Over the top

Naresh Newar in Copenhagen

The so-called ‘historic’ UN climate conference, 15th session of the Conference of Parties (COP-15), ended in the wee hours of Saturday with a very weak deal, much to the disappointment of all vulnerable and least developed countries and the European Union.

Even as I write this from the conference venue at the Bella Centre, a full plenary session is still ongoing as there is continued uncertainty about whether a deal will be adopted by all 192 countries.

Here is the deal so far: no legally binding agreement, no firm target for limiting global temperature rise, no target years for peaking emissions.

The conference was doomed to failure from day one as we watched politics heat up between government negotiators of developed and developing nations, between the big and small developing nations, and eventually further splitting with the least developed nations. Hope of a reasonable deal became even less likely after heads of states from around the world started arriving in the city from Tuesday onwards. Then. negotiations became no longer about climate change action but more about the political muscle of big nations (including the emerging developing powers), caring little about countries’ vulnerabilities.

Towards the end, all the talk zoomed in on to two countries – China and the US – two of the world’s top carbon emitters, a situation which could have been avoided, had small and vulnerable nations been more united and followed the example of Tuvalu. Despite being the fourth smallest nation with a population of less than 12,000, Tuvalu was able to make a strong stand in Copenhagen. Most of us at Bella Centre had never heard of Tuvalu until its negotiators created quite a standstill of negotiations for several hours on 9 December, demanding a new protocol to force deeper global cuts in emissions, including by fast developing nations. Unfortunately, the proposition was opposed by many developing countries steered by India, China and Saudi Arabia.

No brotherly support
What would have further bolstered Tuvalu’s stance would have been support especially from the poorest and least developed small nations like Nepal. Unfortunately, they decided to remain under the shadow of their ‘big brother’ nations. Perhaps eminent climate scientist and expert on adaptation Saleemul Haq was correct in saying. “Now is crunch time, you have to make a choice. Are you with the vulnerable countries or with big brother. If they give in, they deserve what they get.”

Nepal, for one, lost a great opportunity to make its strong presence felt despite having one of the largest official delegates here. With almost 70 members in its official delegation, Nepal’s team was as big as that of India and China. One wonders why such a big delegation was needed, when only a handful of them were technical experts and journalists. Maybe the rest were just taking advantage of an expensive and lengthy holiday. Copenhagen is the most expensive city in Europe today. Airfare costs at least NPR 100,000 one-way from Kathmandu to Copenhagen and hotel rooms reach around Rs 6,000 per night. Add to that amount per diem, logistical expenses and other miscellaneous costs and it adds up to a hefty sum.

While it may not be fair to compare Nepal with India and China, in comparison to other small nations Nepal has also failed to do much. On the one hand, it had ample reason to speak up, especially being the home of the some of the world’s most visited mountain regions that are facing the reality of fast-receding glaciers. Here it had a chance to champion the mountain issue, so neglected and unaddressed in the previous COPs, yet instead it chose to keep a low profile and remain quiet most of the time. Only on Thursday when Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal took to the stage with the other hundreds of heads of states to give a three-minute address, did he manage to get some attention on the mountain issue.

In his speech, Nepal made some strong statements, using less rhetoric than other leaders and focused specifically on glacial melt and its effect on water resources. Nevertheless, all was forgotten after his few minutes in the limelight were over

Alternative channels
To give small nations like Nepal some credit, they had little chance to make their voices heard in the main plenary sessions in front of the big and emerging developing nations of the G-77 that included India, China and Brazil. Small nations often complained in private and off the record about how they were not getting any support from the big nations. However, they did have opportunities outside the negotiation tables, where the world’s high profile experts, thousands of youth, radical activists and journalists from the world’s best media outlets had gathered and were dying to talk to any country as long as they made a strong stand.

There were nearly 3,500 journalists and an additional 15,000 people from all walks of life inside the Bella Centre at all times. Bangladesh, for example, succeeded in promoting its profile through these means. Its senior officials and ministers were outspoken, their position bolstered by high profile climate change scientists brought to Copenhagen together with the official delegation. Bangladeshi civil society groups also managed to attract enough attention from the international media. They never shied away from criticizing world leaders in the worsening daily rounds of negotiations. Their top officials were often seen entering the jam-packed restricted media centre, where a minimum of 2,000 journalists were constantly seated.

While NGOs, media and government officials from Bangladesh collaborated well, this was not the case with the representatives from Nepal, who had not arrived with a defined strategy. NGOs and INGOs representing Nepal failed to work together with the government. Not a single Nepali official was seen entering the media centre to speak with journalists over the whole two weeks. Even Prime Minister Nepal quietly admitted that experts from NGOs and INGOs from his country were distancing themselves and he seemed quite upset about that fact.

Side events organised by the government and various NGOs were also poorly organized. The much anticipated Summiteers’ Summit failed to get much media attention. While receiving some coverage in the local Nepali media, it got a bare mention internationally except for a few online sites. Even the local Danish newspapers failed to cover the event because the organisers had decided to march in the centre of Copenhagen where no journalists were willing to go in the midst of ongoing negotiations. Nepal should have known that it takes more than just press releases or paper invitations left at the corridor of the Media Centre to create a stir, especially with the thousands of invitations displayed in that same corridor.

And where were all the Nepali youth? I had heard that there were hundreds of them who had applied for the conference. What happened to all the climate youth ambassadors? While I recall seeing a lot of youth representatives from Bangladesh, India, Sri Lanka, and many other countries screaming through the halls of the Bella Centre, I don’t recall seeing anyone from Nepal. There were youth dressed up as green aliens, polar bears, rappers in red, indigenous people, beggars, poets, preachers. That they looked amusing is one thing, but they were successful in getting journalists’ attention to address the serious concerns of their respective countries. One would only wish that someone from Nepal had dressed up as a mountaineer with gears and walked inside the centre. Now that would be an eye catcher.

To end the session with any shine of hope, I am reminded of what one senior official told me: “We’re here just to learn. We will do better next time.”

Maybe. But we definitely lost a great opportunity here.

Naresh Newar is a radio editor for Panos South Asia.