Earlier this month, British foreign secretary, Margaret Beckett chaired the United Nations security council's first debate on global warming. It was convened despite criticism from countries such as India and China which argue that the issue is outside the security council's mandate of maintaining international peace. Beckett told reporters before speaking: "This is an issue which threatens the peace and security of the whole planet - this has to be the right place to debate it." She warned of migration on an "unprecedented scale" because of flooding, disease and famine. Drought and crop failure could cause intensified competition for food, water and energy while the economic destruction could be comparable to the second world war or the great depression, she said. "Climate change is a security issue but it is not a matter of narrow national security - it has a new dimension," she said. "This is about our collective security in a fragile and increasingly interdependent world." The initiative has had a mixed reception at the UN. While European countries praised Britain, there were reservations from developing countries which see climate change as an economic issue to be dealt with by the general assembly. Pakistan and South African raised objections to the debate. The Group of 77, which represents poorer nations, has accused Britain of trying to widen the elite security council's power which, it argues, is not to set policy but to deal with immediate breaches of peace.

Andrew Clark, The Guardian
Do you feel the United Nations security council is the appropriate forum for the discussion of climate change?