Clare Short Quotes

Climate change and ozone depletion are two global issues that are different but have many connections. In the ozone depletion case, we managed to work with decision makers effectively so that an international agreement called the Montreal Protocol was achieved that essentially solved the ozone depletion problem.

In a situation where many national leaders do the same thing and look out for national interests, and with an issue like global warming, you're likely to get no solution, so I think you have to have some kind of ethical trump on some of those issues.

It is simply not feasible for sovereignty to be exercised unilaterally by individual nation-states, however powerful. It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the imperatives of global environmental cooperation.

Individual scientists cannot do much on their own. Heads of nations, corporates, and economic giants should recognise the criticality of it.

During practically all of my public life, I have been a sincere advocate of an agreement between the leading nations of the world to set up all the necessary international machinery that would bring about a practical abolition of war between civilized nations.

On big issues like war in Iraq, but in many other issues they simply must be multilateral. There's no other way around. You have the instances like the global warming convention, the Kyoto protocol, when the U.S. went its own way.

It is possible that, post-Kyoto, the developed countries will recognise the requirements of the developing world.

A global deal will only be possible if Britain plays its part, leading the way with other developed countries.

But who knows, some years from now if there's a global emissions trading scheme agreement, as many have hoped for, then I'm sure Australia would be part of it.

I really do hope that the Millennium Summit gives new impetus to the work of the United Nations.

Climate change is a global problem. Its impacts do not respect national borders. No nation can deal with it alone. We must all work together, building joint capability to deal with these emerging threats. .

The U.N. brings everybody together. And without it, we can't deal with Ebola or terrorism or climate change. But it's 70 years old. It's tired. It's acquired a lot of bad habits. And often it feels like only new bad habits get added and old bad habits don't get taken away.

The Paris climate agreement may be a harbinger of the spirit and mindset needed to sustain genuine global cooperation.

The Paris agreement represents a huge step forward. It would have been preferable, of course, to start the process many years earlier, and a lot of question marks remain on how nations will ratify it, adhere to it and report their carbon reductions. But this is a remarkable ray of hope for our planet.

Foreign relations should involve human rights, workers' rights, and environmental protection.

We're competing against other great cities: Madrid, Rio de Janeiro, and Tokyo. That's why it's important that we all join together on the final path to Copenhagen. Having the support of President Obama is key.

If we want to implement climate protection worldwide, countries like Germany, which are capable of developing new technologies, will have to hand over some of their knowledge. We can't expect to have our cake and eat it too.

There are many who criticise the United Nations. And those of us who know this institution well know that it is not immune from criticism. But those who argue against the United Nations advance no credible argument as to what should replace it. Whatever its imperfections, the United Nations represents a necessary democracy of states.

The U.N. can be very frustrating and at times impotent, but it can also be a valuable forum for discussion and resolution of world problems. We should not walk away from it just because it's failed to live up to its promise.

Probably the most useful thing I can do as secretary of state is to assist the president in adapting and renewing the transnational institutions that were created after World War II.

Over many years, the United States has worked to persuade and compel governments around the world to abide by the rules. By spurning our own rules, we put that effort at risk.

As a conservative power, the United States has a vital interest in upholding and expanding the reign of law in international relations.

Global challenges require collective responses.

I think the American people, understandably, have sort of lost faith in the United Nations.

You don’t do foreign policy unilaterally. Foreign policy is a team sport.