...and we're off to a crawl

Bangkok: Day one of the U.N. climate negotiations 2

Coming right off the heels of the U.N. General Assembly in New York and the G20 in Pittsburgh, the world has taken its next step on the road to Copenhagen: the Bangkok round of negotiations for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

This morning the Thai Prime Minister opened the session by saying “There is no plan B, if we do not realize plan A, we go straight to plan F, which stands for failure.”

So, no pressure. 

With an invigorated sense of skepticism, civil society, governments, and of course business interests are here to try to hammer through obtuse and contradictory text to create something that can be of some use on the table at the Copenhagen meetings this December.

The U.N. press office was quick to hand me a defensive-sounding media release stating ‘Negotiations set to pick up in Bangkok as a result of New York Climate Change Summit’ – hoping to put a positive spin on the process. Sure, the New York summit yielded lots of big talk about Climate – unfortunately very little in the way of meaningful targets and commitments, as pointed out (to much applause) by a Sudanese delegate this morning.

The reality of the U.S. being able to meaningfully commit is grim, as illustrated by the statement released by John Podesta and Rajendra Pachauri, this Friday. Despite Obama talking a good game (which in itself is a welcome departure from the Bush years), he still failed to put forward any details. Hopes previously pinned on Obama have been deflated by stalled domestic legislation that NASA’s Dr. James Hansen said if implemented, “would do more harm to the environment than nothing at all.”

On the flip side, many people here in Bangkok have been encouraged by China’s announcement at the NY summit that it is increasing commitments on carbon reduction. We all know though, that responsibility to lead with these negotiations lies on the global North to make bolder and serious commitments. India and China are moving, and the classic U.S. approach trying to pin blame on them is increasingly seen as excuse-mongering even to those who may have bought the line before.

From where we stand now, it looks like Copenhagen will be a greenwash. But civil society here in Bangkok is not taking this as a moment to despair but as a higher call to action for just and equitable ways to meet meaningful targets. Peoples movements and activist networks from across the globe are taking this opportunity to build and organize, invigorating local solutions back home, regardless of what ends up on the negotiating table. And so we keep pushing. If we temper our ambition along with our expectations, governments will feel more emboldened to backslide and allow the treaty to be an industry giveaway. Lets keep pressure up.

Here’s an inspiring quickie of organizers in the United States working for community based solutions to the climate crisis:

Joshua Kahn Russell is the Grassroots Actions Manager for energy and climate at Rainforest Action Network. He is also an action strategy trainer with the Ruckus Society.

Advertisement
Advertisement
  1. dave shukla Posted 8:19 am
    28 Sep 2009

    Great post. Glad to see reporting after the barrage of nothing that was 'Climate Week NYC'. Especially glad for the smartMeme video link.

    What I'd like to know in future writings (from you and others) is the extent to which we are seeing a repeat of the gaming and wastage of the UNFCCC talks from 1995-1997 that led to the wholly inadequate Kyoto Protocol. More, whether events really do look like 1993, as described by Glenn Hurowitz (Fear and Courage in the Democratic Party) or David Victor (The Collapse of the Kyoto Protocol).

    We don't have time for a greenwash. However much public indignation at the U.S. *not* having a federal climate policy during Copenhagen may press our (i.e. climate justice folks') advantage in securing strong policy in the spring - what must happen is a binding agreement that the Senate will ratify, regardless of the time it takes to get a national health plan or any other humane, but non-climate, federal development.

    Anway, thanks for writing this up Josh! Provides important ordinals where the history asked for is at most just cardinal. Keep 'em coming

    Dave
  2. skitters Posted 12:53 pm
    28 Sep 2009

    Going into Copenhagen without binding legislation for domestic green energy targets and Co2 reduction targets is bargaining suicide. Something must give or no one is going to follow the US lead on this. Calling for strong legislation in the spring limits the ability to make Copenhagen a success. This isn't a national problem this is a global problem and we should look at any domestic legislation on climate change as a step towards calling other nations to do the same.
    http://envirogy.wordpress.com/2009/09/23/obama-adresses-united-nations/

Add a Comment

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Hello, Visitor!    Why not register?

Advertisement