Durban, December 5:
Q from The Independent: Any circumstances in which China will go for a legally binding global deal to cut emissions?
So far, multilateral talks have been going on for 20 years. Many countries have spent great efforts. The UNFCCC and KP are legally binding documents, all parties are working hard to implement consensus in the Copenhagen Accord. We need a review of all these efforts. We need to base future decisions on current actions and what has been achieved so far. We will consider 2020 only after that.
After 2020, for what we need to negotiate, the framework I think should be a legally binding one or there should be a document to that effect. But we attach great significance to pin down commitments made by parties and we need a review of these efforts and when the first commitment period will end we need a review of what has been done and assess impacts of climate change. Then we can discuss post-2020 agreement. But before negotiating such a document, we need to resolve the following:
1. We need to stick to UNFCCC and KP
2. We need a 2nd commitment period to KP
3. We need financing conditions to be met; and developed country commitments for fast track and green climate fund
4. We need supervision and monitoring of technology transfer and funding
5. We need to need to stick to CBDR and equity
6. We need to ensure environmental integrity and every country shall take obligations based on individual capabilities
These conditions are not new. They have been negotiated for the last 20 years. We need to implement existing commitments; review actions by parties; need discussions post-2020.
Q from AFP: Is there something new in the position you have articulated? If you will take legally binding commitments, will this also be binding equally for developed countries?
The Chinese position has been fully expressed in negotiations. We will accept legally binding commitments with pre-conditions:
a. as long as CBDR principle and equity is ensured;
b. environmental integrity is ensured
c. all countries can take on commitments according to their respective responsibilities and capabilities
China has taken action with domestic resources, issued national action plan, successfully reduced 1.5 billion tonnes and will reduce by another 17% in five years, has a national action plan for meeting targets, will do industrial restructuring, will follow the low carbon path. Our target of reducing emission intensity has been cleared by the Peoples Assembly -- this is a domestic legally binding target and we will ensure it is met.
Q from The Times of India: What is happening on mutual reassurances and will you agree to discuss post-2020 regime before 2015?
All negotiators are working very hard; hope that joint effort will meet with success. Multilateral institutions work like this -- acceptable to all, but not satisfactory to all.
Countries have already taken the period before 2020, and now need the 2nd commitment period, as laid down in the Bali roadmap. There is a stipulated solution -- annex 1 (KP) should take 2nd commitment, non-annex 1 can make arrangements within UNFCCC and be comparable; and developing countries shall take actions in context of SD
Q from the Chinese media: Media quoted that KP is not an issue, but which country will have mandatory emission reductions in the future?
We need a second KP period: this is the most important issue for Durban.
Q from Japanese media: In the post-2020 framework, will China take same action as the US? Japan is refusing a second KP, what do you expect them to do?
I have already said too much about the post-2020 framework. As far as Japan and others are concerned, the Bali agreement provides different options. I hope these countries who they want KP, but refuse the 2nd period, can find the right position for themselves.
Q: Is China close to coming to an agreement with EU for a legally binding agreement?
Negotiations are about open communication channels, and all cooperative channels are open as far as China is concerned. Multilateral negotiations require inclusive process.. in Durban, China has been talking to many countries..talking to find solutions and that plan shall be able to enable all countries to safeguard their interest and promote the whole negotiation process…multilateral mechanisms must be effective.
is talking to many, including EU but not only EU…
Q from BBC: China is the biggest polluter and does it accept moral leadership for the rest of developing world and if so, why is China not going with the call by LDC for negotiations for a legally binding treaty?
China remains a developing country; still many people live within US$ 1 a day, poverty eradication is our main task. China has deeply suffered from climate change. We fully understand the losses suffered by AOSIS and understand their demand and would like to join hands with them for strengthening the process; we also intend to help developing countries in field of adaptation, mitigation and will provide support for cooperation.
We are a voice to you; you have been a support to us. Together we build journalism that is independent, credible and fearless. You can further help us by making a donation. This will mean a lot for our ability to bring you news, perspectives and analysis from the ground so that we can make change together.
Comments are moderated and will be published only after the site moderator’s approval. Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name. Selected comments may also be used in the ‘Letters’ section of the Down To Earth print edition.