UK Energy and Climate Secretary Ed Miliband on Monday accused China, Sudan, Bolivia and other left-wing Latin American countries of trying to hijack the UN climate summit and “hold the world to ransom” to prevent a deal being reached.
In an article in the Guardian (see accompanying article), Miliband says the UK will make clear to those countries holding out against a binding legal treaty that “we will not allow them to block global progress.”
“We cannot again allow negotiations on real points of substance to be hijacked in this way,” he writes in the aftermath of the UN summit in Copenhagen, which climaxed with what was widely seen as a weak accord, with no binding emissions targets, despite an unprecedented meeting of leaders.
Miliband said there must be “major reform” of the UN body overseeing the talks — the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) — and on the way negotiations are conducted.
He is said to be outraged that UN procedure allowed a few countries to nearly block a deal.
Only China is mentioned specifically in Miliband’s article, but aides on Sunday made it clear that he included Sudan, Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua and Cuba, which also tried to resist a deal being signed.
Diplomats and environment groups hit back by saying Britain and other countries, including the US and Australia, had dictated the terms of the weak Copenhagen agreement, imposing it on the world’s poor “at the peril of the millions of common masses.”
Muhammed Chowdhury, a lead negotiator of the G77 group of 132 developing countries and the 47 least-developed countries, said: “The hopes of millions of people from Fiji to Grenada, Bangladesh to Barbados, Sudan to Somalia have been buried. The summit failed to deliver beyond taking note of a watered-down Copenhagen accord reached by some 25 friends of the Danish chair, head of states and governments. They dictated the terms at the peril of the common masses.”
Developing countries were joined in their criticism of the developed nations by international environmental groups.
Nnimmo Bassey, chair of Friends of the Earth International, said: “Instead of committing to deep cuts in emissions and putting new, public money on the table to help solve the climate crisis, rich countries have bullied developing nations to accept far less.
“Those most responsible for putting the planet in this mess have not shown the guts required to fix it and have instead acted to protect short-term political interests,” Bassey said.
In a separate development, senior scientists said on Sunday that rich countries needed to put up three times as much money and cut emissions more if they were to avoid serious climate change.
Professor Martin Parry of Imperial College London, a former chair of the UN’s Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said: “Even if non-binding pledges made at Copenhagen are completely fulfilled, there is a 1.5ºC “gap” leading to unavoided impacts. The funding for adaptation covers impacts up to about 1.5ºC, and the mitigation pledges to cut climate change down to 3ºC at most ... leaving 1.5ºC of impacts not avoided because of the failure of adaptation and mitigation to close the gap.”
UN climate chief Yvo de Boer said: “The opportunity to actually make it into the scientific window of opportunity is getting smaller and smaller.”
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath