United Nations Climate Change Conference Dec 7th- 18th 2009
On the 19th of Dec. 2009, delegates from 192 countries passed a motion at the United Nations Copenhagen Climate Conference bringing the Summit back from the brink of collapse. The motion simply notes a loose deal
aimed at limiting temperature rises to less than 2C, with out any specific binding emissions targets. Delegates agreed to ‘recognize’ the US-brokered deal, which was arranged between five key nations including China, India and Brazil but failed to secure unanimous support. The Copenhagen summit could not conclude negotiations under the Bali Action Plan (BAP) and the Kyoto Protocol, the treaty that is currently in operation to deal with climate change issues. It is now proposed to be completed by the end of 2010.
Initially a row between China and the US, the world’s two largest emitters, effectively paralyzed the summit. The fundamental dispute between the two was over the monitoring of states’ progress on curbing their emissions. While the US pressed for strong independent verification and monitoring of each country’s progress China opposed the notion as infringement of its national sovereignty.
After eight draft texts Barack Obama and Wen Jiabao, the Chinese premier, were the principle participants to broker the political agreement. The proposed deal quotes ‘recognition’ of the scientific case for limiting emissions to 2C annually, a less ambitious target than the previous 1.5C limit, which was a disappointment for African and other vulnerable countries including low-lying and island nations, fearful of being engulfed by rising sea levels.
Meanwhile the earlier 2050 goal of reducing global CO2 emissions by 80% was also dropped. Scientists say even a 2C limit will require cutting greenhouse gases by at least 50 % by 2050. However a legally-binding target for developed countries was removed in favor of allowing rich countries to set their own targets, with which they will come forward by February. Developing countries have, for the first time, been asked to "take action" to cut emissions.
The US-BASIC deal was brokered following meetings between the US President Barack Obama, the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, Brazilian President Lula Da Silva and South African President Jacob Zuma, aiming to provide $30bn a year for poor countries to adapt to climate change from next year to 2012, and $100bn a year by 2020.The agreement also set up a forestry deal
aiming to significantly reduce deforestation in return for cash
.
The pact lacking unanimity was primarily opposed by Cuba, Sudan, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Venezuela, Tuvalu and Costa Rica. However Japan, Norway, African nations with the European Union nations came out in support of the proposal. Earlier this week however the European Union sought to shift much of the blame for the outcome of the summit on the US and China, the world's two largest emitters of carbon dioxide. Sweden, the current EU presidency holder, described the Copenhagen agreement as a disaster for the environment, while German Chancellor Angela Merkel was slightly more optimistic, commenting that the accord was something that "now needed to be built upon". UN Secretary Genral Ban Ki-moon also noted that the pact was an important beginning with ‘an immediate operational effect’.
In the aftermath of the conference developed and developing nations have traded blows over who was to blame for the weak deal. On a pessimistic world front one analyst notes that Britain accused China of hijacking the proceedings, while Brazil attacked the perceived lack of commitment shown by Washington. In turn, India harangued Australia for being an "ayatollah of the single track," and small island nations like Tuvalu accused rich nations of blatant disregard for their plight.
Critics warn the ‘Copenhagen Accord’ is full of holes and lacks a timetable. Meanwhile environment agencies have branded the deal ‘toothless and a failure’. The pact has no reference to a legally binding agreement which also lacks any detailed framework on controversial carbon markets. Emerging nations are now to monitor their own efforts on climate change and report to the UN
every two years.
The Proponents of the deal argue that it would at least get the money flowing with the $10bn (£6bn) a year "fast start" funding for the poorest and most vulnerable countries to protect themselves from the impact of drought and floods caused by global warming over the
next three years. By 2020 the world is to "mobilize" $100bn a year through a "Copenhagen Green Climate Fund", which will also help poorer countries halt deforestation and switch to greener technology. The accord has also kept the Kyoto Protocol sacrosanct as future negotiations will be based on its basic principles. It binds the developed countries to take deeper cuts in carbon emissions and provide financial and technical support to the developing countries to enable them to reduce their carbon emissions.
A
meeting of all UN members' climate change negotiators is planned to be held in Bonn in June, and their annual conference is due in Mexico in December. The TIME Magazine notes that, “if Copenhagen was tough, Mexico City (COP16 in December 2010) will be a lot more so, because there, countries will be tasked with filling in details sketched in the Copenhagen Accord” – but, as the toughness of the negotiations only demonstrate that climate policy has moved beyond hot air into economic reality – “It’s going to get harder, and that’s a good thing”.
Discussion Questions:
On the 19th of Dec. 2009, delegates from 192 countries passed a motion at the United Nations Copenhagen Climate Conference bringing the Summit back from the brink of collapse. The motion simply notes a loose deal
aimed at limiting temperature rises to less than 2C, with out any specific binding emissions targets. Delegates agreed to ‘recognize’ the US-brokered deal, which was arranged between five key nations including China, India and Brazil but failed to secure unanimous support. The Copenhagen summit could not conclude negotiations under the Bali Action Plan (BAP) and the Kyoto Protocol, the treaty that is currently in operation to deal with climate change issues. It is now proposed to be completed by the end of 2010.Initially a row between China and the US, the world’s two largest emitters, effectively paralyzed the summit. The fundamental dispute between the two was over the monitoring of states’ progress on curbing their emissions. While the US pressed for strong independent verification and monitoring of each country’s progress China opposed the notion as infringement of its national sovereignty.
After eight draft texts Barack Obama and Wen Jiabao, the Chinese premier, were the principle participants to broker the political agreement. The proposed deal quotes ‘recognition’ of the scientific case for limiting emissions to 2C annually, a less ambitious target than the previous 1.5C limit, which was a disappointment for African and other vulnerable countries including low-lying and island nations, fearful of being engulfed by rising sea levels.Meanwhile the earlier 2050 goal of reducing global CO2 emissions by 80% was also dropped. Scientists say even a 2C limit will require cutting greenhouse gases by at least 50 % by 2050. However a legally-binding target for developed countries was removed in favor of allowing rich countries to set their own targets, with which they will come forward by February. Developing countries have, for the first time, been asked to "take action" to cut emissions.
The US-BASIC deal was brokered following meetings between the US President Barack Obama, the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, Brazilian President Lula Da Silva and South African President Jacob Zuma, aiming to provide $30bn a year for poor countries to adapt to climate change from next year to 2012, and $100bn a year by 2020.The agreement also set up a forestry deal
aiming to significantly reduce deforestation in return for cash
.The pact lacking unanimity was primarily opposed by Cuba, Sudan, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Venezuela, Tuvalu and Costa Rica. However Japan, Norway, African nations with the European Union nations came out in support of the proposal. Earlier this week however the European Union sought to shift much of the blame for the outcome of the summit on the US and China, the world's two largest emitters of carbon dioxide. Sweden, the current EU presidency holder, described the Copenhagen agreement as a disaster for the environment, while German Chancellor Angela Merkel was slightly more optimistic, commenting that the accord was something that "now needed to be built upon". UN Secretary Genral Ban Ki-moon also noted that the pact was an important beginning with ‘an immediate operational effect’.
In the aftermath of the conference developed and developing nations have traded blows over who was to blame for the weak deal. On a pessimistic world front one analyst notes that Britain accused China of hijacking the proceedings, while Brazil attacked the perceived lack of commitment shown by Washington. In turn, India harangued Australia for being an "ayatollah of the single track," and small island nations like Tuvalu accused rich nations of blatant disregard for their plight.
Critics warn the ‘Copenhagen Accord’ is full of holes and lacks a timetable. Meanwhile environment agencies have branded the deal ‘toothless and a failure’. The pact has no reference to a legally binding agreement which also lacks any detailed framework on controversial carbon markets. Emerging nations are now to monitor their own efforts on climate change and report to the UN
every two years.The Proponents of the deal argue that it would at least get the money flowing with the $10bn (£6bn) a year "fast start" funding for the poorest and most vulnerable countries to protect themselves from the impact of drought and floods caused by global warming over the
next three years. By 2020 the world is to "mobilize" $100bn a year through a "Copenhagen Green Climate Fund", which will also help poorer countries halt deforestation and switch to greener technology. The accord has also kept the Kyoto Protocol sacrosanct as future negotiations will be based on its basic principles. It binds the developed countries to take deeper cuts in carbon emissions and provide financial and technical support to the developing countries to enable them to reduce their carbon emissions.A
meeting of all UN members' climate change negotiators is planned to be held in Bonn in June, and their annual conference is due in Mexico in December. The TIME Magazine notes that, “if Copenhagen was tough, Mexico City (COP16 in December 2010) will be a lot more so, because there, countries will be tasked with filling in details sketched in the Copenhagen Accord” – but, as the toughness of the negotiations only demonstrate that climate policy has moved beyond hot air into economic reality – “It’s going to get harder, and that’s a good thing”.
Discussion Questions:o Do you think the Copenhagen summit fell short of its potential?
o In your opinion does the global public opinion hold strength to push for more credible commitments in the coming year?
Bibliography/Related Links:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6841472/Copenhagen-climate-summit-meaningful-agreement-reached.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6845929/Climate-summit-ends-in-chaos-and-toothless-deal.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6846033/Copenhagen-Accord-Questions-and-Answers.html
http://en.cop15.dk/
http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1929071_1929070_1949054,00.html http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/copenhagen
http://www.erantis.com/events/denmark/copenhagen/climate-conference-2009/index.htm
http://www.commodityonline.com/news/The-achievement-of-Copenhagen-Summit-24453-3-1.html
http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/current-affairs/copenhagen-summit-failure-or-progress_433250.html
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2010-01/03/content_12749126.htm
http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=210432
http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/world-mainmenu-26/europe-mainmenu-35/2676-copenhagen-report-obama-fails-to-qseal-the-dealq
http://newsblaze.com/story/20100101164752nava.nb/topstory.html
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/2009/1218/Copenhagen-summit-Major-powers-broker-compromise-voluntary-climate-pact
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/copenhagen/article6961422.ece
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,5054166,00.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6951874.ece
________________________________________________________http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6841472/Copenhagen-climate-summit-meaningful-agreement-reached.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6845929/Climate-summit-ends-in-chaos-and-toothless-deal.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6846033/Copenhagen-Accord-Questions-and-Answers.html
http://en.cop15.dk/
http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1929071_1929070_1949054,00.html http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/copenhagen
http://www.erantis.com/events/denmark/copenhagen/climate-conference-2009/index.htm
http://www.commodityonline.com/news/The-achievement-of-Copenhagen-Summit-24453-3-1.html
http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/current-affairs/copenhagen-summit-failure-or-progress_433250.html
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2010-01/03/content_12749126.htm
http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=210432
http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/world-mainmenu-26/europe-mainmenu-35/2676-copenhagen-report-obama-fails-to-qseal-the-dealq
http://newsblaze.com/story/20100101164752nava.nb/topstory.html
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/2009/1218/Copenhagen-summit-Major-powers-broker-compromise-voluntary-climate-pact
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/copenhagen/article6961422.ece
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,5054166,00.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6951874.ece
Business and Politics in the Muslim World (BPM)refers to the project entitled, "Globalized Business and Politics: A View from the Muslim World.' The blog development project has been undertaken and jointly developed by the Gilani Research Foundation and BPM as a free resource and social discussion tool.
Please Preview your comments before posting.
