Copenhagen Climate Summit: Rhetoric or Reality?
Posted on Saturday, December 19th, 2009
Many believe that Obama was the savior of the talks. He came in when the discussions were on the verge of collapse and spent 13 hours brain storming, playing hard ball and negotiating till he reached an agreement that most of the 193 nations accepted.
The objective of the summit was to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; the world leaders present were unable to reach a consensus on this. So instead after days of discussions and negotiations, the Copenhagen summit resulted in document called the Copenhagen accord. The accord will curb greenhouses gases, provide ways to verify countries’ emissions, save rain forests, shield vulnerable nations from the impacts of climate change, and share the costs.
The Copenhagen Accord was the brain child of U.S President Barrack Obama and a small group of other nations. The conference as a whole did not adopt the accord, but voted to “take note” of it.
The Copenhagen summit was dominated by the same disputes. While everyone paid lip service to the need to take united action to reduce global warming, each national delegation was primarily seeking to defend its own narrow economic interests at the expense of its rivals.
So was the summit a success? That depends on your point of view?
On the up side, the accord does unite US, China and other major developing countries in an effort to curb global greenhouse gas emissions. On the flip side however, the summit did not result in a legally binding deal or any commitment to reach one in future. The accord calls on countries to state what they will do to curb greenhouse gas emissions, but these will not be legally binding.
The dangers of global warming cry out for an integrated and planned international response. However, the fundamental contradictions of capitalism—between world economy and between social production and private profit—make that impossible.
Verdict: The Copenhagen Climate Summit flatters to deceive.
