Climate change and terrorism are "heating up" globally.

(Baonghean) - Climate and terrorism were the two hottest keywords in world news this past week. While COP21 failed to achieve the significant progress the public had hoped for, in the US, the dark footprint of ISIS officially set foot on the territory of this leading nation in the international coalition, sowing fear of even darker scenarios…

COP21: Visually stunning but not yet convincing.

Many strong statements were made, alliances were formed, funding was secured, and enormous expenditures were demonstrated – clearly, what world leaders demonstrated at COP21 made a considerable impression on the public. However, the experience and discernment of global citizens yearning for a shift in environmental protection still led to the conclusion: words alone are not enough.

Following the bloody terrorist attacks on November 13th in Paris, security measures were intensified and tightened to ensure the safety of delegates attending the event.

Experts believe COP21 was a success, achieving accomplishments in both the public and private sectors. American billionaire Bill Gates announced the establishment of a private fund to support companies working in the field of new energy solutions to replace fossil fuels – a major contributor to global climate change. Meanwhile, the US, France, India, and 17 other countries pledged to double their combined investment of $10 billion in clean energy research and development over the next five years. India also initiated the creation of the Solar Energy Alliance – comprising 121 countries – with the aim of increasing solar energy production. This alliance committed to mobilizing $1 trillion in investment for solar energy projects by 2030.

As for the goal of controlling global warming, French President Francois Hollande not only wants to set a limit of 2 degrees Celsius but also has ambitions to lower it to 1.5 degrees Celsius. Of course, that is an extremely bold idea, because even the 2-degree Celsius threshold is still causing intense debate in negotiations between national leaders.

However, as is customary, public opinion seems to have become too accustomed to conferences that bring together large numbers of countries from around the world like this, and doesn't place too much hope in a concrete outcome. Because, although environmental issues are nominally recognized as vital for the planet, when compared to the political and economic interests of each individual nation, they are still not a balanced counterweight. Not to mention the considerable expense that countries must spend on environmental protection, and fulfilling commitments such as reducing emissions also has a counterproductive effect on economic development policies.

For aging economies, environmental protection is seen as a "compensatory obligation" for historical development, in a context where green science and technology have not kept pace with economic growth. For today's young economies, pursuing green development policies means slowing down the process of closing the gap with developed countries.

An example illustrating the reluctance of nations to participate in common environmental protection is the promise made by wealthy countries in 2009 to spend $30 billion between 2010 and 2012 to combat climate change. However, as of June this year, only 30 countries had contributed approximately $10.2 billion.

People took to the streets in Sydney, Australia, calling on the COP21 Paris conference to reach a consensus on climate action. Photo: Reuters

Actively participating in environmental protection also places a burden on the political policies of nations, as internal conflicts in this area are often deep within countries. A prime example is the United States, with the opposition between the Obama administration and the Republican Party – who argue that commitments to cut emissions and polluting activities will negatively impact the domestic economy and increase unemployment.

In the latest development, on December 5th, leaders from 195 countries at COP21 adopted a document considered a prerequisite for building a global commitment on climate change. This is a positive sign, as consensus is the first and essential foundation in addressing all global issues.

The threat of ISIS is now present in the United States.

The US officially faces the threat of jihadist terrorism after one of the two perpetrators of the shooting at the San Bernardino community center on December 2nd sent a message pledging allegiance to the leader of the Islamic State (IS), El Abou-Bakr Al-Baghdadi.

People commemorate the victims killed in the attack at a support center in San Bernardino, California. Photo: AFP

In fact, this wasn't a rare mass shooting in the US recently; however, the perpetrators' motives were what drew particular attention from authorities and the public. The two perpetrators identified for the shooting that killed 14 people were a married couple, Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik. Syed Farook, the husband, was a Pakistani-American and also an employee of the center where the attack occurred. This led to the initial hypothesis that it was a revenge attack. However, investigators quickly shifted to a different hypothesis as information about the wife was gathered.

Tashfeen Malik, 29, was born in Pakistan and raised in Saudi Arabia. In August 2014, the couple married in California, USA, after meeting online. Nearly a year later, Tashfeen gave birth to her first daughter. Remarkably, her whereabouts during her 18 months living in the US were virtually unknown to investigators.

All that is known about Tashfeen is that she lived in a rented house in the suburbs of Los Angeles with her husband. Absolutely no other information is available about the female perpetrator of the terrorist attack that killed the most people since 9/11, 2001.

The clue linking the couple to terrorism was a status update the wife posted on a Facebook account minutes before the attack. In it, she pledged allegiance to the leader of ISIS – the existence of this Facebook account was confirmed by a Facebook spokesperson, although police have not yet revealed the identity of the person who used it. The attack then unfolded as we know it: 14 people at the Regional Inland Center were shot dead, including eight close colleagues of Syed. A homemade bomb, connected to a remote control, was also discovered at the scene. Investigators hypothesize that the couple intended to detonate the bomb when rescue forces arrived, but it failed to detonate.

While a possible link between the couple and terrorism has been confirmed, it remains unclear whether the wife was the direct mastermind of the attack or merely part of a larger network. An investigator told the New York Times that “at this point, it appears the suspects acted with inspiration from ISIS rather than direct instruction from the group.” However, the mere fact that an ISIS supporter entered the U.S. under the guise of being “the wife of a U.S. citizen” has raised public concerns about the national security system of a country already a “favorite” target of terrorism.

Thus, in the same event, two pressing questions were raised, posing significant challenges to US authorities: the issue of arms control and counter-terrorism security. While the first issue has long been a point of contention among US political parties, the second is more topical, stemming from a series of recent terrorist attacks involving ISIS around the world. Of course, this scenario is not unforeseeable, given that the US is one of the leading countries in the fight against terrorism in the Middle East.

Thuc Anh

(According to Le Monde)