UN climate talks ‘flawed’, could sabotage efforts

By Pratch Rujivanarom 
The Nation 

 

Environment activists from developing countries speak at the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Thailand yesterday ahead of the UN conference to be held today.

 

Activists say inequality is built into negotiation system, smaller countries being drowned out

 

AN UNDEMOCRATIC and unfair negotiation mechanism in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) will eventually lead to the failure of the landmark Paris Agreement, civic groups said yesterday.

 

 

As the UNFCCC opens a meeting on climate change in Bangkok today to finalise the Paris Agreement’s implementation guidelines for the upcoming 24th Conference of the Parties (COP24) in Poland, climate activists say flaws threaten to sabotage efforts to keep the global rise in temperature to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

 

Members of climate justice advocacy organisations from developing countries told the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Thailand (FCCT) yesterday that the inequality built into the climate negotiation system, and conflicts of interest among negotiators, are hindering the global effort to prevent and mitigate environmental catastrophe.

 

Lidy Nacpil, coordinator of the Asian Peoples Movement on Debt and Development, said major problems with the climate negotiation mechanism were its undemocratic voting system, unequal participation among stakeholders, and the hidden agendas of powerful players.

 

“First of all, the voting system in the UNFCCC’s climate negotiations is not truly democratic, as even though each country has one vote, some countries have far more influence and power than others,” Nacpil said.

 

“So the voices of smaller and poorer countries, such as island nations and developing countries, which have less influence and power in the negotiation forum, are often drowned by louder and more powerful actors. This is despite the fact that these countries are more vulnerable to climate change and suffer more significant impacts from climate disasters.”

 

 

Another problem, she said, is the lack of participation by activists and victims of environmental change, who are often denied even the chance to partake as observers at climate negotiations. 

 

This meant they had limited power to affect the agenda for discussions, Nacpil said. 

 

“We are also concerned about the conflict of interests within the climate change forum, as it is clear that some members of the global negotiations have close ties with the fossil fuels industry. Moreover, lobbyists for fossil-fuel conglomerates also have a strong influence over the forum,” Nacpil said.

 

“These problems are weakening the global efforts to cut down greenhouse gas [GHG] emissions and save the world from extreme climate change once the global temperature rises beyond the tipping point.”

 

Nacpil warned that unless smaller countries, local communities and climate justice advocates were given more power at the climate negotiation table, the Paris Agreement’s goal to cap the global temperature rise at 2C will fail.

 

Vidya Dinker, president of the Indian Social Action Forum, highlighted the urgent need to meet the 2C target by noting that India, along with many other parts of the world, are already suffering climate disasters triggered by the 1C rise in global temperature.

 

“I hope that there will be constructive and effective mitigation measures from the climate conference in Bangkok, as the citizens of developing countries have already suffered serious impacts from climate change,” Dinker said.

 

Meanwhile at another FCCT press conference, Patricia Espinosa, UN Climate Change Secretariat executive secretary, said the Bangkok meet was being held to prepare the implementation guidelines of the Paris Agreement, which will be discussed for adoption at COP24 in Poland in December.

 

“It will be critical for negotiators in Bangkok to produce solid text-based output that can function as the basis for the concluding negotiations in Katowice and be turned into the final implementation guidelines of Paris Agreement at COP24, as the texts capturing progress to date are not yet refined enough for this purpose,” Espinosa said.

 

“With only six days for negotiations in Bangkok, UN Climate Change is carefully coordinating demand to fully support countries in their important task.”

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/national/30353657

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2018-09-04

Smaller counties/people don't have a voice? That is the problem?

 

Ummm, welcome to the world. 

I firmly believe that the world needs to wake up to the dangers of climate change and implement serious, coordinated measures to combat it.

 

However, "...Nacpil warned that unless smaller countries, local communities and climate justice advocates were given more power at the climate negotiation table, the Paris Agreement’s goal to cap the global temperature rise at 2C will fail..." is nonsense; I suspect what Ms Nacpil means is that unless she and her organization is given more power, then things will fail.

 

God help us! I respect Ms Nacpil and her fellow activists, but there is a reason that they are not in positions of power; few people, if any, want them there.

 

If you want to have power in international climate discussions, then you need to attain power in your own country first. And, perhaps this is a mistake, but I know of no country that has elected a Climate-Change activist as leader.

 

Whenever you see the letters UN, you should always expect failure. The UN is a failure. Shut it down and send the "ambassadors" home.

3 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

I firmly believe that the world needs to wake up to the dangers of climate change and implement serious, coordinated measures to combat it.

Like solar power ?   Like electric cars ?  Like CNG fueled cars ?   Market forces are doing just that based on good, sound economic principles without UN wisdom.  10% of greenhouse gases come from ships.  The seventh largest shipping concern went out of business, but prices did not go up, meaning there is a lull in shipping and possibly a lull in pollution.  Reforestation is said to be a way of combating global warming, but I have yet to hear of a study as to how much reforestation should take place.   

 

I would like to see a cleaner world, but from the lack of focus, it looks more like politicians and civil servants are benefiting from the discord and chaos they are creating, not making things better. 

36 minutes ago, bkkgriz said:

Whenever you see the letters UN, you should always expect failure. The UN is a failure. Shut it down and send the "ambassadors" home.

 

23 minutes ago, yellowboat said:

Like solar power ?   Like electric cars ?  Like CNG fueled cars ?   Market forces are doing just that based on good, sound economic principles without UN wisdom.  10% of greenhouse gases come from ships.  The seventh largest shipping concern went out of business, but prices did not go up, meaning there is a lull in shipping and possibly a lull in pollution.  Reforestation is said to be a way of combating global warming, but I have yet to hear of a study as to how much reforestation should take place.   

 

I would like to see a cleaner world, but from the lack of focus, it looks more like politicians and civil servants are benefiting from the discord and chaos they are creating, not making things better. 

Two interesting, understandable posts, but I believe that both are a bit mistaken.

 

What precisely is the United Nations (UN)? It is an international committee of governments.

 

What independent powers does the UN have? None. Nil. Nada. Zero. Zip.

What independent funding sources does the UN have? None. Nada. Zero. Zip.

What power does the UN have to force implementation of its projects? None. Nada. Zero. Zip.

What authority to set an independent agenda does the UN have? None. Nada. Zero. Zip.

What means to independently make stuff happen does the UN have? None. Nada. Zero. Zip.

What UN programs does the UN itself force member countries to do? None. Nada. Zero. Zip.

 

I frequently worked with the UN over the course of many, many years, and I would echo all of the criticism of the UN out there; as a matter of fact, I suspect that I would have more criticism as I am more familiar with the organization than most.

 

The UN is simply a reflection of the world's governments.

 

Are all governments good? Nope.

Are all governments fair? Nope.

Do all governments agree? Nope.

Do all governments share the same viewpoints? Nope

Do all governments work together in a spirit of 'harmony and goodwill'? Nope.

 

If the UN did not exist, i.e. a place/forum where all the nations of the planet could meet, discuss mutual interests and occasionally implement projects of common interest, we would likely create such a body.

 

Is it effective? Not really.

Is it efficient? Not really.

Is it the 'best' way to deal with international problems? Probably not.

Is it the proverbial 'first step' towards world government? No.

Is it an 'out of control' monster bent on world domination? No.

Do they have 'black helicopters'? No.

 

The UN is an imperfect organization that provides a platform for the discussion of common international interests.

 

The UN does what the member countries decide they want it to do.

 

The UN is an imperfect organization that reflects humanity; not everyone agrees, not everyone is happy with it, not everyone is willing to contribute much, etc.

 

And finally, the UN is likely the best place to discuss Climate Change; what other body has the international reach to address an international problem like this?

 

Who has a better idea? Let's hear it.

1 hour ago, bkkgriz said:

Whenever you see the letters UN, you should always expect failure. The UN is a failure. Shut it down and send the "ambassadors" home.

Yes, the UN is the biggest cause of 1st World poverty.

 

Just wait a few years until all of the arctic, Alaskan, Scandanavian, Siberian permafrost areas have melted & released all their toxins into the atmosphere to help the escalation of global warming and to accelerate climate change... maybe a few of the more influential countries/presidents will get on board.. but of course it will be too late to reverse the damage!

Don't expect the large oil, coal and gas interests to let anything get in the way of profits!

 

The "to many people crowd" certainly want the poorer countries to convert to solar or wind power, never mind those two sources are presently 3 times more expensive and less reliable. Not to mention the life expectancy of those who live without electricity, clean drinking water etc etc life expectancy is reduced.  There are just about 2 billion people who cook their meals either by wood, cow dung, or charcoal every day.

 

As far as CO2 it is around .043 to .050 percent of the atmosphere.. Less than half of 1 percent for those mathematically challenged.. Now that there have been ice cores and real science they have figured out that CO2 follows temperature not the other way around..

 

One big volcano going off puts more CO2 in the atmosphere that mankind can do in a couple of hundred years at present release. But there is no money or way of stopping volcanoes, decaying plant matter, ocean releases, thermal vents which they say there are at least one million vents under the ocean spewing their heat and gasses...Never mind all that in is MAN's fault..!  

 

Climate change models which have never been correct with their forecast, (not to be confused with pollution) is a big money maker for those who are in the game while trying to keep the third world countries...third world.. Funny how when this started the Arctic was to be ice free by 2013 along with other predictions according to the models.. Crap in and you get crap out..

 

I doubt very many will take the time to listen but the following video shows real scientist and historical records that totally rebut the CO2 narrative.

 

Most only know what the MSN and certain government controlled news sources are telling them for they are to busy to look at the real science and actual graphs spanning earth's history...

 

This winter is supposed to be worse than last winter in the Northern Hemisphere and I ain't no psychic.. but I do believe were are at a point of solar minimum due to lack of sunspots.. Everything is about cycles and this is the cycle we are in IMO.

 

 

Edited September 4, 20187 yr by 727Sky

1 hour ago, Samui Bodoh said:

And finally, the UN is likely the best place to discuss Climate Change; what other body has the international reach to address an international problem like this?

 

Who has a better idea? Let's hear it. 

My post mentioned without UN wisdom.  Meaning that in some ways the world is improving due to the marketplace, not by the grace of any government body.   From what I read,  government bodies have only seen the bad without focusing on any solutions or seeing the good that is happening.  

 

Starting with the UN office in Thailand that deals with this, why can't they come up with a road map for a cleaner world?  A reforestation road map, a diesel electric study, a solar study, an electric car study, a Magnus effect for propulsion study would be lovely.  I mean who doesn't love trees ?

 

In 1926, this boat crossed the Atlantic using only wind power: 

Almost 100 years later, people think Magnus effect might by useful to help propel cargo ships and save fuel.

 

If others wish to go on about problems without the interest in solving them, they may do so.  That does not interest me. 

1 hour ago, yellowboat said:

My post mentioned without UN wisdom.  Meaning that in some ways the world is improving due to the marketplace, not by the grace of any government body.   From what I read,  government bodies have only seen the bad without focusing on any solutions or seeing the good that is happening.  

 

Starting with the UN office in Thailand that deals with this, why can't they come up with a road map for a cleaner world?  A reforestation road map, a diesel electric study, a solar study, an electric car study, a Magnus effect for propulsion study would be lovely.  I mean who doesn't love trees ?

 

In 1926, this boat crossed the Atlantic using only wind power: 

Almost 100 years later, people think Magnus effect might by useful to help propel cargo ships and save fuel.

 

If others wish to go on about problems without the interest in solving them, they may do so.  That does not interest me. 

"...If others wish to go on about problems without the interest in solving them, they may do so.  That does not interest me...."

Hear Hear! Any idiot can simply say "ohh, that's bad!" Whingers!

 

I think out posts are not really in disagreement. I too would prefer that the private sector take the lead in improving the quality of life in general and climate change in particular (and the evidence suggests that it does), but I think this is one of the (thankfully) rare occurrences whereby the use of government(s) and/or international organizations is required.

 

The difficulty with Climate Change is that it occurs very slowly and thus isn't an attractive enough issue for investment on its own; the profit motive for inventing and popularizing new technologies and/or new practices does not fit the usual time frame. How could one go in front of a group of investors and say words to the effect that " I need 100 million dollars now to deal with an issue that won't really be seen for another 40 years?" 

 

The effect of the UN is to popularize the issue now so that the required urgency can be created before it is too late; waiting until the effects are irreversible is (obviously) too late.

 

I'll have long been worm food by the time the real effects are hitting humanity, but I do hope that means are found to deal with it before then...

 

PS "...Starting with the UN office in Thailand that deals with this, why can't they come up with a road map for a cleaner world?..."

 

Because the UN only acts in accordance with member countries wishes. If the member countries want the UN organization to create a blueprint for the future, it will do so. The member countries don't want that, they want to do that themselves, thus the Paris Accords.

 

And, even if the UN did create a blueprint for a cleaner world, there is no way to force countries to follow it; that is another small detail that member countries insist upon...

 

It is easy to criticize the UN, but the criticism should really be focused upon member governments; they are the ones who set the rules.

 

 

Edited September 4, 20187 yr by Samui Bodoh
Lack of coffee

51 minutes ago, Samui Bodoh said:

And, even if the UN did create a blueprint for a cleaner world, there is no way to force countries to follow it; that is another small detail that member countries insist upon...

Yeah, but there would be a blue print to reference.  It would be something that would turn talk into action.  People could turn their farms in forest land.  People can vote based upon the blue print, should they have that right.  Good documentation is unbeatable.  

58 minutes ago, Samui Bodoh said:

It is easy to criticize the UN, but the criticism should really be focused upon member governments; they are the ones who set the rules.

They are all politicos that do little more than just talk or stir up chaos.  There is plenty of criticism to go around.  The UN gets criticized today.

Global Climate Change is part of God's plan; do not thwart the Will of God. 

 

Yeah, climate change. Keep buying the corporate media propaganda. I'll put this video up. Of course, none of you climate change truthers will watch it because it has real data and facts. Watch it, don't watch it. I really couldn't care less. Don't think for yourself or do any analysis. Just keep filling up your head with the globalist BS. Good little sheep. Oh, and keep licking the boots of your masters in the government. They know what is best for you. The UN and climate change are tools used to extract your tax money and squander it on nonsense. Good little sheep. 

50 minutes ago, bkkgriz said:

 

Yeah, climate change. Keep buying the corporate media propaganda. I'll put this video up. Of course, none of you climate change truthers will watch it because it has real data and facts. Watch it, don't watch it. I really couldn't care less. Don't think for yourself or do any analysis. Just keep filling up your head with the globalist BS. Good little sheep. Oh, and keep licking the boots of your masters in the government. They know what is best for you. The UN and climate change are tools used to extract your tax money and squander it on nonsense. Good little sheep. 

 

51 minutes ago, bkkgriz said:

 

Yeah, climate change. Keep buying the corporate media propaganda. I'll put this video up. Of course, none of you climate change truthers will watch it because it has real data and facts. Watch it, don't watch it. I really couldn't care less. Don't think for yourself or do any analysis. Just keep filling up your head with the globalist BS. Good little sheep. Oh, and keep licking the boots of your masters in the government. They know what is best for you. The UN and climate change are tools used to extract your tax money and squander it on nonsense. Good little sheep. 

It seems everyone has a little something to sell. Your friend Tony there has advertisements and donation links all over his website. Tell enough people what they want to hear, and it looks like you can make some good money.