Bolivian envoy on UN climate talk failure
Pablo Erick Solón Romero Oroza is the Bolivian Climate Change Ambassador, he is a sociologist and economist, he was active in Bolivia’s social movements before entering government, he is an expert on the issues of trade, integration, natural resources and water.
Imagine sending your own daughter on a plane that has only 50% chance of landing. You would never do it. Yet sadly as we gear up for the biggest climate meeting in Copenhagen, this is what many developed countries seem prepared to do to our planet.
Much of the discussion at the UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen is focused on stabilizing greenhouse gases at 450 PPM (Parts Per Million) in order to limit global warming to an average of 2 degrees. Yet scientists say that at 450 PPM, there is only a 50% chance of limiting global warming to 2 degrees. That is a huge risk to take. Most scientists say we must keep emissions limited to 300 to 350 PPM, which would limit global warming to about 1-1.5 degrees.
This lack of ambition is matched by an attempt by rich nations to kill the Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto Protocol, for all its faults, was at least binding, and it also recognized that developed countries had a different obligation than developing nations because their carbon emissions had caused global warming.
Now the rich countries want to do away with the Kyoto Protocol and replace it with a new agreement that would dilute their historic responsibilities for the climate crisis. Because of this attempt to avoid decisive action, the rich nations are making it increasingly difficult to reach a concrete agreement in Copenhagen.
Bolivia believes that we need to place a concept of climate debt at the heart of the talks as this climate crisis will only be averted if it is accompanied by justice. Climate debt tackles the profound social injustice at the heart of climate change - that those least responsible for causing climate change are those that will most suffer its effects. Historically, the developed nations, with less than 20% of the world’s population are responsible for more than three quarters of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. They have pushed the earth beyond its capacity to absorb these gases.
This has created two forms of debt: an ‘emissions debt’ in other words depriving developing countries of the same right to share the atmosphere equally and develop in the future. It has also created an ‘adaptation debt’ as we face the impacts of climate change in our countries with deteriorating environmental conditions that will have a huge impact on our own quality of life. This climate debt will need to be paid by the world’s economically rich nations through substantial commitments to reduce and absorb greenhouse gases and with compensation including transfers of technology to help build low carbon economies worldwide.
As the talks progress, we can be sure that many of the most powerful nations will use a whole range of tactics to avoid making the necessary commitments to reduce emissions. There will be continuing attempts to divide developing countries. I also won’t be surprised if the developed countries get the chair of the UNFCCC or some ad hoc working group to introduce a last minute paper, saying this is the last chance and pressure everyone to sign it. Then they will rely on the tactics of blame, saying to developing countries if we don’t sign it, that we are responsible for the failure of the talks.
That is why all those people of good conscience who believe in creating a safe future for our children must join together and demand a binding, just solution to the gravest crisis humanity and Mother Earth has faced.
We are asking, first, to discuss the main issue, which for us is Mother Earth. We think that is the key issue.
Second, we are asking for a goal that will allow that will save all of humanity. We think the goal that they have put on the table is going to save probably only half of humanity because a two degree Celsius increase and a rise in carbon levels in the atmosphere to 450 parts per million means a 50% chance that there will be severe ecologic failure.
Third, we want that climate debt be paid. It should be paid in terms of reduction of emissions, but real reductions, in terms of a transfer of technology, and in terms of finance – and that brings me to our fourth point.
We see the numbers when it comes to finance are really too small. Ten billion dollars when you compare it to what they have spent in terms of military budgets or to save Wall Street they spent trillions of dollars. But to save the future of mankind, they are saying only $10 billion.
The finally demand is that we really want really want to solve this problem. We don’t want to make business out of this problem. We are very against the idea of building a carbon market that will really not solve the problem. We say lets save humanity, lets save the planet, and, please, please don’t make profit out of this.
Our demands are included in the negotiations. But we are at a stage where all of our language that is in the negotiating texts has been bracketed, which means we are very far away from agreement on these issues. And the process is moving very slow. If you go into the drafting groups you will see that advances are being made in only a few areas. Negotiations are difficult but if you really want to delay agreements you will do this sort of thing.
Our position is that in order to have success, we need to have a very important movement of civil society groups that puts a lot of pressure on the governments of the United States and Europe. If they don’t see this pressure then of course the outcome will be very bad. But if there is pressure, the negotiations could change. So I am sure that a lot of negotiators and authorities can change their positions if the pressure comes from the people and not from the corporations. Because, here, what you see, is huge pressure from transnational companies who are thinking not of how to solve this problem but how to make a business of climate change.
President Morales has called for a Universal Declaration of the Rights of Mother Earth because this problem is about balance – balance between mankind and nature. What we are seeing with climate change is that this balance has been broken. Why, because humans act as if they are the only ones who have rights and treat our Mother Earth like, in the past century, slaves were treated – as persons that don’t have rights, as objects, instruments for exploitation. So if you want to have a balanced relation, humans must recognize that we are not the only one’s that have rights, but also our Mother Earth. We and nature are part of one system and what happens in one part of the system effects the other part.
This way of thinking has been strengthened because of the capitalist system. For the capitalist system everything, nature – even other humans – is considered an object that you can use to obtain a profit. With this system everything can be made into merchandise. So what we are seeing is the consequence of this vision that you can change everything into merchandise, even nature, even your mother – Mother Earth.
<!– @page { margin: 2cm } P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm } –>
Pablo Erick Solón Romero Oroza blogs at The Huffington Post