During the Copenhagen summit, which took place from 7 to 18 December 2009 in Denmark, a participant tells us about an hour that was firsthand experienced by an observer. Following is an excerpt of his account:
One hour with an insider in Copenhagen
We get in the crowded room … For observers, there is a back entrance to the room, a long way from the seats of countries and organizations marked with posters. The moderators, who had been previously elected by the delegates of the country, sit in the front. They distribute the speech, so to speak, by routine repetition of sentences in the like of “thank you Saudi Arabia, Tuvalu now you have the floor”.
Head-phones were made available, with readily accessible translations in all official languages of the United Nations, including English, French and Arabic. This Wednesday, December 9th, between 10 am and noon, the discussions proceeded thus:
Samoa was given the floor to support a seemingly ambitious proposal of Tuvalu, a small island country. The same support was reiterated by St. Lucia, Togo and Senegal, who voiced their opinion only after long thanks to the chairperson. Because that’s how the United Nations works, you should be diplomatic! Even if you only have 1 min30 to talk, you are forced to start by saying “Because I am speaking for the first time on behalf of my country, I must thank you Madam Chairperson for your skilful leadership and we reiterate our confidence in your ability to steer us to an ambitious agreement.” This might suggest that it is the technocrat who will conclude the agreement! But she has still some weight. In fact, she may choose or not to give the floor to NGOs, she also chooses the countries that will speak according to the order convenient to her, which may politically change the situation!
Then comes the cortege of Oman, Kuwait, India and, of course, Saudi Arabia, who massively object to this proposal of Tuvalu. The G77 bloc, formerly the non-aligned, appears to split in two parts! They say “we do not want an additional agreement, suffice it to meet those already underway.”
(…) Finally, the floor is given to civil society represented by two voices. The CAN NGO group first, who speaks in shocking terms: “Are not you haunted by images of daily victims of climate change?” or “who could be as inhuman and empathetic?”. Of course, they proposed the establishment of a new agreement. A speech of 3min40 is long but necessary for the nerve-racking of all observers, who, at the end of the speech, gave a round of applause, though it was somehow against the protocol. The youth follows suit… Some snatches: “we must assume our responsibility,” “improving the Kyoto Protocol is more than necessary”, “unity and responsibility must remain our watchwords. Applauses.
In this favorable context, the chairwoman then proposed to schedule debate for 9 December on: the setting up of a focal group for reflection on the proposal of Tuvalu. Immediate reaction of the cortege: Saudi Arabia, India, Oman and Venezuela do “not support” the initiative. Translation: we do not want to see countries reflecting without us. Their argument was also that delegations are often too small and can not afford to disagree. In short, it’s no great shakes.
(…) China finally was given the floor, it was much awaited. And all we got was “Thanks Miss president, we follow Saudi Arabia’s opinion.”
It is noon, we leave for our daily meeting with the delegation of all youth movements. Walking between the seats and curtains from the exit, we feel a bitter taste. Several things:
- Those who suffer most from the changes do not hold their destiny in hand, causing thousands of future victims.
-No one speak on behalf of Western countries, which means that the real negotiation
are yet to begin.
- Finally, an overwhelming sense of emptiness, helplessness in the face of decision-making bodies. We want to stand up in the meeting and shout to the world that we heading on our peril, and instead we stay there, feeling comfortable on our chairs … watching a neighbor chatting on facebook …Are NGOs powerless, or is the countries do act on their whims?
How hard is the life of an observer!
By Noé Pflieger