Opinion | The world’s best hope for survival? Saving us from ourselves. (2024)

The World Health Organization director general authored a new official report, titled “Climate Change and Health.” This report acknowledges climate change as a critical health issue and proposes a structured approach to address it. As young physicians and global health researchers, we urge governments to prioritize health in their climate policies, enhance data collection and monitoring, and standardize protocols for capacity building.

The pandemic exposed gaps in our emergency response capacity. We call upon the governments to strengthen health-care capacity, preparing the health-care systems to act as pillars of sustainability in the face of climate change. The time to prepare is now.

Shreenik Kundu and Ayla Gerk, Montreal

The writers are PhD students at McGill University with fellowship studies at the Program in Global Surgery and Social Change at Harvard Medical School.

At the most fundamental level, the world’s struggle to make progress combating climate change is a product of humankind’s most tragic flaw: We are incapable of protecting ourselves from ourselves. In the same vein, we might be unable to exhibit the required understanding, cooperativeness and selflessness needed to overcome the effects of climate change.

Since the discovery of climate change a half-century ago, the world’s reaction has been appalling. The response from those in the best position to do something about it, such as world political leaders and the barons of industry, has ranged from inadequate to nonexistent. For far too long, it seems the prospect of the end of humanity has paled in significance when compared with the continuation of the status quo, with its profits and comforts. The urgency of the situation is finally taking hold, but is it happening too late? Precious time has been wasted.

Perhaps the world’s best hope for survival would be the use of cutting-edge science and technology to, for example, remove carbon dioxide directly from the atmosphere. The nature of the process would be analogous to the extraction of salt from the ocean, but immensely more complex. A major advantage of such a solution is that it would be less affected by the proclivities of human behavior. Even in an advanced country such as the United States, a significant number of people still believe the whole thing is a “hoax,” and business as usual still reigns. It really does feel like, once again, we can’t help ourselves — but this time, the consequences could be fatal for the entire human species.

Harry Flickinger, Gaithersburg

While the thought of “two years left” seems depressingly pessimistic to me as a college student, it’s important that we don’t lose faith and focus on solutions. Although this article is more concerned with carbon emissions on a global scale, it is crucial that we look inward at our own domestic responsibility in reducing our emissions. The United States has yet to pass legislation for large-scale emissions reductions, such as a carbon fee to encourage polluters to turn to more renewable energy and a dividend distributed to every citizen to cushion the result of the fee.

While Michael Oppenheimer, a climate scientist at Princeton University, worries this two-year warning will be ignored, it is my hope that it can be a call to action. While issues of climate change seem overwhelming to many citizens, our nation is based on the power of the ballot to prioritize the greatest threats to our future. November is coming.

Courtney Hand, Williamsburg, Va.

Donald Trump’s statement that Jews who don’t vote Republican don’t love Israel is a waste of breath. I am a Jew, and I love Israel. It’s Benjamin Netanyahu whom I don’t like or trust. There is mounting evidence that the Israeli prime minister is holding on to power for the same reason Mr. Trump wants to return to power: to keep out of the courtroom. The last time I voted for a Republican was in November 1990. But if you’re wondering, I’m not voting for any current Republican, and I still love Israel.

Robert Bronstein, New York

Donald Trump might be surprised to learn that Jewish voters, even those of us who are strong supporters of Israel, have strong feelings about other priorities as well. We care about education, the economy, women’s health care, gun safety, foreign affairs, the environment, crime and, yes, even immigration. We are very aware that if Mr. Trump wins and the Republicans take the House and Senate, we will likely lose any progress we have made on these issues.

How do we know this? Mr. Trump has developed a track record since his surprising win in 2016. His overriding concern, as he seeks the presidency for the third time, seems to be avoiding convictions in his many criminal cases and, if he wins, destroying his enemies. We have a long history of democracy and freedom in this country. When countries lose that, it never works well for the Jewish people. There’s a track record for that, too.

Elliott Miller, Bala Cynwyd, Pa.

Before Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel sought a two-state solution. Under the Oslo accords, Israel wanted a two-state solution. Former U.S. ambassador Dennis Ross recounted in his book “The Missing Peace: The Inside Story of the Fight for Middle East Peace” the proposed solution in 2000 that would have given the Palestinian Authority 95 percent of what they wanted. Then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak agreed, but Yasser Arafat, leader of the Palestinian Authority, walked away. The current leader of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, does not want to live in peace with Israel, and Hamas wants to destroy Israel.

The proposed cease-fire will not be permanent until both sides respect each other’s right to exist. Israel is threatened with hostile neighbors and acts accordingly. Are the authors of this op-ed willing to commit troops and resources to ensure that Israel is secure? With a secure Israel, a rational prime minister could be elected to build a two-state solution. What commitments will the authors and the United Nations make to provide effective, peace-loving government(s) for the Palestinians?

Robert Finkelstein, Reston, Va.

Jordanian King Abdullah II, French President Emmanuel Macron and Egyptian President Abdel Fatah El-Sisi have observed that “Protecting civilians is a fundamental legal obligation for all parties and “the cornerstone” of international humanitarian law. Violating this obligation is absolutely prohibited.” With all due respect, this statement is both inaccurate and misleading.

Yes, the protection of “noncombatants” is a fundamental principle of the Law of Armed Conflict. However, it is not the cornerstone. Historically, the LOAC has recognized that civilian deaths and the destruction of civilian property will often occur in the course of armed conflict. The principal purpose of the LOAC has thus been to mitigate, not eliminate, this loss of civilian life and property by regulating the means and methods by which conflict might be lawfully conducted. Accordingly, a commander must refrain from an attack in which the anticipated incidental civilian harm would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage expected to be gained.

Thus, while the protection of civilians is indeed a fundamental consideration in conducting a military operation, this factor does not take priority over mission accomplishment. A warfighter, in developing an operation plan, cannot do so on the basis that, legally, his primary concern must not be the military necessity of accomplishing his mission, but rather the protection of the enemy’s civilian population. To contend that this is the case would be to turn the LOAC on its head.

David E. Graham, Charlottesville

The leaders of Egypt, France and Jordan all support an immediate cease-fire, which is counterintuitive to the universally supported right of Israel to defend itself. Hamas publicly claims its members will repeat the Oct. 7 attack until Israel no longer exists.

The call for releasing hostages is laudable. However, bear in mind that Hamas wishes to exchange the people they kidnapped for criminals and murderers held in Israel’s prisons. Will released prisoners carry out another Oct. 7?

Max Bronstein, Silver Spring, Md.