Mitigation targets remain a sore point of the negotiations - AOSIS chair

By Makereta Komai for Climate Pasifika in Panama

06 October 2011 Panama ---- A day before the resumed negotiation session here in Panama concludes, mitigation actions by wealthy nations remains a major sore point of the climate change talks, especially for Pacific Island Countries and the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS).

Climate Pasifika caught up with the chair of AOSIS, Ambassador Dessima Williams Wednesday evening before she went into one of the many informal meetings convened here to try and consolidate positions of Parties before draft decisions are finalised at the end of the weeklong negotiations.

Ambassador Dessima Williams

“AOSIS is working at three levels – within our group we are working to streamline our positions, within G77 we are working to get our positions on board and we are also working on more understanding with Annex 1 and other partners. 

Under the Kyoto Protocol, Annex 1 countries refer to 37 industrialised nations who have committed to reducing their emissions by an average of 5 percent against 1990 levels over a five year period 2008-2012.

While Ambassador Williams was very cautious with her views on the negotiations so far – describing them as ‘slow but positive energy’ there remains huge gaps in the positions of Parties, especially on mitigation targets.

“I think everyone believes the mitigation is very weak. There is some agreement that we cannot have the gap between the second commitment period and the first but not enough parties are convinced yet. 

“I don’t see universal agreement on that yet and that remains a problem. 

“I think AOSIS, the African Group, the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and others are in conversation and are committed to that. We are in conversations with the European Union, the Environment Integrity Group, Australia as chair of the Umbrella Group and we will be meeting with the U.S on Thursday. So there is a sense that everyone is in dialogue. It’s not enough but it’s a starting point, Ambassador Williams explained to Climate Pasifika.

Since the European Union is taking the lead on pushing for a second commitment period for the Kyoto Protocol (KP), most AOSIS members who also members of the G77 and China group have been meeting with the EU to reiterate their positions to find common grounds.

“We want a KP that is five years (2013-2017), we would like to see real mitigation and not a carry-over of commitments of emissions reduction. There is still some weakness and divisions but we will get there. 

“My point is that within a structure of 190 plus member states, it is very difficult to reach agreements. We have limited and good but insufficient agreements in Cancun and we are now trying to build on them because there are new submissions and that is what is slowing us down.

“I think there is no magic solution and this is a slow multilateralism. But we in AOSIS are clear that we must have a rules based multilateral system that is consistent with our commitment under the Bali Action Plan and almost all delegations agree to that but it is how they want to implement it that is causing the difficulties. 

“Parties are now submitting proposals on how to implement the Bali Plan of Action. Panama is awash with proposals. There are lots and lots of ideas, proposals and texts and that is really where the work is – to see common ground.

She has ruled out any compromises from AOSIS.

In a number of the non-papers and draft text now emerging from the talks, the AOSIS push to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees is reflected but under consideration or bracketed. 

“Everything is on the table. Some of the major emitters in the developing countries are showing flexibility around KP that we haven’t heard before so watch out for that, she told Climate Pasifika. 

Most of the debate around the negotiations for the past three years now has been the push by industrialised or Annex 1 countries for major developing nations like Brazil, South Africa, Indian and China, whose global emissions are high to make similar mitigation commitments under the Kyoto Protocol.

“The legal obligations are different. Developed countries who are historically the cause of the problem have to take obligatory actions under the Conventions. 

“Developing countries under the Bali Plan of Action have two points – one, we must focus our priority on poverty eradication, that’s our main obligation. Our second obligation is to move away from business as usual. If you notice, developing countries are doing both. 

“We cannot do that – eradicate poverty and disrupt business as usual until and unless we get some support, argued Ambassador Williams.

On the expected outcome, Ambassador Williams expects closure to come very late Friday.

“We still have two or three political opportunities to finalise an agreement before Durban. The pre-COP meets in two weeks time and this would be another occasion where what we cannot agree technically here will be discussed politically and fed into the process. 

South Africa has taken the lead in the canvassing the views of the Parties.

“They are leading the way in calling for ambition and providing a space to discuss idea. I think Parties here are impressed and encouraged by South Africa’s initiative. The Mexicans have not pulled back and are also leading the conversations in some areas, especially in the legal form and legal outcomes. However, there are still wide gaps in the negotiations but there are lot of conversations going on now, said Ambassador Williams.

Interview with the Chair of the Alliance of Small Islands States and Grenada’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Ambassador Dessima Williams.

As negotiations reach the half way mark here in Panama City, the chair of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) shares her insights about the highs and lows of the negotiations with Makereta Komai, Editor of PACNEWS and Journalist for Climate Pasifika . 

Ambassador Dessima Williams

Q: It’s now half-way through the negotiations here in Panama, what is your take on the current negotiations so far?

Ambassador Williams: Slow progress but positive energy. I think there is a willingness to use Panama to seriously prepare for Durban. AOSIS is working at three levels – within our group we are working to streamline our positions, within G77 we are working to get our positions on board and we are also working on more common grounds with Annex 1 and other partners. In AOSIS you will find an eagerness for helping Durban be a success. The South Africans are here at many levels, as participants and also as incoming presidency. They are leading the way in calling for ambition and providing a space to discuss idea. I think Parties here are impressed and encouraged by South Africa’s initiative. The Mexicans have not pulled back and are also leading the conversations in some areas, especially in the legal form and legal outcomes. However, there are still wide gaps in the negotiations but there are lot of conversations going on now.

Q: Is that conversation enough, given what you just said about the wide gaps that still exists in the negotiations?

Ambassador Williams: It seems to me the closure comes very late. On Friday, we will see how far we’ve come with the negotiations. We still have two or three political opportunities to finalise an agreement before Durban. The pre-COP meets in two weeks time and this would be another occasion where what we cannot agree technically here will be discussed politically and fed into the process. We have seen some movement amongst G77 partners. I think everyone believes the mitigation is very weak. There is some agreement that we cannot have the gap between the second commitment period and the first but not enough parties are convinced yet. I don’t see universal agreement on that yet and that remains a problem. I think AOSIS, the African Group, the LDCs and others are in conversation and are committed to that. We are working with the European Union. We have had conversations with the Environment Integrity Group, Australia its capacity as chair of the Umbrella Group and we will be meeting with the U.S on Thursday. So there is a sense that everyone is in dialogue. It’s not enough but it’s a starting point.

Q: With only two days, is that enough? The expectation is to get some draft text for Durban at the end of the Panama talks?

Ambassador Williams: The draft text is progressing on the long term co-operative action (LCA) side and we have some text around adaptation, technology transfer, global environment fund (green climate fund). The text is slow in coming but I think we will get there on the building blocks of the LCA. The difficult areas remain with the mitigation.

Q: How can the problem of mitigation can be best resolved?

Ambassador Williams: I think there is no magic solution. This is a slow multilateralism. But I think we are clear that we must have a rules based multilateral system that is consistent with our commitment under the Bali Action Plan and almost all delegations agree to that but it is how they want to implement it that is causing the difficulties. Parties are now submitting proposals and how to implement the Bali Plan of Action. So Panama is awash with proposals. There are lots and lots of ideas, proposals and texts and that is really where the work is – to see common ground. We have a joint consultation between G77 and the European Union on the way forward for a Kyoto Protocol (KP) and we will be taking to them some common positions of our groups We want a KP that is five year, we would like to see real mitigation and not a carry-over of commitments of emissions reduction and we are still stumbling about new market mechanisms. There is still some weakness and divisions but we will get there. My point is that with a structure of 190 plus member states, it is very difficult to reach agreements. We have limited and good but insufficient agreements in Cancun and we are now trying to build on them because there are new submissions and that is what is slowing us down.

Q: Any compromises along the way in terms of positions?

Ambassador Williams: Not yet, not yet, everything is on the table. Some of the major emitters in the developing countries are showing flexibility around KP that we haven’t heard before so watch out for that. 

Q: On the second commitment period for KP, there are some discussions of transition period after 2012. Is that good enough?

Ambassador Williams: No, I don’t think we have to consider that. We have in fact over a 100 countries that are ready to sign and I know there is an argument that KP represent a very low level of emissions captured underneath it but the truth of the matter is that KP is one and the LCA is another and we need to take them together as two distinct conventions as a package to give us the level of certainty at this stage. What I do really have to say is that we need to scale up, particularly developing countries, the level of ambitions in relation to mitigation and financing because we are witnessing more extreme events and that mist be the signal for faster and more rapid reduction of gases in the atmosphere and the faster and more decisive intervention for mitigation and adaptation.  

Q: And that is exactly the European Union position- it is willing to take a second commitment period in KP on the condition that both developed and developing countries step up on their levels of ambition.

Ambassador Williams: The legal obligations are different. The developed countries who are historically the cause of the problem have to take obligatory actions under the Conventions. The developing countries under the Bali Plan of Action have two points – one, we must focus our priority on poverty eradication, that’s our main obligation. Our second obligation is to move away from business as usual.  If you notice, developing countries are doing both. We cannot do that – eradicate poverty and disrupt business as usual until and unless we get some support. We’d like to acknowledge and thank Denmark for making available assistance to 24 AOSIS countries in renewable energy projects. That will make a lot of difference and allow us to have carbon neutrality and take on more initiatives of greening our economies. If we can get more fast start finance to help us out of poverty and move into something that is cleaner, then that’s the way for us to meeting our obligations under the convention.

Q: I notice that in your AOSIS statements, you mention the support of the African Union and the Least Developed Countries. Does collective diplomacy helps in climate change negotiations?

Ambassador Williams:  Yes, enormously. As I said before, we have almost 200 countries trying to come to an agreement on a wide range of topics. The key is we work by consensus to build alliances, build common positions which we have had in the last three years. We have been having common dialogue, common conference with the LDCs because of the poverty eradication priority with island states, the vulnerabilities that we share and climate resilience that we want to build. Now we have that dialogue extended to another 50 countries in the African group and we are negotiating technical points on the level of finance, scale of commitments and various areas. We believe that when come as a group of 100 already with the common position that helps the process as opposed to just 43 of us with a common position. So what AOSIS is doing is taking citizenry responsibility within the negotiating process to be able to bring with LDCs and with Africa 100 plus agreed parties so that we can make more rapid progress.

Q: You are still optimistic that by the end of the week something can come out of Cancun?

Ambassador Williams: Yes Panama will produce texts for the different negotiating groups but we won’t get everything we want but some agreed text. We would get clarity on where the differences are and I am confident that within the developing countries we would have a very strong agreed to positions for going into Durban.

South Africa provides ‘open space’ to discuss possible way forward in Durban

By Makereta Komai for Climate Pasifika in Panama

05 October 2011 --- As the Durban climate change conference looms, hosts South Africa is holding two informal consultations here in Panama in the hope that a possible climate change deal will materialise on home soil.

The open-ended consultation provides an informal space to discuss key issues that may help South Africa to find solutions for the current negotiating difficulties.

Presided by South Africa’s Ambassador Nozipho Joyce Mxakato-Diseko, the informal interaction with delegates allow for a free expression of views on a number of cross cutting issues.  

COP17 President designate, Minister Maite Nkoana-Mashabane with UNFCCC Executive Director, Christina Figueres

“Time is limited and we need to make the most of it. We wish to have an open engagement in a structured and focused manner.

“As incoming Presidency, we have heard from the majority of delegates that delicate balances need to be struck between issues and within issues in order for Durban to have a balanced, fair and credible outcome. Once the balances are better understood, the possibility of putting together a balanced outcome may come within reach, said Ambassador Mxakato-Diseko. 

At the very heart of putting a balanced outcome together is the question of how delegates view the future.

“In climate change negotiations we work within a web of linkages and balances, driven by the urgency of making an impact. It is for the preservation of the multilateral system that we need to look for the end of the thread of this entanglement, to ensure that we strengthen our system by weaving together a solution that can take us forward together.

“We hope that the informal consultations can be useful to develop a common understanding among delegates of where the balances will have to be struck if a successful outcome in Durban is to be achieved. 

The two informal session will try to address two major questions – how to accelerate progress on a legally binding multilateral rules based agreement and is the second commitment period to the Kyoto Protocol an essential element to strengthening the collective response to climate change.

“We believe that in responding to these questions, we can really come to the core elements that would help build a common understanding.

The Pacific delegation have welcomed South Africa’s initiative to create a forum to discuss in a transparent manner a possible way forward to a climate change deal in Durban.

“It’s a welcome move by South Africa to meet with parties and get their positions.

“While these informal sessions are not binding, at least they are an attempt to find common understanding and we support that, said Espen Ronneberg of the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP).

Sea level to rise by a metre or more if wealthy nations do not meet emissions pledges, Climate Action Tracker

By Makereta Komai for Climate Pasifika in Panama 04 October 2011 Panama --- Three non-profit climate research institutions in Europe say aggregated emission reduction pledges of wealthy nations fall far short of what is needed to get the world on track to limiting global warming to 2 and 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels. Both of these warming limits are mentioned in the Cancun Agreements. Findings of the Climate Action Tracker, comprised of Ecofys, Climate Analytics and Postdam Institute for Climate Impact Research were revealed in Panama Tuesday, at the margins of the climate change negotiations underway in Panama City. The group analysed the pledges made under the Cancun Agreement and found a gap of 10-14 billion tonnes is needed to reach the reduction level required. “If countries implemented the most stringent reductions they have proposed, with the most stringent accounting, Climate Action Tracker has calculated the remaining gap would shrink to 8-12 billion tonnes, said Dr Bill Hare of Climate Analytics. Dr. Bill Hare If this situation remains, we are headed towards 3 degrees, which is dangerous for the planet, adds Dr Hare. This will easily result in damage to vulnerable ecosystems, including sea level rise.  “Seal level rise is likely to be a metre or more, he told Climate Pasifika. “Countries that are vulnerable have been calling for 2 degrees or lower because of the substantial risks in these nations. Dr Hare said scientific researches and literatures are warning of the danger uncontrolled global emissions will have on the planet. “These are the kind of risks that politicians need to think very seriously about when they are looking at their levels of ambition. “Many parties have put forward a submission that we establish a process in Durban to continually review and upgrade the level of ambition.   “The EU, small islands and many African countries are pushing to have a concrete and substantative process of both a technical and political character moving forward after Durban. These are being resited by major emitters who are saying we made our pledges for 2020 and we don’t want to touch them until much later, Dr Hare told Climate Pasifika.  According to Climate Action Tracker’s analysis of the pledges of five developed and developing nations, China appears to be on track to meet or even surpass its Cancun pledges but its emissions will rise higher than expected. The five countries are China, United States of America, Brazil, South Korea, Japan and Australia. “The higher overall picture shows that a higher than expected economic growth rate brings with it higher emissions, and the sooner the switch is made to cleaner energy sources, the better it is to avoid locking in climate-damaging energy. “It also illustrates the risks and uncertainties of using business as usual scenarios as the basis for emission reduction pledges, said Dr Hare. China, according to the findings is set to surpass its Cancun Agreement pledge of 40-45 percent reduction in emissions per unit of Gross Domestic Product by 2020 from 2005 levels through its renewable energy and other non-fossil fuel energy sources. “Yet faster than expected economic growth means that emissions in 2020 are likely to be higher than previous estimates – by about 1 Gigatonne of carbon dioxide, said Dr Hare. The group also observed that the absence of substantial action from the United States to meet its Copenhagen pledge of a 17 percent reduction by 2020 (at 2005 levels) will prove more expensive with every year of delay. “If the US doesn’t start acting until 2015, it will need to reduce emissions at a rate of 3 percent a year," said Climate Action Tracker. Brazil’s emissions will grow more rapidly than previously expected, according to new data obtained in the study. South Korea, Japan and Australia have introduced policies to implement their pledges.

Multilateralism is at stake – G77 & China

By Makereta Komai for Climate Pasifika in Panama 04 October 2011 --- The Group of 77 and China says political will is a must if Durban is to produce a legally binding climate change deal. “We are ready to negotiate and to produce actual texts in both tracks, but only on such a basis that respects our position as well as others. The elements are in place, we now have to translate this into an express political commitment from the developed countries, said Argentina’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations and chair of the Group of 77 and China, Ambassador Jorge Arguello. Chair of Group 77 and China, Ambassador Jorge Arguello The Group of 77 and China, comprising 131 and one of the powerful negotiating blocs in climate change negotiations says the basis for any fruitful negotiations must include: the preservation of the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol, in keeping with the Bali road map and the two tracks of negotiation agreed. And key to the negotiations is the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol, said Ambassador Argüello. It urges all parties to respect their obligations and agreements under this multilateral framework. “The defense of multilateralism must go beyond words, this is a tool that has proved beneficial to all humanity and, definitively, to developing countries. “Much as some rich countries like to repeat that discussing scenarios that they oppose is not "realistic" or "practical", they must recognize that there is no point in insisting on a solution outside of the Kyoto Protocol when 132 parties have strongly declared they can only accept a second commitment period as a meaningful outcome. “I think most parties understand by now that a second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol is key for any positive outcome we can expect in Durban. I had the chance to update the incoming President of COP17 on the thinking of our Group and our firm commitment to that end, said the group chair. On Monday, Ambassador Arguello met with the Foreign Minister of South Africa, Maite Nkoana-Mashabane. Minister Nkoana-Mashabane is in Panama to participate in the meeting in her capacity as incoming president of the 17th Conference of Parties (COP17) which would take place in Durban later this year. South African delegation “We have had a very productive and positive meeting,” said Ambassador Argüello. “I am very encouraged by the determination of the Minister to help all parties work towards a meaningful outcome in Durban, even in the short time we have, said Ambassador Arguello.

South Pacific Islands running out of water

By Hilary Whiteman, CNN

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/10/04/world/asia/south-pacific-island-drought/ 

(CNN) -- Two idyllic South Pacific islands are facing a water crisis; they're running out of it, and fast.

The island nations Tuvalu and Tokelau have declared states of emergency after six months of little or no rainfall.

It's estimated that at the current rate of consumption the Tuvaluan atoll of Funafuti, home to 5,000 people, will run out of drinking water in two weeks. Tokelau, a territory of New Zealand with a population of 1,500, could run dry in just one.

"We are all working in line with the fact that we recognize this national emergency situation," Jo Suveinakama, the general manager of the Tokelau government told Radio New Zealand.

The New Zealand Red Cross flew emergency supplies to Tuvalu Monday on a New Zealand Defense Force flight along with two aid workers and two foreign ministry staff.

 Source: CNN

"We have mobilized 2,000 collapsible water containers, hand sanitizers, tarpaulins to be used to capture rain (and) two emergency desalination units," Andrew McKie, New Zealand Red Cross International Operations and Emergency Manager said in a statement Tuesday.

The emergency desalinators are being sent south on a patrol boat at midnight Tuesday to the small atoll of Nukulaelae, part of Tuvalu, whose population of 330 is reported to be down to its last 60 liters of water. Schools have closed as residents conserve what little water they have and pray for rain.

"It's a pretty dire situation there," Gareth Smith, New Zealand High Commissioner to Tuvalu told Radio New Zealand. Smith is one of the two foreign ministry staff sent to Tuvalu this week.

In Nukulaelae, water is being rationed. Families - some with as many as 10 people - are forced to live on just 40 liters a day, according to Dave Hebblethwaite, a water management adviser from the Applied Geoscience and Technology Division of Secretariat of the Pacific Community.

"Families are getting by washing in the sea and only having a short wash in fresh water if at all," he said, adding that most of the fresh water is being reserved for drinking and cooking.

The Tuvalu government briefed a group known as the "Diplomatic Corps" Tuesday in the Fijian capital of Suva on the type of aid that might be needed. Delegates included head of foreign missions, international agencies and regional organizations. Parts for desalination units and fuel top the list, Hebblethwaite said.

Tuvalu, the world's fourth smallest country, is a nation of four reef islands and five atolls covering 26 square kilometers in the Pacific Ocean halfway between Hawaii and Australia.

The island nation relies almost exclusively on rainwater collected from the roofs of homes and government buildings to supply a population of 10,000. However, three dry spells over the last three years has gradually drained the community's water supplies.

"Communities in Tuvalu are pretty used to doing it tough," Hebblethwaite said. "Atoll environments are really hard environments to live in and when you're just relying on rainfall for all of your water, you find yourself in situations where you do need to make the most of every small amount.

"For these communities to be asking for external assistance, it shows that the situation is quite serious," he said.

New Zealand's Foreign Affairs Minister Murray McCully has warned the water crisis could lead to food shortages as crops fail.

"We're now doing an assessment, not just in Tuvalu but also in other areas of the Pacific that are affected by the shortage of rainfall, making sure we deal with the drinking water issue most urgently," he told Radio New Zealand.

Tuvalu imports the bulk of its food but its people also grow their own crops, mostly taro. The root vegetable is grown in pits filled with organic matter due to the lack of soil available on the atoll.

"We know that on some of the islands, particularly on Nukalaelae, many pits are suffering damage from either drying out or getting saline from the water table. So there's certainly an impact on food security," Hebblethwaite said.

"We're even finding that some fruit trees are suffering, even coconuts, which is unusual. Coconut palms on Nukalaelae are starting to lose their fronds," he said.

Tuvalu has been very vocal in its calls for international help to mitigate the effects of climate change. It has warned that it is in danger of "sinking" as sea water levels rise.

"The information we have about climate change and rainfall patterns is getting better and better every month," Hebblethwaite said. However he added that assessing long term trends on the islands was difficult to due the lack of rain gauges.

"One thing's for sure, water will be the main mechanism by which climate change impacts on these island communities, whether it be by droughts or by storms or floods," he said. "So building their resistance to today's climate variability that they're experiencing will be a key defense they can employ against the future impacts of climate change, and I think people are recognizing that."

Australia and New Zealand prioritise Pacific Island Countries in disbursement of fast track finance

By Makereta Komai for Climate Pasifika in Panama

03 October 2011 Panama ---- Australia says it has disbursed more than a third of its fast start finance (FSF) since it was pledged in Copenhagen in 2009.

At an information sharing session here in Panama convened by the UN climate change secretariat, representative from donor and recipient countries shared lessons learnt from the disbursement of FSF finances set up to assist vulnerable nations adapt and mitigate against the impacts of climate change.

Both New Zealand and Australia revealed that more than 50 percent of their allocated FSF funds have been directed to small island developing countries in the Pacific.

In Copenhagen Australia pledged $599 million to the funds, which wealthy nations promised to give voluntarily to nations affected by climate change.

52 percent of its total commitment has been diverted to adaptation while the rest will go towards mitigation, said an Australian government representative on the panel discussion.

“Our pledge is grant based and has a strong focus on vulnerable and small island developing states and least developed countries.

“As of June this year a third of funds have been disbursed and another third by June 2012. By 30 June 2913, our pledged $599 million will be completely disbursed.

However, the Australia Government assured that fast start projects are long term engagements and will continue beyond 2013.

New Zealand on the other hand has disbursed its FSF funds through integrated projects in the Pacific region, which it says will benefits local communities.

“We find that good dialogue with partners and the local communities helps us to deliver quality climate change related projects to Pacific Island communities, said a New Zealand government official at the information sharing session.

However, the Alliance of Small Islands States (AOSIS), whose membership represents most of the vulnerable countries being target by donor funding like the FSF say they need more clarification on how the funds are being used.

AOSIS representative listed seven issues that it thinks needs more discussion with the FSF donors.

These are timely provision of information on funding opportunities, predictability of pledges, balance between adaptation and mitigation, prioritisation of funded projects, criteria to access funds, loans and grants and promises of new and additional funding.

In Copenhagen, industrialised nations pledged US$10 billion a year from 2010-2012 as fast start finance and jointly mobilise US$100 billion by 2020.

Pacific ready to go to work on all issues here in Panama

By Makereta Komai for Climate Pasifika in Panama

03 October 2011 Panama --- Pacific negotiators at the last round of climate change negotiations here in Panama City are happy with preparations for this weeklong meeting compared to the previous meetings in Bangkok and Bonn.

Climate Change Adviser for the region’s environment organisation, Espen Ronneberg told Climate Pasifika this is a good start and ‘the Pacific group is ready to go to work on all issues at hand.’

“In Bonn and Bangkok, there were procedural problems in adopting an agenda for the meeting. That was really frustrating in Bangkok because the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) had a good preparatory meeting and we were ready to go to work on all issues.

“We had a similar start to the session in Bonn, said Ronneberg.

Here in Panama, the Pacific delegation will continue their push for strong targets, credible action on adaptation and clear decisions on finances and how to access them immediately.

“It’s now time to discuss draft text since there appears to be a general consensus amongst Parties to begin work, said Diane McFadzien, also of the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP).

While discussions appear difficult on the Kyoto Protocol because some countries that ratified it say they will step away and not commit to a second commitment period, ‘the Pacific is still persevering’ said Ronneberg.

“We are saying let’s have a discussion on the targets. We are trying to send signals that we are committed to a legally binding outcome for the Long Term Co-operative Action (LCA) process as well.

“AOSIS has been trying to push developing countries like India, China, South Africa and Brazil but it’s becoming increasingly difficult to push them when they are pointing at the industrialised countries and saying they need to take the lead and are not doing so, said Ronneberg.

Top left - Mr. Espen Ronneberg with Pacific colleagues at the UNFCCC COP 16, Cancun, 2011

At the same time, industrialiased nations are saying, we have ratified Kyoto and have our commitment under Kyoto so that’s our lead and its now your turn.

An idea that has now emerged is to allow for a transitional period after Kyoto expires in 2012.

“There is a lot of testing of the waters to see what the reaction to these types of ideas.

“AOSIS has made its point clear - we want to have certainties. While a transition may be pragmatic for some countries it does not give us any sense of security in terms of emissions, said Ronneberg.

Responding to civil society concerns that the Kyoto Protocol may be buried in Durban, McFadzien said a lot of Parties are in agreement that the architecture of the Protocol must be retained.

Centre - Ms. Diane McFadzien at AOSIS meeting, UNFCCC COP 16 Cancun, 2011

“Nobody is killing KP but if anything the transitional period may buy some time whereas we would prefer to go straight into a legally binding agreement.

“Durban will be the deciding point – if anything there is now a lot of willingness, including the industrialised countries to keep the rules and the mechanisms of KP alive, said Mcfadzien.

An attempt by South Africa to create a informal space to discuss issues in the lead up to Durban has received support from the Pacific and AOSIS, who are now actively involved in these informal discussions.

“It’s a welcome move by South Africa to meet with parties and get their positions.

“While these informal sessions are not binding, at least they are an attempt to find common understanding and we support that, said Ronneberg.

Nauru ready to take over AOSIS chair

By Makereta Komai for Climate Pasifika in Panama

Ambassador Marlene Moses

02 October 2011 Panama --- Taking over as lead negotiator for the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) on climate change will be a challenge but Nauru’s top diplomat at the United Nations, Ambassador Marlene Moses is ready to rise up to the challenge.

Ambassador Moses takes over the reign from another equally able and strong negotiator, Ambassador Dessima Williams of Grenada, who has served as chair of AOSIS since 2007.

“I will be filling an incredibly big shoe. Grenada has set the bar very high and we can only do our best to match what Grenada has achieved on behalf of 43 countries.

“Ambassador Williams is a wonderful woman. Her dedication, personality and passion have reflected in the work she has done for AOSIS, said Ambassador Moses.

The Nauru diplomat, who has spent six years representing her island nation at the United Nations in New York, said she will continue to draw on the experiences of Grenada in the transitional period.

“I can only build on her legacy. She is a wonderful negotiator. During the transition, we will draw on her wisdom and guidance as we begin to chair AOSIS.

Ambassador Moses will also rely on the support and experiences of her colleagues in New York.

“My colleagues in New York have given me 120 percent of support. Nauru cannot let the Pacific down and we will not let them down, a confident incoming chair of AOSIS told Climate Pasifika in Panama.

On what Nauru’s chairmanship means for the Pacific, Ambassador Moses said, “This will be an opportunity for our region to raise its profile in terms of climate change”

“Nauru has capacity limitations, so we will be looking to our Pacific colleagues to provide us with expertise to chair the 43-memebr group.

“In this regard, Nauru has placed a number of advertisements in key outlets in the Pacific to advertise for a chief negotiator, deputy chief negotiator, science advisor and economic climate adviser.

“We are hoping that the Pacific will take this opportunity and come forward and support Nauru as AOSIS chair.

“Climate change is critical to the survival of Pacific Island Countries and we hope that Pacific Islanders will apply for these positions to be based in New York for the duration of Nauru’s term as chair, said Ambassador Moses.

On the future of the Kyoto Protocol, the incoming AOSIS chair said there won’t be major changes to the current AOSIS negotiating positions.

“Nauru’s position and the Pacific position are well embedded in the AOSIS position, in terms of temperature, of the Kyoto Protocol and the ambitious reduction targets.

“We are not making changes to the AOSIS position but building on what Grenada has achieved during its chairmanship. I think having this opportunity for the Pacific to be directly involved will add another level or a different perspective because the Pacific is one of the most vulnerable regions.

“So we bring in that urgency, we bring in that impetus that climate change negotiations cannot fail. “It’s the only legal framework available to us and we need this to continue after 2012. If I can use a quotation from a civil society in South Africa at the talks yesterday, ‘we don’t want the Kyoto Protocol to die in our soil.’ And this is exactly where we are coming from. We don’t want the Protocol to die a premature death, said Ambassador Moses.

Q and A with Ambassador Marlene Moses

From 01 January 2012, the Pacific takes over as the lead negotiator for the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) on climate change. This role has been taken up Nauru’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations in New York, Ambassador Marlene Moses. She takes over from another able and strong negotiator, Ambassador Dessima Williams. Here she shares some of her initial thoughts with PACNEWS Editor and Climate Pasifika journalist, Makereta Komai.

Ambassador Marlene Moses

Q: Ambassador Moses you will take over as chair of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) in January next year. This will be an important responsibility not just for you but for the Pacific as a whole. What are your expectations?
Ambassador Moses: Nauru takes over the chair of AOSIS from 01 January 2012. In terms of the expectations for the Pacific, this will be an opportunity for the Pacific to raise its profile in terms of climate change. Nauru is a small and modest mission in New York. It has capacity limitations, so we will be looking to our Pacific colleagues to help us in chairing AOSIS, providing us with the expertise that we need as Nauru chairs the 43-memebr group. In this regard, Nauru has placed a number of advertisements in key outlets to advertise mainly for a chief negotiator, deputy chief negotiator, science advisor and economic climate adviser. We are hoping that the Pacific will take this opportunity and come forward and support Nauru as AOSIS chair. Climate change is critical to the survival of Pacific Island Countries and we hope that Pacific Islanders will apply for these positions to be based in New York for the duration of Nauru’s term as chair.


Q: The advertisements have gone out?
Ambassador Moses: Yes they have gone out. First of all, we have written to all Pacific Islands that are members of AOSIS. We have placed ads in the Pacific Law Journal and written to SPREP, SPC and PIFS where most of our experts are based. We are also providing an opportunity for the Pacific to be directly involved in mapping and driving the climate change negotiations. This is important because of our survival and the future of our nations must be central to the climate change negotiations.


Q: Any responses so far?
Ambassador Moses: We have received some applications and we are encouraging Pacific Islanders to apply for these jobs. Applications close on October 14.


Q: Apart from your push for more Pacific Islanders to be involved in climate change negotiations, what are some other important issues for the Pacific, especially now in the lead up to Durban, there are a lot of discussions on the future of the Kyoto Protocol?
Ambassador Moses: Everything is relevant to the Pacific, especially what you just mentioned about the future of the Kyoto Protocol post 2012. Nauru’s position and the Pacific position are well embedded in the AOSIS position, in terms f temperature, of the Kyoto Protocol and the ambitious reduction targets. We are not making changes to the AOSIS position but building on what Grenada has achieved during its chairmanship. I think having this opportunity for the Pacific to be directly involved will add another level or a different perspective because the Pacific is one of the most vulnerable regions. So we bring in that urgency, we bring in that impetus that climate change negotiations cannot fail. It’s the only legal framework available to us and we need this to continue after 2012. If I can use a quotation from a civil society in South Africa at the talks yesterday, ‘we don’t want the Kyoto Protocol to die in our soil.’ And this is exactly where we are coming from. We don’t want the Protocol to die a premature death.


Q: There are some discussions of a transitional period for Kyoto Protocol after it expires in 2012. Do we accept that?
Ambassador Moses: I think we need to look at that further but right now the survival and future of our island countries are central to how we chair the AOSIS group.


Q: Ban Ki Moon was in the Pacific a few weeks ago and in Kiribati he said the island was the ‘frontline of the frontline’ states impacted by climate change. That is the situation of many Pacific Island countries, we are the frontline states.
Ambassador Moses: Absolutely. The UN Secretary General, I believe after his visit to the Pacific now totally understands and appreciates the urgency of our situation. In New York, two years ago, we ran a Security Council resolution that linked climate change to peace and security. In July this year there was a debate at the UN Security Council and my President, Marcus Stephens was there on behalf of Pacific Island countries. We managed to get the Security Council to recognise that climate change was a security threat. We are hoping that during our term as AOSIS chair, the issue will be highlighted, respecting off course that not all AOSIS member countries share the same position


Q: I remember when Nauru took up the issue, you featured prominently at the UN talking about it
Ambassador Moses: I think Nauru’s name was profiled because we were the chair of PSIDs (Pacific Small Island Developing States in New York. But I have to tell you and place on record that it wasn’t just Nauru but the coalition of 11 PSIDS represented at the United Nations in New York. All of us with our modest missions did our best because we realised that climate change needs to be featured and promoted at the UN and the world over. If we fail, it undermines all the development gains we have achieved in the past years.


Q: That’s exactly what your President said in New York recently. He called on the UN Security Council to take further action. What did he mean?
Ambassador Moses: We are asking the Secretary General to appoint a Special Representative and we are also asking the Secretary General to assess the capacity of the UN system to see f it can respond to the security implications of climate change.


Q: So you see your role as incoming chair of AOSIS as a critical moment for the Pacific to again lift its profile to another level on climate change internationally?
Ambassador Moses: We hope this is one of the things we are able to push during our chairmanship.


Q: The current chair, Ambassador Dessima Williams has done a great job during her term?
Ambassador Moses: Absolutely. It’s a supremely difficult job. We will be filling incredibly big shoes. Grenada has set the bar very high and we can only do our best to match what Grenada has achieved on behalf f 43 countries. She is a wonderful woman. Her dedication, personality and passion have reflected in the work she has done for AOSIS.


Q: As a woman?
Ambassador Moses: Even great. I can only build on her legacy. She is a wonderful negotiator. During the transition, we will draw on her wisdom and guidance as we begin to chair AOSIS.


Q: Support from the Pacific on your chairmanship?
Ambassador Moses: 120 percent! We are grateful to Pacific Island Countries, especially my Ambassadorial colleague in New York who have given me all their support. Nauru cannot let them down and will not let them down!