As negotiations in Copenhagen extended into the small hours of Saturday morning, delegates finally emerged with a final document that some felt could be the only agreeable solution. The so called Copenhagen Accord took form as a three page "gentleman's agreement" that asserts that all countries should develop plans to combat global warming and share their results with the international community. The document replaces the working treaty that had been in development by the UN climate programme for the last two years that was hundreds of pages long and included programs that specifically addressed deforestation, international carbon markets, and aid for developing nations. The Copenhagen Accord, which has yet to see a final vote, only requires that nations submit their plans to the UN by February 2010, and strive to cut greenhouse gas emissions by a nationally appropriate amount. Short term goals for 2020 do not exist in the Copenhagen Accord, nor is there any provision to save the Kyoto protocol, which is set to expire at the end of next year. The Copenhagen Accord also does not specify a time table to establish a legally-binding treaty.
President Obama declared the Copenhagen Accord an "important breakthrough" in climate negotiations that would be the foundation for international action "in the years to come." The New York Times stated that Obama was visibly frustrated during his public remarks, and cited an anonymous member of the US delegation who shared that Obama was put off by the fact that the Chinese sent a low-level official to a multi-national summit that was hosting scores of world leaders. It was alongside Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, as well as the heads of South Africa, Brazil, and India, that Obama helped to craft this 3 page agreement. The Chinese negotiator agreed to a larger amount of transparency, though it is unknown what was conceded to secure this.
When the Copenhagen Accord was presented to the greater delegation, there was a general uproar from developing nations who scolded Obama for trying to "buy their future" with the $100 billion aid package. According to Sudan's Lumumba Stanislaus Di-aping, the Copenhagen Accord "is a solution based on the same very values, in our opinion, that channeled six million people in Europe into furnaces." Di-aping was chastised by Sweden's chief negotiator for the holocaust reference.
"The science tells us we must act now, and urgently," said Ian Fry of the small island nation, Tuvalu. "To use a Biblical allusion, it looks like we're being offered 30 pieces of silver to bargain away our future. Mr. President, our future is not for sale."
In light of the widespread opposition to the Copenhagen Accord from developing nations, Conference Chairman and Danish Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen moved to have the convention merely recognize the document, saying that he had little hope that it would receive the unanimous adoption that the climate summit requires. Venezuela, Cuba, and Sudan were the most vocal detractors, who had disparaging marks for both the countries who helped craft the document and the African nations "who sold their silence for the promise of pitiful sums" of international aid.
One of the most critical groups throughout the Copenhagen climate summit, Friends of the Earth, dismissed the Copenhagen Accord as a sham. "This is not a strong deal or a just one – it isn't even a real one," said the group's president Erich Pica. "It's just repackaging old positions and pretending they're new."
"The city of Copenhagen is a climate crime scene tonight, with the guilty men and women fleeing to the airport in shame," said Greenpeace International executive director Kumi Naidoo. "In the end they produced a poor deal full of loopholes big enough to fly Air Force One through."
The few supportive comments came from conservative groups like Club for Growth, an American pro-business initiative. "Pro-growth, limited government conservatives today can celebrate the word, ‘meaningful.’ Today that adjective probably saved thirty million jobs," said President Chris Chocola of President Obama's assertion that the accord is "meaningful" despite its lack of legal or political strength.
Elsewhere, conservative politicians are using the chaos at Copenhagen as a platform to launch scathing criticism at their liberal leaders. Australian opposition leader Tony Abbot, who blocked his liberal Prime Minister's attempts to pass cap-and-trade prior to Copenhagen, criticized the PM for trying "to rush Australia into prematurely adopting a commitment in the absence of similar commitments from the rest of the world." Abbot said that had Prime Minister Rudd succeeded in passing Cap-and-Trade, Australia would have left Copenhagen "foolish and disadvantaged" as the only country with a legally binding emissions program.
In America the story is similar, with Senator John Kerry saying that while progressive, the Copenhagen Accord would make it "exceedingly difficult" for fence-sitting Democrats to give support to domestic climate laws.
The Competitive Enterprise Institute, a pro-business think tank, said that the Copenhagen Accord "makes it easier for certain Senators to say, 'Well if this can't occur globally, why should this proceed domestically?.' Absent a multilateral treaty, unilateral action is futile."
Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), third chair on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, agreed that "the prospects for an economy-wide cap-and-trade are poor [for] next year."
"There are going to be a lot of people who immediately say, the science says you got to do X, Y, Z," said Obama of the criticism directed at him for what some feel is a lackluster outcome at Copenhagen. "Well, we don't have international government," continued Obama, "and even treaties, as we saw in Kyoto, are only as strong as the countries' commitments to participate." A majority of the countries that ratified the Kyoto protocol not only missed their targets, but actually increased their emissions.
Obama referred to China's assertion that international investigators would not be allowed to verify their emissions cuts as part of a "hollow deal," and was the largest sticking point for the American delegation. Obama admitted in his press conference that despite his intense role in crafting the Copenhagen accord that he was unsure if the United States would physically sign the treaty.
Enraged by the process that created the Copenhagen Accord, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced that he is launching an initiative for large-scale reform of international institutions like the United Nations Environment Programme, which he says has allowed "a greener future be held to ransom by only a handful of countries." Calling the requirement for a 192 nation, zero-sum consensus an "antiquated" political system, Brown is calling for the formation of a new international environment program that is independent of the UN and the "disproportionate influence" given to countries like China and India.
To understand what the noted but not adopted Copenhagen Accord contains, we've broken down what the three page document contains, and also provisions that were present in previous documents that are now missing.
- Included: A statement that deep emission cuts are needed.
- Missing: Emission targets, both for 2050 and 2020.
- Included: A statement that global average temperature must stay within 2°C to avoid the worst effects of global warming.
- Missing: An international mechanism, like deforestation reduction or carbon trading, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
- Included: A statement that all countries should submit nationally appropriate plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by February 2010.
- Missing: A timetable for when a legally binding treaty will be established.
- Included: A statement that nations should report their progress every two years to see if emission reductions are on track.
- Missing: An agreement on what international body will verify the aforementioned reports.
- Included: A statement that rich countries should be allowed to develop emission reduction programs in the developing world due to its cost effectiveness.
- Missing: A declaration of how much, if any, climate funding developing nations will receive in order to help them adapt.
Visit ecofactory on Twitter and visit us anytime at twitter.com/ecofactory !
