The US, China, India, South Africa, and Brazil agreed to a voluntary climate pact. President Obama acknowledged that ‘we have much further to go.’ The deal did not produce commitments on emissions reductions.
Copenhagen, Denmark – The United States and four other countries agreed to a new, voluntary climate pact today. The move, which could become the framework for a broader agreement here, drew responses ranging from cautious acceptance to outrage. But it could prove a historic development in big-power negotiations, say some analysts.
The announcement came at the end of nearly 24 hours of intense talks among nearly two dozen world leaders and their negotiators. In announcing the agreement to reporters from the United States, President Obama acknowledged that it falls short of what the science demands in order to hold global warming to roughly 2 degrees Celsius over preindustrial levels.
But, he added, “it’s a first step,” one designed to overcome what he called a “deadlock in perspectives” between developed and developing countries and build the kind of confidence between the two camps that will eventually allow for a legally binding treaty.
“But if we just waited for that,” added Mr. Obama, “we wouldn’t make any progress…. We have to keep moving forward.”
The outlines of the agreement reached between the leaders of the US, China, South Africa, Brazil, and India acknowledge the 2-degree goal, focus on the emissions-control actions countries already have put on the table, and include provisions for verification along the lines of those set up by the World Trade Organization.
Reactions within the cavernous conference center included support as well as anger.
“If accepted by other parties, this tentative agreement would be an important step forward,” says Elliot Diringer, vice president for international strategies at the Pew Center for Global Climate Change in Arlington, Va. “It’s well short of what’s ultimately needed. But it would provide a reasonable basis for negotiating a fair and effective climate treaty. But even if other parties do accept this as a basis for going forward, achieving the legally binding agreement we need in a year’s time will be an enormous challenge.”
Several environmental groups are far less charitable,for instance. “Copenhagen has been an abject disaster,” said Nnimmo Bassey, who heads Friends of the Earth International, in a prepared statement. “By delaying action, rich countries have condemned millions of he world’s poorest people to hunger, suffering, and loss of life as climate change accelerates.”
Yet the agreement — and the approach to reaching it – could have far-reaching and positive implications for future negotiations on difficult issues, particularly for the US and China, according to Harvard University’s Robert Stavins, director of the university’s Project on International Climate Agreements.
Mr. Stavins calls the agreement historic. It marks the first time in any major international negotiations that heads of state “pushed the bureaucrats out of the way” to craft a deal, he says. “That’s unprecedented in any world talks.”
Despite the disappointment many here are expressing about the climate implications of the deal, it speaks volumes about the importance the leaders put on the issue and the future of US-Chinese relations, he adds.
Those relations are “of the utmost importance” for the future of the two countries and for global security in general, as the world’s most important economy today works out its relationship with the world’s most important economy tomorrow, he adds.
“If the US and China had left this meeting without an agreement, it would have boded poorly for dealing with a range of other issues, from trade, to the environment, to human rights,” he says.
From a climate standpoint, he continues, the agreement lays the foundation for bringing emerging economies into a global climate agreement.
At the time of this writing, it was unclear how much support this agreement was getting among the more than 190 countries here. If they do accept it, it will be up to the technical negotiators to work out the language to turn the broad parameters the deal sets out into text the conference can agree on — a process that could continue well into the weekend.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.