Visions of Spring

As the UN Climate Talks  wound down with little progress made to address the most unique of crises in this time of global crises, Bolivian President Evo Morales wondered aloud that “if the leaders of countries cannot arrive in an agreement, why don’t the peoples then decide together?”

Uncomplicated and to the point, President Morales effortlessly put his fingers on the main tension that plagued the COP 15 talks last month. Mr. Morales directly spoke to the conflict between the delegates in Copenhagen whose approaches to climate change tended to be gradual in nature, and those whose strategies in tackling climate change addressed the urgent nature of climate change.

One could assume that when Mr. Morales speaks about “the peoples” coming together, he is referring to that latter group, people like Maldives President Mohamed Nasheed. Long considered to be one of the international community’s most outspoken leaders in speaking about the devastating impacts of climate change, Mr. Nasheed’s message at Copenhagen was clear. If drastic steps are not taken to reduce carbon emissions in the near future, the Maldives population faces great danger. With 80% of its geographic territory resting three feet or less above sea level, the Maldives people will likely be part of an estimated 200 million environmental migrants by the year 2050.

A member of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), the Maldives and the 41 other members of AOSIS delivered a clear, concise message in Copenhagen. They argued that while their environmental impact has been minimal, small states face disproportionate challenges in the face of increased carbon dioxide emissions into the Earth’s atmosphere by the world’s leading polluters.

“The peoples” also likely referred to vocal critics of the way that the talks were organized, such as Lumumba Stanislaus Di-Aping. Chairman of the Group of 77, a group of the world’s developing – and poorest – countries, Mr. Di-Aping responded furiously to a leaked draft of a text crafted by a group of individuals representing the US, UK, and Denmark and other developed – and wealthiest – countries known as “the Danish text.” Mr. Di-Aping, Sudanese by birth, reportedly reacted to a proposal that would grant $10 billion to Africa as part of the text by declaring that $10 billion “is not enough to buy us coffins.” He characterized the proposal as asking the G77 to “sign a suicide pact.”

Also seated at Mr. Morales’ hypothetical negotiating table would likely be young people. Arriving in Copenhagen with large numbers, youth delegations stepped to the forefront of the debate both inside and outside of the talks. Permitted entry into the Bella Center – where the talks themselves were held – young people made themselves extremely visible during the two week long event. Ascending on Copenhagen from every corner of the world, the young people in attendance had a simple, yet powerful message to their elders: their futures, and the future of unborn millions, were truly at stake in the negotiations.

The more than 1,000 young people attending the talks from over 100 countries gathered as part of an emerging international youth climate movement. Demanding an ambitious, binding, and equitable treaty following the conference, they injected the talks with a healthy amount of urgency.

Among the attendees at Mr. Morales’ alternative “peoples” conference would certainly include Morales’ longtime ally in the region, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

Critical of the organizing of the conference, which saw developed nations meeting in closed door meetings at the expense of a more transparent approach to this worldwide problem, Mr. Chavez spoke eloquently to the COP 15 general assembly about the need to not only change the climate, but also about changing the system.

The system, Mr. Chavez argued, is one that precludes those most affected from the devastating effects of climate change from participating in the discussions to the degree that the world’s leading polluters control the conversation.

This gap in equitable participation is at the heart of climate justice, another theme from the talks more visible in civil society organizations rather than inside the conference itself. Climate justice is an approach to avoiding global climate catastrophe that pushes to strengthen the voices of affected people (indigenous people as well as people in developing nations in the global south living in areas that face an exponentially higher risk of displacement) in the dialogue surrounding climate change.

Unfortunately, the COP 15 talks ended with no binding treaty. Instead, the world is left with a vague accord that promises only the continuance of the same inadequate UN Convention on Climate Change. While more committed attempts to solve this most unique of global problems – one that truly requires an approach from the global community to identify itself as interconnected people rather than as competitors – were largely ignored, hope is not lost.

In the United States, a country that has arguably been the world’s leading stumbling block on the road to sustainable climate solutions, there has been slight progress. Last year, the House of Representative passed the first ever climate bill in American history. However, when it mattered most, the US again showed that it has much to learn from its less developed partners.

New alliances and voices from around the world were not only visible during the negotiations, but were audible as well. Delegates from historically underserved communities seized the opportunity to inform the world about the potentially devastating effects of climate change while collaborating together to magnify their intersecting struggle. Young people, people from Africa, South America, Asia and small island states were in many ways the focal point of the conference pushing solutions and proposals to literally save the human race from self-destruction. Indeed, this approach, moving towards international and equitable cooperation is no less than is needed at this point in our world’s history.