Lima climate conference averts collapse, defers key issues to 2015 Paris conference

The UN climate conference in Lima barely succeeded in salvaging a framework for a new climate change treaty and the outstanding critical issues will have to be thrashed out before the Paris conference next December. Martin Khor reports.

---

DELEGATES at the annual United Nations climate conference, held in Lima, Peru, on 1-14 December, averted the almost-total collapse of a round of talks that was supposed to be an important step towards a new climate change agreement scheduled for adoption in Paris in December 2015.

If the Lima talks had ended without a conclusion on its most important issue, the 'Durban Platform', it would have sent a negative signal that the world is unable to come to grips with its most important challenge - tackling runaway climate change.

Differences over draft

At the time the conference was initially scheduled to close, on 12 December night, many developing countries told the plenary session that they could not accept a resolution that had been prepared by the Co-Chairs of the Durban Platform working group. They found the draft did not contain what they demanded, and it was skewed in favour of the developed countries. Accepting such a draft would put the developing countries at a serious disadvantage.

Groups that rejected the draft included the Africa Group, the least developed countries and the Like-Minded Developing Countries (LMDC) group whose diverse members include Malaysia, China, India, Pakistan, Vietnam, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Sudan, Mali, Argentina, Bolivia, Ecuador and Venezuela.

The Co-Chairs had to concede that their draft could not be passed, and handed the task to the Conference President, Peru's Environment Minister, Manuel Pulgar-Vidal.

It was already 4 am on 13 December. The conference should have ended at 6 pm the day before. The meeting had moved into 'extra time', and with a new referee. Could the President salvage an agreement which could not be reached after two weeks of fierce contest under the Co-Chairs?

The Minister quickly got into the act on 13 December morning, meeting with all the groups and key countries, with all their different views.

A breakthrough came when a critical demand of the developing countries seemed to be accepted by the President and, more importantly, by the United States.

It was the issue of 'common but differentiated responsibilities' (CBDR), a term which is prominent in the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). It denotes that all countries have to act but that the developed countries have to undertake greater commitments because of their role in creating the climate crisis and of their higher economic status. Developing countries also have to act, but their actions are to be supported by finance and technology transfer.

This basic tenet of the Convention has been challenged by the US, the European Union and other developed nations. They want to end the 'differentiation' so that developing countries take on similar obligations as the developed nations. They also want to cut the integral link between the finance they provide and the extent of actions of developing countries.

They obtained an advantage when the terms 'equity' and 'common but differentiated responsibilities' were conspicuously left out when the decision was adopted in 2011 to launch negotiations (known as the Durban Platform) for the new climate agreement. Since then, the developing countries have fought hard to get the CBDR term back on the agenda.

When the final plenary meeting in Lima was convened at 11.30 pm on 13 December, delegates found that a paragraph had been added to the effect that the Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC 'underscores its commitment to reaching an ambitious agreement in 2015 that reflects the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, in light of different national circumstances'.

This is an important paragraph. It was seen by most developing countries as a victory, although they were not happy with the accompanying phrase 'in light of different national circumstances'.

Restored

At the plenary, Malaysia, representing the LMDC, stated that the inclusion of CBDR and also another paragraph in the preamble 'together suggests to us cumulatively that the CBDR principle has been restored and it has been given its rightful place in the context of the Convention and the work that we are going to continue in relation to the new agreement'.

A few other demands of the developing countries were also met in the new text. This enabled them to go along with the new decision. The conference ended at 2 am on 14 December, 32 hours after its scheduled conclusion.

In fact, as critics pointed out, there is not much new in the adopted decision, except perhaps that the CBDR principle would be reflected in the 2015 agreement, something that should have been agreed to from the beginning anyway.

This shows how difficult the negotiations will be in 2015.If it took two whole weeks to reach consensus on a simple text in Lima, imagine how much more contentious and difficult the negotiations will be for an entire new agreement.                                   

Martin Khor is Executive Director of the South Centre, an intergovernmental policy think-tank of developing countries, and former Director of the Third World Network. The above is an edited version of an article which first appeared in The Star (Malaysia) (22 December 2014).

*Third World Resurgence No. 292, December 2014, pp 5-6