Bali bubble, David Steven

David Steven — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:23:21 +0000

The problem with being in the Bali bubble is that it's far too easy to lose all sense of proportion. You get hooked on the minutiae of the negotiations and, like any addict, forget about the things that really matter.

Rumours flash from delegations through NGOs to the media (and then bounce right back again). What's true now, may not be in twenty minutes' time. And the problem gets worse the longer the talks go on. Too many people cooped up together, staying up too late (either working or drinking, or sometimes both), going stir crazy, far from home...

This afternoon saw the first signs of this characteristic madness here in Nusa Dua. Today was the day the basic elements of the Bali war were drawn and so we had a phoney battle to see how it would all work out.

Remember that we're here to agree a process. These are talks about talks. We're trying to agree a roadmap for more negotiations that will take us to a deal in Copenhagen at the end of 2009.

But there's always room for drama and we've found it. So week one was about drawing out the protagonists. On one side, those who want a roadmap with a destination built-in (25-40% cuts for rich countries by 2020, global emissions cut in half or more by 2050). The EU leads this camp. The UN and NGOs are supporters too.

On the other, those who want talks ‘without prejudice'. This is Team America, with the Canadians as loyal foot soldiers, and the Japanese, and possibly Australians, prepared to lend a hand as well.

That leaves a lot of other countries of course, who could combine to cut either side down. Developing countries are ambivalent and suspicious. South Africa is catalyst of an ambitious deal and may be joined by China. India's A-list negotiators only arrived today. It may take a hard line.

The Saudis, meanwhile, deserve a category of their own. They don't seem to be for anything, apart from the idea that they should be compensated for a climate regime's impact on their oil revenues.

So, it's mid afternoon in the bubble and everyone's beginning to think game on. Then out of nowhere - by the force of our collective will - we summon up a spat between our two sides.

Vital ‘text' is said to have been cut from the talks between members of the Kyoto club (rich countries bar the US). Rich countries, the story goes, are reneging on their commitments.

Civil society representatives are up in arms and fan out in the media centre. These guys are superb communicators, making every government here look like rank amateurs - and soon journalists are hitting the panic button.

The next thing you know, the crisis has escalated. Targets are now out of the main Bali roadmap as well. Now that really would be big news. The US would be triumphant. The Euroweenies left to slink back to Brussels.

I hear about the news through Australia's The Age:

Quote:

The latest draft of an accord for the 190-nation December 3-14 meeting, which is seeking to launch two years of negotiations on a new pact to slow global warming, dropped a goal of cuts in emissions of 25-40 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020.

"The numbers are out of the latest text", one delegate said, adding that the United States had led opposition along with countries including Japan and Canada.

Now something didn't add up. I can imagine that happening, but I just hadn't heard about it happening yet. Equally strangely, Yvo de Boer, the head UN guy at these talks, was reported by the BBC as saying there was ‘little chance' of ambitious targets making it into the final agreement.

That was completely at odds with what he'd told us at his lunchtime press conference:

Quote:

The scientific community has indicated that industrialized countries need to reduce their emissions in the order of 25-40% by 2020 if we're to get to grips with this issue. That's going to a critical part of the discussion on the future. It's in the interest of everyone that we walk away from here with a clear sense of where this process is intended to take us.

Now that may well be going to happen. But according to what people are saying in my little corner of the bubble, it hasn't yet. Sure enough Reuters returned with a correction (though the BBC quote stands and may well be accurate). That unnamed delegate again:

Quote:

"The numbers are still in the text. There has been a lot of pressure to take them out," one delegate with intimate knowledge of the draft negotiations said, correcting his own earlier statement that the numbers had been removed.

So that's the Bali roadmap back in play.

Then (and I hope you're keeping up), we hear that the Kyoto club has put stringent targets back on the table. If they were ever of it. Which I am not sure they have been since they were first signed up to in Vienna.

Now I'm a lightweight and am off to bed. The true hardcore, meanwhile, last the whole fortnight without any sleep. Probably everything will have changed again by the time I arrive back at the convention centre whenever I can drag myself out of bed tomorrow.

So... some guidance for readers:

It ain't over until it's over. Nothing is final until we finish on Friday (or Saturday if it all runs late).
Even when it's over, it's only just begun. The talks we're hoping to start now actually finish in 2009 (or 2010 or 2011 if it all runs late).

And, finally, I am not even going to pretend to you that I'll be maintaining a sense of proportion. Just remember that everything I say is true only at the instant it's posted. Bubble reality is flexible, fungible, and friable.

There's some sort of weird quantum shit going down. And where weird quantum shit is concerned, it's always the reader's fault. Isn't that what Heisenberg taught us?

open Democracy News Analysis - Bali bubble, David Steven - Comments

Bali bubble, David Steven