<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.opendemocracy.net" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>open Democracy News Analysis - A never-ending night, and longer day, David Steven  - Comments</title>
 <link>http://www.opendemocracy.net/global_deal/torture_continues</link>
 <description>Comments for &quot;A never-ending night, and longer day, David Steven &quot;</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>Stephen Leahy on &quot;A never-ending night, and longer day&quot;</title>
 <link>http://www.opendemocracy.net/global_deal/torture_continues#comment-438661</link>
 <description>David, I&#039;ve been watching most of the meeting on the live UN webcast over the past few days and you&#039;ve been providing an excellent summary and explanation of the issues. This has been without question the best Bali blog, I almost felt as if I were there. 

Congratulations and thanks very much for your efforts.

Stephen
 (an environmental journalist who couldn&#039;t be there)</description>
 <pubDate>Sat, 15 Dec 2007 16:21:43 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Stephen Leahy</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 438661 at http://www.opendemocracy.net</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>A never-ending night, and longer day, David Steven </title>
 <link>http://www.opendemocracy.net/global_deal/torture_continues</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;
A rolling post, updating the tortuous path towards a Bali agreement. &lt;strong&gt;Update 1&lt;/strong&gt;: a tentative agreement that will be debated further, 8am tomorrow morning. &lt;strong&gt;Update 2&lt;/strong&gt; (the next morning): the agreement begins to unwind. &lt;strong&gt;Update 3&lt;/strong&gt;: misprint in the text! &lt;strong&gt;Update 4&lt;/strong&gt;: farce. &lt;strong&gt;Update 5&lt;/strong&gt;: Shameful scenes - Yvo de Boer in tears. &lt;strong&gt;Update 6:&lt;/strong&gt; Just when it seemed impossible, Bali roadmap agreed. &lt;strong&gt;Update 7: &lt;/strong&gt;De Boer returns.  
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
&lt;em&gt;The story so far&lt;/em&gt; 
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
According to the UN&amp;#39;s Yvo
de Boer, a small group of ministers have agreed text on adaptation, technology
transfer and finance. That&amp;#39;s the good news, though their work could be unpicked
later on in plenary.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Another group, meanwhile,
has agreed text that covers developed country commitments to cut emissions.
It&amp;#39;s now arguing about arrangements for developing countries, an acrimonious
discussion that we believe pits the US, Canada and possibly Japan against the
155 members of the G77.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Then, the group will move
onto the question of the charmingly named ‘preambular text&amp;#39;. The EU is desperate
to see this reflect IPCC findings and to specify a ‘range&amp;#39; of emission cuts by
developed countries. The US is said to ‘agnostic&amp;#39; about IPCC science on these
issues.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
The next stage is to agree
an end date for the negotiations. Most countries want 2009, though arguments over
another date are still possible. 
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Finally, the question of
the status of the negotiations needs to be agreed. Will it be a formal process?
Or just an informal dialogue? 
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Once all this is settled, the
small groups will report back to the conference President. And then, the
proposed text will be presented to a plenary at which all countries have a chance
to say their bit. 
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
(First of course, it will
need to be translated into six languages and photocopied a few billion times.)
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Hopefully, countries will
endorse whatever is given to them, but there will be plenty of scope for delegates
to get picky about the details. That could add hours onto the schedule of a
conference that was supposed to end hours ago.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Ban Ki-Moon, we have just
heard, is flying in to assist the process. And he&amp;#39;ll give a press conference at
eleven tomorrow. I desperately hope everything will be done by then...
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update: &lt;/strong&gt;A tentative agreement&lt;/em&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
It all ended suddenly - and
inconclusively. The small island states had thrown a party in the corridors,
while ministers struggled to iron out disagreements on the Bali text. The
islands were drowning their sorrows while waiting to drown, a handwritten sign
said.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Then, at around, 2 am, the
ministerial meeting broke up. An agreement had been reached, ready for approval
at a final session of all countries tomorrow morning. Bali was on its final
straight - or was it?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
As ministers attempted to
break through a scrum of reporters, activists and other onlookers, rumours
began to swirl round the convention centre. 
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
The Japanese and Indonesian
ministers briefed their domestic media, while German Environment Minister,
Sigmar Gabriel drew the biggest crowd as he stopped repeatedly to put the
European side of the story. 
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
It had not been a good
night for the EU, it seemed. A key battle had been over whether to include
reference to IPCC science in an agreement that merely sets the stage for two
years of negotiation that should lead to a new global deal on climate. 
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
It seems that all numbers
have been excluded, a key American demand. Instead, IPCC findings are
referenced in a footnote, a somewhat undignified relegation in the week it
picked up its Nobel Peace Prize.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
For developed countries,
negotiators appear to have adopted for a simple expedient. Throw as many words
at the problem as possible. The rich world must take on &amp;quot;measurable, reportable
and verifiable nationally appropriate mitigation commitments or actions, including
quantified emission limitation and reduction objectives,&amp;quot; the text we have seen
says.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Importantly, all countries
are asked to make comparable efforts to reduce emissions. This is a pointed
reference to US, which will be expected to do as much as countries that are
already attempting to implement the Kyoto protocol.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
But it&amp;#39;s the provisions for
developing countries that have prompted the most acrimonious conflict.
Gradually it became clear that at least two options had been left undecided in
the proposed text. 
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
I got caught in an eddy as
the German minister swept by, bouncing off a Japanese cameraman, and ending up
pressed against Herr Gabriel&amp;#39;s well-fed flank. Rewarded by a benign smile, I
asked why ministers had given up for the night when key issues were unresolved.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&amp;quot;Ask the United States and
the G77,&amp;quot; he said, &amp;quot;it&amp;#39;s got nothing at all to do with Europe.&amp;quot; 
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
So the two foes have decided
to sleep on their differences and the EU, it appears, has grown sick of acting
as referee. But taking a still incomplete agreement to plenary is a risky strategy.
According to the minister, it is now up to Rachmat Witoelar, the Indonesian
environment minister and conference President, to save the day.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Even if we get an agreement
tomorrow, it may well be an ambiguous one. And that was the result the UN&amp;#39;s Yvo
de Boer most wanted to avoid. Angus Friday, who represents the small island
states, agrees
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&amp;quot;By not being ambitious
here, we are going to end up having to use a huge amount of time to reach
agreement, and we do not have that time,&amp;quot; he said.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update 2: &lt;/strong&gt;A great unravelling?&lt;/em&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
After minimal sleep, we&amp;#39;re
all back in the convention centre for the overrunning UN climate conference. We
were due to start at 8, but the session doesn&amp;#39;t open until 9, kicking off with
some mind numbingly boring procedural stuff.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
But suddenly, we&amp;#39;re onto
the main course - the text that will launch two years&amp;#39; negotiation that should
culminate in a new global deal for climate.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
In the chair, the
Indonesian environment minister explains the tortuous path that the
negotiations have taken and tells delegates that he has been forced to decide
an issue left unresolved by last night&amp;#39;s ministerial discussions.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
He begs countries not to
start unpicking the proposals that are in front of them. &amp;quot;Even minor changes
will compromise our ability to reach an agreement here in Bali,&amp;quot; he warns.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Then he opens discussion up
to the floor. Portugal is first to speak, on behalf of the rest of the European
Union. No text can be perfect, the delegate says. But the EU welcomes the
compromises that have been reached and urges others to support it.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
There is a pause and we all
hold our breath...Then a smattering of applause - the core of the Bali roadmap
appears to have passed without objection. 
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
But wait, India has an
intervention to make.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
The text on developing
country commitments is not the one proposed by the G77, India says, reading out
a preferred alternative.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Here&amp;#39;s the President&amp;#39;s
proposal:
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Measurable,
reportable and verifiable nationally appropriate mitigation actions by
developing country Parties in the context of sustainable development, supported
by technology and enabled by financing and capacity building.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
And here&amp;#39;s India&amp;#39;s
preference:
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Nationally
appropriate mitigation actions by developing country Parties in the context of
sustainable development, supported by technology and enabled by financing and
capacity building in a measurable, reportable and verifiable manner,
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Huh? Yes it took me a while
to see the difference. But look at what is being measured and verified in the
two options. In the first, it&amp;#39;s developing country efforts to cut emissions. In
the second, developed country efforts to transfer technology, provide finance
etc.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
The President begs India to
accept the original, but now the other 800 pound gorilla wants to speak - in
Chinese, which sends delegates scrambling for translation units.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Eventually, the President
tells everyone the gist of what has been said. According to China,
consultations are taking place outside the hall and no decision can be taken
until they&amp;#39;re completed.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
And
with that, the session is suspended. The President&amp;#39;s attempt to force through a
decision may have backfired. We&amp;#39;ll soon know if this is a minor hiccup or the
beginning of a great unravelling...
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update 3: &lt;/strong&gt;Misprint in the text&lt;/em&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
My friend Ron Bailey, the
libertarian science correspondent, has just spotted...a misprint in the text. And
it&amp;#39;s a real howler.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&amp;quot;Mobilization of public-
and private-sector funding and investment, including facilitation of
carbon-friendly choices.&amp;quot;
&lt;/p&gt;
Carbon-friendly?
Shouldn&amp;#39;t that be climate-friendly, guys?
&lt;p&gt;
&amp;nbsp;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Update 4&lt;/strong&gt;: Another false start
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
We&amp;#39;re off again with the
President asking the Indian delegation to repeat its statement from earlier,
but it turns out the Indian minister is not in the room. 
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Then the Chinese ask to
speak. And it turns out they are furious. Various G77 delegates are in a
meeting with the Indonesian minister of foreign affairs, they claim. They sense
a conspiracy to push through decisions while representatives are out of the
room.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
The complaint is
uncompromising: &amp;quot;The secretariat did this intentionally. I would like to ask if
this secretariat is our secretariat. I want an apology from the secretariat.&amp;quot;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
It is an embarrassing -
even humiliating - moment for the Indonesian chair and, when the Pakistan
delegate chips in to complain as well, he bows to the inevitable. After a
farcical few minutes, the session is suspended again. 
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
But
we close with a plea for as short a break as possible. &amp;quot;We are running out of
time,&amp;quot; the President warns.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&amp;nbsp;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Update 5: &lt;/strong&gt;Yvo de Boer in tears.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Astounding events as we
reconvene. First, the Indonesian prime minister and UN Secretary General arrive
to read the riot act to delegations. 
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Their message is carefully
co-ordinated. The world&amp;#39;s leaders demanded progress when they met in September.
The science says the world needs to act immediately if it is to have any chance
of stopping dangerous climate change.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
The conference President,
meanwhile, increasingly resembles a rabbit stuck in the headlights. He
apologies profusely for allowing parallel meetings to take place before the
first two suspensions. But China will not let the
matter drop. The issue demands further explanation, its delegate says. China wants the
UNFCCC secretariat to tell them what went wrong and why.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Then the bombshell. The
floor is given to Yvo de Boer, UNFCCC head, a man who is normally unflappable,
urbane and good humoured.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
But now he looks devastated
and sits head in hands, unable to speak. Eventually, he squeezes out a few
words. He did not know that another meeting was taking place, he says, now
openly in tears.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
There
is warm applause but de Boer has had enough and rushes from the room. I wonder whether that&amp;#39;s the end of the line for him...
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&amp;nbsp;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Update 6&lt;/strong&gt;: Dawn follows the darkest
hour
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Back to the substance. 
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
India repeats its
proposal  and the debate begins. The
European Union, represented by Portugal, follows quickly to support the
proposal. It just wants an agreement, it says.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
But there is a split
emerging in the G77. Bangladesh brings it out. Less developing countries feel
the proposal is too hard on them, and by implication too soft on larger &lt;em&gt;developing&lt;/em&gt;
countries.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
They want a caveat applied,
similar to that used for the industrialized countries. All actions must take
into account differences in the &amp;quot;national circumstances&amp;quot; of countries in the
developing world.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
This is, it seems, a widely
held position among the less developed countries and small island states. Many
come in to support the Bangladesh proposal, though some suggest a slightly
different textual amendment and others say they like the idea in principle, but
will respond to pleas not to unpick the text.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
However, some of the richer
developing countries are not so keen. Saudi Arabia, in particular, is adamant
that no changes should be made to the text, apart from the one suggested by
India. (Pakistan also chips in favour and adds another minor change.)
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
And then a new front is
opened up when the US speaks. Developing countries have talked the talk, but
failed to walk the walk, Paula Dobriansky tells a hushed floor. Their amendment
completely changes the type of commitment they must take on.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
The United States is not
prepared to adopt the Indian proposal to change the text, she says. Her words
are met with a chorus of boos. 
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Japan speaks next, giving
the United States some kind of fuzzy support. But South Africa issues a
ferocious and articulate denunciation of the American position. Developing
countries have gone much further than they needed to. It&amp;#39;s the United States
that has failed to take on strong commitments.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
The mood is now bleak, as
countries speak to argue for more favourable treatment for the world&amp;#39;s poorest,
or to denounce the US position. It becomes hard to see where agreement will
come from.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
But then suddenly, the US
flags its wish to speak again. Dobriansky argues that the US has shifted its
position considerably, agreeing to the principle of taking on a &amp;quot;quantified
emission limitation and reduction objectives.&amp;quot;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
And then we get to the
turning point. The US wants a shared vision, Dobrianky says, and to agree a
Bali roadmap. In a spirit of co-operation and responding directly to the words
of South Africa, she is prepared to withdraw her objections and go with the
consensus position.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Surprised applause follows
and builds, as delegates realise the talks have been pulled back from the
brink. It all moves rather fast after that. South Africa welcomes the new
United States position.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
But South Africa is not
done yet. The delegate ‘interprets&amp;#39; the text that applies to developing
countries and shows that it can be interpreted as meeting the needs of the
poorest people.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
This has been teed up with
Costa Rica, it seems, which now withdraws its proposal. It will accept South Africa&amp;#39;s
mediation.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
With that a final denouement
is only a few minutes away. The Indian proposal is read out and the President
asks whether there are any objections. 
&lt;/p&gt;
The
applause starts slowly, but turns into cheers. Agreement has been finally been reached,
but only after it seemed almost to have slipped out of reach.
&lt;p&gt;
&amp;nbsp;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Update 7&lt;/strong&gt;: De Boer returns
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Yvo de Boer, last seen
rushing from the stage in tears, slipped back onto the platform fifteen minutes
or so later.
&lt;/p&gt;
Costa
Rica speaks of its confidence in him and its huge appreciation of his work. Enormous
applause. More tears on the stage. The Bali deal is done and Yvo de Boer is back in his seat.&lt;br /&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.opendemocracy.net/global_deal/torture_continues#comment</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.opendemocracy.net/blog_terms/climate_change">climate change</category>
 <category domain="http://www.opendemocracy.net/taxonomy/term/729">David Steven</category>
 <category domain="http://www.opendemocracy.net/global_deal">Global Deal</category>
 <category domain="http://www.opendemocracy.net/blog/global_deal">Global Deal</category>
 <category domain="http://www.opendemocracy.net/blog_terms/global_warming">global warming</category>
 <category domain="http://www.opendemocracy.net/global_deal/yvo_de_boer">Yvo de Boer</category>
 <pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 2007 14:44:58 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>David Steven</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">35413 at http://www.opendemocracy.net</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
