One of the key points about 'national security' is the defense -- and even the very existence of -- your sovereign land. On Wednesday (Dec. 9) in Copenhagen, it sounds like the group of 'Small Island States' had their time to demand forthright and agressive action on climate change. They fear that there will be nothing they can do to defend their land if unmitigated climate change melts the ice caps and causes rising sea level.
On moral grounds, their argument is nearly inassailble. Rising sea levels will wipe out their land, forcing their entire populations to either move or sink.
This action is very interesting, because it shows a possible split between the small, vulnerable developing nations -- like the island states and the poorest least developed countries -- and the larger and more politically important developing nations -- like China, India, and Brazil. The large states want to prevent a legally binding treaty that would place a tight cap on emissions (implying that they would have to cap their rapidly growing emissions). Meanwhile, the small, poor states (with emissions so small that they don't really care about caps) are pushing for a treaty that would place tight caps on emissions and prevent dangerous climate change from threatening their very existence.
Ian Fry, Tuvalu's delegate said: "Our future rests on the outcome of this meeting"
The Economist has a very good write-up of the action on their 'Correspondent's Diary' from Copenhagen. The BBC has a good article on this, and their correspondent has a very enlightening blog post on the emerging split in the developing country 'G-77' group.
After the break, click for a YouTube video of the protests from Copenhagen looking at the protests in favor of Tuvalu.