The Durban Climate Conference was a Monumental Success

COP17, held in Durban, South African from  November 28^th to December 9^th was a unparalleled success, as this official statement from the UN declares. There was no expectation that any kind of a deal would get done, and the consensus was that negotiators would leave the conference in shame, unable to work through a deadlock. In this context, the deal to start negotiating a new deal in 2015 was an unprecedented success … if you look at it from the point of view of the politicians who had tasked their negotiators to come up with some sort of an agreement that made it look like they were doing something, while actually just putting off any real decision to someone else, some other time.  If you look at it from the point of view of the rest of us? Oh yeah, we got sold out.

We were sold out by politicians who are more concerned with their image than their actions. Politicians more concerned with getting re-elected than building a better world for us all to live in. Politicians who tasked their negotiators with getting some kind of a deal done, so they could claim to be doing something and thus look good to the progressives among their electorate, while actually ensuring the status quo until well after their own elected terms end. So, they try to look good to us, while actually doing everything that the corporations that fund them want. Everyone wins, right? We get some vague promise to do something (maybe) sometime in the future, and the corporations get solid promises of doing nothing for the foreseeable future. Oh yeah, everyone gets exactly what they want.

The Durban climate change talks were doomed to fail. The negotiators appointed were not at all concerned with the science of climate change, or with the consequences of climate change, as stated by the chair of the IPCC, Dr. Rajendra Pachauri in this interview. They were there to represent the selfish national interests of the most polluting nations on earth. They were there to make sure that we stayed the wealthiest countries and that nobody would have much of a chance to catch up – at whatever the cost, even certain climatic disaster.

Make no mistake about the deal that was done – it is absolutely meaningless. Worse than meaningless, because it will be used as an excuse that we can carry on as we have been, for at least the next eight years. The deal says that countries will begin – yes, just begin – negotiating a treaty for binding cuts to emission in 2015 (what have the last 17 COP meetings been about again?), to take effect in 2020. Forget for a minute that scientists say emissions must peak by 2015 to have a reasonable chance of avoiding cataclysmic climate change – after all, we already established the negotiators weren’t at Durban because they were interested in the science of climate change. Think about this: the conference ran 35 hours overschedule to work out the specific wording of the ‘binding cuts’ portion of the agreement – with India refusing the phrase “legal agreement”, because they  thought that this wording was to strong legally. They ended up settling on “an agreed outcome with legal force.” But let me ask you this: do you really think India agreed to “an agreed outcome with legal force” understanding that it would be legally binding, if they refused other wording for that same reason? And when they claim that they can’t be legally bound because of the wording, do you think China or the US will agree to binding limits? Not a chance.

Furthermore, what is to stop countries from doing what Canada just did on the Kyoto Accord and walk out on it the year before the targets are supposed to be met? What will the reaction be if the US or China simply says they will not make their targets, and they are withdrawing? Same thing that is happening to Canada for its refusal to meet its international obligations: nothing at all. Besides, even if there is good faith to start negotiating a true deal in 2015 (and you can be sure that there isn’t) what happens if one of the major players changes its mind? What happens if a climate change denier wins the US Presidential election between now and then (or even at any point after that) and refuses binding emissions cuts? The entire deal falls apart.

COP17 in Durban was an absolute farce. It was a show trial for the climate. Everyone knew that no deal would actually get done, but to save face negotiators made some sort of obscure promise to start negotiating at a future date. Negotiators paid more attention to wording like an “agreed outcome with legal force” than they did to the science of climate change. But it doesn’t really matter. Because finding a deal that would reduce carbon emissions isn’t what negotiators were in Durban for. They saved face and did what they were there to do: they managed to propagate the illusion that our political leaders truly want to act, that something is being done on climate change, while actually maintaining the status quo for another few years. Let’s see if the negotiators in 2015 can repeat the great success of 2011, and put off real action for another decade or so.

Proud to be Canadian? Not During Durban Climate Change Conference

When you are Canadian, everyone in this country expects you to be proud to be Canadian - talking about how great Canada is is a national pastime. However, as the Durban Climate Change Conference begins today, I must declare that I am, in no way, proud to be Canadian. The Canadian Government… sorry, the Harper Government will begin its attempt to sabotage any good faith negotiation going on at the conference over the next two weeks.

But it doesn’t have to be like this. Just imagine a world where Canada was a leader on environmental issues. Just imagine if believed in fulfilling its international obligations. Just imagine replacing the blinding anti-Kyoto rhetoric that we constantly get, with comments from the government like:

“Kyoto is the past… We need to find a way to continue its good work into the future.”

“We've already declared that however acute the international pressure, we will insist on a second commitment period target under the Kyoto Protocol."


Imagine if articles in the newspapers read like:

“There is a recognition that Kyoto isn’t fair. But there is also a recognition that something has to be done, and working under Kyoto without major emitters like the US is better than working under a strictly voluntary system or no system  at all” Canada’s Environment Minister Peter Kent told The Canadian Press before leaving for Durban. “And it's certainly not as effective as we’d like, but there has to be an understanding that we cannot criticize others for not being a part of the Treaty if we aren’t a part of it ourselves, and doing nothing is not an option.”


Imagine if, instead of criticism, environmental groups and other political parties could praise the government:

“It Kyoto succeeds these next two weeks in Durban,” says Garry Neil, the executive director of the Council of Canadians “Canada will have played a leading role, to our collective pride.”

“It’s very promising from an environmental perspective,” said Matt Horne, Climate Change Director at the Pembina Institute. “It sends a pretty strong signal that Canada is serious about the international process being successful. It certainly is going to be a big positive checkmark on our international reputation.”

"It will reverberate around the world," Elizabeth May told CTV about Canada’s efforts to strengthen the Kyoto Accord. "Canada will be a hero globally if it goes through with this."

Imagine if Harper himself actually believed in making a positive change for climate change:

Stephan Harper once wrote a letter to all members of the Reform Party, shortly after being elected leader, in which he extoled the virtues of the Kyoto Protocol and urged Reform Party supporters to put pressure on the Liberal government to ratify the treaty. Among his points was:

 “Kyoto is essentially a progressive project to suck carbon emissions out of the economies of wealth-producing nations.”

If that were what I was reading in the paper, hearing on the news, then I would scream at the top of my lungs, “I am proud to be Canadian! I am proud that we make a difference! I am proud that we stand up for what is right!” Instead, I sit in front of my computer and type; I am ashamed to be Canadian. I am ashamed that we out our needs in front of the needs of the world. I am ashamed that we stand in the way of what is right.