Rescue Plan for a Sinking Ship?

 “WE are all in the same boat. A hole at one end will sink us all”. These are the words of former head of the United Nations Kofi Annan, who now runs the Global Humanitarian Forum.  He was talking to Graham Readfearn in the Courier Mail about the so far unseen response from world leaders on climate change.

Graham Readfearn in the Courier Mail (11 December 2009):

“WE are all in the same boat. A hole at one end will sink us all”

These are the words of Kofi Annan and he was talking about the so far unseen response from world leaders on climate change.

After 10 years as the head of the United Nations, Mr Annan is now the president of the Global Humanitarian Forum. In recent weeks he’s been pushing for a “fair and just” deal on climate change. But what does this mean and what will need to change?

Here are his answers to questions I put to him, via email.

Australia is the world’s biggest per capita emitter of greenhouse gases and one of the largest exporters of coal. You are asking for a deal on climate that is just and fair – what does that look like for countries like Australia, the US and UK whose economies rely heavily on the coal industry? What lifestyle changes may a just and fair global deal mean for the citizens of these countries?

A workable and effective deal must do two things. First, it must lay the basis for a global regime and subsequent agreements that limit temperature rise in accordance with the scientific evidence. Second, it must have climate justice at its heart. This means it must provide clarity on the mobilization and volume of financial resources to help developing countries adapt to climate change. For it is a tragic irony that the countries which have done least to cause climate change are not only those which will suffer most from its impact, but are also those least resourced to protect their people. If you believe in the “polluter pays” principle, as I do, the implications for countries like Australia are clear. On one side, they need to find innovative ways to reduce emissions dramatically. They have the intellectual, technological and financial resources to do so. On the other side, they need to support poor countries in protecting their populations and meeting the incremental costs of climate change. These resources must be additional to and separate from existing development aid commitments. While there are bound to be some lifestyle changes for Australians as a result, I am convinced that they will be to the better, both for them and for the planet as a whole.

In your home country of Ghana, there have been reports that climate change is threatening the future of the cocoa industry and predictions of increased drought, floods and excessive heat. How can poorer countries like Ghana prepare for the future and should the “west” help? And is it time for major “developing” countries such India and China to commit to a common global future?

Every country, regardless of whether it is Ghana, Australia or China, needs to do its part in accordance with its capacities and historic responsibilities. Industrialized countries such as the United States and Australia must naturally take the lead in reducing emissions and supporting others in following suit, but developing countries like India or China also have an increasing responsibility to do so as their economies continue to grow. Unfortunately, it is the poorest and least responsible that will have to bear the brunt of the climate challenge as rising temperatures exacerbate poverty, hunger and vulnerability to disease for billions of people. As I have said before, they need both immediate help to strengthen their climate resilience as well as long-term support to adapt to climate impacts, reduce deforestation, and pursue low-emissions, clean energy growth. The bottom line is clear. The climate cannot be “fixed” in one country or continent and not in another. Climate change does not respect national borders. We are all in the same boat; a hole at one end will sink us all.

On the chances of a fair deal in Copenhagen – are you an optimist or a pessimist?

I am a realist. Despite the mounting evidence of the negative effects of climate change, reaching a deal will not be easy. It will require extraordinary political courage – both to cut the deal and to communicate its necessity and implications to the public. It will require leaders to think for future generations, and for citizens other than their own. Short-term considerations, including from special interest groups and electoral demands, will need to give way to long-term solutions.  But it is important to remember that any agreement in Copenhagen – however ambitious, universal, and fair it may be – is only the beginning of an enormous challenge for all of us.

Your career was spent working your way to the top of the United Nations – how hard was it to step away, knowing the enormous challenges the world still faces from climate change?

There will always be enormous challenges in the world and I am confident there will always be people who are willing and able to take the lead in tackling them.

Australia, with its relatively small population, is not a major player in the politics of climate change. How much difference, realistically, will our citizens signing an online petition make to the bigger scheme of things?

Every person on the planet has an important role to play. As individuals, you can make a contribution by the choices you make everyday – the food you eat, the transport you use, the energy you consume. You can help to increase awareness of the issues at stake and lobby your political leaders to cut a fair deal in Copenhagen. Signing an online petition is not only an unmistakable sign that you are committed to this cause, but also provides organizations like the Global Humanitarian Forum with the necessary political clout and legitimacy. That, in itself, is a priceless achievement.

Source: www.blogs.news.com.au