The efforts by Africa to present a common front in the global negotiations towards a post Kyoto mechanism are indeed commendable. For once, we are seeing the Continent hold discussions to harmonize the African position and to ensure that come Copenhagen, the continent will not be left gaping, and watching the discussions like a battery of uninvited spectators at a robotic conference.
Indeed, past negotiations on climate change issues have been conducted in an environment where our African representatives sat passively, perhaps pensively awaiting for the conclusion of the discussions for them to retreat back to their hotel rooms. Some of the delegates have even used this opportunity to actually go on shopping sprees and to meet up with some of their long lost friends in the diaspora. This has been unfortunate for the continent since it has only resulted in Africa receiving only lip service in the final edits of the agreed to texts.
Perhaps another key impediment to Africa participating effectively in these negotiations can be attributed to a weak selection process of the actual negotiators. Indeed, when the negotiating texts are being developed, the Lingua Franca employed by the different negotiators has been completely foreign to the hastily convened teams from some African countries. Many still feel that Africa can do better when forming the country negotiating teams, especially since it’s usually the senior officials in the respective ministries in charge of environment who always end up making the list. They could be well trained in their core duties as Ministry Officials, but completely lack both the important negotiations skills that are adeptly applied during climate negotiations and deep veracity for detail.
This is particularly clear, especially during the discussions on funding mechanism/commitments and which funding would be obligatory or which funds will be left some unspecified bilateral discussions between countries. Hence as the story goes, some of the African delegates are usually left wondering why ‘these grown up people are wasting time debating on why the word ‘would’ needs to be substituted by the word ‘should’? But therein lies the catch word.
The negotiators from USA, Europe, China and other key blocks in the negotiations are well trained experts with a knack for international law, hence can be able to decipher a mile away the real ‘teeth’ and what could be considered as impediments to national interests. Thus they debate avidly, sometimes into the wee hours of the morning as to why particular texts in the document have to be redrafted. Indeed, a call has been made on a number of occasions for Africa to focus on enhancing the capacity of its negotiators and it’s commendable to note that some efforts are being witnessed in this regard. Even the African position recognizes this important fact.
This will prove useful in the forthcoming negotiations, particularly as the world discusses modalities of transitioning to a new mechanism with the Kyoto protocol expected to come to an end in 2012.
Quite significantly, the Kenya Government has also set in motion the process of developing a National Climate Change Response Strategy which will ensure that the country makes informed choices when responding to Climate Change issues. This is an important process, and the Ministry of Environment has to be commended for taking a lead on this. However, even as the continent works on pushing for a common position for the Copenhagen Conference, it’s important for Africa to consider some of the key considerations that will determine the outcomes of Copenhagen deliberations.
The Obama effect. While it has been documented that President Obama has managed to move the USA significantly back to the negotiating table on Climate Change, the African negotiators have to remain clearly informed that the interests of the USA in Copenhagen will be driven by the corporate world and private sector therein. That, even as the Obama Presidency seeks to ensure that the USA commits to some form of targets on the reduction of emissions, this will have to be consistent to the general desire of corporate America to recover from the global financial crisis that the US is just recovering from. Hence, even the financial commitments the USA will agree to will have to respect this fact. On a positive note though, the African group needs to realize that for once they have a strong ally, since many still recall that former President Bush was in the school of thought that tried to obfuscate the climate change debate.
Another key issue that Africa has to be aware of as it pushes its position in Copenhagen is the recent meteoric rise in Chinese economy and its hitherto unseen resolve to influence global policy discourse. It has been established that the Chinese have a way of creating and sustaining partnerships if they want a particular position to hold sway. Hence it’s interesting to note that the Chinese would for instance decide to use the greater and more aggressive Group of 77 which includes a greater number of emergent Asian economies to ensure that any attempts to limit emissions for China is nipped in the bud. Africa, could decide to meet with China halfway and make some gains from such a loose coalition.
There are many other factors including the role of Europe and other Annex 1 countries, the global financial crisis, and the political developments in Britain where Gordon Brown is himself facing a pretty uncertain future. But it’s important for Africa to move as a unit and ensure that the Copenhagen deliberations do not end up just as many other negotiations have. It’s important for the developed world to be committed to a Compensation Fund of sorts for Africa and other vulnerable nations, but this can only be done with tact, and some degree of muscle on the part of Africa. Africa should not allow itself to be divided during the negotiations, as has happened before!!
(This article was published in the East African Standard on Sunday 25th October 2009 and in the Nairobi Star on 25th October 2009)
BY JEFF MAKEKE
No comments:
Post a Comment