Kyoto Protocol: Still Under Threat

Last week I questioned whether or not we should add the Kyoto Protocol, the world’s current agreement to tackle climate change, to the endangered species list.

Let's not add the Kyoto to the same box as this cute Red Panda

This week I am calling for the committed survival of the principles and commitments that Annex 1 countries made under the Kyoto Protocol. Because not only are they under threat, it appears they are on their way out.

Fifteen years ago, rich countries, based on scientific evidence, historical responsibility and economic capability agreed they would take the lead in tackling climate change.

In 2007 in Bali, Australia signed up to the Kyoto Protocol and alongside wealthy countries of the world they reaffirmed that their commitments would be greater than developing countries and different in nature. That they would take deeper emission cuts, and provide money for developing countries in their efforts to address climate change.

But, here in Bangkok, less than two months out of Copenhagen, where we need to see the world come together and agree to a global climate change deal, wealthy developed countries are unpicking the threads of those agreements.

The commitments and principles made under the Kyoto Protocol are under threat.

In a meeting with the Australian delegation earlier this week, one of my NGO colleagues questioned Australia’s position on the continuation of the Kyoto Protocol. Our lead negotiator clearly stated that she did not want to get drawn into the sensationalised “killing of Protocol” debate, she said that there were more important things for the negotiators to spend their time on. However, she did firmly state that Australia was committed to uphold the commitments they have made under Kyoto Protocol.

At first I thought this was a sensible approach, and I felt sure that behind the closed doors of bi-laterals that Australia would be clearly affirming their commitments to the Kyoto Protocol to all of the concerned parties.

But, over the past few days listening to the interventions from Australia, and other wealthy countries in the sessions here in Bangkok, I am not so sure.

Australia’s not the only country saying they want Kyoto to continue. The EU, Japan, New Zealand and others have stated they do want to see the protocol continue. BUT, and yes it is a big BUT, it is clear in the proposals they are making to the UNFCCC that this is not so black and white.

Developed countries are pushing back on the “common but differentiated” responsibilities that they agreed to. They (with the notable exception of Norway) are pushing back on making the level of emission reductions that science, historical responsibility and economic capability demand. They are skirting on their financial obligations to support developing countries (Australia in particular has been very quiet on this issue). And they are trying to force the G77 and China (which represent more than 130 of the world’s countries) to take actions that would be unfair considering the gaping holes in rich country commitments.

What we must (at the very very least!!) see from countries that are party to the Kyoto Protocol are commitments in line with what they have already agreed to. While a discussion on what each country’s fair share is essential, this must start with what rich countries are prepared to commit. Not, what they want to see developing countries do.

Right now, Australia has an emissions reduction target of 25% by 2020 based on 2000 levels. Problematically this has a shopping list of conditions attached to it – not least of all action by developing countries.

Now is not the time for the principles and commitments made under the Kyoto Protocol to be dropped, or weakened. Now is the time to build upon what we already have.

Negotiators must realise that the best rhetoric in the world won’t by itself build a single wind turbine, save a single acre of rainforest, or help a single village respond to the impacts of climate change.

As the lead negotiator for Sudan said: “saying that you are taking the lead does not mean that you are doing it.”

The time is now for rich countries, like Australia, to stop talking about being a leader on climate change, and actually be one. This includes ensuring the Kyoto not only stays alive, but is enhanced.