US fury at chief scientist’s ‘dig’ at George Bush’s ‘war on terror’

Britain’s chief scientist sparked outrage in the United States after he warned that climate change represented a greater global threat than international terrorism, according to newly-released government papers.

Files released to the National Archives at Kew, west London, show officials feared Professor Sir David King’s remarks would be seen as a “dig” at President George Bush’s “war on terror” in the wake of the 9/11 attacks on New York.

Prime minister Tony Blair was warned that Sir David risked being branded an “extremist” in Washington, potentially undermining British efforts to get the Americans to address the issue of global warming, which was rising up the political agenda.

Sir David made his comments in an article for the US journal, Science, published in January 2004 – less than three years after the al Qaida attack which destroyed the Twin Towers and which remained fresh in American memories.

As well as arguing that climate change was “more serious even than terrorism”, he also sharply criticised the Bush administration over its failure to ratify the international Kyoto Protocol and its unwillingness to countenance any remedial action.

Following its publication, Britain’s charge d’affaires in Washington, Tony Brenton, informed No 10 that he had been tackled by “a rather worked up” Jim Connaughton, a senior White House adviser on the environment, demanding an explanation.

“He said that the article, and particularly the comparison between the dangers posed by climate change and terrorism, was proving deeply unhelpful here,” Mr Brenton wrote.

“Within the administration, he was having to deal with questions about why they were working in co-operation with the UK on this subject. And there were also already hints of political repercussions on the Hill.

“For good measure, he added that the article misrepresented US policy and that David might usefully reread the president’s public utterances on climate change”.

Mr Brenton said that while he doubted the outrage was a intense as Mr Connaughton was suggesting, the comparison with the terrorist threat had been “bound to go down badly” and that Sir David should be braced for “some pushback” when he visited Washington later that year.

In London, Vicki Bakhshi, a senior No 10 adviser, warned Mr Blair that Sir David’s comments “will be taken in the US as a dig at the war on terror”.

“Together with the blunt criticism on the US policy stance, this is likely to mark Sir David in the eyes of the administration as something of an extremist,” she wrote.

“This could undermine the effectiveness of his efforts on climate change in future.”

She added that Sir David’s office had failed to inform No 10 that the article was being published and that they were writing “to make sure this does not happen again”.