Advanced Search

The story appears on

Page A6

January 8, 2010

GET this page in PDF

Free for subscribers

View shopping cart

Related News

Home » Opinion » Foreign Views

Copenhagen process second-best milestone in climate talks

By Pradeep S. Mehta | January 8, 2010, Friday | Print Edition

MUCH has been written about the recently concluded Copenhagen Conference on Climate Change that will continue to reverberate.

Copenhagen was not supposed to be the be all and end all on environmental matters. It was a part of a process and even if it disappointed many, including this writer, it remains a significant second-best milestone, which will determine the future of climate change negotiations.

The debate has certainly shifted from "poverty is the biggest polluter" to "justice for the poor victims of pollution by others."

The drama will resume in the next summit in Mexico City in December 2010 and all the global pow wows before that. Our political leaders may again sing in chorus, as they have been doing on the Doha Round of negotiations by the WTO members: "Let's do something."

And in this high-voltage drama we often forget that economic, social and political challenges are powerful enough to take care of many environmental concerns that the countries are facing today.

Countries will not have much choice but to take unilateral mitigation and adaptation measures rather than wait for action through global consensus. Our farmers and other common folk have been doing this in their own indigenous ways for centuries and will continue to refine and innovate.

We can discuss whether Copenhagen was an utter failure or a muted success till the cows come home. Writing obituaries of legally binding multilateral treaties serves no purpose. Instead, we should think seriously about the process of arriving at such treaties.

A process involving 193 countries to arrive at a political consensus at the highest level through negotiations over two weeks has little chance of success. This is especially so when our political leaders are lacking in capability as well as intention to reconcile global challenges while, at the same time, satisfying their domestic constituencies.

Negotiations have to be a continuous process with a clear road map in mind along with ready and implementable alternative plans in order to address its ups and downs.

In this respect, it is good to note that a proposal was made in Copenhagen to hold permanent negotiations on climate change in Geneva. This idea received support from many developing countries, as it would allow them to access the negotiating resources of their permanent missions in that city.

The other big multilateral negotiation, the Doha Round on trade, is suffering from the Copenhagen syndrome and the root cause is the same.

One may argue that if it happened in the early 90s when the Uruguay Round (the round that launched the WTO) was successfully concluded through consensus, then why not now.

The world has changed. The days of "forced consensus" are over. It is no longer possible for the US and the European Union to have a deal between them and then sell that to others.

Giving the devil its due, let us take lessons from the positive developments in Copenhagen.

Without compromising their basic positions and those of others who were looking at them for leadership, the BASIC (Brazil, South Africa, India and China) group of emerging economies was able to get the US back to the high table of serious negotiations.

Both should be complimented as they have shown the world that they are politically mature to make deals.

This initiative should be nurtured as a future model to get interests of others on board and balance them properly while addressing the challenges of making the benefits of global public goods such as climate and international trade accessible to people at large, bearing in mind the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities.

Consensus should be developed brick by brick rather than though a sudden act of imposition of will.

(The author is the secretary general of CUTS International. Bipul Chatterji of CUTS contributed to this article. Shanghai Daily condensed the article.)

Foreign Views


 

Copyright © 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.

沪公网安备 31010602000204号

Email this to your friend