Three isssues are still, with only a month to go, holding up a deal at the Copenhagen summit – the level of carbon emission cuts that each country will commit to, the level and source of funding for developing countries to help them cope with climate change impacts, and the passing of a US bill through Congress which binds the world’s biggest polluter to a deal. As a decade ago, the real block is the last one, with the US so far unable to commit to a figure for its cuts which would be legally binding. On the first point, as a decade ago, the EU has taken the lead by committing to a 20% cut by 2020, and a 30% cut by that date if a deal is done at Copenhagen. The EU has also agreed a £90bn package for developing countries for mitigation and adaptation against the effects of climate change, with up to half provided by taxpayers and the remainder by the private sector. But It is still undecided how the contributions by EU countries will be determined, whether by GDP or emission levels (‘polluter pays’ principle) or some other rationale. The developing countries however are not impressed and are threatening a walk-out at the summit.

More than in any recent historical period, perhaps ever, the weaker, poorer, less organisaed developing countries are in the driving seat at this international conference for three main reasons: (i) arresting climate change can only occur if virtually all countries reach an enforceable agreement because any significant exceptions could cause the whole agreement to unravel, (ii) the rich Western world needs an agreement to prevent its own lands and peoples suffering the worst ravages of climate turmoil, and (iii) the big, powerful countries cannot for once enforce their will on the rest. This leaves the G77 (a group originally of 77 countries, now enlarged to some 120) with a strong negotiating hand, which China in particular is exploiting. This weekend the last pre-summit formal negotiations broke up in acrimony with G77 demands for far bigger emission cuts by the Annex 1 (industrialised) countries as well as more extensive funding.
Even so, the hinge remains the US. There are clear signs there of opinion shifting in favour of the Climate Change Bill, including among some crucial Republican Senators, but hard-core Republican resistance on the cost of anti-climate change action has forced a 5-week delay in the timetable for thorough review of this issue, sufficient to prevent any final US position being reached in time for the Copenhagen conference. This will almost certainly mean a postponement of 6 months or so to get final figures for an enforceable agreement. In politics ‘never’ is for never. But perhaps two occurrences might speed the process up – mass civil disobedience against the fossil fuel corporate culprits of oil, coal and gas, or an egregious climate catastrophe which, like the pharaonic plagues in ancient Egypt, finally breaks the resistance.

Bookmark to: