The People’s Climate March on Sunday was a watershed for the emerging global climate movement, with more than 400,000 people taking to the streets of New York City. However, New York was only the tip of an iceberg.
People in 166 countries, from Argentina to Australia, participated in more than 2,800 events and rallies.
Two million activists demanded through an online petition that governments shift to 100 percent clean energy.
For the first time since the fated 2009 Copenhagen Climate Change Conference, virtual climate activism moved into the real world. Why?
Citizens worry about the impact of climate change, and they know that fossil fuels are the problem.
They have come to recognize that powerful interests are blocking the necessary shift to clean energy, and they simply no longer trust that their governments are doing enough to stand up for the future of the planet.
This was reflected not only in the record number of people who participated, but also in the diversity of the marchers — urban activists, indigenous groups, adherents of different faiths and political viewpoints, and, most conspicuously, old and young.
People today draw natural connections between climate change and daily life. Teachers stood for schools that run on renewable energy, women supported healthier agriculture, grandmothers demanded clean air for their grandchildren, unions want a green job transition, and city mayors want investments in energy-efficient buildings.
Five years after the Copenhagen conference failed, governments finally need to act responsibly.
This week’s climate summit, hosted by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, was aimed at increasing the momentum for action by gathering government, business and civil-society leaders. The aim was to create favorable conditions for governments to negotiate a climate deal in Paris next year.
Though the UN cannot enforce the promises leaders made, the summit catalyzed a popular demonstration that has moved the political spotlight back to the climate-change challenge, where it is likely to remain until governments take credible action.
What has changed since 2009 is the degree of concern about the impact of climate change.
In the interim, New Yorkers faced Hurricane Sandy, while Typhoon Haiyan devastated the Philippines. Climate records continue to be broken worldwide. This year alone, ordinary people suffered from heat waves in Australia, floods in Pakistan and droughts in Central America, while the collapse of the West Antarctic ice sheet has been shown to be irreversible.
As a result, the global debate has shifted from the costs of action to the costs of inaction. Though the costs of climate damage are staggering, scientific research indicates that mitigation costs are manageable.
That has become apparent in the growth of renewable energy generation. People want clean energy, the technologies are available and profitable, and, with millions of people lacking access to reliable power, the emergence of renewable sources is a lifesaver.
Global wind and solar energy capacity has tripled since 2009, and renewable energy sources now provide more than one-fifth of the world’s electricity supply.
Indeed, every second megawatt of new electricity that is added globally is green, implying that the share of energy from renewable sources could reach 50 percent by 2030.
Clean energy is a game changer, because it puts power over power back into the hands of citizens, posing a direct challenge to the fossil-fuel industry.
The obvious next step in the fight against climate change is to phase out all subsidies for that industry.
This week’s UN climate summit may not affect the course of negotiations for an international climate agreement.
However, it has put the focus back where it should be: Real people demanding real change from their governments.
Citizens have shown that they are committed and will speak up. The People’s Climate March was only the beginning.
Monica Araya is founder and executive director of Nivela and leads the citizens group Costa Rica Limpia. Hans Verolme is founder and senior strategic adviser at Climate Advisers Network.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
For the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), China’s “century of humiliation” is the gift that keeps on giving. Beijing returns again and again to the theme of Western imperialism, oppression and exploitation to keep stoking the embers of grievance and resentment against the West, and especially the US. However, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) that in 1949 announced it had “stood up” soon made clear what that would mean for Chinese and the world — and it was not an agenda that would engender pride among ordinary Chinese, or peace of mind in the international community. At home, Mao Zedong (毛澤東) launched
With a new White House document in May — the “Strategic Approach to the People’s Republic of China” — the administration of US President Donald Trump has firmly set its hyper-competitive line to tackle geoeconomic and geostrategic rivalry, followed by several reinforcing speeches by Trump and other Cabinet-level officials. By identifying China as a near-equal rival, the strategy resonates well with the bipartisan consensus on China in today’s severely divided US. In the face of China’s rapidly growing aggression, the move is long overdue, yet relevant for the maintenance of the international “status quo.” The strategy seems to herald a new
To say that this year has been eventful for China and the rest of the world would be something of an understatement. First, the US-China trade dispute, already simmering for two years, reached a boiling point as Washington tightened the noose around China’s economy. Second, China unleashed the COVID-19 pandemic on the world, wreaking havoc on an unimaginable scale and turning the People’s Republic of China into a common target of international scorn. Faced with a mounting crisis at home, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) rashly decided to ratchet up military tensions with neighboring countries in a misguided attempt to divert the
Toward the end of former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) final term in office, there was much talk about his legacy. Ma himself would likely prefer history books to enshrine his achievements in reducing cross-strait tensions. He might see his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Singapore in 2015 as the high point. However, given his statements in the past few months, he might be remembered more for contributing to the breakup of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). We are still talking about Ma and his legacy because it is inextricably tied to the so-called “1992 consensus” as the bedrock of his