Congratulations to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and former US VP. Al Gore, winners of the 2007 Peace Nobel Prize … “for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change”.
But it is the Nobel Peace Prize that was awarded, and truly so, the Norwegian committee recognized that the effect of climate change increases the chance of conflicts as natural resources are becoming scarce and countries or ethnics will fight to access these resources. Looking at the list of Nobel Prize Winners, I believe this is the first time that this prestigious – although sometimes controversial – distinction has been awarded for the sake of conflict prevention. Most wars find their roots deep into one people trying to subjugate another to control valuable resources for their survival, defense and/ or development, such as pasturage, trade routes, spices, gold, petroleum and so on – the most striking example being the incessant conflicts in the Middle East (for both/either petroleum and/or water). Another brilliant move by the Oslo committee was to jointly award the prize to a duo that needs very much one another, a duo that I’d like to see team-up in the near future while keeping their precious independence from one another.

When The Inconvenient Truth hit the screens, becoming one of the most successful movie documentaries, it prompted heavy criticism from a certain category of politicians, scientists and industry lobbyists questioning scientific facts and Al Gore’s political motivations, but most of all refusing to admit the most crucial aspect of the debate: the climate crisis is essentially anthropogenic. The brawling intensified after Davis Guggenheim, the movie director, received an Oscar. And of course, the denigration was mainly directed at Al Gore, whose charisma was the real threat. But the message was so powerful and the public so receptive that more and more media outlets started paying attention to hard evidence published by the large majority or the scientific community, and one group in particular echoed more than others – for reasons I can’t completely grasp, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). IPCC was established in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), two organizations of the United Nations. There are two good reasons the IPCC was deemed to become another dormant, insignificant, counter-productive voice in the fight against global-warming: it is a United Nations body, with all the political pressure it entails and it looks to offer a balance of opinions of “relevant” experts.

Its first crisis came in 2002, and what could have been a coup de grace gave it an unexpected rise. Soon after Bush won his first term, his administration pressed for the replacement of the IPCC chair, Dr. Robert Watson, a scientist the New York Times called an “outspoken advocate of the idea that human actions – mainly burning coal and oil – are contributing to global warming and must be changed to avert environmental upheavals.” He was effectively replaced in April 2002 by Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, a shift that many thought to have been instigated by the oil industry. True enough, Dr. Pachauri had been sitting on Global Fortune 500 Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) board of directors as Director for the last 3 years prior to his election. Al Gore was not too keen about the move, calling the new chair the “let’s drag our feet candidate”.

But the Indian native took everyone by surprise – his former position with IOC probably turned out to be an advantage – becoming a more objective ear and voice in the eyes of the scientific community, managing over 2,000 climate change experts’ sensitivity and unimaginable political pressure to produce the most complete and compelling report advocating for rapid action to fight global warming. On a personal basis, and without taking anything away from Mr. Gore’s long journey to open our eyes, I feel somewhat more impressed by Dr. Pachauri and the IPCC achievements.

Anyway, there could not have been two figures more complimentary than Gore and Pachauri to awaken –the still-deniers – convince – the pessimists and CO2 indulgers – and promote – the rest of us – the need for a radical and rapid change in how we interact with our environment. Recognizing the work of one over the other would have had much less impact. Al Gore has done a tremendous job offering the climate crisis a popular voice while Rajendra Pachauri has accomplished the remarkable – Herculean – job of building and disseminating climate change knowledge. But ultimately, it feels very much like it is the Planet Earth who has won it!

Chapeaux bas messieurs, ces héros méritent d’être salués.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS