There was a telling moment at the 23rd edition of the UN climate talks that underscored both the life-and-death stakes in the fight against global warming, and how hard it is for this belabored forum to rise to the challenge.
Twelve-year-old Timoci Naulusala from Fiji, a nation disappearing under rising seas, was delivering a testimonial to ministers and heads of state with crisp English and irresistible charm.
Suddenly, describing the devastation wrought by Cyclone Winston last year, his words became measured, his voice hushed.
“My home, my school my source of food, water, money, was totally destroyed,” he said. “My life was in chaos. I asked myself: Why is this happening? What am I going to do?”
The answer to Timoci’s first question has become frightening clear: climate change.
With only a single degree Celsius of global warming so far, the planet has already seen a crescendo of deadly droughts, heatwaves and super-storms engorged by rising seas.
“Climate change is here. It is dangerous, and it is about to get much worse,” said Johan Rockstroem, executive director of the Stockholm Resilience Center, a climate change research center.
The 196-nation Paris Agreement, adopted in 2015, urges the world to cap the rise in temperature at “well below” 2°C, a goal barely within reach and which still may not save Fiji and dozens of small island states.
Bangladesh and other countries with highly-populated delta regions are also at high risk.
Timoci’s second question remains open: What is he, and by extension the world, going to do?
At first, the answer — laid out in the 1992 UN Convention on Climate Change — seemed straight-forward: Humans must stop loading the atmosphere with the greenhouse gases that drive global warming.
The successful repair of the ozone hole suggested a way forward: an international treaty, but it took a quarter of a century to get one, in 2015, and even then it is woefully inadequate: Voluntary national pledges to curb carbon pollution would still allow the global thermometer to go up 3°C, a recipe for human misery on a vast scale.
Since Paris, the UN climate talks — known to participants as “COPs,” or Conferences of the Parties — have focused on working out an operational handbook for the treaty, which goes into effect in 2020.
However, as the years tick by, the byzantine bureaucracy — where hundreds of diplomats can argue for days over whether a text will say “should” or “shall” — has struggled to keep pace with both the problem, and what some negotiators call “the real world.”
“What is at stake here is the relevance of the COP process,” Nicaraguan chief negotiator Paul Oquist said, lamenting a point of blockage and the generally slow pace. “We cannot risk becoming more and more irrelevant with each meeting.”
The UN climate process risks falling out of step in two key ways, experts suggest.
One is in relation to the unforgiving conclusions of science, which show that the window of opportunity for avoiding a climatic cataclysm is rapidly narrowing to a slit.
This year’s climate talks began with negotiators learning that carbon emissions — after remaining stable for three years, raising hopes that they had peaked — will rise by 2 percent in 2017, a development one scientist called “a giant step backwards for humankind.”
Negotiations were also reeling from US President Donald Trump’s decision to pull out from the Paris Agreement. The US sent envoys to the meetings, but White House officials and energy company executives hosted a pro-fossil fuel event on the conference margins.
Meanwhile, scientists warned of invisible temperature thresholds — “tipping points” — beyond which ice sheets would irretrievably shed enough water to raise global oceans by meters.
“The only question is how fast,” said James Hansen, head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies until 2013.
The UN’s 12-day negotiations came to an end on Saturday with an agreement to hold a stock take next year of national efforts to cut fossil fuel emissions.
The talks are falling behind the response of cities, sub-national regions and especially businesses, which have leapt headlong into the transition from a dirty to a clean global economy.
“For the first time in the history of the COPs, the heart of the action was not in the negotiating arena but in the ‘green’ zone” showcasing innovations in sustainable development, said David Levai, head of the climate program at the Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations in Paris.
About 7,500 cities and local governments have set carbon cutting targets, and hundreds of global companies are retooling for a low-carbon world.
A veteran EU climate diplomat, meanwhile, bemoaned the lack of dynamism in the negotiating arena. “I’ve never seen a COP with so little adrenaline,” he said.
Mads Randboll Wolff, a Danish expert in bioeconomics — a field that did not even exist a decade ago — recalled the bitter disappointment of the failed Copenhagen climate summit in 2009.
“The entire world was looking up to the podium, waiting for world leaders to strike the deal that would save us,” he said.
“One of the lessons from Copenhagen is that the negotiations are not enough,” he added. “We need them. But we also need civil society — people, citizens — to take action.”
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
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
The restructuring of supply chains, particularly in the semiconductor industry, was an essential part of discussions last week between Taiwan and a US delegation led by US Undersecretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy and the Environment Keith Krach. It took precedent over the highly anticipated subject of bilateral trade partnerships, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) founder Morris Chang’s (張忠謀) appearance on Friday at a dinner hosted by President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) for Krach was a subtle indicator of this. Chang was in photographs posted by Tsai on Facebook after the dinner, but no details about their discussions were disclosed. With
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