In December, world leaders are to meet in Paris for the UN Climate Change Conference, which is expected to produce a new agreement to tackle global warming. However, in the run-up to the conference, heads of state and ministers will meet at various other related events. Having attended countless summits, we can attest that, if these other meetings are correctly prepared and heads of state engage meaningfully in them, the prospects of success in Paris could be improved.
One such meeting in particular could be decisive: this week’s biannual summit in Brussels between the EU and the Community of Latin America and the Caribbean States (CELAC). Efforts by Europe and Latin America and the Caribbean have set the groundwork for the world’s strongest bi-regional partnership on climate change. Leaders in both regions have declared their commitment to holding the rise in global temperature to below 2oC and to achieving legally binding outcomes in Paris.
The EU and CELAC heads of state can — and should — forge a close alliance and capitalize on favorable political conditions to advance a progressive climate agenda, one that mandates their negotiators to push for a fair, equitable and ambitious agreement in December. Together, both regions represent nearly one-third of the 195 parties that have signed the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, and account for about 20 percent of global greenhouse-gas emissions. Given soaring climate-related economic costs in Europe and Latin America, both sides have much to gain (and save) from a global regime that significantly reduces emissions and strengthens resilience to climate risks.
Illustration: Mountain People
This common sense of purpose is reflected in our regions’ policies. Latin America and the Caribbean are taking concerted action to contribute to bringing down global emissions and could do much more with funding and technology transfers from developed countries. Brazil, for example, has drastically reduced deforestation in the Amazon — a major contribution. Chile is on track to reach its goal of producing 20 percent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2025. And in 2012, Mexico enacted a climate-change law that aims to reduce emissions by 30 percent below their business-as-usual level by 2020, and by 50 percent by 2050.
For its part, the EU is offering the strongest pledge yet for the Paris agreement: a reduction in domestic greenhouse-gas emissions by at least 40 percent relative to their level in 1990, by 2030. This is in line with the EU’s long-term goal of reducing emissions by between 80 and 95 percent (again, relative to the 1990 level) by 2050.
The EU-CELAC summit can also benefit from diplomatic efforts within CELAC, which includes all of the region’s 33 countries. A regional effort led by Brazil and Chile is promoting dialogue among CELAC countries to build trust, with the goal of identifying common positions for the UN climate negotiations.
CELAC has emphasized that a new global climate-change deal should treat adaptation and mitigation in a balanced manner. In keeping with its commitment to the 2oC cap on the rise in global temperature, it not only supports a legally binding agreement, but also calls for wealthy countries to meet their promises to provide developing countries with US$100 billion per year in climate finance by 2020.
Wealthy countries that have not complied with the emissions-reduction commitments enshrined in the 1997 Kyoto Protocol owe this debt to the planet. CELAC seeks rules to ensure the transparency and verification of countries’ climate actions, and calls on developed countries to increase their technology transfer and capacity-building efforts to support its member countries.
Latin American and the Caribbean countries can also use the Brussels summit to reassure the EU that it is a valued partner. It can call on Europe to provide greater predictability of financial flows and alignment on climate and development objectives, especially to reduce inequality and poverty, boost clean energy and build sustainable urban transport and other infrastructure.
Following the difficult climate negotiations in Copenhagen in 2009, we understand why some European leaders may have lowered expectations for the Paris talks. They are understandably reluctant to expend too much political capital by calling for a far-reaching deal. However, at a time when concern about global warming among citizens in both regions is growing, this is no time for indecisiveness.
European leaders should boldly show that they are committed to an ambitious outcome in Paris, and that Europe will enhance its support of CELAC climate actions. The Inter-American Development Bank estimates that CELAC can more than meet its future energy needs through renewable energy sources, including solar, wind and geothermal. Indeed, such resources are sufficient to cover projected 2050 electricity needs 22 times over.
The EU can play a leading role in promoting renewable energy cooperation, in part by transferring technology that is adapted to our tropical conditions, which would support CELAC countries’ efforts to reduce emissions and pollution, increase their resilience to climate change and create jobs.
This type of enhanced cooperation and diplomacy could pay large dividends. Progress in Brussels would increase CELAC countries’ confidence, thereby encouraging them to offer the strongest-possible national contributions — known technically as the “intended nationally determined contributions” — in Paris.
It could also contribute to bringing all sides closer together on thorny issues, such as the scale and scope of efforts that countries at different levels of development should make to address climate change.
By forming an ambitious alliance — which could be enlarged to include other groups, such as the Alliance of Small Island States and Group of Least-Developed Countries — the EU and CELAC heads of state can chart the necessary course to set the world on a path toward a low-carbon, sustainable and resilient future.
We urge them to take the necessary steps to achieve that goal.
Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva was president of Brazil from 2003 to 2011. Ricardo Lagos was president of Chile from 2000 to 2006.
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