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
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
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
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.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with