Filtered By: Topstories
News

Copenhagen Accord favors US in climate negotiations


They all agreed that the planet is in peril, and along with it the fate of humanity, but in the end, the world’s leaders could not commit themselves to concrete action on how to prevent potential global catastrophe resulting from climate change.

Last week, 119 heads of state and government including controversial rulers such as Zimbabwe strongman Robert Mugabe and President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela gave speeches at the much-hyped climate summit in Copenhagen, along with the likes of German Prime Minister Angela Merkel and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown. After all the talk, however, what was supposed to be a landmark meeting ended with a whimper, or more precisely, a three-page document that many observers have described as a weak political agreement. Worse, the conference refused to adopt the Copenhagen Accord, which many members of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) criticized for disregarding transparent and democratic procedures. Developing countries were particularly incensed that the pact was announced during a late-night news conference, and had come out of daylong meetings by a small number of rich countries and the big four emerging economies – China, India, Brazil, and South Africa. As a result, the two-week conference ended with a decision to simply “take note" of the political agreement, which did not go through the consensus-style UN process and had pushed aside prepared texts from years of climate negotiations. Despite the controversy, however, UN climate chief Yvo de Boer praised the pact as “an impressive accord" and the final press release from the secretariat did not mention the decision taken on the deal. Still, in his final press conference, de Boer highlighted the weaknesses of the accord. Visibly tired from the late-night wrangling and lengthy closed-door meetings, he emphasized that the agreement was “not an accord that is legally binding, not an accord that at this moment pins down industrialized countries to individual targets, not an accord that at this stage specifies what major developing countries will do, not an accord that at this stage makes it clear how the 30 billion that it talks about is to be divided up amongst individual contributors." (See highlights of accord below) He characterized the agreement as “a letter of intent" that needs to be spelled out in legal terms, “and that means we have a lot of work to do on the road to Mexico." The annual climate change talks will be held next year in Mexico City. Prior to the meeting in Copenhagen, Mr. de Boer had outlined four key points that needed to come out of the conference: clear targets on emission reductions from industrialized countries, goals from major developing countries such as China and India on how much they would limit the growth of their emissions, financing for mitigation and adaptation in developing countries, and the mechanism for managing the funds. “If Copenhagen can deliver on those four points I’d be happy," de Boer had said. Using those pre-conference goals as benchmark, it is not surprising that many sectors have branded the meeting as a failure. "I don’t know the protocols"
HIGHLIGHTS OF COPENHAGEN ACCORD
    CLIMATE SCIENCE
  • Recognizes that the increase in global temperature from human activities should be kept below 2 degrees to prevent dangerous impacts from climate change
  • Calls for an assessment by 2015 that will consider the target of 1.5 degrees Celsius EMISSION REDUCTIONS
  • Commits industrialized countries to implement quantified emissions targets by 2020, to be listed in the accord before 31 January 2010
  • Requires developing countries to communicate their efforts to limit greenhouse gas emissions every two years, starting with a list of voluntary pledges by 31 January 2010; these actions are subject to domestic measurement and verification, with provisions for international consultations and analysis
  • Requires developing countries seeking international support to record their mitigation action in a registry along with relevant technology, finance and capacity building assistance from industrialized nations, subject to international measurement FINANCING
  • Establishes the Copenhagen Green Climate Fund as the financial mechanism for support activities to developing countries
  • Commits developed countries to provide new and additional resources amounting to 30 billion dollars for the period 2010 – 2012 with priority for adaptation funding given to the least developed countries, small island states and Africa
  • Sets a goal of $100 billion in funding by 2020 which will come “from a wide variety of sources" to address the needs of developing countries in combating climate change Reference: UNFCCC Text of Copenhagen Accord Text of UNFCCC Text of Kyoto Protocol
At least one world leader emerged victorious from the last day of the conference though. Just before leaving Copenhagen, US President Barack Obama held a news conference with selected media where he announced the climate deal. Journalists who watched the briefing from the monitors at the press center scrambled to get copies of the agreement, which the information desk did not have as it was not an official document at the time. Obama was particularly pleased that he managed to get major developing countries such as China and India to agree to limit the growth of their emissions, a contentious issue that has long been advocated by the US and other industrialized countries. “The challenge here was that for a lot of countries, particularly those emerging countries that are still in different stages of development, this is going to be the first time in which even voluntarily they offered up mitigation targets," he said. “It was important to essentially get that shift in orientation moving, that’s what I think will end up being most significant about this accord." The agreement could very well lead to the death of the Kyoto Protocol, the only binding climate treaty that requires industrialized countries to reduce their carbon emissions. The US has refused to sign the treaty, arguing that it would be detrimental to their economy and pointing out that China has overtaken it as the world’s top polluter. Developing countries often point to the provision in the UNFCCC, the parent treaty of the Kyoto Protocol, that rich countries have a greater responsibility for much of the greenhouse gases accumulated in the atmosphere since the dawn of the Industrial Age. The US signed the UNFCCC, but with the Copenhagen Accord, the issue of historical responsibility has shifted to present-day levels of economic growth and carbon emissions. In his plenary speech in Copenhagen, Mr. Obama effectively reframed the climate debate by pushing for “the principle of common but differentiated responses and respective capabilities" in addressing the problem, instead of affirming the “common but differentiated responsibilities" among countries as stated in the UNFCCC text. While Mr. Obama’s performance in Copenhagen could win him brownie points at home and improve the chances for US Senate approval of climate legislation, he may have lost fans at the international level, especially after he showed ignorance of UN procedures. When asked who would sign the agreement after he had left, Mr. Obama said: “You know, it raises an interesting question as to whether technically there’s actually a signature -- since, as I said, it’s not a legally binding agreement, I don’t know what the protocols are. But I do think that this is a commitment that we, as the United States, are making and that we think is very important." In the end, it was left to Danish Prime Minister Lars Rasmussen to obtain approval from the UN conference for the agreement. Equally clueless about negotiating procedures, however, Mr. Rasmussen faced severe criticism for favoring the 20 or so countries that negotiated the Copenhagen Accord and failing to give courtesy to other delegations. Copenhagen Discord The dismal conclusion dampened the festive preparations for the climate summit in Copenhagen, which saw the largest gathering of world leaders in UN history. “What mainly happened is the complete breakdown of trust among Parties. To build it up again, under the shadow of an Accord that would be pursued at all costs, is immensely challenging," said Bernarditas Muller, one of the Philippines’ principal negotiators in the climate talks until she was excluded from the country’s delegation this year. In a reflection paper entitled “Copenhagen Discord, " Muller assailed what she called divide and rule" tactics in the run-up to the climate summit, principally from the US and European Union delegations, which resulted in some developing countries ultimately backing the controversial accord. “What really occurred in Copenhagen was the culmination of all the frustrations of many developing countries in the total lack of transparency and inclusiveness in the process," said Muller, who serves as the coordinator of the G-77 bloc of developing countries. She was attached to Sudan, which currently heads the G-77, during the summit. Climate change adviser Antonio Hill of the aid agency Oxfam summed up the sentiments of many civil society groups in the conference: “The Copenhagen Accord is hugely disappointing but it also reveals how the traditional approach to international negotiations, based on brinkmanship and national self-interest, is both unfit for pursuing our common destiny and downright dangerous. Archbishop Desmond Tutu, who met with many of the key decision makers in Copenhagen and is also a Nobel Peace Prize laureate like Obama, also expressed regret at the outcome of the climate talks. “The failure of the political process in Copenhagen to achieve a fair, adequate and binding deal on climate change is profoundly distressing," said the South African prelate. “A higher purpose was at stake but our political leaders have proven themselves unable to rise to the challenge." – GMANews.TV
LOADING CONTENT