Citizen Action Monitor

Durban’s legacy: A more complex, unstable geopolitical climate order emerges — Part 2

No 374 Posted by fw, December 20, 2011

“Recent climate conferences have demonstrated just how bankrupt and crass our geopolitical alliances have become. Perhaps Durban represents the first step towards building a new consensus.” —Nikolas Kozloff, concluding sentence of Part 2

Nikolas Kozloff

Nikolas Kozloff, a New York-based writer specializing in political and environmental topics, attempts to unravel Durban’s COP17 legacy. He foresees a more complex geopolitical climate situation. In my abridged Part 1 post, I focused on COP17’s delayed, forced birth of a new “legal agreement”, which, with its 2020 enforcement date, will be too little, too late, and ultimately “push earth over the brink.”

At Durban, it became clear that the US is not the only obstacle to climate change negotiations, as other emerging emitters are seeking to shirk their responsibilities too.” Cracks in alliances appeared as countries such as Brazil, Bolivia and Bolivia backed away from their past demands for urgent action on climate change issues. And the ALBA group, (Venezuela, Cuba, Bolivia, Ecuador), “which sought to shame the US and others into taking more collective action and to limit any increase in temperature to one degree Celsius, was simply seen as an annoyance by most of the other nations.”

Here is an abridged version of Part 2 of Kozloff’s report in which he discusses the role of the EU, Africa and the Middle East in the climate change talks and whether or not a new geopolitical climate bloc will be formed. Although he begins Part 2 on a negative note, his concluding sentence strikes a positive chord. To view the full, original text of the article, click on the linked title below. Subheadings, links and font highlighting have been added to my abridged version.

Time for a new geopolitical climate bloc Part 2 Nikolas Kozloff, Al Jazeera, December 15, 2011

Recent climate conferences have shown how bankrupt current geopolitical alliances have become. Part Two of the series will discuss the role of the EU, Africa and the Middle East in the climate change talks and whether or not a new geopolitical climate bloc will be formed.

EU not only shirks leadership role, Wikileaks docs reveal EU “moves to squelch meaningful change”

With some doubt now hanging over the long-term fate of the EU and financial turmoil roiling the continent, it’s interesting to speculate what this all might mean for climate change. As a whole, the EU has been much more progressive than both the US and BASIC (Brazil, South Africa, India, and China). Yet, the bloc hasn’t shown much leadership, saying it would be reluctant to sign on to a new UN treaty if other big economies failed to participate as well.

Additionally, there’s some evidence that EU leaders, far from acting as innovative trailblazers, instead move to squelch meaningful change. According to WikiLeaks documents, the Europeans secretly negotiated with the Americans and agreed that it was imperative to “work around unhelpful countries such as Venezuela or Bolivia”. 

Britain and Denmark play negative role at Durban

EU member Britain has been particularly bad, with climate secretary Ed Miliband accusing Bolivia and other left-wing Latin American countries such as Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua of hijacking UN climate talks and “holding the world to ransom” to prevent a deal from being reached. Even environmentally progressive EU member Denmark became “fed up” with Morales and the pesky left-leaning ALBA bloc of countries from Latin America, which kept on mounting “propaganda arguments” against the Copenhagen accord.

“Unsavory revelations” that US and EU had previously agreed to team up to “better handle third country obstructionism”

Moreover, the Europeans have held discussions with the Americans concerning both blocs’ common need to “push back against co-ordinated opposition of BASIC countries (China, India, Brazil and South Africa) to our international positions“. When the Americans remarked that “the US and EU need to… work much more closely and effectively together… to better handle third country obstructionism and avoid future train-wrecks on climate“, the Europeans agreed to lobby BASIC as well as the G-77 group of poor nations in advance of the Cancun, Mexico, climate conference.

The fallacy of ‘German leadership’

Despite these unsavoury revelations, one might argue that an EU crack-up would endanger climate negotiations even further. That is because within the EU, smaller countries generally take their cue from Germany, a nation that hasn’t been terrible on climate change. According to WikiLeaks cables, Germany has been angered by the likes of Italy and Poland, two countries that resisted making emissions cuts.

Upon closer inspection, however, Germany doesn’t look all that great, either. Historically, Chancellor Angela Merkel has made it clear to the rest of the EU that she doesn’t think the bloc should go it alone on climate change. Without clear trailblazing German leadership, the EU has dumbed down its expectations at international conferences. Far from raising the bar, the bloc has merely sought to achieve modest agreements.

Lies Germany and US tell about satellites “designed to collect information about climate change”

To make matters worse, Germany and the US reportedly lied about a joint satellite programme ostensibly designed to collect information about climate change. In reality, Germany had no intention of employing the satellites for any such purpose – the technology would be simply used for spying.

Africa could see geopolitical divisions over climate change

Like South America, where a growing fissure could emerge between Brazil and its smaller and more environmentally concerned neighbours, Africa too could see geopolitical divisions over climate change, with South Africa taking some flak from more impoverished nations. As a member of BASIC, South Africa has sought to tread a fine line: The country is the continent’s largest greenhouse gas emitter, but Pretoria would like to ensure friendly ties with other African countries.

At times, South Africa has reportedly been willing to bring emerging economies under international emissions commitments, but in other instances stands shoulder to shoulder with BASIC, presenting a common front against the global North. If South Africa continues to side with BASIC, the country could fall afoul of such nations as Ethiopia. Recently, the drought-prone East African country announced its intention to become carbon neutral by 2025, and the authorities have embarked on an ambitious tree-planting programme.

Saudi Arabia stands in the way of emergence of progressive Middle East bloc on climate change

What are the chances that threatened sub-Saharan countries might receive crucial support from another quarter? With the continuing unrest in the Middle East, it’s interesting to speculate about what might happen within the 22-member Arab League, including Palestine. Perhaps, as the bloc throws off the yoke of local despots, the grouping could become a key voice on progressive issues like global warming. Such hopes, however, seem far off.  For the time being, Arab League members like Saudi Arabia stand in the way of change, with the kingdom declaring that climate change agreements shouldn’t limit oil-producing income.

Might “Cartagena Dialogue” point the way from a current bleak outlook to a better future?

With the current geopolitical milieu looking rather bleak as far as climate change is concerned, the world is desperately in need of more innovative blocs. While it’s certainly a discouraging picture, perhaps new configurations such as the so-called “Cartagena Dialogue” could point the way to a better future. The bloc, which was originally formed in 2010 in the coastal Colombian city of Cartagena, now includes more than 30 countries. The body is not a formal negotiating group but could provide a crucial space for informal and creative talks in the future.

Interestingly enough, the Cartagena Dialogue includes countries from almost every negotiating group, with particularly strong leadership from Latin America. With ALBA looking like a geopolitical dead-end and Brazil negotiating in other networks, the need has never been greater for Latin American unity on climate change. Mexico, which has been irked by Brazil’s manoeuvrings, has chosen to participate in the new bloc, as well as others such as Costa Rica, Peru, Colombia, Chile and many others.

Colombia is particularly interesting. The country currently has a conservative government in place under Juan Manuel Santos, but just like Brazil, a new generation of urban youth has taken to environmental politics. During the last presidential election, former Bogota mayor Antanas Mockus of the Green Party garnered more than 20 per cent of the vote, suggesting that in Colombia, as well as in wider South America, greens may yet have a political future. At Durban, Colombia was a leading voice supporting EU calls for a more progressive climate change agreement.

The Cartagena Dialogue, which stipulates that all countries should reduce carbon emissions commensurate with their relative economic capacities, could serve as a crucial bridge between the developed and developing world. In addition to the many island nations, Cartagena Dialogue includes some of the more progressive European states like Denmark, Germany, Belgium and the UK. With the EU now fraying at the edges, perhaps these states can help to shape a new agenda along with Australia. The G-77 is facing similar fissures due to shenanigans within BASIC, and in this sense, African participation within the Cartagena Dialogue is particularly noteworthy.

Recent climate conferences have demonstrated just how bankrupt and crass our geopolitical alliances have become. Perhaps Durban represents the first step towards building a new consensus.

About Nikolas Kozloff — Kozloff is a New York-based writer specializing in political and environmental topics. A former academic, he received his doctorate in Latin American history from Oxford University in 2002. Kozloff has worked as a Senior Research Fellow at the Washington, D.C.-based Council on Hemispheric Affairs, where he conducted research papers on Venezuela. He has provided political analysis on Latin America for the BBC, National Public Radio, WNYC, C-SPAN Washington Journal. The author of three books, he also writes for Al Jazeera and a number of outlets including Le Monde DiplomatiqueKozloff is the author of No Rain in the Amazon: How South America’s Climate Change Affects the Entire Planet. Visit his website here — http://www.nikolaskozloff.com/

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog, Citizen Action Monitor, may contain copyrighted material that may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material, published without profit, is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues. It is published in accordance with the provisions of the 2004 Supreme Court of Canada ruling and its six principle criteria for evaluating fair dealing

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Information

This entry was posted on December 20, 2011 by in climate change, evidence based counterpower, political action and tagged , , .
%d bloggers like this: