Copenhagen negotiators bicker and filibuster while the biosphere burns
George Monbiot
The Guardian (UK)
19 December 2009
First they put the planet in square brackets, now they have deleted it
from the text. At the end it was no longer about saving the biosphere: it
was just a matter of saving face. As the talks melted down, everything
that might have made a new treaty worthwhile was scratched out. Any deal
would do, as long as the negotiators could pretend they have achieved
something. A clearer and less destructive treaty than the text that
emerged would be a sheaf of blank paper, which every negotiating party
solemnly sits down to sign.
This was the chaotic, disastrous denouement of a chaotic and disastrous
summit. The event has been attended by historic levels of incompetence.
Delegates arriving from the tropics spent 10 hours queueing in sub-zero
temperatures without shelter, food or drink, let alone any explanation or
announcement, before being turned away. Some people fainted from exposure;
it's surprising that no one died. The process of negotiation was just as
obtuse: there was no evidence here of the innovative methods of dispute
resolution developed recently by mediators and coaches, just the same old
pig-headed wrestling.
Watching this stupid summit via webcam (I wasn't allowed in either), it
struck me that the treaty-making system has scarcely changed in 130 years.
There's a wider range of faces, fewer handlebar moustaches, frock coats or
pickelhaubes, but otherwise, when the world's governments try to decide
how to carve up the atmosphere, they might have been attending the
conference of Berlin in 1884. It's as if democratisation and the flowering
of civil society, advocacy and self-determination had never happened.
Governments, whether elected or not, without reference to their own
citizens let alone those of other nations, assert their right to draw
lines across the global commons and decide who gets what. This is a
scramble for the atmosphere comparable in style and intent to the scramble
for Africa.
At no point has the injustice at the heart of multilateralism been
addressed or even acknowledged: the interests of states and the interests
of the world's people are not the same. Often they are diametrically
opposed. In this case, most rich and rapidly developing states have sought
through these talks to seize as great a chunk of the atmosphere for
themselves as they can – to grab bigger rights to pollute than their
competitors. The process couldn't have been better designed to produce the
wrong results.
I spent most of my time at the Klimaforum, the alternative conference set
up by just four paid staff, which 50,000 people attended without a hitch.
(I know which team I would put in charge of saving the planet.) There the
barrister Polly Higgins laid out a different approach. Her declaration of
planetary rights invests ecosystems with similar legal safeguards to those
won by humans after the second world war. It changes the legal
relationship between humans, the atmosphere and the biosphere from
ownership to stewardship. It creates a global framework for negotiation
which gives nation states less discretion to dispose of ecosystems and the
people who depend on them.
Even before the farce in Copenhagen began it was looking like it might be
too late to prevent two or more degrees of global warming. The nation
states, pursuing their own interests, have each been passing the parcel of
responsibility since they decided to take action in 1992. We have now lost
17 precious years, possibly the only years in which climate breakdown
could have been prevented. This has not happened by accident: it is the
result of a systematic campaign of sabotage by certain states, driven and
promoted by the energy industries. This idiocy has been aided and abetted
by the nations characterised, until now, as the good guys: those that have
made firm commitments, only to invalidate them with loopholes, false
accounting and outsourcing. In all cases immediate self-interest has
trumped the long-term welfare of humankind. Corporate profits and
political expediency have proved more urgent considerations than either
the natural world or human civilisation. Our political systems are
incapable of discharging the main function of government: to protect us
from each other.
Goodbye Africa, goodbye south Asia; goodbye glaciers and sea ice, coral
reefs and rainforest. It was nice knowing you. Not that we really cared.
The governments which moved so swiftly to save the banks have bickered and
filibustered while the biosphere burns.
Saturday, December 19, 2009
There is no deal
I'm not entirely clear on what is being reported at home, but there is no deal, there is a pseudo deal to make a deal, but as far as most of the world is concerned, this is NOT A DEAL. I'm reposting some thoughts from Prof. Michael Dorsey of Dartmouth College's Climate Justice Research Project below:
I am so very sad to see this "report" below is nothing more than rubish --from the US State Dept. peddled by CAN. And that friends is the ONLY word: garbage.
This is nothing but US propaganda--in the full sense of that word.
There is NO final text in the eyes of the majority of the planet's nations--especially those from the small islands, from Africa and the so-called lesser developed countries.
Small Islands, Africa are STILL here at 10 minutes to 5AM... battling against this "agreement".
It is an honorable fight indeed. One to remember by those that dare carry fond memories of Obama to their grave.
So much below is such a worth distortion words cannot even suffice.
"Danes are making copies" --far from utter bullocks...is nothing more than a boldfaced lie. One of the battle all night is the "agreement text" was NEVER circulated.
"Good compromises" this is this is the audacity of nihilism, shock, and distort.
I have never seen such hubris by Europeans and American in some time.
Truly baseless skullduggery.
Words are truly insufficient.
Watch it live--:
http://www7.cop15.meta-fusion.com/kongresse/cop15/templ/live.php?id_kongresssession=1&theme=unfccc
There seems there will NOT be a Copenhagen Accord.
And more from today:
1. Developing countries did not block the Obama-Danish text – they merely proposed that it be put on the Agenda for the next meeting because they had no reasonable chance to review it.
2. The text was negotiated by a small and exclusive group of countries at the highest level and then presented to the over 190 countries minutes before the final plenary meeting.
3. Developing countries across the world had concerns including small islands like Tuvalu, mountainous countries like Bolivia and large African desert states like Sudan were opposed to agreeing to accept the documetn because of its substance
· It does not include emission reduction numbers for developed countries - the key to actually stopping climate change
· It includes a 2 degree stablisation target even though over 100 countries have said that they need 1.5 degrees and that 2 degrees means death for Africa, for small island states, for anyone living near glacial mountains
4. Rememeber that before Copenhagen everyone was talking about binding emission cuts? This document does not at all - why? Because one country blocked that being a part of any agreement and that country was the United States.
5. Ed Milliband has said we should not take a step backward - let's be clear developing countries are saying we should stop and take stock before we take a step in the wrong direction - remember this so called 'deal' was cooked up without them and annouced while they were in a meeting so they had to read about it from the BBC - it's fair enough for htem to want to keep it on the agenda and think about it.
I am so very sad to see this "report" below is nothing more than rubish --from the US State Dept. peddled by CAN. And that friends is the ONLY word: garbage.
This is nothing but US propaganda--in the full sense of that word.
There is NO final text in the eyes of the majority of the planet's nations--especially those from the small islands, from Africa and the so-called lesser developed countries.
Small Islands, Africa are STILL here at 10 minutes to 5AM... battling against this "agreement".
It is an honorable fight indeed. One to remember by those that dare carry fond memories of Obama to their grave.
So much below is such a worth distortion words cannot even suffice.
"Danes are making copies" --far from utter bullocks...is nothing more than a boldfaced lie. One of the battle all night is the "agreement text" was NEVER circulated.
"Good compromises" this is this is the audacity of nihilism, shock, and distort.
I have never seen such hubris by Europeans and American in some time.
Truly baseless skullduggery.
Words are truly insufficient.
Watch it live--:
http://www7.cop15.meta-fusion.com/kongresse/cop15/templ/live.php?id_kongresssession=1&theme=unfccc
There seems there will NOT be a Copenhagen Accord.
And more from today:
1. Developing countries did not block the Obama-Danish text – they merely proposed that it be put on the Agenda for the next meeting because they had no reasonable chance to review it.
2. The text was negotiated by a small and exclusive group of countries at the highest level and then presented to the over 190 countries minutes before the final plenary meeting.
3. Developing countries across the world had concerns including small islands like Tuvalu, mountainous countries like Bolivia and large African desert states like Sudan were opposed to agreeing to accept the documetn because of its substance
· It does not include emission reduction numbers for developed countries - the key to actually stopping climate change
· It includes a 2 degree stablisation target even though over 100 countries have said that they need 1.5 degrees and that 2 degrees means death for Africa, for small island states, for anyone living near glacial mountains
4. Rememeber that before Copenhagen everyone was talking about binding emission cuts? This document does not at all - why? Because one country blocked that being a part of any agreement and that country was the United States.
5. Ed Milliband has said we should not take a step backward - let's be clear developing countries are saying we should stop and take stock before we take a step in the wrong direction - remember this so called 'deal' was cooked up without them and annouced while they were in a meeting so they had to read about it from the BBC - it's fair enough for htem to want to keep it on the agenda and think about it.
Friday, December 18, 2009
Is no deal better than one whose own drafters admit it is "insufficient to address the threat of climate change"?
Here is the text of the proposed deal, as it was about an hour ago - click on the images to enlarge:
And some quick commentary here:
http://twitter.com/GreenHejira
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/18/a-climate-deal/
And some quick commentary here:
http://twitter.com/GreenHejira
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/18/a-climate-deal/
Thursday, December 17, 2009
For those wondering what they can do - consider signing this petition
I am reposting a letter sent out over the Avaaz listserve earlier today. Avaaz is a great group that does a lot of outstanding work, particularly when it comes to mobilizing citizens to send a strong message to government. Read the letter, check out the sites, and consider adding your name to the petition!
***
Dear friends,
Canada is blocking crucial UN climate negotiations in Copenhagen and secretly rolling back our efforts to fight climate change. A massive national outcry has stopped Harper before, the planet needs us now.
Enough is enough. As the world enters a desperate 36 hour effort to stop catastrophic global warming in Copenhagen, Canada is receiving the global "fossil award" for wrecking this crucial summit! And new leaked documents show that while the entire world is increasing cuts to carbon emissions, the government is rolling back ours.
A massive national outcry forced Harper to stop blocking the Bali talks in 07. But Harper's friends in the oil companies know that Copenhagen is the make or break moment for climate. It will not be easy to win this time, but to save the planet and our country we have to.
Let's mount a tidal wave of pressure on Harper with the largest petition in Canadian history - click below to sign, and forward this email to everyone. We have 36 hours:
http://www.avaaz.org/en/harper_enough_is_enough
The petition and names of the signers are actually being read out by youth in the summit hall, and another group of youth have done the same in Harpers own office! The Canadian delegation has become the object of international disbelief and ridicule in Copenhagen, but we can show the world that the Canadian people still hold our values of being good neighbours and global citizens.
Harper is undermining our deepest values and proudest traditions. But this is about more than our reputation. Studies show that climate change is already taking up to 300,000 human lives a year through turning millions of farms to dust and flooding vast areas. We can no longer allow Harper to make us responsible for these deaths, or put Canada's economic future in jeopardy by sacrificing our green competitiveness for a brown economy based on the dirtiest (tar sands) oil in the world.
Copenhagen is seeking the biggest mandate in history to stop the greatest threat humanity has ever faced. History will be made in the next 36 hours, and our country is the problem, not the solution. How will our children remember this moment? Let's tell them we did all we could.
With hope,
Ricken, Laryn, Anne-Marie, Iain and the Avaaz Canada team
More information at these sites:
CBC -- "Tories pondered weaker emission targets for oil and gas": http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/12/14/greenhouse-gas-emissions.html
Mail and Guardian -- "Canada's climate shame": http://www.mg.co.za/article/2009-12-04-canadas-climate-shame
Toronto Star -- "Who are the Yes Men and why did they punk Canada at Copenhagen": http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/738933--who-are-the-yes-men-and-why-did-they-punk-canada-at-copenhagen
Macleans -- "Suddenly the world hates Canada": http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/12/15/suddenly-the-world-hates-canada/3/
Fossil of the Day Awards: http://www.fossiloftheday.com/
***
Dear friends,
Canada is blocking crucial UN climate negotiations in Copenhagen and secretly rolling back our efforts to fight climate change. A massive national outcry has stopped Harper before, the planet needs us now.
Enough is enough. As the world enters a desperate 36 hour effort to stop catastrophic global warming in Copenhagen, Canada is receiving the global "fossil award" for wrecking this crucial summit! And new leaked documents show that while the entire world is increasing cuts to carbon emissions, the government is rolling back ours.
A massive national outcry forced Harper to stop blocking the Bali talks in 07. But Harper's friends in the oil companies know that Copenhagen is the make or break moment for climate. It will not be easy to win this time, but to save the planet and our country we have to.
Let's mount a tidal wave of pressure on Harper with the largest petition in Canadian history - click below to sign, and forward this email to everyone. We have 36 hours:
http://www.avaaz.org/en/harper_enough_is_enough
The petition and names of the signers are actually being read out by youth in the summit hall, and another group of youth have done the same in Harpers own office! The Canadian delegation has become the object of international disbelief and ridicule in Copenhagen, but we can show the world that the Canadian people still hold our values of being good neighbours and global citizens.
Harper is undermining our deepest values and proudest traditions. But this is about more than our reputation. Studies show that climate change is already taking up to 300,000 human lives a year through turning millions of farms to dust and flooding vast areas. We can no longer allow Harper to make us responsible for these deaths, or put Canada's economic future in jeopardy by sacrificing our green competitiveness for a brown economy based on the dirtiest (tar sands) oil in the world.
Copenhagen is seeking the biggest mandate in history to stop the greatest threat humanity has ever faced. History will be made in the next 36 hours, and our country is the problem, not the solution. How will our children remember this moment? Let's tell them we did all we could.
With hope,
Ricken, Laryn, Anne-Marie, Iain and the Avaaz Canada team
More information at these sites:
CBC -- "Tories pondered weaker emission targets for oil and gas": http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/12/14/greenhouse-gas-emissions.html
Mail and Guardian -- "Canada's climate shame": http://www.mg.co.za/article/2009-12-04-canadas-climate-shame
Toronto Star -- "Who are the Yes Men and why did they punk Canada at Copenhagen": http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/738933--who-are-the-yes-men-and-why-did-they-punk-canada-at-copenhagen
Macleans -- "Suddenly the world hates Canada": http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/12/15/suddenly-the-world-hates-canada/3/
Fossil of the Day Awards: http://www.fossiloftheday.com/
Some thoughts on non-violent civil disobedience
As I reread the postings of the past few days, it occurred to me that to someone not following the events closely, the intention of the demonstration at the Bella Center yesterday and thus the full context of our interaction with the police might not be clear. Yesterday's post was written very soon after we left the action and my main goal was to get out an account of what had happened, rather than provide circumstantial background or thoughtful analysis - so I thought I’d attempt to do this now (Stick with me - the good stuff's at the end!).
The publicised purpose of the demonstration yesterday was to enter the Bella Center in an act of non-violent civil disobedience aimed at opening up the negotiation space to the public. Our decision to participate in this action was guided by the fact that this week, numerous accredited NGOs have been shut out of the Center and thus each day there is diminishing civil society oversight within the negotiations room. I do not exaggerate to say that decisions about the future of our planet are being made behind closed doors and without accountability or transparency. Further, some allies who are still being permitted into the center have been reporting back on the exchanges that are happening inside, and the picture they paint is one of Northern countries committed to developing a carbon market without much of a care about whether or not it does anything to reduce CO2 emissions, as Southern nations that are already feeling the effects are pleading for real action on the part of the developed world and financial support to help them both adapt and mitigate the effects they are already feeling. This information is substantiated by the frequent walk-outs staged by members of the G77 to demonstrate their disgust over the bad faith participation of the developed world.
We decided to attend this event knowing that an act of civil disobedience had been planned and knowing the police would be present and would presumably be attempting to stop people from entering the center.
What ultimately happened, however, is that the police moved in on us as soon as we arrived in the area - a point at which no one was breeching any of the barriers that have stood around the building all week and where, again, no one was doing anything violent or illegal. Further, rather than simply acting to prevent us from entering the center (which would have been extremely hard for us to do given the one entrance to the building, the fence, the line of police vans in front of the fence and the several hundred police officers present), they acted immediately with violence and in a manner that can only be assumed to be designed to escalate the situation, not defuse it. Given the reaction of police, the decision was made almost immediately to abandon the plan to enter the Bella Center and to instead hold the transparent and open meeting outside, where a legal demonstration permit entitled us to the space. Although this decision was announced repeatedly, the police continued to press in on the crowd, beat people seemingly at random (for example, if they were not moving quickly enough for the police’s liking because there were people in front of them and they had no way of moving any faster) and fire tear gas and pepper spray indiscriminately into the crowd.
I hope you are all still with me, cause here’s sort of the point of why I wrote this post:
I know that there are many, many people who will say that the Bella Center is a private space and “we” had no right to even announce a plan to attempt to go in there – the public is not allowed in and we should respect that. Further, there are others who will say that, like it or not, rightly or wrongly, we have no right to be outraged by the actions of police, given that we knew it was likely to be a contentious situation going in. I’d like to briefly provide my thoughts on these two points.
1) We have no right to be there: I encourage all of you to consider what it means that so many in society are content to allow governments to negotiate life-changing agreements behind closed doors, without the oversight of civil society. I would also ask you to consider this in the case of Canada in particular, where recently released government documents show that our government has been lying to its citizens about their plans on capping emissions. We are the ones who will bear the consequences of the decisions made here in Copenhagen, and yet we are being denied any voice in the process. I contend that the notion that anyone does not have a right to be fully informed, witness to and participant in these negotiations is a complete fallacy – the closed doors are a way to ensure that governments are not held to account for what they say or the position they present, their intention is to let governments make decisions that will affect their citizens without involving citizens in that process at all. Of course I get the idea that we elect representatives to ensure our views are heard in parliament, but how do we know they are doing a good job advocating for us if we aren’t allowed to know what they are saying? There is a reason proceedings in the house of commons are open to the public and broadcast on CPAC. The great social movements of previous decades were founded on the notion of non-violent civil disobedience and I'd encourage you to question what it means for a government to tell its people, you aren’t allowed in, you have no right to speak, you cannot know the content of the negotiations we make on your behalf.
2) We had it coming from the police: We were peaceful and committed to non-violence, it was not necessary for the police to be so aggressive in order to prevent us from entering the center. It was clear to me that the goal of the police was not to prevent us from entering the center (which could have been very easily done by simply standing in a line in front of the entrance, or in front of the fence in front of the entrance, or in front of the line of the police vans in front of the fence in front of the entrance), but to punish us for speaking up and attempt to intimidate us into silence. Whether you agree with my particular set of political beliefs or not, I think most people can appreciate that it is a scary, scary thing indeed when the police act violently towards a group of peaceful people not because of a HARM they are causing, but because of the MESSAGE they carry. If we accept that people who wish not to have their rights violated by the police should simply not do things to anger the police, that seems to be the end of most of the freedoms a person can hold. I refuse to accept the idea that it is foolish or too radical to expect that I should be able to engage in non-violent, non-harmful public action without facing a violent reprisal from the police.
The publicised purpose of the demonstration yesterday was to enter the Bella Center in an act of non-violent civil disobedience aimed at opening up the negotiation space to the public. Our decision to participate in this action was guided by the fact that this week, numerous accredited NGOs have been shut out of the Center and thus each day there is diminishing civil society oversight within the negotiations room. I do not exaggerate to say that decisions about the future of our planet are being made behind closed doors and without accountability or transparency. Further, some allies who are still being permitted into the center have been reporting back on the exchanges that are happening inside, and the picture they paint is one of Northern countries committed to developing a carbon market without much of a care about whether or not it does anything to reduce CO2 emissions, as Southern nations that are already feeling the effects are pleading for real action on the part of the developed world and financial support to help them both adapt and mitigate the effects they are already feeling. This information is substantiated by the frequent walk-outs staged by members of the G77 to demonstrate their disgust over the bad faith participation of the developed world.
We decided to attend this event knowing that an act of civil disobedience had been planned and knowing the police would be present and would presumably be attempting to stop people from entering the center.
What ultimately happened, however, is that the police moved in on us as soon as we arrived in the area - a point at which no one was breeching any of the barriers that have stood around the building all week and where, again, no one was doing anything violent or illegal. Further, rather than simply acting to prevent us from entering the center (which would have been extremely hard for us to do given the one entrance to the building, the fence, the line of police vans in front of the fence and the several hundred police officers present), they acted immediately with violence and in a manner that can only be assumed to be designed to escalate the situation, not defuse it. Given the reaction of police, the decision was made almost immediately to abandon the plan to enter the Bella Center and to instead hold the transparent and open meeting outside, where a legal demonstration permit entitled us to the space. Although this decision was announced repeatedly, the police continued to press in on the crowd, beat people seemingly at random (for example, if they were not moving quickly enough for the police’s liking because there were people in front of them and they had no way of moving any faster) and fire tear gas and pepper spray indiscriminately into the crowd.
I hope you are all still with me, cause here’s sort of the point of why I wrote this post:
I know that there are many, many people who will say that the Bella Center is a private space and “we” had no right to even announce a plan to attempt to go in there – the public is not allowed in and we should respect that. Further, there are others who will say that, like it or not, rightly or wrongly, we have no right to be outraged by the actions of police, given that we knew it was likely to be a contentious situation going in. I’d like to briefly provide my thoughts on these two points.
1) We have no right to be there: I encourage all of you to consider what it means that so many in society are content to allow governments to negotiate life-changing agreements behind closed doors, without the oversight of civil society. I would also ask you to consider this in the case of Canada in particular, where recently released government documents show that our government has been lying to its citizens about their plans on capping emissions. We are the ones who will bear the consequences of the decisions made here in Copenhagen, and yet we are being denied any voice in the process. I contend that the notion that anyone does not have a right to be fully informed, witness to and participant in these negotiations is a complete fallacy – the closed doors are a way to ensure that governments are not held to account for what they say or the position they present, their intention is to let governments make decisions that will affect their citizens without involving citizens in that process at all. Of course I get the idea that we elect representatives to ensure our views are heard in parliament, but how do we know they are doing a good job advocating for us if we aren’t allowed to know what they are saying? There is a reason proceedings in the house of commons are open to the public and broadcast on CPAC. The great social movements of previous decades were founded on the notion of non-violent civil disobedience and I'd encourage you to question what it means for a government to tell its people, you aren’t allowed in, you have no right to speak, you cannot know the content of the negotiations we make on your behalf.
2) We had it coming from the police: We were peaceful and committed to non-violence, it was not necessary for the police to be so aggressive in order to prevent us from entering the center. It was clear to me that the goal of the police was not to prevent us from entering the center (which could have been very easily done by simply standing in a line in front of the entrance, or in front of the fence in front of the entrance, or in front of the line of the police vans in front of the fence in front of the entrance), but to punish us for speaking up and attempt to intimidate us into silence. Whether you agree with my particular set of political beliefs or not, I think most people can appreciate that it is a scary, scary thing indeed when the police act violently towards a group of peaceful people not because of a HARM they are causing, but because of the MESSAGE they carry. If we accept that people who wish not to have their rights violated by the police should simply not do things to anger the police, that seems to be the end of most of the freedoms a person can hold. I refuse to accept the idea that it is foolish or too radical to expect that I should be able to engage in non-violent, non-harmful public action without facing a violent reprisal from the police.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Democracy.
This is what democracy looks like?
Following yesterday night's post, we attended the march to the Bella Center this morning. I can say with total honesty that I did not see one agressive or violent action on the part of the demonstrators. The police were a different story however. We had a demonstration permit that allowed us to go right up to the fence surrounding the Bella Center and to legally occupy space on the street outside the center, despite this, the police started pushing in on the crowd almost immediately upon our arrival and crowding people into the center for the intersection from all sides, pushing them up against police vans so they had nowhere to move, and then beating the people on the outside of the group for failing to move. I was among the many, many peaceful, law-abiding protesters who were cornered by police in this fashion - having no where to go even if I wanted to leave and was then pepper sprayed while in the middle of this police-created mob. Unable to see anything, I had to rely totally on Steve to guide me out of the crowd (after the sprayed everyone they had cornered, they backed up to let us move); had we somehow lost hold of each other at that moment, I don't even know what would have happened - it was absolutely a recipe for disaster. I would like to mention, however, that everyone took great care of each other, with those the spray had missed guiding others out of the central area and offering water and calling the volunteer demonstrator medics over to put eye wash that neutralizes the effects of the spray in peoples eyes.
After this initial rush, it seemed the police had backed off a bit and might allow us to hold the 'people's assembly' we had planned in the street (which, once again, we had a legal permit entitling us to be in), as it was announced that many delegates from inside the center were going to come out and meet us. Soon after, however, they announced that these delegates were actually being prevented from leaving the Bella Center (we also later learned that (this is a quote from an email I was forwarded by one of our contacts working in the BC): "Norwegian govt delegate prevented from speaking to FoE Norway representatives at protest and all media banned from speaking or interviewing any FoE members. Any FoE members on the premises of the Bella Centre are being physically escorted out the premises." FoE is Friends of the Earth, and unbelievably popular and well-respected international NGO.
After this, we noticed that the police were lining up along the road, near where we (and many others were standing) and then they started walking in towards us, herding everyone into the center intersection once again (on the other side of which was the Bella Center along with a fence and several police vans). This made no sense - they were forcing us all into the center, where the mix of pepper spray and tear gas was so thick, clouds were actually visably hanging in the air, as you can see here:
with no way to get out - not exactly an approach designed to calm down a tense situation. I actually asked one of the officers where we were suppose to go and how they expected people to get out and he told us to go around a corner that was almost totally cut off the people were packed so tightly.
Eventually we made it around this corner. On the way, we passed an individual crumbled on the ground, as a medic tended to him or her, along with several people running in the opposite direction from us, coming from a group on the other side of the wide road, yelling that they needed medics. Again, I'll point out that the only medics on the scene to anyone who had been sprayed or gased, beaten by police, or otherwise injured in the crush of people were demonstrators themselves who had voluntarily worn medic armbands and brought first aid supplies. At this point, we agreed that with such a large (but still peaceful crowd) being forced into such a small space, and with the police behaving so recklessly, it was best to leave. We came prepared to be arrested, but seriously injured is a whole other ballgame. As we broke free of the crowd, we could see a police line down the road, but as the crowd had thinned a bit in this area, we thought maybe they were letting people through.
As we got closer, we saw a line of people on their bicycles across the street facing a line of police vans. Again, we were still in the area where we had a legal demonstration permit. We then saw the police vans drive forward and run into the line of people on their bicycles. Then, so fast I didn't even see where they came from even though I was standing right there, a group of officers with dogs appeared and the people from the bikes started running with the police dogs chasing them. We then learned that the police were not letting people out this way either - the way that the police on the other side told us we could go to get out - the police had surrounded the demonstrators on all sides and were moving in, pushing everyone to the centre of the intersection. Ultimately we got out (along with many others) by making our way through some undergrowth and wading across a brook and walking through a parkland area.
If the police's goal is to dissipate the demonstrators I really don't understand how they thought what they were doing would be at all effective. I also don't understand how people wanting to have their voices heard (freedom of expression? democracy? anyone?) is so dangerous that such violent action was necessary against peaceful individuals? Again, I can say with absolute truth that I saw not one demonstrator engaging in a violent act; it was clearly our presence alone that was enough for the police to act with such force against us, despite our legal right to be here. Right now, I am mostly hoping that the combination of force outside the bella center on such a large group of peaceful people, combined with the actions inside the center of revoking accrediation for respected NGOs, forbidding anyone (including press) from speaking with certain groups and essentially holding parties captive in the building so that they couldn't join demonstrators outside will be enough to ensure that this gets widespread and accurate coverage in the mainstream media. People have to know what certain state's are willing to do in order to convince themselves and others that everything is fine and they are in control and they are handling the problem, even when the people who are already suffering the impacts of climate change show us we are not fine, and the science tells us that things are not being handled appropriately (current targets would mean a ppm of CO2 of 770 in 2050, even though we know 350 is the upper limit for healthy life on earth) and their reaction shows that they are not actually in control of the process, because in a democracy people are not treated like criminals for simply attempting to share a point of view and leaders LISTEN to their people, they don't try to intimidate them into silence.
Violent Police Action Against Legal, Peaceful Demonstrators
Details of our personal experiences to come, but police are going ape-shit (If I might be so poetic) and Avaaz, Friend of the Earth, Via campesina, and tcktcktck have all had their accreditation suspended for apparently, symathizing with the demonstrators....
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
The message we send to the world
There has been a lot of talk around Copenhagen today about the pre-emptive arrest of Tadzio Mueller, a spokesperson for Climate Justice Action, and an accredited participant of COP15. Police have refused to say what he is being charged with and only that he will appear in court tomorrow morning. Everyone knows this arrest is directly related to an action planned for tomorrow morning to march to the Bella Center where the summit is taking place, entering the building and holding a people's assembly in the main hall, thus shuting down negotiations for a period. This action has been on the agenda all along, and initially I wasn't inclined to attend this particular demonstration; there were a lot of NGOs present in the Bella Center who were able to represent the voice of civil society and I thought that it was simply sensational and disruptive without real purpose to enter the building and actually HALT talks so close to the end of the summit.
My thoughts have really changed in the past few days, however, as the action has taken on new meaning as good faith negotiations have ceased and as numerous NGOs have been shut out of the Bella Center in the second week, we are told to make way for the increasing number of politicians and other government officials (although the number being denied access far exceeds the increase in these groups). Today, my frustration and anger (and fear) reached a breaking point as I heard of the arrest of Mueller. It is so important to the Danish government that Copenhagen be viewed in a "positive" light in the rest of the world (although we must ask, "who's definition of 'positive'?) that they are willing to arrest people who have done nothing illegal simply because they encourage others to engage in peaceful demonstrations! This should terrify people of all political stripes.
So I'm leaning towards going. Partially, this is because I want to send a message to all those governments in the Bella Center that real democracy doesn't happen behind closed doors and in secret meetings and that, try as they might, they cannot ignore the people who it is their duty to represent. Partially, this is because my knowledge of the consequences of climate change and my committment to fighting for a fair, ambitious and binding international agreement to fight climate change have grown exponentially during my time here. Partially, and increasingly, this is because I want to tell them that I (we) will not shut up when we know we are fighting for what is necessary and what is just, and that when it comes to the climate crisis that already kills 300,000 people a year, our cries will only get louder as they try to quiet us. I want them, and people watching around the world, to know that we will not be intimidated into silence. Some things are worth fighting for and if fighting for climate justice means I find myself handcuffed, kneeling on the freezing streets of Copenhagen for hours (as the demonstrators arrested on Saturday found themselves) with a few thousand like-minded people, then hopefully that makes our message stronger. We will not be violent and if we are arrested for attempting to make our voices heard, the only thing that seems to suggest to me is that the government knows we have something important to say.
For those who are interested, there are some great articles on both the Huffington Post and the Guardian on the arrest of Tadzio Mueller and tomorrow's demonstration.
Let's hope I'm here to post tomorrow, cause it's getting really cold in this city and kneeling on the street for hours is just something I could really do without.
My thoughts have really changed in the past few days, however, as the action has taken on new meaning as good faith negotiations have ceased and as numerous NGOs have been shut out of the Bella Center in the second week, we are told to make way for the increasing number of politicians and other government officials (although the number being denied access far exceeds the increase in these groups). Today, my frustration and anger (and fear) reached a breaking point as I heard of the arrest of Mueller. It is so important to the Danish government that Copenhagen be viewed in a "positive" light in the rest of the world (although we must ask, "who's definition of 'positive'?) that they are willing to arrest people who have done nothing illegal simply because they encourage others to engage in peaceful demonstrations! This should terrify people of all political stripes.
So I'm leaning towards going. Partially, this is because I want to send a message to all those governments in the Bella Center that real democracy doesn't happen behind closed doors and in secret meetings and that, try as they might, they cannot ignore the people who it is their duty to represent. Partially, this is because my knowledge of the consequences of climate change and my committment to fighting for a fair, ambitious and binding international agreement to fight climate change have grown exponentially during my time here. Partially, and increasingly, this is because I want to tell them that I (we) will not shut up when we know we are fighting for what is necessary and what is just, and that when it comes to the climate crisis that already kills 300,000 people a year, our cries will only get louder as they try to quiet us. I want them, and people watching around the world, to know that we will not be intimidated into silence. Some things are worth fighting for and if fighting for climate justice means I find myself handcuffed, kneeling on the freezing streets of Copenhagen for hours (as the demonstrators arrested on Saturday found themselves) with a few thousand like-minded people, then hopefully that makes our message stronger. We will not be violent and if we are arrested for attempting to make our voices heard, the only thing that seems to suggest to me is that the government knows we have something important to say.
For those who are interested, there are some great articles on both the Huffington Post and the Guardian on the arrest of Tadzio Mueller and tomorrow's demonstration.
Let's hope I'm here to post tomorrow, cause it's getting really cold in this city and kneeling on the street for hours is just something I could really do without.
Just when we thought the Harper government couldn't get any more shameful...
the CBC uncovers internal documents proving they are actually planning on further WEAKENING our already astoundingly low emissions targets.
Read all about it.
Read all about it.
Monday, December 14, 2009
Message of the day: Love and respect your mother
We kicked the week off right joining in a very moving demonstration arranged by the Indigenous Environmental Network near (the police stopped us from getting in front of) the Canadian embassy here in Copenhagen to draw attention to the environmental disaster that is the Tar Sands and to encourage the Canadian government to address its environmental obligations to its own people and the rest of the world. The speakers were unbelievably passionate, many of them speaking from their own experience.
There were also a few well-known Canadian advocates in the crowd, including Naomi Klein and Maude Barlow; check out what Maude Barlow had to say, not only about the tar sands, but also about the arrests of the demonstrators on Saturday:
The tarsands are well known and frequently discussed among the attendees here, with it being almost the first words off of nearly everybody's lips when we tell them where we are from. My sense is that most Canadians really have no idea just how damaged our reputation is on the international stage. One barrel of tarsands oil produces 3 times the greenhouse gases of a conventional barrel and it is the single biggest source of CO2 emissions on the planet! This is not just about climate change, the deforestation (so far, an area the size of Greece has been cleared) and toxic run-off are killing the local environment and destroying the health and way of life for local (mostly indigenous) communities. The Canadian government is widely recognized as the single biggest force standing in the way of developing a real international solution to climate change.
After the speeches, a representative from the Canadian Embassay came down to meet the crowd and accept a gift basket to welcome Steven Harper to Copenhagen. The basket included all the treaties being violated by the tarsands, as well as other fun items I'm sure the Prime Minister will enjoy.
Later in the day, back at Klimaforum we attended a really powerful presentation by Bill McKibben, the founder of 350.org about the development of the 350 movement. The basic idea is that 350 ppm CO2 is the number scientists have identified as the maximum amount of CO2 that can be in the atmosphere if we are to sustain a planet hospitable to life. 350.org took this number and made it the basis of their campaign because it crosses all language barriers and it's based on science, not belief. I definitely encourage you to check out the site, there is lots of great information, along with hundreds of inspirational photos of actions that took place around the world on October 24th, 2009, as well as this past Saturday. He showed many of these photos during his speech, including one from Toronto, on which he paused to make sure everyone in the audience knew just what a big climate criminal the Canadian government is.
One of the biggest supporters of the 350 movement has been President Mohamed Nasheed of the Maldives, a country the seriously means business on the climate change front and has committed to being carbon neutral by 2020. Given that the country is on average only 1.5 metres above sea level, they are quite literally fighting for their survival on this one. We were all very excited when President Nasheed arrived at Klimaforum to close the 350 presentation. As a former political prisoner very much used to being the underdog, especially given the tone of negotiations here, he is every bit the empassioned speaker you'd expect and it was really exciting to see such a strong leader, clearly dedicated to the wellbeing of his people.
There were also a few well-known Canadian advocates in the crowd, including Naomi Klein and Maude Barlow; check out what Maude Barlow had to say, not only about the tar sands, but also about the arrests of the demonstrators on Saturday:
The tarsands are well known and frequently discussed among the attendees here, with it being almost the first words off of nearly everybody's lips when we tell them where we are from. My sense is that most Canadians really have no idea just how damaged our reputation is on the international stage. One barrel of tarsands oil produces 3 times the greenhouse gases of a conventional barrel and it is the single biggest source of CO2 emissions on the planet! This is not just about climate change, the deforestation (so far, an area the size of Greece has been cleared) and toxic run-off are killing the local environment and destroying the health and way of life for local (mostly indigenous) communities. The Canadian government is widely recognized as the single biggest force standing in the way of developing a real international solution to climate change.
After the speeches, a representative from the Canadian Embassay came down to meet the crowd and accept a gift basket to welcome Steven Harper to Copenhagen. The basket included all the treaties being violated by the tarsands, as well as other fun items I'm sure the Prime Minister will enjoy.
Later in the day, back at Klimaforum we attended a really powerful presentation by Bill McKibben, the founder of 350.org about the development of the 350 movement. The basic idea is that 350 ppm CO2 is the number scientists have identified as the maximum amount of CO2 that can be in the atmosphere if we are to sustain a planet hospitable to life. 350.org took this number and made it the basis of their campaign because it crosses all language barriers and it's based on science, not belief. I definitely encourage you to check out the site, there is lots of great information, along with hundreds of inspirational photos of actions that took place around the world on October 24th, 2009, as well as this past Saturday. He showed many of these photos during his speech, including one from Toronto, on which he paused to make sure everyone in the audience knew just what a big climate criminal the Canadian government is.
One of the biggest supporters of the 350 movement has been President Mohamed Nasheed of the Maldives, a country the seriously means business on the climate change front and has committed to being carbon neutral by 2020. Given that the country is on average only 1.5 metres above sea level, they are quite literally fighting for their survival on this one. We were all very excited when President Nasheed arrived at Klimaforum to close the 350 presentation. As a former political prisoner very much used to being the underdog, especially given the tone of negotiations here, he is every bit the empassioned speaker you'd expect and it was really exciting to see such a strong leader, clearly dedicated to the wellbeing of his people.
Sunday, December 13, 2009
and the Canadian Media Keep the Propaganda Train Going...
As many of you know, I am a big, big fan of the CBC, but this article - posted front and centre on their website, pisses me off big time.
First of all, the headline focuses on the small number of people arrested at the demonstration: 1000 out of 100,000 participants. Further, it only notes at the very end that 600 of these people were arrested as "a preventative measure" by police because they were all dressed in black (Ooooo, a sure sign of trouble!). The article does not mention at all that Danish police have considerably more powers than Canadian police, particularly when it comes to managing demonstrations and that people can be arrested for simply being part of a crowd, even when that crowd is not being agressive or violent. Update: all but 3 of these people were released on Sunday morning without charges.
Second, they say police estimated the number of participants at 25,000, while demonstration organizers put it at 100,000. As someone standing on the ground, (where, by the way, I saw a bunch of cbc reporters, so I know they heard this info too) the conference organizers told us that the number police gave them was 100,000. Further, no one who was there could possibly believe that crowd was at 25,000. It went on for blocks and blocks - tell me this is 25,000:
I hate to say that this is a deliberate attempt to downplay the scale of the action, or to deligitimize the groups that were there by associating it with arrests in the headline, but it is somewhat difficult to draw any other conclusion. This demonstration was massive, it involved people from all over the world and from all walks of life and it was non-violent. I saw cbc reporters there, some friends we were walking were even interviewed by them, I know that these individuals know this story is factually inaccurate and written with a lot of spin. I can not even discribe how distressing it is to see it reported in this way to the Canadian media.
While I`m ranting, I`ll also add that after talking with people from all over the world this past week about climate change, the need for political leadership, and our decision to come from Canada to participate - I will also blame the Canadian media for the complete lack of knowledge of most Canadians about the embarrassing and disgraceful reputation our government is perpetuating for us (sadly, it seems that many non-Canadians are more aware of our government`s position - mostly because it is so out of whack with the rest of the world). The Tar Sands is one particular example of this knowledge disconnect: while most Canadians seem to know little about the Tar Sands other than it`s going to make us a lot of money, the rest of the world knows that Canadians are currently allowing government and business to move ahead with what is widely considered to be the worst climate crime in the world.
Because I talk to them everyday, I know many Canadians want better - they want strong leadership that will make Canada a leader for the climate change action that will literally save our planet, as well ensure a future for Canada`s farmers, Inuit, fishers, coastal inhabitants and the many others who rely on a stable environment for their livelihoods and well-being. The provinces have taken action - implementing things like Ontario`s Green Energy Act; cities and municipalities are the sites of some of the most inspired changes, like Toronto`s lake water cooling system in the downtown. There are a number of truly green businesses waiting for the regulations and legislation that will allow them to launch their technologies and establish themselves in the market without fear that doing so is tantamount of financial suicide. So many people see the urgency and they want action, whether it is out of concern for your children`s future, economic well-being, reliance on natural resources, or a simple love and respect for the natural world. What frustrates me the most is the number of people who still just don`t know - they don`t know the science, they don`t know the threats and they don`t know the changes that are already killing people and other natural beings. I know some of them don`t want to know and aren`t interested in listening, but so many of them don`t know because they aren`t told. I often think of a great book called `Gag Rule` by Lewis Lapham. In this book, Lapham discusses the failure of the American media to uphold its public duty to critique and question the stories they are provided with by government. I feel this is happening in Canada today. Our media is not reporting on what is possible the greatest threat to face humankind (or our government's shameful role in creating and perpetuating the cause of our demise). Instead, they choose to sensationalize what stories they do run by focusing on the number of people arrested or, as we saw with 'climategate', to present them as though they provide a realistic counter-position to what is considered by scientists to be a settled point. This type of reporting not only cripples the ability of the general public to become informed about these issues and thus act accordingly, but also demoralises those that do know into thinking that they are alone in their anger and that there is simply nothing to be done. Perhaps the biggest lesson I've learned here this past week is to never believe that I am alone, or that the vast majority of people who have actually taken the time to turn their minds to this issue aren't with me (or that I am not with them) and that the only mistake I could ever make would be to believe that I should compromise and settle for anything less than the deep system changes we need.
end rant.
First of all, the headline focuses on the small number of people arrested at the demonstration: 1000 out of 100,000 participants. Further, it only notes at the very end that 600 of these people were arrested as "a preventative measure" by police because they were all dressed in black (Ooooo, a sure sign of trouble!). The article does not mention at all that Danish police have considerably more powers than Canadian police, particularly when it comes to managing demonstrations and that people can be arrested for simply being part of a crowd, even when that crowd is not being agressive or violent. Update: all but 3 of these people were released on Sunday morning without charges.
Second, they say police estimated the number of participants at 25,000, while demonstration organizers put it at 100,000. As someone standing on the ground, (where, by the way, I saw a bunch of cbc reporters, so I know they heard this info too) the conference organizers told us that the number police gave them was 100,000. Further, no one who was there could possibly believe that crowd was at 25,000. It went on for blocks and blocks - tell me this is 25,000:
I hate to say that this is a deliberate attempt to downplay the scale of the action, or to deligitimize the groups that were there by associating it with arrests in the headline, but it is somewhat difficult to draw any other conclusion. This demonstration was massive, it involved people from all over the world and from all walks of life and it was non-violent. I saw cbc reporters there, some friends we were walking were even interviewed by them, I know that these individuals know this story is factually inaccurate and written with a lot of spin. I can not even discribe how distressing it is to see it reported in this way to the Canadian media.
While I`m ranting, I`ll also add that after talking with people from all over the world this past week about climate change, the need for political leadership, and our decision to come from Canada to participate - I will also blame the Canadian media for the complete lack of knowledge of most Canadians about the embarrassing and disgraceful reputation our government is perpetuating for us (sadly, it seems that many non-Canadians are more aware of our government`s position - mostly because it is so out of whack with the rest of the world). The Tar Sands is one particular example of this knowledge disconnect: while most Canadians seem to know little about the Tar Sands other than it`s going to make us a lot of money, the rest of the world knows that Canadians are currently allowing government and business to move ahead with what is widely considered to be the worst climate crime in the world.
Because I talk to them everyday, I know many Canadians want better - they want strong leadership that will make Canada a leader for the climate change action that will literally save our planet, as well ensure a future for Canada`s farmers, Inuit, fishers, coastal inhabitants and the many others who rely on a stable environment for their livelihoods and well-being. The provinces have taken action - implementing things like Ontario`s Green Energy Act; cities and municipalities are the sites of some of the most inspired changes, like Toronto`s lake water cooling system in the downtown. There are a number of truly green businesses waiting for the regulations and legislation that will allow them to launch their technologies and establish themselves in the market without fear that doing so is tantamount of financial suicide. So many people see the urgency and they want action, whether it is out of concern for your children`s future, economic well-being, reliance on natural resources, or a simple love and respect for the natural world. What frustrates me the most is the number of people who still just don`t know - they don`t know the science, they don`t know the threats and they don`t know the changes that are already killing people and other natural beings. I know some of them don`t want to know and aren`t interested in listening, but so many of them don`t know because they aren`t told. I often think of a great book called `Gag Rule` by Lewis Lapham. In this book, Lapham discusses the failure of the American media to uphold its public duty to critique and question the stories they are provided with by government. I feel this is happening in Canada today. Our media is not reporting on what is possible the greatest threat to face humankind (or our government's shameful role in creating and perpetuating the cause of our demise). Instead, they choose to sensationalize what stories they do run by focusing on the number of people arrested or, as we saw with 'climategate', to present them as though they provide a realistic counter-position to what is considered by scientists to be a settled point. This type of reporting not only cripples the ability of the general public to become informed about these issues and thus act accordingly, but also demoralises those that do know into thinking that they are alone in their anger and that there is simply nothing to be done. Perhaps the biggest lesson I've learned here this past week is to never believe that I am alone, or that the vast majority of people who have actually taken the time to turn their minds to this issue aren't with me (or that I am not with them) and that the only mistake I could ever make would be to believe that I should compromise and settle for anything less than the deep system changes we need.
end rant.
Saturday, December 12, 2009
99,998 isn't nearly as impressive as 100,000
Authors note: Steve wanted to call this post "The Hobbits in Isengard":
...but Sarah thought it was too obscure and vetoed it. Feel free to email her if you think she made a poor call.
When it comes right down to it, today was the reason we came all this way. As Steve has put it on numerous occasions, we wanted "to be counted" among all of those that are outraged by the lack of international governance action on this issue and who refuse to stand by as yet another opportunity for ambtious change passes our world by. As Canadians in particular, we have both been frustrated many times by the obstructionist position the Harper government has taken at climate-related meetings in past years (and continues to take here in Copenhagen). In fact, the inception of this trip came while watch the news, as we sat yelling at Environment Minister Jim Pretince about his out-dated, dangerous and, quite frankly, embarrassing take on the COP15 negotiations and what Canada needed to do in order to fulfill its duty on the global stage.
So we came to put ourselves on the ground and add our voices and bodies to the many, many others demanding effective and meaningful action on climate change. While we have been here almost a full week and have been very active, today was really the first day involving any kind of direct action and it was exciting to say the least. Estimates earlier this week were ranging from 30-60,000. On Thursday, the husband of one of the organizers told me they were actually thinking 25,000. I thought these numbers seemed a bit low, but I had also been advised that the Danes shy away from participating in public demonstrations, particularly given that the police have been a bit overzealous in actions in the past few months. This morning, as we headed around the corner onto the street leading to the public square in front of the parliament building I actually commented to Steve "I just really hope there is a good turn out". Well, it seems I had little to worry about as the final estimate being reported in the city is 100,000 people! Amazing. There were obviously many, many organized groups in attendance, but what really struck me, as we talked to people during the march, were how many people currently living in other European cities decided last minute to come and join in. We found a couple of women studying at Guelph who are here writing for Canadian Dimension Magazine (we actually got interviewed!), with a "Canadians Blame Canada" banner:
You will not the disappointment and disgust on our faces. You will also note that Steve's hat matches his coat. This is not a coincidence.
We also met up with a small group carrying Canadian flags with "Tar Sands Climate Crime" written on them:
We ended up walking most of the march with this group, which was great - not only were the people very interesting and friendly, but carrying the flag drew many other Canadians to us, giving us the opportunity to meet many others who feel much the same as we do when it comes to Canada's current environmental policies (especially as they relate to the tar sands).
It was such an inspiring day that I find it difficult to even know what to say. Simply, it was great to see just how many people care enough to march for 3 hours in the fridged Danish winter with the sun setting at 3:30 in the afternoon with 1.5 hours of the march still to go. It is so easy to become exhausted and jaded and to lose hope that alternative systems and solutions are possible and I find that while I frequently reach this point here, every time I do there are people and events that pull be back and give me hope and remind me that at the end of the day the future we choose really is in our own hands and we do not have to except the system we have, nor the status-quo solutions currently being offered. Needless to say, I'm looking forward to the many, many more action events scheduled for the coming week (starting with a demonstration at the Canadian Embassy on Monday morning - tomorrow is a school work day for us, as Steve still has to write a take-home exam (Steve's note: how to concentrate on what does or does not constitute a bona fide occupational requirement in a wrongful termination suit when the climate is on the line!) and I have to put in some time on my MRP which is due the day after we return).
And now: Steve introduces the photo spread (about which he feels quite passionately despite his refusal to actually take any photos and merely instruct me what to photograph all day): Of the many infirmities of the human species, likely the most tragic is our deficient sense of perception and appreciation. We find ourselves in the current climate crisis because even if we can claim to percieve the problem we have a natural inability to appreciate the urgency and enormity of it. Tragically, this same imperfection of faculties can operate to blunt the demonstations seeking to remedy the problem. Begin on the ground, you do not see 100,000 people. At only one time you-re lucky to se see maybe 5,000 and thus your perception of the situation is seeing a series of 5,000 bodies, whose sum never reaches 100,000, and never leave 5,000. The aid of aerial photos may help the perception shortcomings but does so at the expense of appreciation. Seeing 100,000 nebulous pixels of colour (if you could even distinguish each dot from the large mosaic), does not help you appreciate the experiences and hardship each took to be present, the passion behind their pleas, and the volume and intensity with which they make them. Each individual photo below is bounded by a frame which exclude 995,000 people (and likely more), and the demonstration itself is bounded by logistics which exclude millions and billions more. Despite this, we hope they give you at least a sense of the power of the crowd today.
Gathering at the Square
You may have to look closely, but the streets all along the canal and across the bridge leading into the square are all totally packed.
Heading Out
The Greenpeace boats were docked next to the bridge you cross leaving the square.
Along the March
Greenpeace's polar bears in their reflective vests posing with the police officers guarding the McD's.
Arriving at the Bella Center
Unfortunately, this photo came out quite dark, but it gives some sense of the size of the crowd - this is only part of the stretch of a main road taken up by the demonstrators.
If you look down the crowd, on the left you can see a block of light that is a massive big screen tv - it gives some ide of just how far back we are and how big the crowd was - and this is probably only about 2/3rds of the group!
...but Sarah thought it was too obscure and vetoed it. Feel free to email her if you think she made a poor call.
When it comes right down to it, today was the reason we came all this way. As Steve has put it on numerous occasions, we wanted "to be counted" among all of those that are outraged by the lack of international governance action on this issue and who refuse to stand by as yet another opportunity for ambtious change passes our world by. As Canadians in particular, we have both been frustrated many times by the obstructionist position the Harper government has taken at climate-related meetings in past years (and continues to take here in Copenhagen). In fact, the inception of this trip came while watch the news, as we sat yelling at Environment Minister Jim Pretince about his out-dated, dangerous and, quite frankly, embarrassing take on the COP15 negotiations and what Canada needed to do in order to fulfill its duty on the global stage.
So we came to put ourselves on the ground and add our voices and bodies to the many, many others demanding effective and meaningful action on climate change. While we have been here almost a full week and have been very active, today was really the first day involving any kind of direct action and it was exciting to say the least. Estimates earlier this week were ranging from 30-60,000. On Thursday, the husband of one of the organizers told me they were actually thinking 25,000. I thought these numbers seemed a bit low, but I had also been advised that the Danes shy away from participating in public demonstrations, particularly given that the police have been a bit overzealous in actions in the past few months. This morning, as we headed around the corner onto the street leading to the public square in front of the parliament building I actually commented to Steve "I just really hope there is a good turn out". Well, it seems I had little to worry about as the final estimate being reported in the city is 100,000 people! Amazing. There were obviously many, many organized groups in attendance, but what really struck me, as we talked to people during the march, were how many people currently living in other European cities decided last minute to come and join in. We found a couple of women studying at Guelph who are here writing for Canadian Dimension Magazine (we actually got interviewed!), with a "Canadians Blame Canada" banner:
You will not the disappointment and disgust on our faces. You will also note that Steve's hat matches his coat. This is not a coincidence.
We also met up with a small group carrying Canadian flags with "Tar Sands Climate Crime" written on them:
We ended up walking most of the march with this group, which was great - not only were the people very interesting and friendly, but carrying the flag drew many other Canadians to us, giving us the opportunity to meet many others who feel much the same as we do when it comes to Canada's current environmental policies (especially as they relate to the tar sands).
It was such an inspiring day that I find it difficult to even know what to say. Simply, it was great to see just how many people care enough to march for 3 hours in the fridged Danish winter with the sun setting at 3:30 in the afternoon with 1.5 hours of the march still to go. It is so easy to become exhausted and jaded and to lose hope that alternative systems and solutions are possible and I find that while I frequently reach this point here, every time I do there are people and events that pull be back and give me hope and remind me that at the end of the day the future we choose really is in our own hands and we do not have to except the system we have, nor the status-quo solutions currently being offered. Needless to say, I'm looking forward to the many, many more action events scheduled for the coming week (starting with a demonstration at the Canadian Embassy on Monday morning - tomorrow is a school work day for us, as Steve still has to write a take-home exam (Steve's note: how to concentrate on what does or does not constitute a bona fide occupational requirement in a wrongful termination suit when the climate is on the line!) and I have to put in some time on my MRP which is due the day after we return).
And now: Steve introduces the photo spread (about which he feels quite passionately despite his refusal to actually take any photos and merely instruct me what to photograph all day): Of the many infirmities of the human species, likely the most tragic is our deficient sense of perception and appreciation. We find ourselves in the current climate crisis because even if we can claim to percieve the problem we have a natural inability to appreciate the urgency and enormity of it. Tragically, this same imperfection of faculties can operate to blunt the demonstations seeking to remedy the problem. Begin on the ground, you do not see 100,000 people. At only one time you-re lucky to se see maybe 5,000 and thus your perception of the situation is seeing a series of 5,000 bodies, whose sum never reaches 100,000, and never leave 5,000. The aid of aerial photos may help the perception shortcomings but does so at the expense of appreciation. Seeing 100,000 nebulous pixels of colour (if you could even distinguish each dot from the large mosaic), does not help you appreciate the experiences and hardship each took to be present, the passion behind their pleas, and the volume and intensity with which they make them. Each individual photo below is bounded by a frame which exclude 995,000 people (and likely more), and the demonstration itself is bounded by logistics which exclude millions and billions more. Despite this, we hope they give you at least a sense of the power of the crowd today.
Gathering at the Square
You may have to look closely, but the streets all along the canal and across the bridge leading into the square are all totally packed.
Heading Out
The Greenpeace boats were docked next to the bridge you cross leaving the square.
Along the March
Greenpeace's polar bears in their reflective vests posing with the police officers guarding the McD's.
Arriving at the Bella Center
Unfortunately, this photo came out quite dark, but it gives some sense of the size of the crowd - this is only part of the stretch of a main road taken up by the demonstrators.
If you look down the crowd, on the left you can see a block of light that is a massive big screen tv - it gives some ide of just how far back we are and how big the crowd was - and this is probably only about 2/3rds of the group!
The Planet is Saying Something
For the very first time since arriving in Copenhagen almost a full week ago, there is actually some sun peaking through all the clouds that normally cover the city throughout the winter months. I am taking this as an atmospheric sign of support for today's day of action. So we are off, and if any of you are interested in showing your outrage at the lack of action so far and adding your voice to the many demanding a fair, ambitious and binding international agreement to reduce CO2 emissions, tcktcktck's website has a list of events happening today around the globe (3172 events in 139 countries!).
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Catching Up
As we somewhat anticipated, the pace of activities here is really picking up and I think it will only continue after the day of action on Saturday. We've been dividing our time between the Klimaforum, where we are both working as volunteers and attending events, and working with various people associated with a coalition group called the Climate Action Network! This has made for extremely busy days and late nights. As I find myself with an hour or so between events and with internet access, it seems the ideal opportunity to catch up on what's been happening.
Klimaforum: I must admit that I was a bit sceptical of what I would find at this totally free, totally open to the public "people's climate summit", fearing that it would fall victim to a lack of organization that sometimes plagues volunteer based groups, or that the events would be alienatingly extreme or disillusioningly status quo. It has, however, been excellent. Our experience as volunteers has been great. At times it has been a bit disorganized (as one would expect for such a large event managing so many volunteers) but I ultimately leave everyday feeling as though we were able to help in some way, be it through running errands, making and putting up posters guiding people around the multi-site conference area, or handing out schedules at the city centre square and talking to passersby about the conference. Admittedly, these are not glamorous tasks, but they need to be done and create many phenomenal opportunities to talk with other people from all over the world about both climate change issues as well as many other aspects of their lives. As a participant in the events, I have been very impressed by the quality of the panelists (both in terms of their expertise on their issue and their commitment to real climate solutions) and the knowledge and thoughtfulness of the attendees. I'm quite looking forward to a number of 'klima' events over the next week, including a film and discussion this evening, How Cuba Survived Peak Oil.
Climate Action Now!: Our work with this group has been haphazard. It was through them that we found ourselves making posters and handbills on Monday night and distributing them around the city throughout Tuesday. We've also started helping a post doctorate student from Dartmouth College on a research project looking at the role civil society groups (particularly business lobby groups) are playing in the negotiations. What this means is, we go to panels and other open events that are targeted at the business community and take notes on the discussion and then walk around afterwards introducing ourselves to complete strangers and asking if they'd be willing to provide contact info for this project. While this might not sound so exciting, it has actually proved very interesting. Today we attended "The Business of Climate Change Post-Copenhagen", a panel discussion put on by The Corporate Leaders' Group on Climate Change. The panel included the Executive VP (Future Fuels & CO2) of Shell and Chairman of the Zero Emissions Platform, the VP of Global Energy & Sustainability at Johnson Controls, and The Director of Oxfam International, among others. I must admit that I was not expecting the extreme progressiveness of this group of individuals, nor the challenging questions posed by the audience, who were largely businesspeople or those who represent business interests in some way. In response to a question from the audience about what they considered to be single most important change needed to combat climate change, the entire panel spoke of the need to a multi-dimensional approach that did NOT rely exclusively on market mechanisms like cap and trade, but also incorporated straight-up regulations that required change. One panelist (not from Oxfam) also said outright that there needed to be a high tax on carbon. Even knowing that many businesses see huge opportunities in the shift to a low carbon world, and that there are many truly dedicated individuals within industry, I was very surprised by their bluntness and willingness to acknowledge the dramatic amount of change needed.
City Happenings: Keeping up with all the news around COP is it's own activity. We've subscribed to the IISD's daily email summary of the prior day's highlights within the actual summit. We've also discovered that Copenhagen's English language paper is publishing daily special editions on all the COP15 related happenings in the city (The COP15 Post) - this has proved a great source of info about what 'alternative' events are going on; it's also were we read about the police raid that happened last night on the headquarters of one of the largest coalition groups here, Climate Justice Action. This is pretty scary stuff considering that there has been no reported violent or aggressive action to date, and while the group is open about their plans to attempt to get into the Bella Center next Wednesday, they are equally adamant about their non-violent position. It will definitely be interesting to see how that plays out. In the meantime, most people involved in any of the climate change-orient events in any way are looking forward to Saturday, which will be an excellent and exciting day of action with a big march across the city to the Bella Center (One of the speakers at the rally preceding the march will be Vandana Shiva, who I've loved forever. She's also a member of a number of panels at Klimaforum!). Speaking of the Bella Center, we were at this site for the first time today and I was really surprised at the groups that had set up camp at the metro station immediately outside the main entrance to the building. There were basically two discernable groups (neither of whom had more than a handful of people): 1) Supporters of the Supreme Master Ching Hai (don't even ask me); 2) People who claim climate change is not happening and is in fact a western science conspiracy designed to further marginalize the people of the global south (they also claim this somehow links up with accusations of genocide. I'm going to be honest, I did ask the guy about the sign he was wearing that made this claim - it was actually that "Climate Lies = Genocide", but about 1 minute was all I could handle talking to him and we never got to the part where he explained exactly how genocide fit in. These people seem to be related to the LaRouche movement, as you can tell in the photo below). Needless to say, as discouraging as it was that this was the most articulate and well presented message "we" could produce to present to all the delegates as they enter the building, it was nice to know that the climate change deniers seem just as crazy as the supreme master people who were urging everyone to go vegan and holding signs of animals with word bubbles saying "thanks" (I say this as a long-time vegetarian who maintains this lifestyle in large part due to my environmental beliefs). There was also a large screen playing videos and testimonials of a number of what I will choose to call more legitimate environmental groups, such as Greenpeace. We have also been attempting to make the rounds to the many public events happening around the city. There are several interesting exhibits, including "Hopenhagen City", which is set up in the city's centre square, a WWF exhibit on climate change in the arctic, complete with a melting ice sculpture of a polar bear, and some large inflated balloons showing just what one tonne of CO2 looks like. I'll leave you with some pictures below.
Klimaforum: I must admit that I was a bit sceptical of what I would find at this totally free, totally open to the public "people's climate summit", fearing that it would fall victim to a lack of organization that sometimes plagues volunteer based groups, or that the events would be alienatingly extreme or disillusioningly status quo. It has, however, been excellent. Our experience as volunteers has been great. At times it has been a bit disorganized (as one would expect for such a large event managing so many volunteers) but I ultimately leave everyday feeling as though we were able to help in some way, be it through running errands, making and putting up posters guiding people around the multi-site conference area, or handing out schedules at the city centre square and talking to passersby about the conference. Admittedly, these are not glamorous tasks, but they need to be done and create many phenomenal opportunities to talk with other people from all over the world about both climate change issues as well as many other aspects of their lives. As a participant in the events, I have been very impressed by the quality of the panelists (both in terms of their expertise on their issue and their commitment to real climate solutions) and the knowledge and thoughtfulness of the attendees. I'm quite looking forward to a number of 'klima' events over the next week, including a film and discussion this evening, How Cuba Survived Peak Oil.
Climate Action Now!: Our work with this group has been haphazard. It was through them that we found ourselves making posters and handbills on Monday night and distributing them around the city throughout Tuesday. We've also started helping a post doctorate student from Dartmouth College on a research project looking at the role civil society groups (particularly business lobby groups) are playing in the negotiations. What this means is, we go to panels and other open events that are targeted at the business community and take notes on the discussion and then walk around afterwards introducing ourselves to complete strangers and asking if they'd be willing to provide contact info for this project. While this might not sound so exciting, it has actually proved very interesting. Today we attended "The Business of Climate Change Post-Copenhagen", a panel discussion put on by The Corporate Leaders' Group on Climate Change. The panel included the Executive VP (Future Fuels & CO2) of Shell and Chairman of the Zero Emissions Platform, the VP of Global Energy & Sustainability at Johnson Controls, and The Director of Oxfam International, among others. I must admit that I was not expecting the extreme progressiveness of this group of individuals, nor the challenging questions posed by the audience, who were largely businesspeople or those who represent business interests in some way. In response to a question from the audience about what they considered to be single most important change needed to combat climate change, the entire panel spoke of the need to a multi-dimensional approach that did NOT rely exclusively on market mechanisms like cap and trade, but also incorporated straight-up regulations that required change. One panelist (not from Oxfam) also said outright that there needed to be a high tax on carbon. Even knowing that many businesses see huge opportunities in the shift to a low carbon world, and that there are many truly dedicated individuals within industry, I was very surprised by their bluntness and willingness to acknowledge the dramatic amount of change needed.
City Happenings: Keeping up with all the news around COP is it's own activity. We've subscribed to the IISD's daily email summary of the prior day's highlights within the actual summit. We've also discovered that Copenhagen's English language paper is publishing daily special editions on all the COP15 related happenings in the city (The COP15 Post) - this has proved a great source of info about what 'alternative' events are going on; it's also were we read about the police raid that happened last night on the headquarters of one of the largest coalition groups here, Climate Justice Action. This is pretty scary stuff considering that there has been no reported violent or aggressive action to date, and while the group is open about their plans to attempt to get into the Bella Center next Wednesday, they are equally adamant about their non-violent position. It will definitely be interesting to see how that plays out. In the meantime, most people involved in any of the climate change-orient events in any way are looking forward to Saturday, which will be an excellent and exciting day of action with a big march across the city to the Bella Center (One of the speakers at the rally preceding the march will be Vandana Shiva, who I've loved forever. She's also a member of a number of panels at Klimaforum!). Speaking of the Bella Center, we were at this site for the first time today and I was really surprised at the groups that had set up camp at the metro station immediately outside the main entrance to the building. There were basically two discernable groups (neither of whom had more than a handful of people): 1) Supporters of the Supreme Master Ching Hai (don't even ask me); 2) People who claim climate change is not happening and is in fact a western science conspiracy designed to further marginalize the people of the global south (they also claim this somehow links up with accusations of genocide. I'm going to be honest, I did ask the guy about the sign he was wearing that made this claim - it was actually that "Climate Lies = Genocide", but about 1 minute was all I could handle talking to him and we never got to the part where he explained exactly how genocide fit in. These people seem to be related to the LaRouche movement, as you can tell in the photo below). Needless to say, as discouraging as it was that this was the most articulate and well presented message "we" could produce to present to all the delegates as they enter the building, it was nice to know that the climate change deniers seem just as crazy as the supreme master people who were urging everyone to go vegan and holding signs of animals with word bubbles saying "thanks" (I say this as a long-time vegetarian who maintains this lifestyle in large part due to my environmental beliefs). There was also a large screen playing videos and testimonials of a number of what I will choose to call more legitimate environmental groups, such as Greenpeace. We have also been attempting to make the rounds to the many public events happening around the city. There are several interesting exhibits, including "Hopenhagen City", which is set up in the city's centre square, a WWF exhibit on climate change in the arctic, complete with a melting ice sculpture of a polar bear, and some large inflated balloons showing just what one tonne of CO2 looks like. I'll leave you with some pictures below.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)