Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Copenhagen Conference on the Brink of Collapse as World Leaders Arrive at Talks
Talks to save the planet from catastrophic climate change were on the brink of collapse this morning as officials from the three main blocs - rich countries, major developing economies, and small island states - said they had given up on getting a substantive deal.
Lars Lokke Rasmussen, left, prime minister of Denmark, with Rajendra Pachauri, centre, chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and the UN climate chief Yvo de Boer. (Photograph: Anja Niedringhaus/AP) Even
as 115 world leaders began arriving to put their personal imprint on a
deal, the summit hosts were admitting they had failed to broker an
agreement.
The chaotic end game to the negotiations could mean that world leaders only have time to hastily paper over a face-saving agreement.
In a story headlined Denmark gives up, the influential Berlingske newspaper quoted a senior source in the host delegation, saying the failure was a monumental disappointment to the Danes.
"During the whole process, the problem is that this is a huge puzzle where all the pieces had to fall in place at the same time. But to do that, the countries had to make a serious effort and they have been unwilling to do so," the source was quoted as saying.
However, Denmark could try to revive the process by formally introducing a version of a negotiating draft from last week and imposing it on the summit. However, the draft - the Danish text leaked to the Guardian last week - has infuriated developing countries, and its re-entry could trigger chaos.
Other countries were also working to resuscitate the talks. A UK official said: "We are not giving up. The irony is that on substance we have had considerable movement in the last few days. For the talks to be in this state simply over matters of procedure rather than substance is immensely disappointing."
The sense of collapse was compounded further still when China - the world's biggest emitter and an essential component to any deal - said it saw no possibility of achieving a detailed accord to tackle global warming.
An official from another country told Reuters the Chinese had instead suggested issuing "a short political declaration of some sort", but it was not clear what that declaration would say.
China was still committed to the negotiations, the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu told reporters in Beijing today. Jiang said: "China hopes the Copenhagen meeting is successful, and has always taken a constructive attitude."
In the final nail in Copenhagen's coffin, the Maldives president, Mohamed Nasheed, whose island country could be almost entirely swallowed up by rising seas, said he was staring at failure.
"We will not have a draft. There is no draft. We are facing a situation where it is possible that nothing comes out of COP15 unless the heads of state decide to come up with it themselves," Nasheed told an NGO meeting last night. "I am very nervous and very disappointed. During the course of the last two years, negotiators were supposed to have come up with a document for us to see and consider tomorrow, but they have failed."
Dino Patti Djalal, an Indonesian presidential spokesman said: "Obviously we are considered at the prospect of negotiations are having some kind of a deadlock. We are thinking it's going to need the leaders pushing very hard until the last minute." He said uncertainty about emissions cuts from the major developed countries plus America's insistence on a monitoring regime for emissions cuts by rapidly emerging economies had led to the impasse.
The Indian environment minister Jairam Ramesh said, "We have lost a day and a half. I don't want to point fingers. We must get talks back on a sold substantive track by the time the world leaders meet tomorrow...I am hopeful that negotiations can resume."
The sense of despair from the Danes comes after nine days of working negotiations which has seen increasing acrimony and distrust between rich countries and poor countries, and industrialised countries and the rapidly emerging economies.
African countries and small island states which are on the frontline of climate change accused Denmark of trying to railroad them into a deal without getting strong enough commitments to act on climate change from the developed world. "The Europeans have broken the African solidarity," said a negotiator from Mauritania. "If these talks produce a good deal for Africa that would be a big surprise for me. There is enormous pressure on the heads of state of Africa. They are very weak - especially in financial terms. Any African country that depends on French or British aid will not be able to raise its voice to object."
- Posted in
45 Comments so far
Show AllHuman societies have forgotten how to reach consensus. Nationalism is inherently competitive. The whole Copenhagen debacle has gotten off on the wrong foot. Scientists need to come together, forget their national identities, and reach a consensus about how to handle global warming and other environmental issues. This body of scientists should be given the power to impose their decisions on every nation, and those that refuse should be shunned by all countries that agree to cooperate.
One of the things the world has to face is that Africa and Island nations are desperate. They are suffering the effects of global warming, and have done little if anything to cause it. Instead of acting selfishly in the interest of their nation-states, the developed (and developing) world should show a little compassion and since of fair play towards Africa and the Island nations.
Emerging Nations like China and India should be figuring out how to develop without adding to pollution and global warming, instead of pointing the finger at developed nations and insisting on being allowed to make the same mistakes.
Behind everything in the world today is the effects of greedy corporations. Before anything can be done about global warming human society has to deal with this. It will be brutal, as those with immense wealth and power won't give it up without a fight. I'd say identify the wealthiest one thousand or two thousand or whatever people on the planet, investigate them, and get out the guillotines. Corporations should be very limited and regulated. They are like wild tigers, and have to be watched, otherwise they will eat us.
We are all in the same boat, on the same little planet. Sooner or later everyone will be starving and running out of water and competing for resources, not just the undeveloped countries. Didn't the images of earth from the moon teach us anything?
First things first, for the purpose of this world is to show the harm in
the driving force that causes people to self-actualize, to be all they
can be and to take all they can take. The self-delusion that they
deserve more, which gives them a reverse-conscience, a guilt-free
conscience as they take all their corrupt capitalist laws will allow
For we are all given a different level of intelligence as a test, to see
if we pass our excess down to those less intelligent where it belongs.
This theory of intelligence levels seems misguided and Eurocentric.
The Yananami could have lived indefinitely in the South American jungles.
The Sioux could have done the same on the American Plains.
Same for the Australian Bushmen and many others.
All found sustainable lifestyles to fit their respective environments.
Who is more intelligent?
People that were/are content to live in harmony with Nature or those whose lifestyles are destroying the delicate balance on this wondrous blue ball?
Perhaps I'm not understanding your definition of intelligence.
If you will explain, then I'll listen.
Yeah. I'm waiting for an explanation too.
'One of the things the world has to face is that Africa and Island nations are desperate. They are suffering the effects of global warming, and have done little if anything to cause it. Instead of acting selfishly in the interest of their nation-states, the developed (and developing) world should show a little compassion and since of fair play towards Africa and the Island nations.
Emerging Nations like China and India should be figuring out how to develop without adding to pollution and global warming, instead of pointing the finger at developed nations and insisting on being allowed to make the same mistakes.'
The problem is, these countries (China, India, the nations of Africa, the threatened Island Nations) have had nothing but suffering from being dominated by Western Colonialism and Imperialism for the past 150 years. Which is precisely the same amount of time that we have been bingeing on oil. Ours is the only model they have left to show them. Any native sense of moderation and low impact prosperity is as dead as the dodo.
Western lifestyle is exported ruthlessly by our media. It shows wastrel consumption, conspicuous material wealth, and a lifestyle that is straight out of Hollywood. The West has been pushing it in peoples faces for more than sixty years!
The major difficulty is that people now expect that the entire planet should live a Western lifestyle. But we can't sustain it. We...simply...*DO*...*NOT*...*HAVE*...*THE*...*RESOURCES!*
The world is already staring down multiple resource shortages, all of materials and elements critical to the continuation of Western Technological Society as we understand it, oil being the most important.
Thirty years ago, the Club Of Rome did a study and found that then, if humanity as whole were to adopt the Western lifestyle, we would need four, almost five more Earth type planets to survive for just over a century. And despite the rosy optimism of the pie-in-the-sky technology fans, and data of possibly viable planets that are lightyears and trillions of kilometers distant, we simply have no method of reaching them.
Instead of having the entire population reach Western standards of living, instead we should be agreeing on a minimum acceptable standard for a healthy, low impact lifestyle in harmony with the local area, and start planning now for massive displacement from nations that will soon be affected by rising oceans.
In essence, I am saying we in the West must accept living in a Second or even Third World manner, with no more long distance vacations, no more cars, mostly vegetarian diet, and fewer material goods.
"Ours is the only model they have left to show them."
Then they will invent their own model. The Chinese and Japanese are pretty damned smart, just not in ways that we may understand. They will adapt and they'll do so more quickly than we will in the west.
Even in our region, Europe will adjust its living standards more successfully than the US.
Someone's going to help Africa. It just won't be us.
q
"The Chinese and Japanese are pretty damned smart, just not in ways that we may understand."
And why can't "we" understand the ways in which "they" are smart? Could it be because "we" (our media) aren't listening to anything that "they" (anyone but Western elites) are saying?
Makes sense to me George, but the capitalist tigers are running the refuge.
Some americans scream as the tigers clamp down on their legs. Others sit munching popcorn as their neighbors are consumed, like wildebeests that return to grazing after the days quarry is down. Others still, blame the victims for being too slow and getting caught, never realizing they will become meals in the marrow. I guess the question is, Who will be first to grab the tiger's tail?
Look around you. And you call me insane? Would you rather be ruled by corporate capitalists or scientists? Inso far as global warming is concerned, I'll take the scientists every time.
Agreed.
MASTER-SLAVE AGREEMENT
Royal Dutch Shell is indicative of the corporate rich that have
ruled Denmark as a capitalist dictatorship for over 500 years.
For with a colonizer mentality did they herd and brutalize protesters,
bar most NGO’s from the conference and seek to force a master-slave
agreement upon all the nations it once occupied.
After Barry Obama (US), Stevie Harper (Canada), Gordy Brown (UK) and other heads of the Western Elite fail to come to any substantial agreement that would save millions of lives in the future, they can do their little photo-op shuffle, smile vacantly at the camera and say they did their best given how difficult it is to come to a consensus that there even is a problem.
Both Obama and Harper said weeks before the Nopenhagen Summit that they would kill any deal that would cut back on the wastrel Western lifestyle. They have held true to that promise.
Years from now they can write their memoirs and wax poetic about how they tried. oh, how they tried, if only the people had listened them about how to save the world by clinging to the lifeboats built by the Elite.
You can almost hear them brag that they did their best to re-arrange the deck chairs on the Titanic... "There was this ship, an iceberg, chain of command, decisions, some lifeboats, yadda yadda, lives were lost, great tragedy, blame to go around, yadda yadda. We came through it just fine... Just fine. Good times."
"An official from another country told Reuters the Chinese had instead suggested issuing "a short political declaration of some sort", but it was not clear what that declaration would say."
"So Slorry, Prease rearn to swim"
"...the Chinese had instead suggested issuing "a short political declaration of some sort", but it was not clear what that declaration would say."
"for sale cheap, chinese-made lead life jackets"
THE UNITED NATIONS IS THE DEVIL'S WORKSHOP.
The only way the "Developing Countries" (the G 77) will have a voice internationally is if they get together to form their own organization of unity.
The United Nations is bankrupt. It has been infected from its inception because it was set up UNdemocratically. As long as any small group of members can control by veto power, the U.N. will only benefit that small group.
The so-called G 77 should quit the U.N. and stop supporting its corrupt system. Until they do, we are ALL doomed to capitalist domination and enslavement.
Yes, and does that not establish the root cause of all corruption,
the self-absorbed majority with a delusion that they deserve
to be rich?
IF NO GLOBAL WARMING ---- WHAT THEN?
Take mass transit for example, the thing global coolers desire most of all,
be the climate heating up or cooling down this has to be the most tender
loving care we could possibly do for mother earth.
And all the other climate improvements those global coolers have on the table,
surely all are of the highest priority whether the North Pole is freezing up or
about to be vapǫrized by the sun.
How many people have really seen or thought much about the images of the earth from the moon. Most People are slow learners, the smart rich no that and take huge advantage, the not so rich but smart know that and can usually do little to move the world. What can we do about it? Probably not much, but we can die trying. Hopefully with a smile on our face and a positive attitude. Love before guilt, make haste before the waste. Anyway thanks for good thoughts that eminate from this site.
Galenwainwright says, “we in the West must accept... mostly vegetarian diet”
A most admirable goal, one that I and many others adhere to, but one you do
more harm then good in proclaiming to the world. First things first, show
people the root cause of all their problems and get them walking in the light.
First things first, for the purpose of this world is to show the harm in
the driving force that causes people to self-actualize, to be all they
can be and to take all they can take. The self-delusion that they
deserve more, which gives them a reverse-conscience, a guilt-free
conscience as they take all their corrupt capitalist laws will allow
For we are all given a different level of intelligence as a test,
to see if we pass our excess down to those less intelligent where it belongs.
POST BELOW ---- PURE CONFUSION
By a paid actor no doubt.
Not okay for those who feel the purpose of this world is to
prove the good in it, as they see irreversible harm being done
to the environment that could make extinct the human race.
But okay for those who believe the purpose of this world is
to prove the harm in it. For when things cannot possibly get any
worse, their vision is that all things will turn toward the good.
The best thing that could ever happen to this world is the extiction of the human race.
Buck says, “Perhaps I'm not understanding your definition of intelligence.”
Intelligence is the speed at which the brain rationalizes a problem
and takes corrective action.
For ambition is in direct proportion to visible signs of progress,
as it is the smarts to do it which produces signs of progress
in the doing of it, and only then does one have the ambition
needed to continue on.
For ability to kìll is in direct proportion to intelligence.
For ability to compete in a competition based economy is in
direct proportion to intelligence.
Surely, speed of thought like sęx appeal passes from father to sun.
I guess there are different ways to look at things.
Wouldn't it be more prudent to go slower and avoid the problem?
Ambition and what progress reflects on intelligence?
Your sickest explanation is that the ability to kill measures one's intelligence. Ouch!
Then it's ability to compete in a competition based society.
Have you not heard of George W. Bush or Paris Hilton?
Sorry about your dad.
later dude
Buck says, “Who is more intelligent?”
We have a brain that functions by habit, learning more advanced habits as it
gains knowledge. It is controlled by emotions, unless of course we have wisdom.
For wisdom is to grasp the reality that this day of life is more then any man
deserves, for the highest priority in life is a quest to achieve what a man
perceives he deserves.
For the vast majority feel they deserve more, and with much pleasure do they
take all they can take, actually feel guilty if ever they miss an opportunity
to take all they can take.
It has been terribly sad to witness the roaring crash approach.
My life since around age 9, i have been watching this approach, trying to do my best to help turn this train onto a different track, or slow it down, as we hurtle ever faster toward the granite mountainside.
Even now, even now, even now, as the species are dying by the thousands and the ice is melting everywhere and the acidified oceans are killing the teeming reefs and the islands are literally vanishing... even now, the greedy colonizing monsters are shoveling "More coal! More coal!" into the train's engine, speeding faster, faster toward the granite wall...
As the passengers stir, and imagine what it would take to stop this train, while the crew sit in the dining car eating sumptuous meals, having very interesting discussions about whether the speed of the train will bring us to the wall in two weeks, or in four weeks, or whether certain minor adjustments in the rate of pouring coal will avert catastrophe, or whether the wall really exists at all or is perhaps just a conspiracy theory of those who want to stop the train for their own evil purposes, or whether hurtling the train into the wall will really prove beneficial to the people on the train because of certain benefits created when huge masses of metal come near giant slabs of stone... as the passengers stir...
And even now, as the time for action has passed, and the train is close enough to the wall that the passengers can hear the roar of the engine echoing off the granite, filling our ears with portents of the near future, still the crew sits, and eats, and talks, and sends orders to shovel more coal into the hot engine...
"... no more long distance vacations, no more cars, mostly vegetarian diet, and fewer material goods."
This is how i have lived my life, through these decades of pleading with the passengers to seize control of the engine, pleading with the crew to open their hearts, plodding along in my own life wearing found clothes, eating simple food, never driving or flying, working and dancing and making music and making compost and growing gardens and writing words and watching the mountainside looming and drawing ever nearer, ever faster, the roar of the engine echoing off the mountianside, roaring in my ears... the passengers stirring... learning to let go...
"Copenhagen Conference on the Brink of Collapse as World Leaders Arrive "
12 scariest words in the english language
"We are from the government, and we are here to help you"
Looks like Seattle all over again. The people outside should be the people inside, because most of their motives are altruistic and for all the people. Most of the people inside have ulterior motives and like Naomi Klein stated: Hillarys' offer was nothing short of blackmail!
How will giving our money to Africa (which is totally corrupt and would feed uselessly into the pockets of the wabenzi) help anything except to impoverish us and thereby allow us less money to take useful action ourselves: like insulation, changing to more economical cars, moving nearer work, buying gardening tools - and radically improving our infrastructure. etc. etc.?
Those making the most noise in Copenhagen have done the least thinking - and know nothing of Africa.
Whose is "our" money? You mean the 1.2 Trillion given to banks? It's not my money. But more importantly, the issue is about infrastructure and moving away from an oil economy globally. That won't happen unless the global South gets about $800 Billion a year for 10 years. That is a small price to pay.
But more importantly, addressing the economic system itself is the key. The philosophy of infinite growth on a finite planet is over.
World leaders! How pathetic that's what these whores are called. And if they're the leaders, the world's in more trouble than we think.
The following is excerpted (pages 24-25) from the book "How the Rich are Destroying the Earth," by Herve Kempf, environmental editor of Le Monde, originally published in 2007 by Editions du Seuil; reprinted in the U.S. by Chelsea Green Publishing.
"If nothing happens even as we enter an economic crisis of historic seriousness, it’s because the powerful of the world want it that way.
"This observation is brutal ... (b)ut that must be one’s point of departure; otherwise the exact diagnoses of Al Gore or Lester Brown, not to mention Nicolas Hulot, Jean-Marie Pelt, Hubert Reeves, and others who invariably conclude with an appeal to “humanity,” are nothing but lukewarm sentimental water.
"Naïve comrades, there are evil men on Earth.
"If one wants to be an ecologist, one must stop being a half-wit.
"Ecology totally overlooks social issues, that is, the relationships of power and wealth at the heart of societies.
"But symmetrically, the left overlooks ecology; the left, meaning those for whom the social question—justice—remains primary. Dressed in what remains of the rags of Marxism, the left incessantly repaints the chromos of the nineteenth century or sinks into the “realism” of “tempered (free-market) liberalism.” Thus, the social crisis—marked by the deepening of inequality and by the dissolution of connections, both private and collective, of solidarity—that seems to overlie the ecological crisis serves de facto to brush it aside from our field of vision.
"Consequently we find simpleminded ecologists—ecology with no social conscience—alongside a left stuck in the old days—social conscience with no ecology; and above them all the happy capitalists: 'Speak, good people, and, above all, remain divided.'
"We must get out of this space and understand that the ecological crisis and the social crisis are two faces of the same disaster. And this disaster is implemented by a system of power that has no other objective than to maintain the privileges of the ruling classes."
This is why Copenhagen will amount to nothing, and why we the people must have no other objective than to destroy the privileges of the ruling classes.
Sounds like the author of that article and yourself have never heard or studied the analysis behind Social Ecology:
http://www.social-ecology.org/
I recommend reading Murray Bookchin's work on the subject
Until recent times, the general criticism was valid though - the ecological movement and the left did not consciously try to find common ground. There were also instances where labor groups were co-opted by corporate interests against ecological protection by citing jobs. BTW, "How the Rich Are Destroying the Earth" by Hervé Kempf is not an article - it's a book, although a small one - under 150 pages. The title of this book is clear - and it's important to understand and remember this concept. And that's exactly what's reflected in the outcome at Copenhagen.
I think the general criticism is still quite valid. What has changed recently? (I'm not trying to challenge you; it's a sincere question.)
Maybe not much has changed, except that there are a few people who have recognized the necessity of thinking about these issues as not separate. I've heard someone talk of the coming together of the 'green' and the 'red', though, frankly, the use of the term 'red' scares me a bit. Or the reference to any '-ism' other than as a loosely used term to talk about ideas.
Here's my own thinking: it's good that people are talking about the left and the environmental groups coming together - because a lot of their goals are similar, though historically their approaches might have been different. Maybe their approaches were different because they were influenced by one ideology or the other. In addition, I notice that more people are pursuing or thinking about or curious about some kind of a spiritual awakening - *at the individual level*, not as an organized religion or a belief system. I think that's a good thing. What spiritual awakening does to a person is to bring about a recognition that we are connected in some way, even while fighting our own battles externally. The very fact that people across the world are able to connect with one another - not based on some ideology or belief, but a common concern about the future of humanity - indicates that there's something new here. I just hope that the momentum continues.
I hope you're right. Thanks for the thoughtful reply.
Thanks for the link. I am familiar with Bookchin, and have little to no use for him (for reasons elaborated in Warwick Fox's "Toward a Transpersonal Ecology: Developing New Foundations for Environmentalism"--I'll summarize if you're interested, but this thread is getting old and I don't know that you'll be back).
I didn't editorialize on Kempf's words because I wanted to offer them up as they were--felt his main point was right on: things are as they are because the wealthy like it just the way it is.
I re-read my response below, and it comes off as harsh. Sorry. I DO have some issues with Bookchin's approach, especially given his vitriolic attacks on "deep ecology" in the late 80s. Since that was 20 years ago, I guess I can let it go now!
>>>...the summit hosts were admitting they had failed to broker an agreement....a senior source in the host delegation, saying the failure was a monumental disappointment to the Danes.
The chief negotiator for Denmark, Thomas Becker (the man said to be instrumental in getting this conference to be hosted in Copenhagen) resigned just two months ago - in October. The rumors are that the Danish government wanted to water down the targets even back then. The Danish government is most likely not above blame.
I am 100% in favor of holding governments responsible and speaking truth to power.
That said, our we holding ourselves responsible as well and doing our part to reduce consumption or are we content to blame the "world leaders" for letting us down once again.
"In terms of immediacy of action...reducing meat consumption clearly is the most attractive opportunity." - Dr.Rajendra Packauri, UN chair on climate change
Nothing is going to change unless we make the effort to reduce consumption and our contribution to supply and demand.
Farmed animals contribute 65% nitrous oxide equalling 296 times GWP of C02.
Livestock is responsible for 40% more to climate change than all transport (cars, trucks, planes, ships, trains) combined.
Are we environmentalists letting go of the defensiveness and old habits and doing our part and passing up on the cheeseburger?
What makes us progressive is that we are fluid and recognize what needs to change and then make the change based on critical thinking and the facts.
And after all is said and done...alas! wasn't this to be expected? There is no such thing as a "level playing field" when it comes to the rich, thieving nations defending their rights to go on exploiting and pillaging the Third World. There is no such thing as "transparency" as the rich, thieving nations don't want us to see what is being cooked behind closed doors. Democracy dies behind closed doors and so does COP 15. It is time to start BOYCOTTING all those, nations or corporations, who engineered the collapse of Copenhagen. The boycotts must be world-wide and for as long as it takes - not these "one day" jobs that make our opressors laugh.