• Home
• /
• Opinion

Copenhagen Climax

The developed world, which is supposed to funnel a staggering $150 billion a year to meet the task of transforming the prevalent developmental and energy pattern into one that is pro-nature in essence, is in a fix. The proposition is: where will the money come from and who will be contributing what. Yet, one hopes the climax of Copenhagen will be a consensus whereby a global agreement on reducing heat-trapping greenhouse gases is reached.

The difference of opinion, however, between the haves and have-nots is an issue, which will continue to be there. What is needed, in fact, is a cautious approach to save the world from catastrophic affects of climate change and successfully convert the Kyoto Protocol into an environmental protection treaty. The menace of global warming is already taking a heavy toll and small island nations are at the verge of annihilation. The struggle to preserve tropical forests, melting glaciers and depleting food production shouldn’t be lost. Thus, headway can only be made when the concerns of some of the poorest countries, fearing too much of burden to curb greenhouse gases, are addressed judiciously.

If the ongoing debate and tug of war following the leaked document, calling on the under-developed countries to tighten their belts, is any criterion, some serious leadership is needed. A way out has to be found to come to terms with climate change. Leaders will have to walk a fine line to spell out the compensation mechanism against the impacts of climate change and the switch to low-emission technology. The ambitious target of halving the level of greenhouse gases by the year 2050 on 1990 levels cannot be underestimated. Reductions are achievable and should be undertaken without great costs or damage to economies. In attaining equilibrium on the ecological front, free-flow of modern technology and aid for the developing countries cannot be ignored any more.