Countries can then hammer out legally binding agreement
Jessica Cheam Straits Times 10 Dec 10;
CANCUN (MEXICO): Both developed and developing countries must summon the political will and converge on how to deal with climate change, said Singapore's Senior Minister S. Jayakumar.
When there is such a will, they can then forge a global legally binding agreement, which will ensure that commitments will be based on rules applied across the board.
This will help the world avoid a worst-case scenario in which dissent among nations could lead to a failure of multilateral negotiations.
This underlines the importance of the ongoing climate talks at Cancun, said Prof Jayakumar, who on Wednesday described them as 'an important turning point'.
'In that sense, we are at a crossroad. The future direction of climate change negotiations depends on what we do here or fail to do,' he declared.
Prof Jayakumar was speaking at the high-level segment of the summit, which he is attending with Minister of the Environment and Water Resources Yaacob Ibrahim.
The two-week United Nations conference aims to address the curbing of greenhouse gas emissions and helping countries cope with climate change.
Last year's summit at Copenhagen failed to produce a binding agreement on emissions targets to replace the Kyoto Protocol, a treaty that expires in 2012.
In his speech, Prof Jayakumar stressed the need for a legally binding global deal, noting it would instil confidence in countries to carry out their pledges.
He described three possible scenarios arising from negotiations: A 'united world' with a legally binding pact; 'muddling along' with a mix of agreement and disagreement, which could lead to prolonged tension among major players; and 'conflict and crossfire', with dissent among all parties that could ultimately prompt some to take harmful unilateral actions such as trade tariffs.
Prof Jayakumar noted that the eventual scenario would depend on how countries acted collectively.
'If we have the political will, we can avoid the worst-case scenario. We should also avoid a scenario of muddling along. If there is political will, we can achieve the best-case scenario of a climate regime built on a legally binding global agreement,' he said.
European Union climate action commissioner Connie Hedegaard made the same point at a press conference on Wednesday.
'What is at stake here is also multilateralism... to come out of here with nothing is not a political option, and a dangerous option for multilateralism,' she said.
So far, the issue of what to do after the Kyoto Protocol expires, remains a sticking point. Prof Jayakumar noted that it was important to 'send a strong political signal' in Cancun on its continuity.
But developed countries such as those in Europe, and Japan and Russia say they will not commit to another period of emissions reduction targets if major players like the US, China and India do not do the same.
Another key issue is monitoring how countries keep to their pledges.
Major emerging economies like China and India have recently softened their stance on external verification, but Ms Hedegaard said specifics had to be ironed out. The issue of transparency, she added, is still 'in conversation'.
With days to go before the conference ends tomorrow, Singapore time, negotiators are still working out the details on monitoring and other issues including climate funding. Among other things, they are still debating the size and sources of the funding.
Prof Jayakumar told The Straits Times that the atmosphere at Cancun was less acrimonious than at Copenhagen. But there was still a sharp polarisation of views beneath that surface, especially between developed and developing countries, he revealed.
Dr Yaacob Ibrahim acknowledged that climate change was a complex topic that would likely not interest average Singaporeans, but he appealed to them to understand and support Singapore's efforts to become more resource-efficient.
A climate crossroads
Esther Ng Today Online 10 Dec 10;
CANCUN - With less than 48 hours to go before global climate talks in Cancun conclude, Senior Minister S Jayakumar laid out the options the world was facing as it finds itself at a crossroads.
Outlining the various "rough sketches" as to how climate change negotiations could evolve in the next few years, Professor Jayakumar, who heads the Singapore delegation to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), called on world leaders to show the necessary "political will".
"If there is political will, then we can create the convergence necessary for a global agreement," said Prof Jayakumar, "How we choose to proceed, and what outcome we can have, is entirely up to us as sovereign states."
Prof Jayakumar said that, under a "united world" scenario, a global legally-binding agreement (LBA) will be reached by next year or 2012. He acknowledged that this "optimistic scenario" may not be achieved but said the world had to aim for this outcome as it was the "best way" to deal with the challenges posed by climate change.
The second scenario, which he described as "muddling along", would happen when there was no clarity in the approach but some agreement on certain issues. This could lead to concrete decisions adopted at each UNFCCC, also known as Conference of Parties (COP).
While this proposition was "realistic", it would not be satisfactory as it is "not sufficient to be muddling along", he said.
He added: "There could also be convergence on substance using the political understandings reached at Copenhagen Accord as a framework. But public pressure in our countries may demand more action than is delivered by our process and this could lead to tension among the major players."
The worst-case scenario? A "conflict and cross-fire" where there is divergence and dissension among all parties on many substantive issues, and no clarity in approach between an LBA and COP decisions and countries resort to unilateral or plurilateral measures, like "border trade adjustments".
Prof Jayakumar noted that this was "not an impossible scenario" but one that countries have to "avoid at all cost, because such a scenario will represent the failure of multilateral negotiations and of the UNFCCC".
Reiterating Singapore's goal of reaching a legally-binding outcome, Prof Jayakumar said: "The LBA does not absolutely guarantee the implementation of all commitments and pledges. However, it will provide reasonable assurance that there will be reciprocity of actions among parties and instil confidence in countries to implement their own."
An LBA would apply not only to commitments on mitigation, but also those relating to finance, capacity building and technology transfer.
By Saturday, the world will know which path it has chosen.
Legally binding pact after Cancun 'vital'
Jaya outlines three possible scenarios resulting from climate change talks
Joyce Hooi Business Times 10 Dec 10;
SENIOR Minister S Jayakumar outlined three possible scenarios in which the climate change negotiations could result, while delivering Singapore's national statement at the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Cancun, Mexico on Wednesday.
The best of the three outcomes was what Professor Jayakumar called a 'United World' scenario, in which political will and convergence would be present among all the parties involved.
'Under this scenario, there is agreement on a comprehensive, global legally binding agreement (LBA) to be reached not now but later in 2011 or 2012. The LBA will provide the foundation for a multilateral, rules-based climate change regime,' said Prof Jayakumar.
He added that such a scenario may not be immediately achievable. 'Nevertheless, we must aim for such a scenario because it is the best way to deal with the challenges posed by climate change,' he said.
The worst possible foreseeable outcome was one that he called the 'Conflict and Cross-fire' scenario.
'In such a scenario, the UNFCCC fails to deliver an agreement, which in turn could lead to public pressures to take action through other channels, such as unilateral or plurilateral measures, like border trade adjustments,' said Prof Jayakumar.
'This is a scenario that we have to avoid at all cost, because such a scenario will represent the failure of multilateral negotiations and of the UNFCCC.'
Somewhere in between, a 'Muddling Along' scenario exists, in which a lack of clarity could exist alongside agreement on some issues, according to Prof Jayakumar.
'There could also be convergence on substance using the political understandings reached at Copenhagen Accord as a framework. But public pressure in our countries may demand more action than is delivered by our process and this could lead to tension among the major players,' he said.
Prof Jayakumar deemed this scenario a realistic one but not satisfactory. 'It is not sufficient to be muddling along. We have to aim higher than that,' he said.
Which scenario ultimately triumphs will depend on whether there is both political will to solve the climate change problem and political convergence on the key issues during negotiations, he said.
Prof Jayakumar also stressed the importance of a legally binding agreement. 'It will provide reasonable assurance that there will be reciprocity of actions among parties and instil confidence in countries to implement their own,' he said.
'This applies not only to commitments on mitigation, but also those relating to finance, capacity building, adaptation and technology transfer. Such a system is necessary for the success of our collective effort to address climate change.'
