COP-23 negotiations came to an end on November 18 in Bonn, Germany. One thing was clear. Negotiations were partially deflated but not completely derailed as many had suspected because of Trump's rejection of the Accord (that had been supported by his predecessor, Barack Obama) and defence of fossil fuels. The US approach nevertheless cast a long shadow on the proceedings. There were key disagreements that revolved round how to share responsibilities for drawing down greenhouse gas emissions and the money required for achieving this through adaptation and mitigation.
The media, always alert about the evolving dynamics, did not fail to draw attention to the fact that White House Officials had hosted a sideline event with energy company bosses on November 13 to defend the continued use of fossil fuels - coal, oil and natural gas - that emit planet-warming and climate-altering gases when used. This approach, according to some analysts, did not help in the making of enough progress in developing the much-awaited "rules-book" for executing provisions in the Paris Agreement which enters into force in three years. One, however, needs to note here that White House Special Adviser on Climate Change, George David Banks, after the sideline meeting told the media that President Trump was still open to staying in the Paris Pact.
It may be recalled that the Paris Treaty calls for limiting average global warming to 'well under' two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Farenheit) compared to pre-industrial levels or 1.5 degree Centigrade, if possible. Experts believe that anything over 2.0 degrees Centigrade dooms the world to calamitous climate change with more extreme superstorms, droughts, floods and land-grabbing sea level rise. A report, published while the COP-23 was in progress, warned that emissions of Carbon dioxide, the main planet-warming gas, was set to rise by two per cent in 2017 after three years of hardly any growth.
Nations have submitted voluntary emissions-cutting commitments under the Paris Pact. Scientists pointed out at COP23 that current pledges were not being upheld. This was placing the world on course for warming of 3.0 degree Centigrade or more. The scientists have advised to make an an urgent upgrade of the global commitment to phase out or reduce greenhouse gases produced from fossil fuel. Environmentalist activists in separate meetings held on the sidelines have also stressed on this issue and underlined the need for countries to review and rachet up their commitments to cut carbon.
Fiji, holding the responsibility of Presidency of this meeting in Bonn, has proposed what is being called - the Talanoa Dialogue. It is understood that over the next year, a series of discussions will take place to help countries review the promises they made earlier under the Paris Pact. Results from such review will eventually be discussed in the next Climate Conference to be held in Katowice, Poland in December, 2018.
There is general agreement that many governments can now see a clean energy future that is not only achievable but also affordable. But most industrialized countries -from Europe to Japan to the USA - are not on track to meet their emission goals. This in turn is creating the risk of destabilizing ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica, drastic sea-level rise and more destructive heat waves and droughts.
This anxiety has been reflected in the comment made by Maldives Environment Minister Thariq Ibrahim. While addressing the Plenary he stated "while the Paris Agreement represents a remarkable diplomatic achievement, it will be judged by history as little more than words on paper if the world fails to take the level of action needed to prevent the loss of entire island nations."
The COP23 Conference saw developed and developing countries "butt heads on several issues" - mainly financing of operations related to adaptation and mitigation of after-effects of climate change. Developing countries demanded detailed progress reports on the execution of promises made earlier by rich, developed nations to boost climate finance to US$ 100 billion per year by 2020. Many poorer countries pointed out that they were the first to feel the sting of climate change impacts and needed cash to make the costly shift away from atmosphere-fouling coal and also to shore up their defences against extreme weather. This feeling led 20 governments from both wealthy and developing nations, led by Britain and Canada, to openly promise on November 16 a coal phase-out initiative.
This was followed by French President Macron announcing the hosting of the "One Planet Summit" in Paris on December 12, 2017. Nearly 100 Heads of State and Government, as well as business leaders have been invited to this meeting. President Trump has, however, been left out. It is hoped that this Conference will be able to identify challenges common to all countries and then suggest steps and measures on how to overcome them. Germany has already pledged Euro 50 million to the Adaptation Fund this year.
The summary of the outcomes titled "Bula Momentum for Implementation" issued at the conclusion of the Conference agreed on many aspects but significantly could not agree on how to cover climate change-induced Loss and Damage in vulnerable developing countries. Instead of arranging financing from the funds promised by developed countries, a proposal, named Insu-Resilience Global Partnership, was put forward that would provide 400 million poor and vulnerable people with insurance. Apparently, 25 large insurance companies have joined the Global Partnership with the supposed aim of reducing climate vulnerability.
Such a step, as expected, has been received with severe criticism from activists who have pointed out that poor and vulnerable people, who have done nothing to cause the climate crisis, should not have to pay for the climate insurance. Some activists have, instead, suggested that a climate damage tax should be introduced to help out the vulnerable people and this should be paid for by the fossil fuel industries.
The participants at the COP23 Conference agreed on one simple fact. They stressed that the world needed to have Germany, France, UK, Canada, New Zealand and Japan stepping up and providing real leadership. They felt that this would actually help deliver the ambition unfurled earlier in Paris.
It would be pertinent to refer to certain comments made by our Environment Minister Anwar Hossain Monju in this Conference. He pointed out quite correctly that Bangladesh was looking forward to a simple procedural format regarding the Adaptation Fund and noted that "the Fund would be very important for the vulnerable developing countries and particularly LDCs and the SIDs". He drew attention to the need for countries like Bangladesh to be able to address the issues of adaptation with the technologies that can deal with protecting its population by providing early warning and by minimizing the potential economic and livelihood damages from the extreme climate change impacts. Consequently, effective implementation of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) by developed countries was critical. It was also underlined that although adaptation was Bangladesh's priority, nevertheless, it was also focusing on energy efficiency, energy conservation and use of renewable energy.
We have difficult days ahead in resolving the differences of opinion among States regarding how to tackle climate change and what measures need to be taken to avert this growing crisis. However, we should also try, as underlined by President of COP-23 Frank Bainimarama, Prime Minister of Fiji, to work out a functional matrix through which this Global Partnership can make a practical response to the needs of those who suffer loss because of climate change. This will enable countries like Bangladesh to make a more resilient form of development and also be able to adapt to the great challenge of climate change.
The writer, a former Ambassador and Chief Information Commissioner of the Information Commission, is an analyst specialized in foreign affairs, right to information and good governance.
