated that nations should be donating to those in need out of selflessness for the purpose of helping people. It is the World Bank and IMF’s job to issue loans to those in need but now is the time for charity and donation, New Zealand expressed.
Resolution Moved Forward
Regardless of the United States’ controversial ideas and requests, the resolution was passed. This represents a great step forward for the support of all refugees and the acceptance of environmental refugees as a legitimate and growing issue. The paper also marks a great victory for international cooperation and representation of smaller nations and their beliefs.