How a single word could've derailed the entire climate change pact
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
You are now subscribed
Your newsletter sign-up was successful
Nearly every nation in the world approved a historic climate change deal Saturday, but getting to that point wasn't easy. One last-minute quibble was over a single word, Politico explains:
Obama administration lawyers discovered early in the day that the latest draft text had a potentially deal-killing tweak: Deep into the document, in Article 4, was a line declaring that wealthier countries "shall" set economy-wide targets for cutting their greenhouse gas pollution. [Politico]
Why the big fuss? Earlier drafts used "should" instead of "shall," a term that is legally binding in United Nations documents. If the U.S. hadn't worked to get "should" back in instead, the deal may have required final approval from the Republican-controlled Senate — a hard sell.
"When I looked at that, I said, 'We cannot do this and we will not do this,'" Secretary of State John Kerry told reporters. "'And either it changes or President Obama and the United States will not be able to support this agreement.'"
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Julie Kliegman is a freelance writer based in New York. Her work has appeared in BuzzFeed, Vox, Mental Floss, Paste, the Tampa Bay Times and PolitiFact. Her cats can do somersaults.
