NGOs raise concerns about the COP Presidency’s efforts to create a parallel ‘unofficial’ negotiating process – in the margins of the UN

NGOs raise concerns about the COP Presidency’s efforts to create a parallel ‘unofficial’ negotiating process – in the margins of the UN

Talking points – Green Room process from Copenhagen, December 14, 2009

Last week, NGOs raised concerns about the COP Presidency’s efforts to create a parallel ‘unofficial’ negotiating process – in the margins of the UN. NGO’s called the COP Presidency to serve in an unbiased manner to ensure that Copenhagen delivers a fair and ambitious outcome

This weekend the COP Presidency hosted a meeting (known as the Green Room) outside the Bella Center – the official UN meeting point – and in the middle of the UN negotiation process. The UN process includes all parties to the UNFCCC, this process excluded most.

Around 40 representatives of a selection of parties, to discuss mitigation and finance issues. Several parties were excluded from these discussions, despite the fact that the COP Presidency has stated that it is committed to continuing negotiations in a transparent and open way.

This week, several European capitals will be hosting closed meetings with representatives from different country groupings – ahead of the formal UN Leaders meeting.

The leaked Danish text last week puts in evidence that when negotiations take place behind closed doors and with only a handpicked selection of countries the ambition and fairness of the outcome is severely compromised.

It is clear that the UN process is stalled as a result of the lack of ambition of developed countries (cuts and finance) – there’s no reason to believe that these blockages will be surmounted outside the UN process.

The process being taken forward by the COP Presidency further provides evidence of attempts to divide the group of G77+China into different blocks of countries.

Such efforts are closely related to the substance of what is on the negotiating table – vulnerable countries are being talked into accepting an agreement which allows developed countries off the hook in terms of their emission cuts but offers the poorest countries a tempting short term finance package for adaptation.

Nnimmo Bassey (Friends of the Earth at COP15, December 14, 2009) defends African countries' possible walkout

Nnimmo Bassey, Friends of the Earth at COP15, December 14, 2009

greendignews, December 14, 2009

(more info)

Want to Subscribe?
Sign In or Sign Up now!

Statement from Friends of the Earth environmentalist Nnimmo Bassey on why the G77 may walk out. COP15 negotiators he says are trying to collapse the 2 tracks of the conference, wiping out the one l...  

Statement from Friends of the Earth environmentalist Nnimmo Bassey on why the G77 may walk out. COP15 negotiators he says are trying to collapse the 2 tracks of the conference, wiping out the one legal framework (Kyoto Protocol) that Africa has to work with.

Link to YouTube video:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_gn98Uvw3w 

Copenhagen climate summit in chaos after the G77 countries walk out of negotiations en masse today

Developing nations walk out of climate talks

by news.com.au, Copenhagen, December 14, 2009


THE Copenhagen climate summit is in chaos after poor countries walked out of negotiations en masse today.

The G77, a group which represents 130 developing countries, walked out because it is concerned the existing Kyoto protocol will be abandoned.

Australia's Climate Change Minister Penny Wong confirmed that organisers were trying to fix the problem and coax back the developing world.

Many countries at the UN climate summit want a brand new treaty to tackle climate change, but the developing world wants the Kyoto protocol to continue as well.

The protocol forces rich countries to reduce or limit their greenhouse gas emissions.

Senator Wong said the walkout was "most unfortunate.''

"It is regrettable that we appear to have reached a gridlock on process,'' she said.

''(This) is not a time to play procedural games.''

It is understood developing countries walked out of the working groups at the summit today, and have refused to take part in special meetings which have been organised to tackle the biggest obstacles in the negotiations.
A plenary session, for all countries, has not started as planned because of the breakdown.

Senator Wong said she and others were working hard to get the problem resolved, but she could give no indication of when that might happen.

She did not support the developing countries' focus on the need to commit now to a future for the Kyoto protocol.

"An extension only of the Kyoto Protocol is not going to achieve the environmental outcome the world needs,'' Senator Wong said.

Australia does not want the Kyoto Protocol to be the only vehicle to tackle climate change because it does not include the US, nor major developing countries like China and India.

Link:  http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/developing-nations-walk-out-of-climate-talks/story-e6frfku0-1225810384368

Oxfam: African countries pulled the emergency cord in Copenhagen today as rich countries reluctance to discuss binding emissions reductions brought chaos to the negotiations

Climate talks suspended – Oxfam Comment

December 14, 2009

African countries pulled the emergency cord in Copenhagen today as rich countries reluctance to discuss binding emissions reductions brought chaos to the negotiations.

Jeremy Hobbs, Executive Director of Oxfam International said:

“Africa has pulled the emergency cord to avoid a train crash at the end of the week.  Poor countries want to see an outcome which guarantees sharp emissions reductions yet rich countries are trying to delay discussions on the only mechanism we have to deliver this – the Kyoto Protocol.

“This not about blocking the talks – it is about whether rich countries are ready to guarantee action on climate change and the survival or people in Africa and across the world.

“Australia and Japan are crying foul while blocking movement on legally binding emissions reductions for rich countries. This tit for tat approach is no way to deal with the climate crisis.”

African countries have refused to continue negotiations unless talks on a second commitment period to the Kyoto Protocol are prioritized ahead of broader discussions under a second LCA track. Australia, Japan and others have succeeded in stopping Kyoto Protocol discussions as a result.  Of the two tracks of negotiations underway in Copenhagen the Kyoto Protocol is the only one which includes a mechanism for legally binding emissions reductions by rich countries.

Notes:
Oxfam’s Climate Advisors from around the globe are available to provide expert analysis on policy and politics of the talks. Our team of experts is liaising closely with government delegations and party to inside
information on the talks.

Oxfam International is a confederation of independent organisations from 14 countries around the world. It works to help others to tackle poverty.

Oxfam is a member of the tcktcktck campaign - a global coalition environments and development organisations, faith and youth groups and unions that is calling for a fair, ambitious and binding climate agreement in Copenhagen in December 2009.

Contacts for blogger interviews:
Karina Brisby  kbrisby@oxfam.org.uk  +44 7540 702806; Head of Digital Campaigns, Oxfam GB

Email: kbrisby@oxfam.org.uk
Mobile UK: +44 (0)7771 387 315 - Work

Link:  http://www.pitchengine.com/free-release.php?id=37874

On day 3 of COP15, developing countries (G77) split over climate measures in Copenhagen

Developing countries split over climate measures

by Richard Black, Environment correspondent, BBC News website, Copenhagen, December 9, 2009

A binding deal is favoured by some, but other developing countries are wary

A major split between developing countries has emerged at the UN climate talks in Copenhagen, Denmark.

Small island states and poor African nations vulnerable to climate impacts laid out demands for a legally-binding deal tougher than the Kyoto Protocol.

This was opposed by richer developing states such as China, which fear tougher action would curb their growth.

Tuvalu demanded -- and got -- a suspension of negotiations until the issue could be resolved.

The split within the developing country bloc is highly unusual, as it tends to speak with a united voice.

Our future rests on the outcome of this meeting Ian Fry, Tuvalu delegate Earth Watch - Richard Black's blog

After talks resumed in the afternoon, the Tuvalu delegation walked out when it appeared that the issue might be sidelined.

Private discussions will now continue behind the scenes among a small group of concerned countries.

Tuvalu's negotiator Ian Fry made clear that his country could accept nothing less than full discussion of its proposal for a new legal protocol, which was submitted to the UN climate convention six months ago.

"My prime minister and many other heads of state have the clear intention of coming to Copenhagen to sign on to a legally binding deal," Mr Fry said.

"Tuvalu is one of the most vulnerable countries in the world to climate change, and our future rests on the outcome of this meeting."

Demonstrators protest in support of Tuvalu's proposal

The call was backed by other members of the Association of Small Island States (AOSIS), including the Cook Islands, Barbados and Fiji, and by some poor African countries including Sierra Leone, Senegal and Cape Verde.

Several re-iterated the demand of small island developing states that the rise in the global average temperature be limited to 1.5 °C, and greenhouse gas concentrations stabilised at 350 parts per million (ppm) rather than the 450 ppm favoured by developed countries and some major developing nations.

Developing split
Fast-growing economies such as China, India and South Africa oppose the lower target of 350 ppm because they feel that meeting it would retard economic development.

Here, they also opposed Tuvalu's call for a new legally binding protocol to run alongside the existing Kyoto Protocol, arguing that the existing convention and Kyoto agreement are tough enough.

"The main task of this (conference) is to adapt an agreed outcome from the Bali Action Plan [agreed in 2007] and we should very much focus on that," said China's lead negotiator Su Wei. "We have a very valid system to combat climate change." But the existing agreement is not tough enough for the smaller, more vulnerable members with more to lose from rising sea levels and less to lose in terms of the economic constraints of a tough treaty. China's negotiator Su Wei told the conference that his country, and the other emerging economies, did care about the problems of small island states; but Jerome Esebei Temengil from Palau's delegation gave a different view. "We're dying here, were drowning; and some of us know that they don't really care, because we have to beg them," he told BBC News. "Actions speak louder than words. If they really do care, please have a little listen to us." Great divide? Some observers suggested the session marked a major development in the politics of the climate convention, with small countries prepared to stand up to more powerful neighbours. "This is the first time we've seen the island nations make such a splash," said Malini Mehra of the India-based Centre for Social Markets. "The AOSIS call for a new protocol and the way it was denounced by Saudi Arabia, China, and India show that the G77 has now come asunder and the island nations are leading," she told BBC News "As they must -- they have seized the high moral ground." During the same session, China -- and other countries -- re-iterated calls for industrialised nations to pledge bigger cuts in their greenhouse gas emissions. But that has been a familiar call here; the rift between members of the formerly solid developing country bloc is a much less common happening, and may indicate that hopes held out by some countries of signing only a political commitment here may not be enough to placate the poorest and most vulnerable nations. China has protested against an incident which prevented a top diplomat from entering the vast Bella Center where the conference is underway. Mr Wei told the meeting he is "extremely unhappy" that a Chinese minister was barred from entry on three consecutive days. He said the unnamed minister has been trying to enter since Monday but failed despite having two security badges made out. Both badges were confiscated by security guards on Wednesday morning. Richard.Black-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk

Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8403745.stm

Richard Black of the BBC: On day 3 of COP15, developing countries (G77) split over climate measures in Copenhagen

Developing countries split over climate measures

by Richard Black, Environment correspondent, BBC News website, Copenhagen, December 9, 2009

A binding deal is favoured by some, but other developing countries are wary

A major split between developing countries has emerged at the UN climate talks in Copenhagen, Denmark.

Small island states and poor African nations vulnerable to climate impacts laid out demands for a legally-binding deal tougher than the Kyoto Protocol.

This was opposed by richer developing states such as China, which fear tougher action would curb their growth.

Tuvalu demanded -- and got -- a suspension of negotiations until the issue could be resolved.

The split within the developing country bloc is highly unusual, as it tends to speak with a united voice.

Our future rests on the outcome of this meeting Ian Fry, Tuvalu delegate Earth Watch - Richard Black's blog

After talks resumed in the afternoon, the Tuvalu delegation walked out when it appeared that the issue might be sidelined.

Private discussions will now continue behind the scenes among a small group of concerned countries.

Tuvalu's negotiator Ian Fry made clear that his country could accept nothing less than full discussion of its proposal for a new legal protocol, which was submitted to the UN climate convention six months ago.

"My prime minister and many other heads of state have the clear intention of coming to Copenhagen to sign on to a legally binding deal," Mr Fry said.

"Tuvalu is one of the most vulnerable countries in the world to climate change, and our future rests on the outcome of this meeting."

Demonstrators protest in support of Tuvalu's proposal

The call was backed by other members of the Association of Small Island States (AOSIS), including the Cook Islands, Barbados and Fiji, and by some poor African countries including Sierra Leone, Senegal and Cape Verde.

Several re-iterated the demand of small island developing states that the rise in the global average temperature be limited to 1.5 °C, and greenhouse gas concentrations stabilised at 350 parts per million (ppm) rather than the 450 ppm favoured by developed countries and some major developing nations.

Developing split
Fast-growing economies such as China, India and South Africa oppose the lower target of 350 ppm because they feel that meeting it would retard economic development.

Here, they also opposed Tuvalu's call for a new legally binding protocol to run alongside the existing Kyoto Protocol, arguing that the existing convention and Kyoto agreement are tough enough.

"The main task of this (conference) is to adapt an agreed outcome from the Bali Action Plan [agreed in 2007] and we should very much focus on that," said China's lead negotiator Su Wei. "We have a very valid system to combat climate change." But the existing agreement is not tough enough for the smaller, more vulnerable members with more to lose from rising sea levels and less to lose in terms of the economic constraints of a tough treaty. China's negotiator Su Wei told the conference that his country, and the other emerging economies, did care about the problems of small island states; but Jerome Esebei Temengil from Palau's delegation gave a different view. "We're dying here, were drowning; and some of us know that they don't really care, because we have to beg them," he told BBC News. "Actions speak louder than words. If they really do care, please have a little listen to us." Great divide? Some observers suggested the session marked a major development in the politics of the climate convention, with small countries prepared to stand up to more powerful neighbours. "This is the first time we've seen the island nations make such a splash," said Malini Mehra of the India-based Centre for Social Markets. "The AOSIS call for a new protocol and the way it was denounced by Saudi Arabia, China, and India show that the G77 has now come asunder and the island nations are leading," she told BBC News "As they must -- they have seized the high moral ground." During the same session, China -- and other countries -- re-iterated calls for industrialised nations to pledge bigger cuts in their greenhouse gas emissions. But that has been a familiar call here; the rift between members of the formerly solid developing country bloc is a much less common happening, and may indicate that hopes held out by some countries of signing only a political commitment here may not be enough to placate the poorest and most vulnerable nations. China has protested against an incident which prevented a top diplomat from entering the vast Bella Center where the conference is underway. Mr Wei told the meeting he is "extremely unhappy" that a Chinese minister was barred from entry on three consecutive days. He said the unnamed minister has been trying to enter since Monday but failed despite having two security badges made out. Both badges were confiscated by security guards on Wednesday morning. Richard.Black-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk

Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8403745.stm

Richard Black of the BBC: COP15 Copenhagen Climate Summit: Day 3

COP15 Copenhagen climate summit: Day 3

by Richard Black | BBC News, environmental correspondent, Wednesday, 9 December 2009

14.39 CET: So as I mentioned yesterday, I wanted to try and give you a quick look at how the UN climate conferences work - or how they don't.

I'll have to do it in bite-sized chunks, otherwise I risk your sanity as well as mine.

The official negotiations proceed along two "parallel tracks" that - in theory at least - have equal weight.


One is the Ad-Hoc Working Group on Long-Term Co-operative Action (AWG-LCA) - the other the Ad-Hoc Working Group on the Kyoto Protocol (AWG-KP).

The remit of the second is a bit easier to set out, because the Kyoto Protocol already exists. The matters it is looking at include:

• commitments by developed nations still inside the protocol (the vast majority) to cut greenhouse gas emissions beyond 2012
• how the Adaptation Fund is working
• and whether the number of greenhouse gases covered by the protocol should be increased.

The AWG-LCA is a little more nebulous. "Long-term co-operative action"...what is that?

Part of it is emission reductions from developed countries outside the Kyoto Protocol - especially, in this context, the US - and emission curbs from developing countries.

It includes financial mechanisms not covered by the Kyoto Protocol, such as the idea for a "quick-start" fund of $10bn per year proposed by UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown. Another facet is the future shape and operation of the UN climate convention.

How discussions progress in these "tracks", though, is uneven. Sometimes there are plenary sessions in which virtually every country is represented, and sometimes negotiators break into smaller working groups to thrash through a specific issue (the AWG-KP currently has four such groups).

Mainly negotiators work from texts that could form the basis of an eventual treaty, but at the moment they're working from "non-papers" - issue-based documents that do not have the status of official text.

Aside from these two "tracks," there are the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI) and the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA).

Lots of technical assessments happen there - although still firmly influenced by politics, of course - on issues such as whether "clean coal" should be eligible for funding under the Clean Development Mechanism.

But this is just the formal stuff. Most of the really interesting and important stuff happens behind the scenes, in closed rooms, where positions are adopted and deals are done.

For more on that, I've included here a feature I made for the BBC radio programme The World Tonight - broadcast last week - in which some of the people who've been deeply involved in negotiations give some insights into how it really works.

18.57 CET: What a host of issues were raised today with the opening of a rift - I won't go so far as to call it a chasm - between small, relatively poor developing countries and some of their richer and more powerful brethren.

We will have to watch what happens because the plot lines change fast here; but potentially the stand of small island states and some of the poorer African countries will prove to be of major significance.

Countries most vulnerable to climate impacts have chosen the politically risky option of not only criticising the western industrialised powers, which is expected and routine, but also the Chinas and Indias and Brazils of this world.

They simply want all the big emitters to do more - to put tougher constraints on emissions than have been pledged so far - because they feel their survival as countries and cultures is at stake.

Intriguingly, the move has also raised very different reactions among the NGO community here.

Some groups see a split in the developing world bloc as disastrous. They say it is only through having been united for so long that they have gained strength in international negotiations - not only on climate change, but on trade and other issues.

Others feel that's an old-fashioned view; that the world has changed, and small nations need to extricate themselves from the powerful grip of the emerging economies and the Gulf states just as they once had to fight off the yoke of colonial powers.

In the conference hall today, we have been living in interesting times.

Link:  http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/richardblack/2009/12/cop_15_copenhagen_climate_summ.html