|
The lines were drawn as the industrialized nations
of the Group of Eight gathered in Heiligendamm, Germany on
6 June 2007. The forces mustered to fight global warming were
divided into competing camps.
Germany and the United Kingdom sought urgent talks on a new
climate change treaty, to go into effect when the Kyoto Protocol
expires in 2012.They spoke of stiff measures to curb carbon
emissions and limit the rise in global temperatures to 2?
Celsius over the coming four decades. The United States, offering
an initiative of its own, opposed what it considers to be
arbitrary targets and timetables.
 |
UN Secretary-General
Ban Ki-moon
UN photo/ Eskinder Debebe |
As I travelled to Heiligendamm that day, my chief concern was
to ensure that all these different and potentially conflicting
initiatives come together in a multilateral process within the
United Nations framework. And that is precisely what was achieved
at the summit. The eight Governments agreed that the United
Nations climate process is the appropriate forum for negotiating
future global action, accepted their responsibility to act on
emission reductions and eventual cuts, and called for closure
by 2009 on a global agreement, under the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change, to ensure that there is no gap
between future approaches to climate change and the expiry of
the Kyoto Protocol in 2012.
With this breakthrough, the Group of Eight recognized that certain
basic facts are beyond dispute. First, the science is clear.
The earth's warming is unequivocal; we humans are its principal
cause. Every day brings new evidence, whether it is the latest
report on retreating glaciers or the recent discovery that the
Antarctic Ocean can no longer absorb carbon dioxide (CO2). Think
of that: the world's largest carbon trap, filled to capacity.
Second, the time for action is now. The cost of not acting,
most economists agree, will exceed the cost of acting early,
probably by several orders of magnitude. The damage Hurricane
Katrina inflicted on New Orleans may or may not have something
to do with global warming, but it is a useful caution nonetheless
on the financial and social perils of delay. It is equally evident
that we can no longer afford to endlessly parse our options.
Global greenhouse gas emissions have to start to come down.
Carbon-trading is but one weapon in our arsenal, even if it
does range among the most effective policy solutions. New technologies,
energy conservation, forestry projects and renewable fuels,
as well as private markets, must all be part of a long-term
strategy. Yet, even the most rigorous mitigation efforts today
will be unable to prevent all climate changes in the future,
since changes in the climate occur only after a long time lag.
Current global warming is the consequence of greenhouse gases
having been emitted over decades. What is worrying is that this
process is accelerating.
 |
| Anvers
Island, Antarctic Peninsula. Ice cave in receding glacier-an
illustration of global warming /Photo © 2007 Gary
Braasch |
There is a third fact-as I see it, the most important of all.
That is a basic issue of equity-a question of values, ranking
among the great moral imperatives of our era. Global warming
affects us all, yet it affects us all differently. Wealthy nations
possess the resources and know-how to adapt. An African farmer
losing crops or herds to drought and dust storms, or a Tuvalu
islander worried that his village might soon be under water,
is infinitely more vulnerable. Large-scale adaptation and its
funding-on the order of billions of dollars a year-to manage
climate change impacts is essential, particularly in the developing
world. The carbon market has the potential to deliver much of
what is needed in the way of funding. How would we achieve the
Millennium Development Goal of halving world poverty if the
developing world's aspirations for a greater stake in global
prosperity are not honoured?
A sense of human dimension should govern any issue which we
peoples of the world must face together, climate change included.
I consider it a duty, an extension of the sacred obligation,
to protect that is the foundation of the United Nations.
In a discussion in the Security Council in April 2007, the representative
of Namibia spoke out on his perception of the dangers of climate
change. "This is no academic exercise", he stated.
"It is a matter of life or death for my country."
He told of how the Namib and Kalahari deserts are expanding,
destroying farmland and rendering whole regions uninhabitable.
This made me think of my own country, Korea, more and more often
choked by dust storms swirling across the Yellow Sea from the
expanding Gobi Desert. Malaria has spread to areas where it
was once unknown, the Namibian representative went on. Species
of plants and animals are dying out, in a land famed for its
biodiversity. Developing countries like his own are increasingly
subject to what he likened to "low-intensity biological
or chemical warfare".
These are strong emotions, drawn from life and not imagined.
For those in the developed world, it is important to hear and
to act accordingly. For the entire world, it is important to
come together to address this issue now. To build on the current
positive momentum and to underline the need for early action,
I am convening a high-level meeting on climate change in New
York on 24 September 2007, in conjunction with the beginning
of the General Assembly. I hope the leaders there will send
a message to the Bali negotiations in December under the United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change: business as
usual is no longer an option, and concrete agreements must be
reached soon. In my consultations with Member States, I am assisted
by three special envoys, established international personalities
who approach leaders on my behalf about the scope of the United
Nations role. I intend to continue to act as a catalyst and
facilitator of a global response to this most global of problems.
Climate change, and how we address it, will define us, our era
and ultimately the global legacy we leave for future generations.
It is time for new thinking, and a new inclusiveness. Leaders
need to accept their responsibilities, but look less at their
responsibility to their ancestors, and more to their responsibility
to their grandchildren. The United Nations is a big part of
the solution, and I will do all I can to ensure we play our
role to the full. |