Saturday 30 january 2010 6 30 /01 /Jan /2010 23:00
A fiasco, a summit for nothing, a total nonsense, the height of irresponsibility, etc. A lot of very pessimistic reports have been published here and there about the conclusions of COP15. This included not only highly committed environmentalists or alter-globalization activists, but also participants in the conference, from directly threatened poor territories to rich European countries.

It took me more than one month to seize what happened there, as it is true that the result is, frankly speaking, very far away from the expectations initially set... But hey! we knew that gathering 193 countries and asking them to reach a unanimous agreement within 12 days on one of the most complex matters of the moment would be tough. And still, some progress was made.
Anyway, I have decided to see the glass half full rather than half empty. So let's see what occurred during the last days of the conference, and the final status.

Because of the various moves on the past days, starting from day 8 the atmosphere was becoming more and more confused, tinged with suspicion and intransigence among the parties. Draft after draft, no common position could be found. The failure of the summit was deemed possible, and getting more and more likely. Still, several countries tried hard to find an acceptable compromise, without success. Then came day 11, when 27 countries and Ban Ki-Moon decided to gather and take the discussions out of the dead lock. It took them the whole night to come up with a text in the early hours of day 12. Victory!

Well, not quite... It seems that China and India fought up with the USA, that France claims the text is empty, the rich are not considering the imminent danger threatening the poor Southern states... Then arrives Obama, and with him the last hope to save Copenhagen. But it soon turns up to be overestimated. He multiplies bilateral talks, makes leaders of poorer and even European countries angry and disappointed, aggressively pushing for more responsibility in his proposals... One last discussion with PRC's Premier, Wen Jiabao, and it's done.

Day 8 ends up at 11pm, after a speech from Obama and a series of press conferences. The final text, instead of being a binding agreement as originally expected, is a mere political declaration. Moreover, it is yet to be ratified by all UN members... which is not likely to happen because of the too low level of commitment many blame it for. The content of this 2.5 pages document, can be summarized as follows.

  1. The countries should cooperate to limit, in the long term, global warming to a maximum of +2°C. This objective is in line with the expectations set before the summit.
  2. It is agreed that an effort is necessary to reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases on a global scale, based on various initiatives like promoting REDD-plus (a mechanism to prevent deforestation) or using the markets to trade emission rights. Compared to the initial goal, no more figures are mentioned to determine the level of reductions to reach, namely -50% in total and -80% for rich countries.
  3. The amount of subsidies for the poor countries, to help them fight reducing their emissions and adapt climate change, is set to $30 billion by 2012 and $100 billion by 2020. This objective also is in line with the expectations set before the summit.
  4. No other 'commitments' raised ahead of the conference are mentioned in the document. The Appendix section of the text even shows blank tables, where targets and mitigation actions should have been stated.

Most important, this document has no real legal existence, as it is neither a Treaty nor a signed Agreement. No official commitment is attached to it. It is less obvious in its name, the 'Copenhagen Accord', than in the introductory sentence to it: "The Conference of the Parties, Takes note of the Copenhagen Accord of 18 December 2009."

What are the reasons for this lower-than-expected result? Well, they are both easy and hard to identify. On the one hand, one can blame the complexity of the agreement process, as all 193 countries have to ratify it unanimously. More than that, the very different levels of climate threat are one other reason. But most likely, domestic considerations are responsible of this relative failure, not to mention the absolute lack of power of Europe to have its voice heard. Namely, the USA would not commit to reduce their emissions at the expected level, for fear this would endanger their economic leadership as a super-power. Likewise, China would not accept that an external institution controlled their effort and achievements in greenhouse gas limitations. The country would also not commit to reducing their emissions without a financial help from rich countries, which was deemed unacceptable by the USA.

Anyway, although almost everything is yet to be done, hope is still allowed. At the diplomatic level, the next step will take place in Mexico, in December 2010. Until then, it is our uppermost duty to continue working this issue around, at every possible scale - individual, household, company, government, NGO and global.









By Alex - アレックス
Enter comment - View the 0 comments
Monday 14 december 2009 1 14 /12 /Dec /2009 05:41
Highs and lows of global negotiations... I love that!
So what should we take away from the past 5 days of talks at COP? Well, we can consider 3 main times in the world symphony.
  1. On Day 3 Tuvalu, a group of small islands of the Pacific Ocean in the frontline of territories endangered by climate change, called for a suspension of the debates. This came after the Danish draft proposal was uncovered (see Episode 2), this suspension aiming at convicing both the 'rich' and 'emerging' groups of countries to use the Kyoto Protocol as a base for the final agreement.
  2. The next day, the draft text (the "Copenhagen accord (draft)" available here) gathering the requirements from the 'poor' and 'emerging' countries was made public. Developed in secret by the Basic group (consisting of Brasil, South Africa, Soudan, India and China) and claimed to have "leaked", it contains both strong demands as well as reasonable compromises. Based on the Kyoto Protocol and suggesting a prolongation of its application beyond its theoretical end in 2012, it asks for the commitment of the USA (who never ratified the Protocol) to the same level of effort. But it goes even further, claiming that the limitation of global warming cannot be achieved without the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from the 'emerging' countries themselves; this condition was not present in the Kyoto Protocol, targeting the group of 'rich' countries only. Finally, the text describes the actions to be taken by 'emerging' countries, in line with guidelines given by  the international community,  but refuses any organization to control their application or results. The creation of a Fund to finance adapation means for climate-wise 'poor' countries is requested as well, filled by 'rich' countries and for which a specific control organism should be put in place, on top of the existing Global Environment Facility.
  3. On Day 5, a draft text summarizing the various proposals so far was shared with the 191 delegations present at COP. In further included the EU commitment to finance around 30% (7.2 million EUR over 3 years) of the fund aimed at the 'poor' and 'emerging' countries to reduce their emissions and adapt to alimate change. This was seen as too "short-term" oriented by developing countries, with Europe claiming they cannot forecast longer-term aid until other industrialized countries have not made their own proposals. On the other hand, the USA entered the discussion by arguing that they expected 'emerging countries' to involve more concretely in emission reduction. Moreover, they claimed having no intention to provide fast-growing China with a financial aid.
Things are getting more and more interesting as big players are starting to fight about serious money...
By Alex - アレックス
Enter comment - View the 1 comments
Wednesday 9 december 2009 3 09 /12 /Dec /2009 14:32
What to say about the second day of the UN Conference on Climate Change held in Copenhagen?
Well... nothing much, except the comeback of the so-called 'Climategate'. In brief, this is the name of a scandal revealed late November and consisting in the diffusion over the web of stolen emails exchanged between experts of a British research center on climate. The contents of these messages? Supposedly some proofs that, in particular, these experts tried to purposedly hide the less-than-expected temperature increase (or even reduction). This will make 'climate-sceptic' experts get extra momentum, at least for a while.
There was indeed another happening of the same kind on Day 2. A draft of the Danish proposal leaked before its completion, which could threaten the chances of an agreement with developing countries. The reason is that the Kyoto Protocol is simply never refered to in  this document, as if it never existed. Furthermore, beside an immediate financial aid of 10 billion USD per year until 2012 to help weaker countries to adapt to climate change, nothing is clearly defined after that date.
This is just too much for 'poor' and 'emerging' countries to accept.
By Alex - アレックス
Enter comment - View the 0 comments
Tuesday 8 december 2009 2 08 /12 /Dec /2009 00:05
One of the most important summits for the future of our planet  - and our lives! - has just kicked off in the capital city of Denmark (official site http://en.cop15.dk/). What is at stake there? Basically, all UN members gather during 12 days to discuss the measures to adopt to limit to 2°C the global temperature increase by 2050. Why 2°C? Because this is generally understood as the minimum figure achievable with reasonable effort.
Three groups of countries are to be considered.
  1. First of all, the 'rich', who have been contributing to the global warming for years now and obviously have the most to fear from such a conference. Includes North America, Western Europe, Japan.
  2. At the other end of the scale, the 'poor', who have had almost no impact on CO2 emissions and global temperature increase; they also comprise almost all the countries likely to be hit the most by the consequences of global warming (drought, flood, sea level increase, etc.). Includes most African and ASEAN countries.
  3. In between, the 'emerging', a group of countries showing low greenhouse gas emissions in the past but whose recent economic growth has turned them into big contributors-to-be. Includes Bresil, India, China, South Korea.
Generally, the debates at Copenhagen will consist in determining the means to put in place (cap and trade, clean technologies, etc.), the objectives to reach for each country by 2050 and the corresponding financing (several thousand billions of US dollars, or Euros, or whatever currency). More concretely, this means how much the rich will commit to reduce their emissions by 2050 (ideally 80% decrease compared to 1990, to reach a global reduction target of 50%), as well as the effort (money, technology transfer, etc.) they will provide the poor with for them to adapt and reduce their own impact. Another big issue is how the emerging will be required to take part in the process.
Tough job...

So, to start with, here is the video shown at the Conference opening today. Frightening...



Moreover, you can also follow the debates taking place 24/7 live at CCC on the OneClimate homepage here:
http://www.oneclimate.net/

Finally, just to conclude today's introductory report, two good news have arrived from the US.
First, President Barack Obama will attend COP on the closing day, instead of somewhere in between as he initially planned to (taking the opportunity of Peace Nobel price ceremony). This will give even more meaning to the commitment of the USA, who are the biggest contributors in the world in terms of greenhouse gases, to meet the requirements agreed upon during the debates.

Moreover, the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) formally declared CO2 and five other greenhouse gases to be pollutants that endanger public health and welfare. This declaration will engage a process leading to the regulation of the gases for the first time in the United States, despite the permanent opposition shown in the past by the country to sign any treaty that endanger its economic supremacy.


I think things are starting not that bad...
By Alex - アレックス
Enter comment - View the 1 comments
Tuesday 17 november 2009 2 17 /11 /Nov /2009 20:12
During his visit to Asian countries this month, President Obama paid an official visit to Japan's Emperor Akihito and his wife, Michiko. On this occasion, he bowed to the Emperor, which was interpreted by some, particularly on the conservative side, as a humiliation and a sign of submission of the USA towards the sovereign of a foreign state.
The video is available below and on YouTube.



I believe this bow is to be seen as a sign of respect, which is totally different from submission. To me this illustrates once again the deep care Obama shows of his counterpart.
To be frank, one would be correct to argue that he is not behaving well, in the sense that he shouldn't have shaken Akihito's hand as a salute, as this is not the done thing in Japan; strictly speaking he should have bowed only.
Anyway, this proves his class and how he can smartly adapt, whatever the slight mistakes he may make.
By Alex - アレックス
Enter comment - View the 7 comments

Overview

  • : Yet Another Blog
  • : Weblogs World France USA Japan Society
  • : General discussion about France/Europe, Japan/Asia, the USA, the World and their relations. Less serious topics are welcome as well! フランス・欧州、日本・アジア、アメリカ、世界とこれらの関係に関する一般的なディスカッション。もっとかるい話しでも歓迎!
  • Back to homepage
  • Contact

Profile

  • Alex - アレックス
  • Male
  • Paris Tokyo
  • USA France Travel Europe Japan
  • Male, early 30's, born&raised in France, lived&worked 5 years in Japan, currently working for a Japanese company in Paris. 男性、30歳前半、フランス生まれ・育ち、日本滞在・勤務歴5年、現在日系企業のパリ支社勤め

Syndication

  • RSS feed

Recommend

Create your blog for free on over-blog.com - Contact - Terms of Service - Earn Royalties - Report abuse