I recently learned of a United Nations study on environmental funding for projects around the world. The UN wanted to know what programs are working.
One of the researchers shared an example of ‘what’s working’ with me.An oil exploration/services company wanted to operate off of the coast of Panama. In order to obtain permission from the Panamanian government, this corporation agreed to work with an indigenous group of Indians who have been living in and cutting down their forest habitat. The corporation offered to provide 15 years worth of compensation to the Indians in exchange for their commitment to stop cutting the trees. Payment would be on an annual basis. In order to monitor the project the oil exploration corporation required that the Indians give up their ownership title to their land for the 15 year period. If they didn’t cut the trees they would get their land titles back in 15 years. An independent third party non-governmental organization would monitor the land for the 15 year term.
The oil exploration corporation would then own the land for 15 years and be able to sell carbon credits for that land on the international market.
When I was told about this plan I asked the following questions:
Why did the Indians need the oil exploration corporation to make this agreement for carbon credits?
Couldn’t an NGO arrange this for them without a middle man and without them having to give up ownership of their land?
Are the carbon credits projected to fully compensate the oil exploration corporation for their 15 years of payments to the Indians?
Will there be a profit for the oil exploration corporation besides the profit on oil drilling?What will the Indians do for 15 years?
Will they have to change their lives and traditional way of living? What happens at the end of the 15 years?
What other impacts might result from loss of land ownership over a generation?
How would the NGO monitoring the land use change the relationship of the Indians to their land?
What is the nexus between oil drilling and Indians besides exploitation?
The researcher was angry and disgusted with me for asking these questions, and said that I was biased against seeing that it was a benefit for the people. I said that these questions should be explored and answered fully before any agreements were made. The researcher said that the questions had not occurred to him and that as far as he was concerned it’s a ‘win-win.’
Is it? We’ll know in 15 years, if anyone cares to look.
Rosa Koire, ASA, is the executive director of the Post Sustainability Institute and the author of BEHIND THE GREEN MASK: UN Agenda 21. She is a retired forensic commercial real estate appraiser specializing in eminent domain valuation. As a District Branch Chief at the California Department of Transportation her nearly 30 years analyzing land use and property value enabled her to recognize the planning revolution sweeping the country. While fighting to stop a huge redevelopment project in her city she researched the corporate, political, and financial interests behind it and found UN Agenda 21. Impacting every aspect of our lives, UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is a corporate manipulation using the Green Mask of environmental concern to forward a globalist plan. Rosa speaks across the world and is a regular blogger on her website Democrats Against UN Agenda 21. Her book, BEHIND THE GREEN MASK: UN Agenda 21 is available on Amazon.com, Kindle, and Nook, at her websites: www.PostSustainabilityInstitute.org and www.DemocratsAgainstUNAgenda21.com