Tags:
Journalism of Courage
The breakdown of the meeting on climate change in the Hague and the continuing uncertainty surrounding the American presidency mark a new and dangerous point in international affairs. The world8217;s major states cannot agree on policies to deal with global warming. The United States faces years of indecisive government, with Washington paralysed by score-settling and legislative gridlock. Against this background, there can be no concerted action to cope with the environmental crisis. The world is set on a course of wild globalisation.
In itself, the collapse of the climate talks two weeks ago in the Hague is not particularly significant. The meeting was an attempt to ratify the 1997 Kyoto convention on reducing greenhouse gases. Its failure has been widely put at the door of the Americans, but the Europeans were probably equally to blame in not following up concessions offered by the American delegation in the later stages of the talks.
In fact, there is not the remotest prospect of this happening. It is not just that imposing the necessary fiscal measures is politically impossible in the US, and 8212; as has been evident since the fuel protests in September 8212; far from easy in Europe. It is that climate change and industrialisation in developing countries are indissolubly linked. China and India account for more greenhouse gases than the whole of Europe. The impact of industrial development in such developing countries on global warming is rising steeply. Yet, no doubt rightly, developing countries are not covered by the Kyoto protocol. It is grossly inequitable to demand that poor countries should impose controls on their industries which many of the richest countries flout daily. Why should the path of development that the world8217;s richest countries adopted 8212; at whatever cost to the environment 8212; be closed to its poorest?8230;
Excerpted from Wild Globalisation8217;, by John Gray, The Guardian8217;, December 5
