December, 11 2008, 03:28am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Laura Rusu +1 202-459-3739 / +48 728 637 769 / lrusu@oxfamamerica.org
Lucy Brinicombe +44 (0)7786 110054 / +48 728 637 768 / lbrinicombe@oxfam.org.uk
Angela Corbalan + 32 473 56 22 60 / +48 728 637 767 / angela.corbalan@oxfaminternational.org
UN Climate Talks: Too little but not too late
Possible Progress in Poznan Hinges on Adaptation Finance
POZNAN, Poland
As government Ministers
arrive today at climate change talks in Poznan, Oxfam called on them to
kick start stalled negotiations to secure a deal by Copenhagen in 2009.
"The UN negotiations towards emissions reductions beyond 2012
have proceeded at a glacial pace," said Phil Bloomer, senior executive
with Oxfam. "Poznan was meant to be a staging post on the way to an
ambitious deal that would be achieved in Copenhagen, but instead, it is
like a polluting truck stalled in the truck stop."
Far from the
rapid progress that was needed after last year's conference in Bali,
little has been achieved. On the big issues - a vision for the future,
targets, financing, clean technology - the negotiating text has not
progressed.
"This is collective complacency on a major scale,"
said Bloomer. "But it is not too late for Ministers to make crucial
decisions that would move the negotiations forward."
Ministers
have been asked by the Executive Secretary Yvo de Boer to address six
questions at a round table on Thursday. The right answers to those
questions - answers based on science and reflecting equity - would move
the negotiations forward. It is not too late to salvage an outcome from
Poznan. Oxfam's suggested answers are included here.
Oxfam
called for urgent action especially on the issue of adaptation -
helping developing countries protect themselves from climate impacts
and adapt to them. The elements are almost agreed to - starting up the
Adaptation Fund, finalizing a work program, and, the crucial element,
ensuring enough funding to meet the urgent needs. Negotiators are stuck
on this last issue, but without it, there is little that can be done to
save lives and prevent suffering.
"Ministers could leave Poznan
with an agreement on adaptation, an issue that is crucial to millions
of people suffering from climate change impacts," said Bloomer. "But
sensible proposals on funding adaptation have so far been rejected by
negotiators from the EU and most other rich countries. This is
unacceptable. Instead of ducking the finance issue, Ministers arriving
in Poznan must reach a decision to fund adaptation in developing
countries to take effect as soon as the ink is dry in Copenhagen."
Notes to editors
Oxfam's suggested answers for the six questions posed to ministers in Poznan:
Government
ministers arriving in Poznan have been asked to discuss six questions
in a round table. Here is a "cheat sheet" for the ministers with the
(simplified) questions and Oxfam's suggested answers.
1. What cuts in greenhouse gas emissions are needed?
We
need to listen to the scientific evidence and keep global temperature
from rising to avoid climate chaos. Rich countries must agree to cut
emissions by at least 25-40% by 2020 in order to stay below 2degC
warming. There would be catastrophic impacts above that, with almost
two billion people likely to be affected by water shortages, global
agriculture undermined, and hunger likely to kill up to three million
more people every year.
2. What can developing countries do to contribute?
Developing
countries can do a lot, and in fact many of them already are. But rich
countries have caused this problem and they must deliver on their
promises of funding and clean technology to help developing countries
do more. Under any objective framework of fairness, the lion's share of
emissions reductions and finance and technology obligations fall on
industrialised countries for at least the next three decades.
3. How can vulnerable countries prepare for climate change and adapt to it?
People
have always adapted to natural variability in the climate, but human
induced climate change will create unprecedented climate stress for
many of the world's most vulnerable communities. Early action must be
taken to reduce their vulnerabilities and build their resilience to
these new and heightened risks. We know a lot about how to prepare for
natural disasters and build community resilience. It is time to
deliver. Poznan must agree to start up the new Adaptation Fund and now
deliver new money, especially for the Least Developed Countries. Now,
not later.
4. How can we make clean low-carbon technologies available to developing countries?
Developing
countries have already made interesting proposals to address this, but
rich nations have not responded. Companies need to be involved, but
governments must put in place strong regulation to ensure that there
are real benefits in terms of clean and sustainable development.
5. How can we generate the funding needed to make this happen?
Rich
nations need to make commitments in Poznan to kick start this process.
They agree here to start immediately after Copenhagen 2009 with at
least a 2% sharing of proceeds from emissions trading to support the
Adaptation Fund. Then funding needs to scale up from there.
6. What kinds of funding mechanisms do we need?
The
new Adaptation Fund has a good balance in its governance system and
rich countries should fund it by instituting a polluter pays regime
that delivers dependable flows of financing. This precedent should
inform development of a comprehensive arrangement for a financial
mechanism under the Convention. We can develop new sources of funding
by using already existing mechanisms, such as auctioning emissions that
rich countries are allowed or levying airline and shipping fuels.
World leaders were able to find trillions of dollars for the financial
crisis; the amounts being asked for to combat climate change are a
fraction of that. If we don't act on climate change, we will soon not
need a financial system.
Oxfam International is a global movement of people who are fighting inequality to end poverty and injustice. We are working across regions in about 70 countries, with thousands of partners, and allies, supporting communities to build better lives for themselves, grow resilience and protect lives and livelihoods also in times of crisis.
LATEST NEWS
​State of Emergency Declared After Cargo Ship Destroys Baltimore Bridge
Maryland Congressman Jamie Raskin said he was "deeply concerned for the safety and well-being of everyone affected by the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore."
Mar 26, 2024
This is a developing story... Please check back for possible updates...
A state of emergency was declared in Maryland early Tuesday morning after a large cargo ship slammed into the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore leading to its total collapse and sending a still unverified number of vehicles and people into the Patapsco River.
As the Baltimore Sunreports:
In a Tuesday morning news conference, just a few hours after the incident, Baltimore Fire Department Chief James Wallace said authorities are "still very much in an active search and rescue posture" noting they are searching for "upwards of seven individuals" and that sonar has detected the presence of vehicles in the water. There is no indication that the event was intentional, Wallace said.
"This is a tragedy that you could never imagine … It looked like something out of an action movie," Mayor Brandon Scott said.
The terrifying footage of the bridge's collapse—which CNN correspondent Omar Jimenez commented was "almost unbelievable" to watch—is circulating widely on news channels and social media:
This video is almost unbelievable. The Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore literally collapsed this morning after it was struck by this large ship. pic.twitter.com/rYuy4U2r7H
— Omar Jimenez (@OmarJimenez) March 26, 2024
U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said Tuesday that he had spoken with Mayor Scott and well as Maryland Governor Wes Moore and was helping to coordinate federal assistance.
"Rescue efforts remain underway and drivers in the Baltimore area should follow local responder guidance on detours and response," said Buttigieg.
Moore said in a statement he had declared a state of emergency and that work was underway to "quickly deploy federal resources" to the area.
"We are thankful for the brave men and women who are carrying out efforts to rescue those involved and pray for everyone's safety," said Moore. "We will remain in close contact with federal, state, and local entities that are carrying out rescue efforts as we continue to assess and respond to this tragedy."
Kevin Cartwright of the Baltimore Fire Department told CNN that the number of missing people may be higher than reported in other outlets. "Unfortunately," said Cartwright, "we understand that there were up to 20 individuals who may be in the Patapsco River right now as well as multiple vehicles."
Early reporting indicated that no crew members aboard the container ship, which sails under a Singapore flag, were injured or missing. A local harbor pilot was also said to be on board at the time of the crash.
"Deeply concerned for the safety and well-being of everyone affected by the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore," said Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) following the accident. "I'm profoundly thankful to first responders on the scene and will track rescue efforts by local, state, and federal authorities."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Grave 'Threat to Journalists' Remains as UK Court Delays Assange Extradition Ruling
"The Biden administration should take the opportunity to drop this dangerous case once and for all," said the executive director of the Freedom of the Press Foundation.
Mar 26, 2024
The United Kingdom's High Court ruled Tuesday that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange cannot immediately be extradited to the United States and gave the Biden administration three weeks to provide "assurances" that the publisher's First Amendment rights will be protected and that he won't face the death penalty.
If the U.S. does not provide the requested assurances, Assange will be allowed to pursue a limited appeal of his extradition. Should the U.S. submit assurances by the April 16 deadline, a hearing will be held on May 20 to determine whether they are "satisfactory."
Assange, whose health has deteriorated badly during his five years in a high-security London jail, faces 17 counts of violating the Espionage Act and a possible 175-year prison sentence in the U.S. for publishing classified information—a common journalistic practice. WikiLeaks disclosures exposed grave U.S. and U.K. war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Press freedom and human rights groups say the extradition of Assange to the U.S. would set a dangerous precedent and pose a dire threat to journalism everywhere.
Trevor Timm, executive director of the Freedom of the Press Foundation, said in a statement Tuesday that "we are glad Julian Assange is not getting extradited today."
"But this legal battle is far from over, and the threat to journalists and the news media from the Espionage Act charges against Assange remains," said Timm. "Assange's conviction in American courts would create a dangerous precedent that the U.S. government can and will use against reporters of all stripes who expose its wrongdoing or embarrass it. The Biden administration should take the opportunity to drop this dangerous case once and for all."
"It's long past time for the U.S. Justice Department to abandon the Espionage Act charges and resolve this case."
The U.S., which has been aggressively pursuing Assange's extradition for years, previously provided the U.K. government with assurances that Assange would not be held at a supermax prison that's notorious for its inhumane treatment of inmates.
Human rights groups have said such assurances from the U.S. government are "inherently unreliable" and should not be taken seriously by British authorities.
"While the U.S. has allegedly assured the U.K. that it will not violate Assange's rights, we know from past cases that such 'guarantees' are deeply flawed—and the diplomatic assurances so far in the Assange case are riddled with loopholes," noted Simon Crowther, legal adviser at Amnesty International.
"The U.S. must stop its politically motivated prosecution of Assange, which puts Assange and media freedom at risk worldwide," Crowther said Tuesday. "In trying to imprison him, the U.S. is sending an unambiguous warning to publishers and journalists everywhere that they too could be targeted and that it is not safe for them to receive and publish classified material—even if doing so is in the public interest."
Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, echoed that message, saying in a statement that "prosecuting Assange for the publication of classified information would have profound implications for press freedom, because publishing classified information is what journalists and news organizations often need to do in order to expose wrongdoing by government."
"It's long past time for the U.S. Justice Department to abandon the Espionage Act charges and resolve this case," said Jaffer.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Sanders Rips 'Absurd' US Claim That Israel Is Not Violating International Law
"The State Department's position makes a mockery of U.S. law and assurances provided to Congress," said Sen. Bernie Sanders.
Mar 26, 2024
Sen. Bernie Sanders on Monday said the U.S. State Department's determination that Israel is not violating international law with its assault on the Gaza Strip is "absurd on its face," pointing to the mass death, destruction, and starvation that Israeli forces have inflicted on the territory's population over the past six months.
"Thirty-two thousand Palestinians in Gaza have been killed and almost 75,000 injured, two-thirds of whom are women and children," Sanders (I-Vt.) said in a statement. "Some 60% of the housing units have been damaged or destroyed, and almost all medical facilities have been made inoperable. Today, hundreds of thousands of Palestinian children are facing starvation because [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu won't let in sufficient humanitarian aid, while thousands of trucks are waiting to get into Gaza."
"The State Department's position," said Sanders, "makes a mockery of U.S. law and assurances provided to Congress."
The senator's statement came after State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller told reporters during a press briefing earlier Monday that the Biden administration has not found Israel "to be in violation of international humanitarian law, either when it comes to the conduct of the war or when it comes to the provision of humanitarian assistance."
Miller was responding to a question about assurances the administration has received from the Israeli government that its use of American weaponry has complied with international law and that it has permitted U.S. humanitarian aid to enter Gaza, where the entire population is facing acute hunger.
Under a new Biden administration policy known as NSM-20, recipients of American military aid are required to provide the U.S. government with "credible and reliable" written assurances that they are using such assistance "in a manner consistent with all applicable international and domestic law and policy."
Late last week, a group of U.S. senators—including Sanders—warned the Biden administration that deeming Israeli assurances credible would "be inconsistent with the letter and spirit of NSM-20" and "establish an unacceptable precedent" for the application of the policy "in other situations around the world."
"Until Biden is ready to impose real policy consequences on Netanyahu's government, the famine will continue."
It is a violation of U.S. law to continue sending military assistance to a country that is obstructing the delivery of American humanitarian aid. Last month, far-right Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich blocked a U.S.-funded flour shipment from entering the Gaza Strip, and Israeli forces have repeatedly fired on convoys attempting to deliver aid to desperate Gazans.
Prominent human rights groups have been calling on the U.S. to impose an arms embargo on Israel for months, pointing to documented examples of the Israeli military using American weaponry to commit atrocities in Gaza.
But the Biden administration has refused to even apply concrete restrictions on American military aid. Over the weekend, U.S. President Joe Biden signed into law a measure that approves $3.8 billion in unconditional military assistance for the Israeli government and imposes a one-year ban on funding for the primary humanitarian aid organization in Gaza.
Jeremy Konyndyk, the president of Refugees International and a former USAID official, said Monday that Israel's assurances to the U.S. are "not remotely credible" and argued the Biden administration is undermining efforts to combat the worsening humanitarian crisis in Gaza by accepting the Israeli government's claims.
The U.S., he said, is "talking a big game about fighting the famine that its bombs and diplomatic cover have helped create." Resorting to "gimmicky" efforts such as airdrops and temporary ports while a U.S. ally obstructs humanitarian aid "is not how you fight a famine," Konyndyk argued.
"Fundamentally Biden must choose: between continuing to enable Netanyahu, or ending the famine. There's no way to split the difference," said Konyndyk. "Until Biden is ready to impose real policy consequences on Netanyahu's government, the famine will continue."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular