Before the Copenhagen climate-change summit two years ago, the two of us sat together in Cape Town to listen to five African farmers from different countries, four of whom were women, tell us how climate change was undermining their livelihoods. Each explained how floods and drought, and the lack of regular seasons to sow and reap, were outside their normal experience. Their fears are shared by subsistence farmers and indigenous people worldwide — the people bearing the brunt of climate shocks, though they played no part in causing them.
Now, two years later, we are in Durban, where South Africa is hosting this year’s climate-change conference (COP17) and the -situation for poor people in Africa and elsewhere has deteriorated even further. In its latest report, the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concludes that it is virtually certain that, in global terms, hot days have become hotter and occur more often; indeed, they have increased in frequency by a factor of 10 in most regions of the world.
Moreover, the brutal paradox of climate change is that heavy precipitation is occurring more often as well, increasing the risk of flooding. Since 2003, East Africa has had the eight warmest years on record, which is no doubt contributing to the severe famine that now afflicts 13 million people in the Horn of Africa.
These are the consequences that a mere 1?C of warming above pre-industrial levels has wrought. The UN Environment Program’s just published report Bridging the Emissions Gap shows that over the course of this century, warming will likely rise to 4?C unless we take stronger action to cut emissions. Yet the latest evidence demonstrates that we are not acting — the International Energy Agency’s World Energy Report 2011 reveals that carbon dioxide emissions have rebounded to a record high.
We are alarmed that expectations for COP17 are so low. Where is the global leadership that must respond urgently? We desperately need a global deal.
At the heart of this deal is the preservation of the Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto Protocol is not a perfect instrument. It does too little to cut global emissions, and it requires too few countries to cut their emissions growth. However, it is part of international law, and that is vital.
Climate change is a global problem: If countries are not confident that others are addressing it, they will not feel an imperative to act themselves. So, having a legal framework with clear and common rules to which all countries are committed is critically important — and the only assurance we have that action will be taken to protect the most vulnerable.
The first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol expires at the end of next year. So the EU and the other Kyoto parties (the US never ratified the agreement, and the Kyoto Protocol’s terms asked little of China, India and other emerging powers) must commit to a second commitment period, to ensure that this legal framework is maintained.
At the same time, all countries must acknowledge that extending the lifespan of the Kyoto Protocol will not solve the problem of climate change, and that a new or additional legal framework that covers all countries is needed. The Durban meeting must agree to initiate negotiations toward this end — with a view to concluding a new legal instrument by 2015 at the latest.
All of this is not only possible, but necessary, because the transition to a low-carbon, climate--resilient economy makes economic, social and environmental sense. The problem is that making it happen requires political will, which, unfortunately, seems in short supply.
Climate change is a matter of justice. The richest countries caused the problem, but it is the world’s poorest who are already suffering from its effects. In Durban, the international community must commit to righting that wrong.
Political leaders must think inter-generationally. They need to imagine the world of 2050, with its 9 billion people, and take the right decisions now to ensure that our children and grandchildren inherit a liveable world.
Former Irish president Mary Robinson is president of the Mary Robinson Foundation for Climate Justice. Archbishop Desmond Tutu, archbishop emeritus of Cape Town, is a Nobel Peace Laureate.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Congressman Mike Gallagher (R-WI) and Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL) led a bipartisan delegation to Taiwan in late February. During their various meetings with Taiwan’s leaders, this delegation never missed an opportunity to emphasize the strength of their cross-party consensus on issues relating to Taiwan and China. Gallagher and Krishnamoorthi are leaders of the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party. Their instruction upon taking the reins of the committee was to preserve China issues as a last bastion of bipartisanship in an otherwise deeply divided Washington. They have largely upheld their pledge. But in doing so, they have performed the
It is well known that Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) ambition is to rejuvenate the Chinese nation by unification of Taiwan, either peacefully or by force. The peaceful option has virtually gone out of the window with the last presidential elections in Taiwan. Taiwanese, especially the youth, are resolved not to be part of China. With time, this resolve has grown politically stronger. It leaves China with reunification by force as the default option. Everyone tells me how and when mighty China would invade and overpower tiny Taiwan. However, I have rarely been told that Taiwan could be defended to
It should have been Maestro’s night. It is hard to envision a film more Oscar-friendly than Bradley Cooper’s exploration of the life and loves of famed conductor and composer Leonard Bernstein. It was a prestige biopic, a longtime route to acting trophies and more (see Darkest Hour, Lincoln, and Milk). The film was a music biopic, a subgenre with an even richer history of award-winning films such as Ray, Walk the Line and Bohemian Rhapsody. What is more, it was the passion project of cowriter, producer, director and actor Bradley Cooper. That is the kind of multitasking -for-his-art overachievement that Oscar
Chinese villages are being built in the disputed zone between Bhutan and China. Last month, Chinese settlers, holding photographs of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), moved into their new homes on land that was not Xi’s to give. These residents are part of the Chinese government’s resettlement program, relocating Tibetan families into the territory China claims. China shares land borders with 15 countries and sea borders with eight, and is involved in many disputes. Land disputes include the ones with Bhutan (Doklam plateau), India (Arunachal Pradesh, Aksai Chin) and Nepal (near Dolakha and Solukhumbu districts). Maritime disputes in the South China