Comments
ACCORDING TO LIZ - If Trump wants to impose tariffs on Canada for wildfire smoke, should Canada sue the United States for exacerbating the global warming that caused them?
And the president in particular for freeing fossil fuels – also a significant cause of hazardous air quality – from regulations? And slamming the brakes on what was an impressively fast-tracked move to wind and solar that would have bent the arc towards mitigating the problem?
Not to mention his pre-emptive support for A.I. and crypto that, in addition to adding to his personal fortune, further intensifies American energy demands?
The recurring forest fires north of the border are the ultimate proof of global warming, a phenomenon that the president calls “the greatest con job perpetrated by the world” in the face of global scientific consensus that it is human-caused and a significant risk to the environment and human health.
It is his policies, promoting the return to fossil fuels and reversing the move to renewable energy that he has fallaciously labeled too expensive which threatens that climate change will become unimaginably worse in future years. Not only for the Americans but for all of mankind.
Pollution, both air and water, doesn’t recognize political borders.
Can Canada now get tariff credit for the smoke and ash drifting and flowing north to British Columbia, Alberta and beyond, to the Northwest Territories, from the dozens of fires ignited in Washington and Oregon due to more than 14,000 lightning strikes from thunderstorms over the weekend?
Did the European Union charge Iceland for the weeks of air travel disruption and the ash cloud that covered much of the continent after the 2010 eruption of Eyjafjallajökull?
Did Canada or Oregon charge Washington state for the Mount St. Helens eruption’s effect on air quality, agriculture, transportation, health, and disruption of daily life? Plus interest?
Will third-world countries which accepted toxic waste from American companies bite the hands that fed their leaders’ luxurious lifestyle and sue for the environmental and health damages?
Should Mexico file more cases over the depletion and pollution of the Colorado River before it crosses into Baja California for the environmental damage of its once-thriving delta?
Should the descendants of the mostly-innocent Japanese maimed and killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki file a class-action lawsuit against the companies that built those bombs, entities that have profited, and the American government?
It may be a reasonable gut reaction to want to blame a tangible “other” in the short term for damages today resulting from long term environmental consequences – but it may not be the president’s wisest move. Especially given his extensive history of finger-pointing to deflect any and all personal responsibility.
Especially when there are human components multiplying the magnitude of the aftermaths of natural disasters.
Natural calamities spread out in waves; Katrina’s damages went far beyond the coastal storm impact; major volcanic eruptions have worldwide consequences. Industrial accidents like the Deepwater Horizon disaster and the Fukushima meltdown walloped lives and the environment across seas and oceans.
Or consider the ancillary economic costs of significant power outages such as the Northeast blackout of 2003 triggered by an alarm system failure in Ohio which rapidly led to cascading failures of interconnected power grids affecting 55 million people in the United States and several Canadian provinces.
Plans up-ended, loss of work, failure of food storage, impact on medical care, transport system gridlock...
Who’s to blame then?
Who was at fault for the Palisades Fire?
LAFD Chief Kristen Crowley or the absence of Mayor Karen Bass? The Uber driver who might have caused the Lachman Fire, embers from which lingered and were released by a perfect storm of destructive weather conditions? The U.S. healthcare system or, rather, the lack thereof, which should have addressed the man’s mental instability well before the incident?
Who should be regulating fireworks which, alternatively, could have caused the blaze?
And who in the chain of command at Southern California Edison is responsible for the concurrent Eaton Fire, the second most destructive wildfire in California history?
Are the growing number of brush fires ignited at or adjacent to homeless encampments the fault of individuals or the failure of a system that has allowed their numbers to spiral out of control?
Should Canada not send support the next time California has another out-of-control wildfire?
People may titter at Trump and his visceral craving to blame someone else at all times but, as president of the United States, his is the responsibility not to point pudgy fingers but, in the wake of disaster, to man up and get on with the job of succoring those suffering and facilitating the rebuilding of people’s lives rather than trying to shift accountability elsewhere.
(Liz Amsden is a former Angeleno now living in Vermont and a regular CityWatch contributor. She writes on issues she’s passionate about, including social justice, government accountability, and community empowerment. Liz brings a sharp, activist voice to her commentary and continues to engage with Los Angeles civic affairs from afar. She can be reached at [email protected].)
