Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. - Frederick Douglass
by Fred Milligan
PEC Representative at COP 26
The
events of this COP26 have proven this in spades.
The
second week started out as more of the same kinds of events:
A
program sponsored by the World Council of Churches and the Church of Sweden
(Lutheran Church) on their efforts to have the concept of “ecocide” or the
destruction of species and eco-systems become codified in international law was
explained in one event.
Another
event focused on the intersection of human rights with the loss and damage
related to climate change and the efforts to combat these.
We
viewed a video of a speaker from an Asian country who commenting on the
efforts of multi-national companies to silence those attempting to protect
their rights to clean land, air and water said: “They tried to bury us, they
didn’t know we were seeds.”
The
woman representing the Quakers at the United Nations spoke about a document,
long in the formation stage that will be coming before the U.N. General
Assembly in the coming session establishing that environmental rights are human
rights.
A Young
woman from Pacific islands expressed frustration and anger about the propensity
of the developed world to try to find technological solutions to problems which
local people already understand how to deal with. She described her culture’s
practice of designating sectors of the ocean around their island as set aside
for a certain period of time for replenishment. Afterwards the area is
re-opened for fishing with rituals and prayers that honor the intricate nature
of the relationship they have with the sea creatures.
She
said: “We’re sick of the talking, just bring on the action of phasing out
fossil fuels. No more blah, blah, blah.”
A young
Brazilian man said that greed is a great part of the problem. “It’s important
for young activists to learn from older generations who lived when the skies
were still blue.”
A
Franciscan priest from the Philippines spoke about how November 8 was the
anniversary of cyclone Hayan that killed 10,000 people in one night bringing
the nation to its knees in grief and anguish.
A human
rights approach to climate change mitigation
Is one
that takes the power and money dynamics seriously
A
Catholic sister from Srilanka spoke to the reality of climate anxiety and
fear.
There
was an Ecumenical service of solidarity with Custodians of the Forest Organised
by Christian Aid and held at the Sandyford Henderson Memorial Church, 13
Kelvinhaugh Street, Glasgow
It
included first hand reports from people putting their lives at risk to stand in
the way of the destruction of the Amazon rain forest.
The
Preacher spoke on Romans 8 text about the creation being subjected to
frustration through the abuse being inflicted upon it through all the
extractive and exploitative processes of human efforts to dominate the land and
those who attempt to protect it. The scripture speaks of how the earth is “waiting
expectantly for the revealing of the children of God.” She then said: “If we
need to be revealed, it may be that we are hiding for some reason? Why are
we hiding? Is it because we have been neglecting our role as the tenders and
keepers of creation? Her conclusion on Paul’s meaning in these verses for our
day is that by freeing ourselves from the self-imposed bondage of hiding (as
children of God, and care-takers of the earth) we will turn from our support of
the status quo abuse and assist with liberate creation so that it may be healed
and made whole along with humanity.
State
Department Negotiating Team “Up-date” Meeting
On
Wednesday, the draft agreement was released and I suddenly realized that I
needed to find a way to connect with the U.S. negotiating team. I was
particularly excited by the fact that this draft made the first mention since
the Paris Agreement, calling for the phasing out of fossil fuels.
Then,
as I was looking for a place to sit for lunch, I encountered a member of the
U.S. sub-committee on finance. She was unable to commit to the kind of lobbying
I had in mind, but gave me her email address and offered to pass along my
emailed request for a meeting to the person in charge of “constituency
relations”.
As it
turned out, this was the same person who had been sending daily updates to Bill
Somplasky-Jarman, who had already given me that person’s contact info. I
received a quick response from him and filled out the contact form, which
included a request for our “point of contact” who was Rebecca Barnes back in
Louisville.
First
thing the following day, there was a note from Rebecca that I had been invited
to join an “Up-date” micro-soft Teams call with the lead negotiator. It was not
the one-on-one conversation I had hoped for but it was the closest I would come
to making direct input into the negotiating team.
I
passed along the link to a few others and once on the call noted that it also
included individuals still in the U.S. as well as some of us who were in
Glasgow a total of 61 persons.
The
moderator had invited a member of the U.S. department of transportation to the
call and it was something of a “dog and pony” show about the carbon reducing
and climate change focused elements of the just passed infrastructure
legislation. But then the moderator did an overview of what is called the
“Cover Decision” paper omitting any mention of the precedent setting line in
the draft.
So,
when the opportunity came for questions I posted my “raised hand” and then had
to wait for a long time through what I considered mostly tedious minutae of
rather technical responses to other questions before suddenly hearing my name
called.
I
expressed concern that the moderator had failed to mention the call to halt the
use of fossil fuels in the draft of the cover decision document. The response
was that the U.S. team was “not opposed” to anything in the paragraph on
mitigation, including the line about fossil fuels and saw the current language
as the “floor” which could be built upon for an even stronger statement.
However,
his hesitance to single out the fossil fuel language led me along with Burkhard
and Bill who were also listening in on the call, to feel that the U.S. was
likely to also not be “opposed” to eliminating that reference.
(I have
a complete notes of the meeting should anyone be interested in seeing these.)
Interfaith
Liaison Committee and the Talanoa Document
The ILC
works as a platform for faith-based organisations to facilitate dialogue and
action. The ILC meets during the annual UN climate negotiations and regularly
online to collaborate on faith advocacy for climate ambition, embracing all the
pillars of the UNFCCC and of the Paris Agreement. The World Council of Churches
staffperson, Henrik Grape, along with a non-Christian female co-chair, provides
leadership to this group.
This
year the ILC sponsored a gathering at a local Glasgow synagogue and organized a
conversation amongst those 200+ persons gathered there and on-line in a process
called a Talanoa Dialogue. This is a process, originating in Pacific islands,
through which each participant is offered time and space to offer up their
thoughts concerning the matter being considered by the group. The group sang
and prayed together and then responded to the questions: Where are we now?
Where do we want to go? And how do we get there?
The
process extended late into the night and included break-out discussion groups
on the key themes mentioned by participants. Based on this Talanoa, Henrik and
a few others developed a document that was presented to the COP leadership. I
will be happy to make the entire document available to anyone who would like to
see it, but here are the key “asks”:
Advocacy
We call
on COP26 to
●
include faith groups as a constituency in the climate talks.
We
invite people of faith to
●
advocate by example and highlight different ways of living with a smaller
ecological footprint.
Resilience
and empowerment
We
invite people of faith to
●
create time and spaces for meditation, prayer and silence for people to gain
the perspective of working for the whole of the natural world, of which
humanity is one part.
●
create programmes for empowerment of people mentally, physically and materially
at all levels to respond to the urgency of the present time.
Finance
We call
on COP26 to
●
provide more grants rather than loans and erase climate debts.
● move
from “aid” to “just compensation” for the Global South.
●
deliver climate finance at scale and meet the USD 100 billion finance target.
Loss
and damage
We call
on COP26 to
●
effectively address loss and damage in a spirit of solidarity between the
Global North
and
Global South.
●
provide new, additional and necessary finance to help poorer and more
vulnerable
countries
to address loss and damage.
Gender
Inclusive Climate Action
We call
on COP26 to
●
monitor and ensure that the Gender Action Plan is implemented nationally, and
in
international
cooperation, including through climate finance.
●
ensure that a holistic, intersectional, and transformative lens is clearly
incorporated
into
Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and National Action Plans.
●
develop proposals and processes in consultation with grassroots women’s
organisations.
Adaptation
We call
on COP26 to
●
ensure adaptation is at the centre of the climate agenda.
● make
50% of the annual $100 billion commitment for climate action available for
adaptation, and available now.
Human rights
We call
on COP26 to
●
promote accountability among the parties of the UNFCCC for their climate
actions, in
particular
in proving that their climate actions do not infringe on human rights.
●
ensure policy coherence between climate change, development and human rights.
●
uphold human rights principles in the NDCs.
Just
Transition
We call
on COP26 to
●
develop spaces for social dialogue.
●
ensure that the costs of transitioning to a post-fossil fuel economy do not
fall on the
already
vulnerable, including by providing training, compensation, and social
protection
for workers.
Climate
science
We call
on COP 26 to
● take
decisions that align with climate science delivered by IPCC reports.
●
involve faith-based organisations and their traditions that promote a more
sustainable lifestyle.
Indigenous
people
We call
on COP 26 to
●
protect indigenous peoples’ rights when taking action on climate change.
● take
notice of the Indigenous wisdom and worldviews.
Youth
We call
on COP 26 to
●
incorporate an intergenerational perspective in every decision made to halt
greenhouse
gas emissions.
●
ensure the representation of young people in climate discussions.
Global
Governance
We call
on COP 26 to
● start
a process to design and build new global institutions and initiatives
based
on an ethic of caring for all, with a clear commitment to take care of
each
other, across the whole of the human family
●
foster a spirit of ethical leadership and accountability in the UNFCCC
decisions
● close
the gap between word and deed in the climate decisions made under UNFCCC
COP27
in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt
In
looking toward the next COP27 in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt the question was asked
what specific issues or concerns members of the group might suggest for
organizing our efforts there. I suggested that this location would be an
excellent one for raising the topic of water rights and use, its scarcity, its
symbolic place in the various religious cultures and the conflict it
increasingly engenders among the various national and business interests that
rely on it. The case studies of the Nile and the Jordan were suggested as important
for us to lift up during our time there.
ACT
Alliance Loss and Damage Event
Speakers
differed somewhat on whether it is possible to actually quantify the issue of
the adequate compensation due to a region for the destruction of animal
habitat, such as coral reefs, whole species of life forms, etc. which, once
they are gone can no longer be brought back to life.
One
speaker, however, offered that “Fair share” costs have been quantified through
complex economic models as developed by an institute (in Stockholm I believe).
This is based on the “polluter pays” principle, and factors in the historic
amount of carbon and other greenhouse gasses and other harmful actions
contributed by various nations of the “developed” world. This renders it
possible and imperative that wealthy nations fund a program to make reparations
and pay expenses of loss and damage.
Faith
actors have an important role to play in providing healing and leadership in
address loss and damage.
First
Final Day, Nov. 12
We
finally arrived at the last scheduled day of COP when the 196 national partners
to the Paris agreement would hopefully come to an agreement on the exact
wording of their “Decision Statement”.
At our
morning briefing, Cornelia, the German ACT Alliance chairperson came to our
morning strategy session and announced that she had just left a consultation
with the German negotiators. They had announced that the initial summation of
the International Energy Agency that the various Nationally Determined
Comittments and other initiatives of the previous two weeks would assure, (if
fully kept) that the earth would not warm beyond an additional 1.8 degrees
Celsius over pre-industrial surface temperatures,
Counted
theoretical “sinks” and the turning away from fossil fuels was “bull-shit”.
When I asked for clarification about this she responded that this is because it
depended upon an overly optimistic and speculative scenario in which all the
nations would fulfill their committments in ways they have never done in the
past. The more realistic number, she was told, is around 2.4 degrees Celsius,
which is practically un-survivable. This is the number offered by the Carbon
Tracker organization.
Positives
and Negatives
According
to one blogger, James Murray, “If you're looking for #COP26
upsides
it's notable no one is arguing about the science, no one is arguing about
whether climate change is a crisis, and no one is arguing whether we need to
get to net zero emissions or not. The disagreements are all about precisely how
we deliver.”
The
speaker from Panama was quite direct in challenging the efforts to water down
the fossil fuel language and called to leave it in the ground. He also called
on negotiating teams to include indegenous, female and young people and their
gifts as Panama has done. The average age of their delegation is 29!
In the
afternoon, there was a “People’s Plenary” approved by the Presidency and
security people, that started in the Blue zone and then moved outside to join
with the youth from Fridays for Future school strike. There was a good bit of
chanting and speeches, but the crowd seemed small for what they were trying to
accomplish. I’d say around a thousand people, tops.
But at
the end of the day, there was no agreement on the decision document and the
Presidency had to work through the night to draft something that would be
watered down enough for all parties to agree to support and say the event had
been a success.
Second
Last Day, Saturday, Nov. 13th
New
drafts of an agreement on the different sections were released at 8:00 a.m.
this morning and are being debated and “tweaked” (read: watered down even
more.)
Another
COP is now past and all the activists are frustrated and disappointed with the
out-come of this event that was billed as the “last hope for planet earth.”
At the
moment it appears as though this draft will be agreed.
1)It
calls for the reduction and phase out of “un-abated use of coal and inefficient
fossil fuel subsidies.”
2)It
places “loss and damage” into play as a new section of concern but without a
specific financial commitment
3)It
apologizes for lack of honoring the 100 billion USD per year for mitigation and
adaptation transfer from wealthy nations who have created the problem to the
poor nations who have contributed far less and to implement this beginning
immediately.
4)Establishment
and funding of the Santiago Network to provide technological expertise to poor
countries
5)specific
call for gender inclusiveness and local wisdom in decision-making in the
process of mitigation and adaptation
6)It
calls for nations to renew commitments every two years rather than the Paris
agreement’s every five years.
There
are many details that could have been better or different. For instance, in the
last moment, after hours of “informal stock-taking” comments by one after
another parties, India asked for (more likely, demanded) a revision in the text
replacing the phrase “phase out the use of unabated coal with “phase down the
use of unabated coal” basically stripping the most impactful element in the
document. However, it does keep the 1.5 degrees celsius surface
temperature increase since pre-industrial times goal within reach.
Once
again we learn:
“Power
concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.”
Frederick
Douglass
No comments:
Post a Comment