From Bonn to Durban, climate meetings are conferences of polluters

Patrick Bond* alerts activist to the challenges of achieving climate justice as the conference itself contains the main polluters. Bond also highlights the role of the South African government.

The South African port of Durban will host the COP17 conference on climate change in December. Previous COP17 meetings have failed to produce satisfactory results and binding treaties aimed at addressing climate change. Fears are already growing that this year’s conference will also fail. Some countries have already indicated that they are not prepared to cut their emissions to suggested levels. In light of above, it becomes clear that a binding agreement may be the only way to ensure emission reduction globally.

South African climate justice legacy

South African officials have a history of supporting climate-destroyed activities. At the COP17 meeting held in Bonn, South African negotiators, under the influence of Eskom, Sasol and the National Business Initiative, tried to break African solidarity against European Union plans for opening up new carbon markets.

Some of the local controversial projects that have been approved include the following;

• Building two of the world’s four largest coal-fired power plants for $20 billion each at Kusile and Medupi (not to mention new nuclear power plants too)
• Digging a vast new $14 billion port in South Durban announced last week,
• Constructing a new $12 billion heavy-oil refinery in Port Elizabeth, and
• Offering shale-gas fracking exploration rights to South African, Norweigian and US firms in the Fragile Drakensberg mountain range.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF)

The Green Climate Fund is a world bank funded project meant to address climate change issues. It has promised 100 billion dollars a year towards climate issues. The fund is led by people whose commitment to climate issues is questionable. The co-chairperson, minister Trevor Manuel, has a track record of supporting eco-catatrophic investments. At the May 30 GCF workshop in Bonn, on;y co-chair Kjetil Lund of Norway attended parts of the session. Manuel and the third co-chair, Mexico’s Ernesto Cardero Arroyo did not attend.

The GCF leadership has also demonstrated little commitment to environmental issues. They have allocated little time towards strategising around the December COP17 meeting. This is a move that may have negative implications for its success. The fund has also proposed some questionable solutions to climate change. Trevor Manuel has already pronounced that the GCF should raise up to half its fund through carbon trading.

Campaigning for an agreement

Calls have been made on the South African Government to have an open, democratic and accountable process. Fears have been heightened by news of proposed solutions such as soil carbon markets; solutions that will further impoverish already poor regions. The North has also proposed a voluntary ‘political commitment’ given the tendency by the big nations to avoid their responsibilities. A binding global deal is ultimately needed to meet scientific requirements for emissions cuts. Activities are also against the involvement of the World Bank. The argument is that is has a bad social and environmental track record. In the case of South Africa the bank forwarded a 3.75 billion dollar loan to Eskom last year, mainly to fund the Medupi plant in spite of well-known conflicts of interest.

Can activists change the balance of forces?

Activists are aware that they cannot rely on the state to support their cause. Some of the Bonn meeting poceedings have already been criticised for their lack of transparency. In light of this, it becomes clear that activists need to work together towards securing a binding agreement from state leaders.

Last Friday as Bonn was drawing to a close the Durban-born leader of Greenpeace International, Kumi Naidoo, showed exactly the spirit required while attempting delivery of 50,000- strong petition to an offshore drilling rig run by Cairn Energy near Greenland. He was arrested for climbing an oilrig in protest against the damage rigging and the use of fossil fuels has done to the environment. The same line will have to be drawn against Durban Conference if the climate change issue is to be addressed.