Para ler esse texto em português, clique aqui
I don’t know about you, but today I realized that I cannot stand to listen anymore about a “fair, ambitious and binding deal” (FAB Deal) as a result of the climate negotiations. It’s not because I do not defend it and I do not believe in fairness, appropriate goals for climate protection and legislation, but that expression, like “sustainability” and “low-carbon economy” only makes sense when it ceases to be words and start to become actions.
In the penultimate day of talks in Tianjin, I listen to people talking and all I hear is “blah blah blah.” I think my brain has heard the same speeches so often, the same words, same expressions, that it enters in auto-pilot. Occasionally, there appears a new term, which my brain promptly logs, such as “balanced package”, that I have mentioned here, and ICA. I still haven’t figured out what the latter acronym means, but I know it has to do with MRV. Sometimes I find myself thinking when REDD has become REDD +… I do not know how many pages all the existing acronyms about this negotiating process would occupy if anyone tried to compile them. The increasing number of acronyms and technical terms every session shows how complex this whole process has become. Anyway, my post is not about that.
I was saying that I am tired of the repetitive process. I long for real progress, true actions, nothing less than that. Don’t countries and their negotiators realize how ridiculous and, at the same time worrying, these negotiations are becoming? Can anyone imagine itself participating in CoP-25 with outstanding issues and still taking the Climate Convention (UNFCCC) seriously? In June, in Bonn, WWF made a joke about the slow pace of negotiations that I commented on this text.
On Friday, the issue of Brazil’s refusal to let the discussions of the AWG-KP contact group on legal matter go forward still remained – I have already spoken about this issue on Tuesday and yesterday.
Yesterday, I spoke with the Brazilian negotiator responsible for the Kyoto Protocol track and he said that the position to not discuss any article beyond 3.9 of the Kyoto Protocol in the AWG-KP contact group is not only a Brazilian position, but also G-77+China’s. He said Brazil is not blocking the discussions because the AWG mandate relates only to Article 3.9 (second commitment period of the Protocol). The country accepts to discuss other items in the CMP, but not under the AWG-KP.
Today, I talked to the head of the Brazilian delegation and he said that Brazil will not let a political discussion happen within a technical group on legal matters. Brazil fears that opening the discussion on other articles would leave the door open to developed countries questioning the existence of a second commitment period and the Kyoto Protocol itself.
No group meeting was scheduled for today. However, in the afternoon, there was an informal plenary for the chair to consult countries on a “balanced package” of decisions to Cancun. The issues that dominated the session were the blocking of legal discussions on the second commitment period and LULUCF. Nothing new here either. Long story short: with the exception of some countries such as Norway (a true leader) and Tuvalu (that expects more sanity in this process), the same speeches were, as always, repeated. Brazil, together with the G77+China, continued to defend its position, calling for leadership, commitment and collective action with the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol.
It is clear that the expectations for CoP-16, which will happen in less than two months, are nowhere near the expectations for CoP-15. Nevertheless, and despite not knowing exactly which package I will take home with me from Cancun, I am still waiting for news (and sanity).
About the authorJuliana Russar
Apaixonada por política internacional e desenvolvimento sustentável. Sou formada em Relações Internacionais, tenho 26 anos, vivo em São Paulo e atualmente sou coordenadora da 350.org Brasil e faço parte do programa Oxfam International Youth Partnerships. Acompanho as negociações desde 2007. Essa é a minha quinta Conferência das Partes.