Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Copenhagen Chaos: Developing Countries Insist Kyoto Stays
UN and Danish hosts rush to repair rift as G77 delegate claims scrapping Kyoto would mean 'killing of Africa'
COPENHAGEN - The U.N. Climate Change Conference enters its final week under a cloud of uncertainty as the Africa Group led a protest of the developing world against a perceived attempt to abandon the Kyoto Protocol.
Delegation members from Lesotho (R) talk prior a meeting at the Plenary Tycho Brahe of the Bella center of Copenhagen. Africa's frustration at the UN climate summit boiled over Monday as delegates walked out of key talks and continental giant Nigeria warned the negotiations were now on red alert.
(AFP/Attila Kisbenedek) Monday found long lines of delegates and observers waiting to clear security at the Bella Center's entrance. The now-familiar invitations to this or that side event in the background, you could hear people discussing the fate of precious clauses over the weekend, and murmurings of trouble brewing in the official process.
One of the day's early press conferences found the Africa Group unhappy with the way the formal discussions are being structured. The group spoke against an order of business that seems to follow a developed country preference to discuss a single track for negotiations. Africa prefers to continue with parallel discussions that would preserve the imperfect but legally-binding structure of the Kyoto Protocol while negotiations continue over a binding replacement for the long term.
By the middle of the day, the Africa Group's displeasure had brought official talks to a halt. Africa told the chair of the working group on a long-term treaty that it would simply not participate in any negotiations or contact group discussions until movement restarted on the parallel discussion of the Kyoto Protocol.
The protest was supported by AOSIS (Alliance of Small Island States) and quickly became a G77 position, stalling the talks.
The Climate Action Network, in its daily media briefing on the state of negotiations, announced that having studied the various commitments on the table as the new week began, a deal signed on that basis today would lead to increased emissions that would mean an estimated 3.9 degree rise in the average global temperature.
The network, a coalition of 450 environmental and social justice organizations from around the world, said there had been progress by negotiators on technical cooperation and building capacity towards a plan to reduce damage to forests. Two years of very slow progress had been rapidly advanced by the release of draft texts by the chairs of the working groups, the network said, although little had been achieved on difficult political issues.
Several key points were highlighted, including disagreement over emissions targets, the question of long-term financing, and the scale of such support.
China and other major polluters from the developing world have proposed only conservative targets for reducing emissions - failure that is linked to the reluctance of developed countries to pledge significant funding to the roughly $200 billion a year that will be needed for adaptation, mitigation, technology transfers and capacity building.
As growing numbers of ministers arrived in Denmark, the Climate Action Network stressed that the biggest failure thus far was political leadership.
Marcelo Furtado, executive director of Greenpeace Brazil, said it was clear the negotiators had not been given mandates allowing them to resolve thorny questions.
Furtado pointed out that when Brazilian industry resisted the abolition of slavery 120 years ago, maintaining that they could not afford it, the moral argument that was raised prevailed in the end.
"Here we are 120 years later, looking at a very similar scenario. People are saying there is no moral discussion, (the debate has been) only about technology, only about finance," the Greenpeace campaigner said.
Where major, long-term funding is called for, the developed world has thus far offered only short-term financing. Emerging economies such as China, India and South Africa have not responded to the call for them to make firm commitments to act quickly to reduce their emissions.
"The challenge this week is to ask for vision, responsibility and leadership. And that falls on the shoulders of everyone: of developing countries like Brazil, China and India who will have to agree to their commitments being measured and verified, but also to the developed countries that ought to put money on the table and show willingness to raise their ambitions," Furtado said.
India's negotiator told the press last week that its priority was economic growth and adaptation to harmful effects, with mitigation taking a back seat. South Africa's behavior was soundly condemned at another press conference, where Friends of the Earth International criticized a massive new World Bank loan to the country (double its total commitment to renewable energy worldwide) for the construction of massive new coal-fired plants.
A deal to reduce emissions due to deforestation has been prominent since the start of the conference. But on this front, campaigners were concerned that over the weekend vital safeguards for indigenous people have been moved out of the legally-enforceable main body of the text, to the preamble.
Dr. Rosalind Reeve of Global Witness pointed to Papua New Guinea, Ghana - speaking for the Africa Group - and India as having worked over the weekend to remove the clear phrase saying parties "shall implement" and replace it with the much weaker "should protect".
If these safeguards are lost, Reeve said, there are no guarantees for indigenous people's rights in REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation).
*This story appears in the IPS TerraViva online daily published for the U.N. Conference on Climate Change in Copenhagen.

11 Comments so far
Show AllNaomi Klein ---- EYE WITNESS
“Copenhagen's policing by design”
“The Copenhagen cops used a little shattered glass as the pretext for detaining almost a thousand people, hundreds of whom were corralled together, forced to sit on the freezing pavement for hours, with wrists cuffed (and some ankles too). According to organiser Tadzio Müller, these were not the people who threw rocks but "the treatment was humiliating", with some of the detainees urinating on themselves because they were not allowed to move. The arrests, part of a pattern all week, felt like a warning: deviations from the "Hope-enhagen" message would not be tolerated.
Inside the official summit, delegates apparently gathered around flat screen TVs and watched the police breaking up the march and pushing groups of protesters against walls.
For some it must have felt familiar. After all, that's pretty much what the Danish government and other western powers have been doing here all week: trying to break up the G77 bloc of developing countries by using classic divide and conquer tactics, including pushing especially vulnerable states up against the wall with special offers.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cif-green/2009/dec/14/copenhagen-policing-climate-summit-protesters
These meetings should be held in Countries where the rights of the people to Protest are respected.
Cuba might be a better choice these days.
"Cuba might be a better choice these days."
It's got an enviable carbon footprint as well. Coincidence?
India's position is being dictated by its elites. The majority of India's population will be devastated by climate change, but the elites are so far removed from the concerns of rural India or any alternative philosophy of development, that their position is a catastrophe. What a shame, but one only has to travel through India to see what over-consumption has wrought.
Agreed. When the glaciers are gone, India will be toast. Such an event has already occured during India's very long history--The redirection of the Sarasvati River doomed the Vedic Civilization, it's peoples migrated both east and west where they started the Indus Civilization (which still exists) and greatly influenced the Mesopotamian Civilization, which the US and UK have tried in vain to destroy.
Do you have some reference to show that people of the Vedic civilization later on "started" the Indus civilization? I have read a few articles and research papers over the years - pointing out that there is little connection between the hymns of the Vedas (the primary basis for understanding the Vedic period) and what has been excavated in Harappa and Mohenjo-daro (the primary basis for understanding the Indus Valley civilization). I understand there's a bit of controversy on this subject. I know this is off-topic, but you make a timeline of Vedic --> Indus --> Mesopotamian civilizations. I have included a link - if you are interested.
Horseplay in Harappa:
http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl1720/17200040.htm
Alcyon--This work, "In search of the cradle of civilization," and the works it cites provide the basis for my statement. I note that the authors in the linked article do not directly address the above mentioned source, although they do mention its authors in a non-positive manner without details or facts as to why.
My investigations as an historian led me further East and futher into the past, with "Eden in the East" having a large impact. But I must admit my studies have concentrated on the US Empire and Imperialism in general in which various myths such as the Aryan Invasion factor. Said's "Orientalism" and Bernal's "Black Athena" have definately influenced my thinking about the verity of the West's version of Asian Historiography.
When I taught, one of the questions I asked students in relation to human migrations and likely sources of agriculture and settled society's beginnings: If Asia is so backward and youthful compared to the West, why is it far more populous?
What I understand from the article I cited was that the authors were challenging what they saw as revisionism to fit a certain ideology. Anyway, I mentioned that article only to show that there is this controversy. I am somewhat familiar with this controversy (as I have this thing for controversies and conspiracies...), and I was following the heated debate on the PBS website after they aired some documentaries on India.
As to your question why Asia is more populous, my own theory is that Asian people did not migrate and spread out as much - nowhere near the levels of European migration (some of which was forced) into North & South Americas, Australia and parts of Africa. Asian migrations were mostly limited to nearby lands. Even though religion and culture spread out of India (Buddhism, Hinduism - to South East Asia and East Asia), this was not accompanied by the migration of people so much. Don't know why. The climate in most parts of Asia is also suited to grow crops all year round, and agriculture developed there at a very early stage - I don't have theories on why or how. This allowed greater reliance on farming and less on hunting/gathering, and allowed settled communities and eventually civilizations to thrive. And I have another theory - that epidemics were probably less frequent - I'm going out on a limb here - perhaps due to their diet. Tropical diseases and diseases like small pox were still present, but perhaps not so severe as to wipe out a big chunk of the population. I guess I should stop here - being an armchair linguist/anthropologist is my hobby, but that's where it should stay :)
Your answer contains the basis for what I consider the correct answer--Asia was settled first and complex societies/cultures arose there first; Europe actually lagged far behind. As for migrations from Asia, Asians settled the Western Hemisphere and Oceana (I'm defining Asia as the lands east of the Urals to the north and east of the Black Sea's western extent in the south); yet, many European ethnic groups migrated west from Asia--the Germanic peoples being the most numerous and interesting. I could type for hours, but my time is currently short. Given your interest in linguistics and anthropology, along with "Eden in the East," I would suggest "Noah's Flood." At least those books take one's mind away from the trials of the present.
Best!
I wonder how long it will be before there really is chaos. Oh, I'll make a guess. How about after May of this year. Uranus goes into Aries. Uranus rules chaos, revolution and we all know what Aries stands for. The U.S. will have this combo happening in it's 4th house. This is the homeland-domestic issues. Uranus is in a sign for 7 years... get ready.
When I grew up in the 1950/60s, I loved watching science-fiction movies. A common theme to these movies was that a global threat would present itself, and overnight, an international meeting of policy makers and scientists would occur, and a solution to the problem found DURING THE SAME MEETING.
Alas, today, policy makers have been meeting on the global problem of climate change for 20 years, and still nothing happens.
Sigh.