Across Africa, there are growing concerns, which the three of us share, that the continent is being marginalized in the major debates leading up to the COP15 climate-change summit in Copenhagen this month. While the main focus has been on the impact of climate-change mitigation on industrialized countries, the urgent adaptation needs of the world’s poorest countries, in the face of possible catastrophe, have largely been ignored, at least in terms of concrete measures.
Perhaps the world needs reminding that Africa is the continent that contributes least to climate change, but must now live with its most serious consequences. The signs are already ominous. Weather patterns are changing; the rains, in certain areas, have been failing; and great swaths of the continent have been suffering unusually severe drought.
Africa’s geographical position, sensitive water resources, unsustainable agricultural methods and exploitation by foreign and other private companies increases its vulnerability. Deforestation for timber and energy precipitate erosion and reduce soil fertility. Conflict is increasing as communities compete for scarce resources. Indeed, the conflicts in Darfur, Somalia and the Ivory Coast were partly caused by disputes over agricultural and grazing land.
Africa’s potential can be harnessed only by adaptation to climate change using disaster risk-reduction mechanisms. Moreover, parts of Africa possess massive latent potential for agricultural development, which it is in our collective interest to encourage. If communities can replant rather than deforest, they can create carbon-dioxide sinks, improve the water balance and protect the micro-climate — all of which would favor agriculture, food security and efforts to mitigate global climate change in a sustainable way.
Historically, Europe must shoulder much of the responsibility for Africa’s current state of development. The slave trade, colonialism and the flawed process of colonial divestment all left their mark on Africa’s newly independent and fragile states. Now materialistic Europe and the developed world are imposing another disaster on a struggling Africa through a life style of self-enrichment, consumption and waste.
The African-European Parliamentary Dialogue on Climate Change was launched by AWEPA (the Association of European Parliamentarians for Africa) in cooperation with the Pan-African Parliament and other major parliamentary actors in Nairobi in August last year. During follow-up meetings in Africa and Europe, concrete action plans with a special focus on Africa began to be developed.
Other Parliamentary networks such as GLOBE (Global Legislators Organization), PGA (Parliamentarians for Global Action), and PNOWB (the Parliamentary Network on the World Bank) are also participating. The aim is to put Africa high on the agenda at the Copenhagen summit.
The conclusion of the Dialogue will be presented to the Copenhagen summit this month. The African-European Parliamentary Seminar in Stockholm this August (Sweden is the current EU president) emphasized the need for an implementation strategy to ensure that commitments made at Copenhagen in such areas as the development of climate change-related policies and legislative reform are fulfilled.
Similarly, AWEPA will work with African and European parliamentarians to ensure that international assistance for African adaptation is delivered and carefully monitored. It will also mobilize support for African parliamentarians, enabling them to work with their constituents in raising awareness, at a local level, of new sustainable agricultural policies that respond to changes in weather patterns and other consequences of climate change.
African countries, as parties to global negotiations, have crucial contributions to make to climate politics. But climate-change mitigation and adaptation are costly. European and other high-income countries, including the US, must meet their obligation in accordance with the “polluter pays” principle to provide Africa with new, accessible, dependable and reliable funding to support mitigation and adaptation strategies in areas such as disaster risk reduction, renewable energy, technology and skill development.
The position taken by the EU’s national leaders in October, that developing nations would need 100 billion euros (US$148.5 billion) in help annually by 2020 to cope with climate change, was an important step in the right direction. But those commitments are still vague given the fact that EU leaders failed to say how much of the funding would be coming from Europe. Therefore, the real results of this EU agreement on climate funding remain to be seen.
The time has come for Europe, the US and others to recognize their responsibilities concerning the impact of climate change on Africa. But, as they recognize their responsibilities, they must do so in ways that respect African priorities. This is simple justice.
Graca Machel is president of the AWEPA Partnership Council and founder and president of the Foundation for Community Development in Mozambique. Wangari Maathai, president of the Green Belt Movement, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2004. Mary Robinson, a former president of Ireland, is president of Realizing Rights: The Ethical Globalization Initiative.
COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers