The United Nations climate talks in Doha went a full extra 24 hours and ended without increased cuts in fossil fuel emissions and without financial commitments between 2013 and 2015.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis is an incredibly weak deal,\u201d said Samantha Smith representing the Climate Action Network, a coalition of more than 700 civil society organisations.<\/p>\n
\u201cGovernments came here with no mandate for action,\u201d Smith said in a press scrum moments after the meeting known as COP 18 ended and the 195 parties to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) approved a complex package called \u201cThe Doha Climate Gateway\u201d.<\/p>\n
The Doha Gateway creates a second phase of the Kyoto Protocol to cut fossil fuel emissions by industrialised nations from 2013 to 2020 but does not set new targets. There is also no financial support to help poor countries adapt to impacts of climate change \u2013 only agreement for more meetings in 2013. Talks will also begin next year to create a \u201cmechanism\u201d to assess damages and costs for countries suffering losses from climate change.<\/p>\n
Finally, the Doha Climate Gateway has an agreed outline for two years of negotiations on a new global climate treaty that would go into legal force in 2020.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt is impossible to get everyone here to smile\u2026.I too am disappointed,\u201d said Qatar\u2019s Abdullah bin Hamad Al-Attiyah, the COP18 president. Al-Attiyah told Tierram\u00e9rica * he was surprised countries wanted to make so many changes throughout the two weeks and right up to the final hours.<\/p>\n
However, this is a \u201chistoric\u201d agreement, Al-Attiyah insisted.<\/p>\n
Doha will do nothing to cut emissions that are taking the world to four degrees and more of warming. It offers little in terms of finance to help poor countries cope with climate change, Smith said.<\/p>\n
Smith singled out the U.S. and Canada for blocking progress on keys issues. Canada was one of the worst, she said. While profiting from its massive oil sands operations, it was \u201csuper-obstructive on finance\u201d.<\/p>\n
Industrialised countries promised to put 100 billion dollars a year into a Green Climate Fund by 2020. To bridge the gap till then, developing nations asked for 60 billion dollars in total by 2015. Britain, Germany and few other countries promised to contribute six billion dollars but this is not binding. Under the Doha Climate Gateway, countries agreed to further talks on finance in 2013.<\/p>\n
The loss and damage debate was among the most intense during closed meetings, featuring the U.S pitted against island states like the Philippines that are badly impacted by stronger cyclones and sea level rise. The U.S. delegates blocked all references that implied compensation or liability, openly admitting they feared a political backlash at home, according to an anonymous source.<\/p>\n
\u201cLoss and damage is huge issue for Central America. We are highly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change,\u201d said M\u00f3nica L\u00f3pez Baltodano, of Centro Humboldt Nicaragua, an environmental NGO.<\/p>\n
\u201cHonduras and Nicaragua are the number one and number three most vulnerable countries in the world according to the Climate Risk Index,\u201d Baltodano told Tierram\u00e9rica here in Doha.<\/p>\n
The Germanwatch Global Climate Risk Index was released here a few days ago. It said those two countries have been the most affected in terms of lost lives and damages over the past 20 years. In 2011, Thailand, Cambodia, Pakistan and El Salvador were the worst affected by extreme weather events in 2011.<\/p>\n
In 2010, at COP 16 in Cancun, there was agreement to find ways to assess and reduce losses and damages from impacts of climate change, including extreme weather events and slow onset events like sea level rise, ocean acidification, loss of biodiversity and desertification.<\/p>\n
Developing countries wanted a new institution and framework to deal with loss and damage, but the U.S. was opposed to any new institution. The compromise is for a \u201cnew mechanism\u201d to be created in 2013.<\/p>\n
A new second phase of the Kyoto Protocol will run from 2013 to 2020. Getting this second phase or commitment is considered very important by developing countries because it has hard-won legal terms that commit countries to making cuts as well as methods for measuring and verifying emission levels.<\/p>\n
However, only the European Union, Australia and a few other countries are involved, representing just 12 percent of global emissions. The U.S. has never participated, while Canada and Japan have opted out of the second phase.<\/p>\n
None of those in the second Kyoto phase increased their emission cuts pledges. They did agree to a mandatory review of their reduction targets in 2014. Rich countries outside of Kyoto promised to make comparable cuts but offered nothing new here in Doha.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe COP process is very disappointing,\u201d said Baltodano, who has attended two previous ones. \u201cIt\u2019s very clear that countries\u2019 economic interests dominate the negotiations.\u201d<\/p>\n
Countries are mainly influenced by the corporate sector and civil society has very little interaction or influence there, she said. \u201cThere is a huge space we don\u2019t reach.\u201d<\/p>\n
The Doha outcome puts the world on track for three, four or even five degrees of warming, said the delegate from the South Pacific island nation of Nauru who represents the Alliance of Small Island States in the final plenary.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe\u2019re not talking about how comfortable your people (in developed world) may live but whether our people live,\u201d the delegate said. \u201cThe lives of our people are on the line here.\u201d<\/p>\n
_________________________<\/p>\n
Stephen Leahy is the lead international science and environment correspondent at IPS, where he writes about climate change, energy, water, biodiversity, development and native peoples. Based in Uxbridge, Canada, near Toronto, Steve has covered environmental issues for nearly two decades for publications around the world. He is a professional member of the International Federation of Journalists, the Society of Environmental Journalists and the International League of Conservation Writers. He also pioneered Community Supported Environmental Journalism to ensure important environmental issues continue to be covered.<\/em><\/p>\n This story was originally published by Latin American newspapers that are part of the Tierram\u00e9rica network. Tierram\u00e9rica is a specialised news service produced by IPS with the backing of the United Nations Development Programme, United Nations Environment Programme and the World Bank.<\/em><\/p>\n