Global Deal investigates new pathways in the international politics of climate change. Read more
Global Deal is a joint project of openDemocracy and E3G. Global Deal is financially supported by the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation.

Part of the openDemocracy Network
About Global DealGlobal Deal investigates new pathways in the international politics of climate change. Read more Global Deal is a joint project of openDemocracy and E3G. Global Deal is financially supported by the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation. ![]() Receive Global Deal NewsGrab the Global Deal RSS FeedGlobal Deal NewswireOr join the Global Deal mailing listEnter your name and email address below to join our mailing list and become a member of openDemocracy. You may unsubscribe at any time. Global Deal Widget
Want this on your site? Copy this code into your HTML
tags in Global Deal |
A solid startAs I suggested yesterday, NGOs have reacted positively to the draft agreement on future commitments. But there's a good chance that their mood will darken as the week goes on. They'd have preferred mention of 2 degrees in the text and stronger language on legally binding targets. They are also keen to see a clear plan for how the negotiations will be conducted. But my guess is that, as the week goes on, the text is more likely to be diluted than strengthened. The Saudis have already made it clear that they're opposed to key elements of the text. Malaysia is also against starting formal negotiations. The US and Canada seem likely to join this group, while there are question marks about the positions of Japan and Australia (though it's worth noting that the latter's chief negotiator worked with his South African counterpart to draft the proposed text). Meanwhile, there's always the chance developing countries will balk at the commitments they're being asked to make. So the mood was pretty chipper at this morning's press conference, but expect the fireworks to start if these countries manage to water down the proposed text.Trackback URL for this post:http://www.opendemocracy.net/trackback/35341
|