MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, June 16th 2019 - 01:37 UTC

Key states reach “meaningful but modest” agreement at climate summit

Saturday, December 19th 2009 - 11:53 UTC
Full article 1 comment
The agreement brokered by US President Obama still needs to be accepted by all of the 193 nations at the talks The agreement brokered by US President Obama still needs to be accepted by all of the 193 nations at the talks

Key states have reached what they call a “meaningful agreement” at the Copenhagen climate summit. Five nations, including China and the US, reached a deal on a number of issues, such as a recognition to limit temperatures rises to less than 2C.

US President Barack Obama said it would be a foundation for global action but there was “much further to go”. However, the deal could be rejected as a number of nations were reported to be unhappy with the contents.

Observers called the achievement “modest” and questioned how it fitted into the overall deal being negotiated.

President Obama said the US, China, Brazil, India and South Africa had “agreed to set a mitigation target to limit warming to no more than 2C and, importantly, to take action to meet this objective”.

He added: “We are confident that we are moving in the direction of a significant accord.”

“The meeting has had a positive result, everyone should be happy,” said Xie Zhenhua, the head of China's delegation.

“After negotiations both sides have managed to preserve their bottom line. For the Chinese, this was our sovereignty and our national interest.”

The five-nation brokered deal promised to deliver $30bn of aid for developing nations over the next three years, and outlined a goal of providing $100 billion a year by 2020 to help poor countries cope with the impacts of climate change.

The agreement also included a method for verifying industrialised nations' reduction of emissions. The US had insisted that China dropped its resistance to this measure.

However, the emerging deal - which needs to be accepted by all of the 193 nations at the talks - received a mixed reaction.

Lumumba Stanislaus Di-Aping, speaking on behalf of the G77-China group of nations, reacted angrily to the developments, saying that a deal had been done behind their backs.

“Gross violations have been committed today - against the poor, against traditions of transparency and participation on an equal footing by all nations, and against common sense,” he said. But he stopped short of saying G77 nations would oppose any deal.

“I will not hide my disappointment regarding the non-binding nature of the agreement here,” EU Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso told reporters.

“In that respect the document falls far short of our expectations.”

A number of nations are reportedly not willing to accept the latest draft of the document, known as the “Copenhagen Accord”.

The two-week summit had been deadlocked as world leaders had struggled to hammer out a deal. “The text we have is not perfect,” said French President Nicolas Sarkozy.

But he added: “If we had no deal, that would mean that two countries as important as India and China would be freed from any type of contract.

”The United States, which is not in Kyoto, would be free of any type of contract. That's why a contract is absolutely vital.“

Jo Leinen, chairman of the European Parliament's environment committee, described the document as ” a disappointment and below our expectations“.

”It's behind on emission targets, behind on commitment to verification and monitoring,“ he said.

A number of leaders have now left the Danish capital, including the US president and Brazil's President Lula da Silva.

Reacting to the Copenhagen ”deal“, John Sauven, executive director of Greenpeace UK, said: ”The city of Copenhagen is a crime scene tonight, with the guilty men and women fleeing to the airport. There are no targets for carbon cuts and no agreement on a legally binding treaty,“ he observed.

”It is now evident that beating global warming will require a radically different model of politics than the one on display here in Copenhagen.”

Top Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • enito

    This is just one side of the story, with an emphasis on “story”.

    Another side is the 30,000 plus scientists who think that the climate is actually getting colder and that human impact on CO2 levels are negligable.


    Then there are high-level establishment defectors, such as Lord Christopher Monckton, who openly also states that the threat of a climate change is used as an instrument to covertly introduce a global dictatorship.


    Perhaps all those the G77 leaders who threw out the idea of a “treaty” for the de facto global dictatorship Lord Monckton warns about were among the plus 4 million viewers of the good Lord's speech a couple of weeks ago?

    Dec 22nd, 2009 - 07:39 am 0
Read all comments

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!