COPENHAGEN, Dec 19, (AFP) - A UN conference on Saturday rammed through a battle plan against climate change forged by US President Barack Obama and other top leaders, sidelining smaller states which lashed the deal as betrayal.
After toxic exchanges, the summit chair forced through a deal using an unusual procedural tool that effectively dropped all obstacles to the new-born Copenhagen Accord.
UN chief General Ban Ki-moon admitted the agreement had failed to win global consensus and would disappoint many who demanded stronger action against climate change but voiced relief it had not been strangled at birth.
 |
| Delegates sleep during a break in an all-night plenary meeting at the UN Climate Change Conference 2009 in Copenhagen on December 19, 2009. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-mooon praised the deal at the Copenhagen climate summit as an “essential beginning” but admitted it did not achieve all that was hoped. AFP |
“Many will say that it lacks ambition,” Ban said. “Nonetheless, you have achieved much.”Obama earlier called the political accord an “unprecedented breakthrough”after meetings with about two dozen presidents and prime ministers in Copenhagen.
The agreement was assembled in a frenzied game of climate poker among the leaders of the United States, China, India, Brazil and South Africa and major European countries. The group had been chosen by conference chair Denmark after it became clear the summit was in danger of catastrophic failure.
But the deal was savaged when it was put to a full session of the 194-nation UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
Half a dozen developing countries led the charge, blasting the document as a cosy backdoor deal that violated UN democracy, excluded the poor and doomed the world to disastrous climate change.
“It looks like we are being offered 30 pieces of silver to betray our people and our future,” said Ian Fry of Tuvalu, a tiny Pacific island whose very existence is threatened by rising seas.
The draft is intended to be the kernel of a strategy to slash the fossil-fuel emissions that trap the Sun's heat and are warming Earth's surface, slowly but ruthlessly damaging our weather systems.
It set a commitment to limit global warming to two degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit), but did not spell out the important stepping stones -- global emissions targets for 2020 or 2050 -- for getting there.
It did not identify a year by which emissions should peak, a demand made by rich countries that was fiercely opposed by China. And, under it, pledges are voluntary and free from tough compliance provisions to ensure they are honoured.
China had bristled at anything called “verification” of its plan to cut the intensity of its carbon emissions, seeing it as an infringement of sovereignty and saying rich nations bore primary responsibility for global warming.
The deal was more detailed on how poor countries should be financially aided to shore up their defences against rising seas, droughts, floods and storms.
Rich countries pledged 30 billion dollars in “fast-track” finance for the 2010-2012 period, including 11 billion from Japan, 10.6 billion from the European Union and 3.6 billion dollars from the United States.
They set an ambitious goal of “jointly mobilising” 100 billion dollars by 2020.
But to make the “fast-track” funds operational, the accord needed plenary approval. Countries were invited to sign up to the deal.
The UN's climate pointman Yvo de Boer denied the 13-day conference had been a complete failure but admitted it had not lived up to expectations.
“A great deal of energy was invested, a great deal was within our grasp, we managed to capture a certain degree of success but we should be conscious of the huge challenge that lies ahead of us,” he told a closing press briefing.
More than 130 leaders attended the outcome, “the biggest meeting of heads of state and government in the history of the United Nations and possibly in history,” said UNFCCC Information Officer John Hay. |
E-mail