Diplomats agree on “weak” text for Rio+20 green summit..”epic fail”..Argentina see trade wars over “Green Economy”
Diplomats from over 190 countries agreed on a draft text on green global development on Tuesday to be approved this week at a summit in Rio de Janeiro, but environmentalists complained the agreement was too weak.
The summit, known as Rio+20, was supposed to hammer out aspirational, rather than mandatory sustainable development goals across core areas like food security, water and energy, but the draft text agreed upon by diplomats failed to define those goals or give clear timetables toward setting them.
It is “telling that nobody in that room adopting the text was happy. That’s how weak it is,” the European Union’s climate commissioner Connie Hedegaard said on social network Twitter.
The text “has too much ‘take note’ and ‘reaffirm’ and too little ‘decide’ and ‘commit’. (The) big task now for U.N. nations to follow up” on this, she added.
Expectations were low for the summit because politicians’ attention is more focused on the euro zone crisis, a presidential election in the United States and turmoil in the Middle East than on the environment.
The first Rio Earth summit in 1992 paved the way for a global treaty on biodiversity, and the 1997 Kyoto Protocol on greenhouse gases, which is due to expire this year. The Rio+20 moniker is a nod to the 1992 summit.
Heads of state and ministers, including Russian President Vladimir Putin, French President Francois Hollande and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, will meet with diplomats representing other nations from Wednesday for three days to discuss the text and possibly make some changes to its wording.
NEGOTIATORS in Rio de Janeiro have claimed success after finalising a statement to be issued by more than 100 world leaders who arrive in the Brazilian city over the next few days.
But many observers said the ”success” at the United Nations conference was possible only after the agreement was watered down so far it became meaningless.
”Rio has turned into an epic failure. It has failed on equity, failed on ecology and failed on economy,” the executive director of Greenpeace International, Kumi Naidoo, said.
The World Wildlife Fund executive director, Jim Leape, said the document was a ”colossal failure of leadership and vision”.
And the Oxfam spokesman Stephen Hale said the world leaders should ”start again”.
But the Brazilian External Affairs Minister, Antonio Patriota, said the result was ”very satisfying … because it is a result. As of yesterday we were facing considerable difficulties to have a text at all”.
And the US chief negotiator, Todd Stern, said the agreement was a ”good strong step forward”.
Argentine Planning Ministry Undersecretary of Planning & Environmental Policy Silvia Revora told Veintitresmagazine today that “we’re headed toward a trade war” because of what developed nations are demanding in terms of “green economy,” and that behind this very concept “are a variety of different traps.” She rejected the idea of some form of “global governance” for environmental policy, as a ploy to pass on the cost of dealing with environmental damage to developing countries. “Our concept of sustainable development implies distribution of wealth, and includes the whole range of social, economic and environmental policies defined by a country. That’s why we say ‘no’ to the imposition of a green economy, and ‘yes’ to sovereign development, in which we control our resources on the basis of our reality.” She warned that several European and other nations want to violate the sovereignty of developing countries, and obstruct their development, through such ruses as imposition of carbon taxes, or demanding that countries certify how much carbon was used in the production of certain goods. This is absurd. We can’t compete with this nonsense, and we are hurt by it, she stated.
once again the argentines are the smartest in the room..the “green economy” is a wankfest of utopian ideals for earth worshipping elites..yes its nice to have green eneregy but in no way do we need to destroy ourselves to get there..thats why AGW was created to make it urgent and a necesssity but its not..it should preoceed at an orderly rate and no country should hand over sovereignty to the UN..