The curtain falls on Copenhagen
IT struck when the finale of the 12-day Congregation attended by 192 members of the UN's Framework Convention on Climate Change was enacted in Danish capital on December 18 with the highest ever stake in the brief history of environmentalism. The leaders of the nations of the world were indeed in Copenhagen to roll back the legacy of hunger, disease, drought, flood, storm and rising seas -- all due mainly to mankind's unwitting impact on the weather system.
The leaders had to decide the fate of the planet against the backdrop of many grim predictions, including one received from Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research in Britain. It says "if fossil fuel use continues at the present pace, the planet will be an average of 4°C warmer by 2060." This, however, contrasted with the prediction of the IPCC published in 2007 that we might see 4°C at the most by 2100. Yet, the world's major governments agreed in principle that the warming must never be allowed to exceed 2°C because beyond that we risk runaway warming, and it had been thought that 450 ppm would let us stop there.
In the meantime, UN's Copenhagen climate talks were in shambles after the developing countries reacted furiously to the leaked documents that showed that world leaders would finally be asked to sign an agreement that would hand more power to rich countries and sideline the UN's role in all future climate change negotiations. The document also set unequal limits on per capita carbon emission for developed and developing countries in 2050; meaning people in rich countries would be allowed to emit almost twice as much under the proposals.
There were also other glitches. The so-called Danish text -- a secret draft agreement worked on by a group of individuals -- had been confided to a handful of countries. The agreement leaked to the media was a departure from the principles of the Kyoto Protocol. According to it, the rich nations which already emitted the bulk of the CO2 should make firm and internationally binding commitments to reduce green house gases (GHG) while poorer nations should not compelled to be under such obligation.
The draft also handed effective control of climate change finance to the World Bank. It would abandon Kyoto -- the only legally binding treaty the world now has on emission reduction -- and would control any money given to help poor countries' adaptation to climate change. The leaked document was described by diplomats as a very dangerous one for developing countries. Fundamentally, it was a reworking of the UN balance of obligation. It was to be superimposed without much deliberation. A confidential analysis of the text by developing countries caused deep anxiety for them over its details.
It was known to be designed to force developing countries to agree to specific emission cuts, creating a new category of developing countries called the "most vulnerable," dividing the poor countries further and weakening the UN's role in handing climate finance. It did not allow poor countries to emit more than 1.44 tonnes of carbon per person by 2050 while allowing rich countries to emit 2.67 tonnes. Developing countries that saw the text were understood to be furious that such gross disparity was being promoted by rich countries without their knowledge and without discussion or deliberation.
The rich countries, including the US, deliberately put the climate debate on hold, knowing fully that success at Copenhagen rested on the willingness of all countries to accept binding reductions in carbon emissions. Alarmed at the American delay in passing legislation in the Congress, Angela Merkel, the German leader, criticised the US for dragging its feet by saying that a climate deal within the year was comparable in importance to the tearing down of the Berlin wall 20 years ago.
She said: "We need readiness of all countries to accept internationally binding obligations" in signing a climate deal. She further said: "In December the world will look to us: the Europeans and Americans. I am convinced once we show ourselves ready to adopt binding agreements, we will also be able to persuade China and India." Referring to Merkel's concerns, President Obama paid tribute to her by saying: "Chancellor Market has been an extraordinary leader on the issue of climate change."
On the eve of the opening ceremony of the Conference on December 7, Yvo de Boer, the UN's top climate official, called the climate change summit a "turning point" in the international response to the carbon monster. He said that the climate targets announced in the run-up to the summit were boosting the chances of success even though they fall short of what scientists say is needed to avoid a dangerous level of warning.
In his words: "Never in the 17 years of climate negotiations have so many different nations made so many firm pledges together -- it's simply unprecedented. And they must set up a financial safety-net for the countries least to blame for global warming but most exposed to its wrath, and provide them with technology to avoid becoming big polluters in turn."
"It's a very crucial test of the UN system," said Rajendra Pachauri, head of the UN Panel of Climate Scientists. It's an extremely important aspect of the ability of the nation states to get together and manage the global commons."
The road to Copenhagen had also been long and arduous. Beginning two years ago at UN FCCC talks in Indonesia the countries, following a bitter wrangling, set there eyes on a global pact that would take effect from 2013, after pledges expire under the Kyoto Protocol, the world's first emission curbing accord. Bit-by bit, hopes that Copenhagen would yield a soup to nuts treaty have vanished. The lesser objective now is a strong outline accord, one that can be fleshed out by further negotiations in 2010.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments