Vuvuzela excitment as the contest remained deadlocked after extra time

The world cup final in Durban reached a dramatic climax in the small hours of Sunday morning as the annual contest between developed and developing countries was finally decided in a nail-biting penalty shoot-out.  Successive periods of extra-time had been unable to separate the sides, with the tie deadlocked in a high-scoring draw despite some elaborately theatrical point-scoring from both camps.  Minister Nkoana-Mashabane, refereeing for the Proteas, was left with no choice but to call for the dreaded spot kicks.

3am tactical huddle before the shoot out could begin

As the deafening drone of thousands of vuvuzelas  filled the streets around Durban’s Moses Mabhida stadium, Ministers and coaches called their teams into tight huddles to discuss last minute tactics before the 3am shoot-out could begin.

And so the two sides lined up for their nominated strikers to fire shots at one another. The developing countries had India, China, Brazil, with Bolivia taking a more back-seat role, seemingly keen to avoid a second consecutive red card having been ruthlessly dispatched by last year’s referee. First blood to India, scoring authoritatively with point full of moral force about global equity.  On the developed country side, the charge was led by the EU and Norway, with some support from Australia.  The EU had recently emerged from endless tortuous and sometimes hostile qualifying rounds to establish their communal position, with hopeful long balls from the UK being playfully snubbed by Gallic flair. As the British and French resorted to bickering, calling each other names and doing down each other’s economy. some effective and systematic defence from the Germans and Poles served to steady the European position.

Canada prefers to tear up the rulebook

The United States, accustomed to playing a central role in such international contests, appeared increasingly bemused and uncomprehending of the game that everybody else was playing. Each time they stepped forward wielding a baseball bat, there was nobody to pitch to them and the superpower found itself increasingly sidelined from the discussion. Close neighbours Canada, for their part, preferred to tear up the rulebook and resort to gloves-off ice hockey brawls to settle international agreements, claiming that their own rules are better.

The potshots continued as the clock crept towards dawn and the delegates began to droop into their microphones. Brazil, much hyped as a key player on the developing side, produced a spectacular bicycle kick that went soaring high over the bar.  Norway slotted one away for the developed countries with cool Scandinavian ease. Just when it looked like the contest could continue forever, the EU came forward and, though often criticised for their pragmatic and boring playing style, resolutely kept firing low shots passed the now napping Indian goal-keeper, fighting coolly for an agreement with legal force applicable to all Parties.  When Referee Nkoana-Mashabane finally brought down the hammer on proceedings, the EU was celebrating a clear negotiation victory.

But perhaps the loser in all this is the planet, with no further ambition or binding agreement scheduled until at least 2020. And as delegations return to Delhi and Beijing with clear ground conceded, perhaps we can expect a return to more fractious argument come Doha in 2012.  Doha. A word synonymous with effective, timely and easy multilateral agreements. Not.

STOP messing around - this is really a car park

Rumours were rife around Durban’s “International Conference Centre” today as it became apparent that Canada has expressed intention to pull out of the Kyoto Protocol having seen the state of the meeting facilities in the South African city. Already rattled by being told not to walk the streets after dark, the discovery that the delegation offices are in a bona fide underground car park was just too much for the reticent North American delegation. “I don’t care if they’ve put a carpet down and scattered a few pot plants”, said one senior delegate, “it’s still a f***ing parking lot. If that’s the best they can do then we’ve had it with Kyoto. We’re outta here”. On leaving they added “what’s more the wifi is rubbish. I can’t even facebook during KP plenaries”.

The EU's subterranean homesick "pavilion"

Other countries begged them to reconsider, pointing out that the rest of the conference centre is rather accommodating, the locals are fabulously welcoming and the negotiations could really do without unilateral self-removals from treaties.  The EU delegation in particular was looking on the bright side, still insisting on naming their subterranean burrow a ‘pavilion’, a misty-eyed euphemism of a distant colonial past, much like their attitude towards the Kyoto Protocol.  ”In some ways this is great”, an EU spokesperson said, “it fits with our theme of calling all policies ‘roadmaps’“.  One cynical observer added that the existence of multiple stop signs, speed humps and scrape marks from near-miss collisions is  a rather appropriate backdrop for a UNFCCC negotiation meeting.

But the Canadians remain unmoved.  Besides, there are some far more interesting tar sands conferences coming up in Calgary.

Roadmaps, roadmaps everywhere!  The EU is gearing up to release its Energy Roadmap 2050, which has as usual leaked its way onto the internet ahead of time. In customary fashion the media have leapt on individual out-of-context quotes to highlight inconsistencies in EU energy and climate policy. But, you may be thinking, isn’t this old news? Didn’t the 2050 roadmap already come out some months ago?  You’re right, the 2050 Roadmap did come out in March; but that was A Roadmap for moving to a competitive low carbon economy in 2050, utterly distinct, obviously, from The Energy Roadmap 2050.   But that’s not all;  in September this year the Union proudly launched the The Roadmap to a resource-efficient Europe, which might also have a thing or two to do with energy and low carbon.

So are these three trailblazing autobahns independent atlases towards an energy secure, low carbon, resource-efficient Europe? Or is this the product of some not-altogether-joined-up and perhaps rivalrous thinking from the three Directorate Generals that produced them (DG ENERGY, DG CLIMA and DG ENV respectively)?

And the roadmap fascination doesn’t end there. Policy-making is a spaghetti junction of cartographic aides, none of which, of course, will ever feature a road or any other geographic feature. You needn’t go far to find talk of a European Crisis Roadmap, the EU’s role in the Middle East peace roadmap and of course the Bali Roadmap towards climate panacea (which, as it happens, Europe seems to be currently continuing to navigate whilst pushing the deadlines further back…changing the scale of the roadmap, perhaps). There’s even a European Gender Policy Roadmap. Not to mention the Michelin guide to restaurants, close to the hearts of the French delegation.

How then to navigate this complex network of overlapping policy maps?  We need a handy guide for confused citizens making their way through the policy jungle. Like a roadmap.  A roadmap of roadmaps. Such a roadmap could embrace the digital age and be available via mobile application. This downloadable ‘Roadmapp’ could allow handsfree navigation of sudden changes in policy direction, with add-ons including the option to have the phrase “Changed Priorities Ahead. Please perform a U-turn”  uttered repeatedly by celebrities in all 23 of the Union’s official languages.  The Maltese version is expected to be particularly popular.

Real decision time will be at COP(N) next year

“Talk of any legally binding instrument would be irresponsible, very irresponsible. To even begin to suggest that the outcome of Durban must be a legally binding instrument would be irresponsible, because it will collapse the system.”  NJ Mxakato-Diseko, South Africa Ambassador-at-large for COP17  (and for once a real quote on lowcarbonara!)

As the days tick down towards this year’s annual gathering of climate change negotiators and ministers, known as the (N-1)th Conference of the Parties (COP(N-1)), many negotiators and bureaucrats have been actively trying to play down expectations of what might be achieved. Although COP(N-2) last year did culminate in agreement on some points, commentators are mixed over the importance of that agreement; some see it as a significant step forward, others are dismissive of its content and see it more as a figurative agreement serving only to keep momentum in the talks towards COP(N-1).  Bureaucrats are keen to remind observers that given the factious and divided discussions that were had at COP(N-2), COP(N-1) cannot be expected to deliver a breakthrough agreement and a legally-binding treaty. However, all are in agreement that this is still achievable but will be more relevant for the agenda of COP(N) that will happen at the end of next year.

“COP(N), next year, is really where our negotiation deadline lies”, said one veteran negotiator who said the same thing last year and continues to wish not to be named. The delegate, of indeterminate age, said that he had been around since COP1 and was confidant of the prospects of agreeing at COP(N), after a bit more negotiating time.  In the meantime, analysis produced after the last pre-COP negotiating session earlier this month suggests that whilst progress may be made on secondary issues such as technology, capacity building, a mechanism for REDD+ and the ability to make the same predictions for COP every year, the crunch issues of finance and countries’ mitigation ambitions were likely to remain deadlocked through to COP(N) next year.

Last minute preparations are now underway for COP(N-1), which will also include other negotiating groups such as the (2n+4)th session of the SBSTA and the (3n-7)th session of the SBI, as well as the 3,232^nd instance of the infamous NGO party. Environmental groups, pointing out that climate change is an urgent issue and cannot wait for yet more merry-go-round negotiations, were assured that their concerns would be aired at COP(N) next year if time permits, or maybe at COP(N+1).  As compensation, the world was presented with a pretty new UNFCCC logo which, although escaping from the dated 1990s flavour of its predecessor, does bear a rather striking resemblance to a copyright symbol. Is this subliminal messaging about rich nations’ fears about intellectual property rights and technology transfer?

Dramatic stock image of smoke stacks similar to the one used by anyone saying anything about the EU ETS

Carbon traders appeared to take heart this morning on news that the European Commission had surpassed itself by being less clear and more contradictory in its policy communication than ever before. In the space of little more than 24hrs the message picked up by the press ranged from a tentative “perhaps” through to an authoritative “no” and back again to a reassuring “probably” on the issue of future bans on more CDM project types.    One trader was overheard looking on the bright side. “This is great progress by the Commission” he said. “In the past it has often been unclear whether the message is really unclear or just slightly unsure. This time there is total clarity in the unclearness of the message. I can take positions based on that”.

1. “EU to consider ban of coal and hydro CDM projects
Published: 21 Sep 2011 18:40 CET
The EU will next month consider whether to ban U.N. offsets sourced from coal-fired power stations and large hydro projects from the EU ETS, following an investigation into the environmental integrity of credits used by Europe’s biggest emitters. Xxxx Xxxx, an official with the European Commission’s climate department, said Wednesday that external consultants paid by the EU executive would complete a report in October on which types of offsets should be eligible for the bloc’s cap-and-trade scheme. The report could recommend a ban on offset-generating sectors including efficient coal-fired power stations and large hydro.”

2. “European Union Not Considering Bans on Additional CO2 Offsets
Sept. 22 (Bloomberg) — The European Commission is not currently considering any further restrictions on the use of United Nations carbon offsets in the European Union’s carbon market, Yyyy Yyyy, emissions trading coordinator at the commission, said in an e-mail.”

3. “EU will “probably” ban more offsets: Hedegaard
Published: 23 Sep 2011 11:17 CET Last updated: 23 Sep 2011 11:47 CET
The EU will “probably” ban more types of U.N.-backed carbon offsets from being used in its emissions trading scheme, the bloc’s climate commissioner told media in New York late on Thursday.”

[with apologies to Bloomberg and Point Carbon, who I hope won't take offence at the reproduction of their work in the name of humour]

Nondescript conference centre where the killing is said to have taken place

Although some say that the aging Protocol was no longer the threat to American prosperity that it once was, it remained a potent symbol of a stubborn regime that for more than a decade had withstood numerous US attempts at assassination. On several occasions US Presidents tried in vain to kill the Protocol – George Bush came closest to delivering a fatal blow in 2001 – but each time the Protocol managed to rally and return to vivaciously haunt the US over its lamentable lack of participation in a worthwhile treaty.

Following a concerted  intelligence effort lasting several months, the Protocol was finally tracked down to its hiding place in a boring yet functional UN conference centre in Asia. As its international friends gradually abandoned their protection of their once-dear Protocol, US forces were left with an unexpected clear shot to the head that brought an era to a close.

Some commentators are questioning the significance of the killing, saying that it is too late and has taken to long to really be of political value. “The Protocol really mattered a few years ago”, said one expert, “but now it is not as important as it seems. Yes America has defeated an important icon of its old international foe, but sufficient momentum has built up that international action can still continue without the leadership of the late Protocol”. Other analysts maintain that the Protocol’s demise is not the momentous event that the world’s media is claiming it to be. Whilst crowds may celebrate in Washington DC, the removal of the political stigma of the protocol could open the door to greater international leadership from the US as it helps to shape a new longer-term agreement more suited to its terms.

Washington goes nuts at news of the Protocol's demise

In the meantime, conspiracy theories abound regarding the lack of proof of the elimination, leading some to claim the Protocol is still alive and will once again bounce back with force. This suggestion has been swiftly countered by the White House, saying that the remains of the Protocol were disposed of at sea. The International Maritime Organization (IMO), who had until this point stubbornly managed to avoid all contact with the Protocol, was said to be aghast at this news.

Talks had for a long time been gridlocked as some major countries refused to see a need for international action on regime change whilst others struggled to demonstrate an economic case for it given their long-running dependency on the social pollutants responsible for the underlying problem. The oil industry lobby is also believed to be powerful in the process, given that profits are so closely associated to the source of the problem, especially in the Middle East.

The recent breakthrough came as Russia and China appeared to thaw on the issue enough to abstain on the vote rather than oppose it. They are however rumoured to still not support intervention at this time, believing that action now may set a dangerous precedent that could impinge on their future development. Critical observers say that abstention from China and Russia is not enough to effectuate long-term change; if the issue is to be solved on a global scale, China and Russia must be leading the case for definitive action on regime change, not sitting back and letting others take the first steps.

Definitely not action on regime change

Even Western governments have to tread carefully on the issue.  Although President Obama is said to believe strongly in taking definitive action, the American public is sensitive after previous action on regime change was seen to be costly and of limited effectiveness.  Obama is having to rein in his desire to speak passionately about how action on regime change is a moral objective and crucial to our future security and for the prosperity of our children. Instead he puts forward a measured message, being careful to never mention regime change, speaking only about protecting American interests and security and something about a ‘no fly zone’.

David Cameron spoke of how Britain was leading the world and was not afraid of taking the initiative on long-running action. He implied that Britain was prepared to engage in regime change combat for the long-haul, regardless of the time and cost. When critics likened this to a widely condemned, long-running and costly conflict engaged in by the previous government, Mr Cameron unconvincingly dismissed the allegations by stating that this was a whole different sort of regime change action. When challenged on the costs of the action, he looked rather nervous for a moment before highlighting substantial cost-savings to be made back home. Modern Britain needs another long-term foreign conflict more than it needs public services, he said.

Hedonistic Cancun, scene of wild conflict

[NOTE: this post was written a few days before the end of COP16 and before the surprising progress made during the final 36 hours of the summit, rescuing at least the credibility of the UNFCCC process with adoption of the Cancun agreements]

Mexico saw a return to the bad old days this week as violent clashes erupted between warring cartels in the lively beach town of Cancun. The lawless groups readily engaged in open warfare with hand-to-hand combat through the lavish corridors of a swanky beach-side hotel, with little regard for the safety of bemused international bystanders. The gangs are thought to have links with the narcotics trade and some shocked eyewitnesses reported that many of the perpetrators appear to have lost all grip of the reality of the outside world, leading to allegations that some may be themselves under the influence of strong hallucinogenic substances. “These guys appear to be on another planet, totally disconnected from the real world” said one, “I can’t explain it any other way”.

Insiders say that the new round of combat is nothing more than a renewed effort to settle old scores festering for years – with violence never far from the surface. The two biggest cartels involved, known by their street names ‘G77’ and ‘Annex I’, are operating covertly and the Mexican government is said to be powerless to stop them. Despite its rumoured complicity with both cartels, the government is undecided over which side to support.

Few expect a peaceful outcome of the conflict without further loss of life, the cartel leaders seemingly impervious to the millions of lives potentially put at risk through their action (and inaction).  Reports suggest that the latest bout of conflict surfaced over alleged lack of commitment to established gang Protocol and for disagreements over promised financial payments. For the latter it appears that one side claims that the other had made a financial promise, but the donor being adamant that the conditions of the promise were never properly understood. Such petty misunderstandings are common in the narcotics world.

A Mexican minister was quoted as saying “we are doing all we can to get these gangs under control in order to secure a successful outcome, but at the present time they are not responding to any rational arguments.” It was hoped that the traditional alcohol-fuelled shindig that marks the mid-point of such meetings might go some way towards restoring calm. But hazy reports from the venue suggest that excessive consumption of low-quality margaritas and questionable DJing did nothing to improve the atmosphere; if anything Sunday’s negotiations were more terse as a result.

As gang leaders fly in to the resort whose name means literally ‘snake pit’, a desperate attempt for last-minute mediation will begin. But it now appears that the most likely outcome is to resort to the tried-and-tested method of escaping from such face-offs with minimal political damage: blame everyone else for lack of progress and go home satisfied that the conflict can continue to fester for another year before the opposing forces meet again in the South African city of Durban, a place known for its history of happy peace and harmony.

Remains of a civilisation

Archaeologists toiling under the tropical Mexican sun have dug up unprecedented evidence of what appears to have been a crucial meeting of Mayan high priests during the final days of the great Central American civilisation. The relics suggest that after decades of gradual decline of the empire, the ancient leaders gathered on a palm-lined beach on the Yucatan coast near present day Cancún to discuss what could be done to save their society in the face of collapsing ecosystems. But as the palm wine flowed many disagreements surfaced, with the head of each clan unwilling to be the first to take action to reduce his people’s ravenous depletion of the great nation’s once-abundant natural riches. Some blamed everyone but themselves as the cause of the problem, others claimed that there was not even a problem to be solved. Evidence suggests that the local coastal tribe hosting the conference made sure that each leader’s material needs were fully provided for, a practice known in Mayan dialect as “poshti resorto allainclusivo” so that during the great conference the priests could consume to their heart’s desire without feeling the consequences of their actions. Many Mayan people had also travelled to the meeting to express their deep concern in the hope of imploring their leaders to take drastic action, but unearthed remains suggest that these mere mortals were corralled at some distance from the chiefs’ meeting and were unable to effectively pass their message to them. Realising that they had travelled many miles and in great numbers to be left to talk amongst themselves, it seems these Mayan activists consoled themselves by further indulging in the last of the once abundant produce of the Mayan lands, enjoying the beach and partying hard in the firm belief that there would be no tomorrow.

The artefacts are not conclusive over how the meeting may have ended, but the subsequent catastrophic demise of the Mayans suggests that those once powerful high priests never could bring themselves to accept that the world they lived in was no longer the land of cheap abundance that their forefathers enjoyed. It seems that even the welcoming beach atmosphere could not overcome each clan’s self-interest and that the action required to prevent over-depletion of the Mayan empire’s resources was never forthcoming. And all that remains of their inaction are some once magnificent buildings poking out of the jungle.

The association representing the small but dedicated subgroup of treasure hunters who are also witch hunters was said to be astounded by the series of discoveries, as many had thought of such bullets as the Holy Grail for treasure hunters; but this claim is disputed by those suggesting this revered term should be better reserved for the fabled Grail itself. One expert commentator stated that these events represent a “tipping point” but this was not available for satire because nobody really understands what he means by it.  It is however feasible that this could be the tip of the iceberg that leads to a sea-change in public opinion, although it is quite likely that the latter will only in fact occur when all of the former melt, tips and all*.

The story is reminiscent of a tale that set the Gold Standard for heart-warming anecdotes in the world’s press several years ago, involving a Mr Babar Tembo in Kenya, who saved his wife and children from near certain death when he turned around during a heated family discussion to discover that an angry lone bull elephant had somehow found its way, hitherto unnoticed, into their small living room. Showing complete disregard for his own safety, he fearlessly stood up to the enormous pachyderm cliché and chased it, screaming and shouting, out of his village and off into a nearby sunset.

*(along with land-based ice melt and seawater expanding with increased temperature, of course)