The BBC television reporter asked if Obama had spent too long in one to one sessions with foreign leaders like Wen Jiabao at Copenhagen. I guarantee that China only moved on the transparency concessions because people like Obama took the time to approach Wen Jiabao at home in Beijing before the conference and then in a culturally appropriate manner at Copenhagen. Can you imagine what is like in an alien ‘parliamentary’ style plenary session conducted predominantly in English with jet-lag from China? You have to get close before you get critical in the Chinese culture. The fact that any deal was made at all in Copenhagen is thanks to Obama’s and Wen Jiabao’s efforts to understand each other.
When I ran a “Climate Change conference” of a somewhat more modest nature in Beijing, I realized that informed bicultural communication on the topic is uncommon and raises provocative questions. Three experts who understand the issues from the perspective of the developed and developing world are Dr John Shi who has a PhD in chemistry from the States and runs a carbon trading company in Beijing; Ma Jun who wrote China’s Water Crisis and then founded an NGO to report on polluters in the provinces; and Professor Alex Ng who helps Chinese companies to develop sustainable business strategies for a global market.
Hopenhagen
By Dr. John Shi, CEO Arreon Carbon, Beijing
As the fierce debates among 192 nations rages on in Copenhagen, this is no longer about debates. Over the last decade, and especially over the last year, most arguments on all sides have been forcefully made. From the need to curb climate change to the right to develop, from total emission cuts to emission cuts per capital, from climate aid based on developed world’s largess to climate debt that is justifiably owed to developing nations, from the small nation of Tuvalu to the emission giants such China (at current level) and the US (from a historically accumulated amount), all issues have been debated, with passion and conviction and profound sense of the other views being unfair and irresponsible. this year, this time in Copenhagen, the question is, could we seize upon this chance to really create legally binding emission reduction targets, or will Copenhagen remain Hopenhagen with no tangible results?
The human race has never come together like this to respond to a such a global challenge. Watching the huge floor of the plenary session in the COP 15 conference, with endless repetitions of disagreements, coming from 192 nations, amid a group of loud demonstrators outside chanting “Tuvalu, Survival!”, I cannot help but feeling strangely optimistic. Despite the fact the mountainous barriers that separate us and the deep sense of disappointments from just about every stakeholders in this – the Green Peace on inept government actions, China on inadequate US leadership, US on China not doing its fair share – we are making progress, we are march forward, and we are in fact making things happen.
With Obama, Sarkozy, Brown, Merkle and Wen among many other world leaders descending into Copenhagen in the coming week, they are setting the stage for a spectacular success for the human race to rise above our individual grievances to strive for our common interests. Failed on that, they could be pointing fingers for years to come at each other, but the rest of us, and our children for generations, will know exactly what failed leadership looks like.
As seen in Charitarian Issue 1 – January 2010
