Eli Kintisch is reporter for Science Magazine and author of “Hack the Planet” released by Wiley April 19, 2010.

Bill McKibben, author of “EARTH: MAKING A LIFE ON A TOUGH NEW PLANET” and co-founder of 350.org, an organization that our readers know that we hold in very high esteem,  wrote about “HACK THE PLANET:”

“Anyone who considers themselves scientifically literate had better get versed in the new discipline of geo-engineering — or planethacking, as Eli Kintisch calls it in his nuanced and useful new account. This discussion is not going to go away anytime soon!”

Once the stuff of science fiction, geoengineering has come into the mainstream, with top scientists, the National Academy of Science and Congress investigating this radical concept.

please look at www.hacktheplanetbook.com

and if you need a contact – the book’s publicity is with Erin Beam of  ebeam at wiley.com

———————–

I got a few minutes late to the library’s lower level and so a nice size roomful of very mixed crowd – from the young shoeless intellectual in the front row to the spectacled white hair retiree in the back row. They all listened very intent and at the end asked good questions.

As my usual way, I went directly to the table loaded with the books for sale, took one and stood next to the wall – leafing from cover to cover. That is how I learned that the book starts with old-time friend Academician Yuriy Izrael from Moscow with whom I shared before the Rio Summit of 1992 two weeks in Fortaleza, Ceara, Brazil, where local Professor Jose Oswaldo Carioca was preparing for a Brazilian submission to the upcoming UN Conference on Environment and Development. Since then I visited with Academician Izrael a couple of times in Moscow – the last time in Moscow during the September 29 – October 3, 2003 World Climate Change Conference where he was the head of the local organizing scientific committee and co-chair of the Conference, with Mr. A. N. Illarionov (Andrey Nikolayevich), the Adviser of then Russia President Vladimir Putin. Bert Bolin of Sweden, a pioneering climatologist and the first chairman of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), was the foreign co-chair of the event.

That was a very important meeting, with participants from over 100 countries, because it dealt with the crucial question – Will Russia Ratify the Kyoto Protocol? At the time Putin was relying on Yu. Izrael and Andrey Nikolayevich, and the world still thought that the KP is imperative for a Multilateral approach to Climate Change. With the US clearly out – Russia became all important in order to reach the magic number of ratifications so the KP gets into effect. Eventually it became Putins decision to say – DA – YES – while his two advisers still said NO!
That was real drama.

Somehow I still have my stash of papers from that meeting and I was looking now at hints at geoengineering in Russia’s position. But I did find a list of 10 questions Illarionov did put before the conference in his presentation that had the title: “Antropogenic Factors in Global Warming: Some Questions.” It was Bert Bolin, chair emeritus of IPCC, who gave the two answers with the last one answering to “How much will it cost.” This is fascinating history from the days we thought we had a plan – but the Russians seemingly were already convinced then that we really had no plan.

Strangely, when I looked up Google I found there on first page for Illarionov -

Answers to the questions raised by A.N. Illarionov during his talk …

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
Answers to Questions by A. Illarionov (Adviser of the President of Russian Federation). Moscow – World Climate Change Conference 2003 …
www.sysecol.ethz.ch/Articles_Reports/Illarionov_QandA_WCCC_2003.pdf

further: As a senior advisor to Russian President Putin, Illarionov was outspoken against Russia’s ratification of Kyoto. Despite Illarionov’s vocal opposition, Putin ratified the Kyoto Protocol in 2004. In October 2006, Illarionov was appointed senior researcher of the Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity of the US libertarian think tank Cato Institute in Washington, DC.

————

The above was just an aside and I will get back to it after doing full justice by reading “Hack the Planet” as I am convinced that some form of geoengineering will eventually become part of humanity’s effort to put a lid – cap in BP’s language – in order to control the runaway increase of concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Yuriy Izrael was talking of placing sulfur compounds in the upper atmosphere – others may have various sun deflectors in mind,
I for one may think that the Peter Glazer idea of concentrating sun light in outer space and beaming it back to earth might be a way to provide clean solar energy for our needs. I have no trust in the Carbon Capture and Sequestration concept – this because I do not think that we know how to do it and I mistrust those that promote the idea as it feels rather like an attempt to keep us away from research in positive directions that can wean us from our dependence on oil and coal. Further, it is clear that just companies like Haliburton and large oil companies will be the only ones to be able to implement these programs if there is ever some success with these ideas. This is also a geoengineering concept. Changing fish population in a pond is a case of forced change of nature and we have many examples that led to negative results because of unintended consequences.

Anyway – this is a large topic that serves our attention, so after talking to the great family of presenter Eli Kintisch – he was there with both his parents and kid brother – all knowledgeable in the subject – and to one of the people that asked questions, I continued to Piermont.

There it was all fun, but my connection to the book presentation is clear to me. It will eventually take a revolution to break down the Bastille walls of the anti-progress interests when dealing with climate change.

I saw in Piermont a friend from the UN, bought two interesting T-shirts and went home.

I still visited a great cooperative gallery – The Piermont Flywheel Gallery – that was about half works of Howard Berelson – a colorist with many scenes from East Africa.

He has a great painting from the Serengeti Plain in Tanzania – “Death in the Garden of Eden.” Was that bull failed also because of the high heat? Are the colors of the Hudson River Odyssey – another painting – so that we are reminded of the turning of our area into another hot Africa?

————————————

and if someone is interested in contacting Academician Izrael:

Yuri IZRAEL
Institute of Global Climate and Ecology
Glebovskaya str., 20B
107258 Moscow
RUSSIA
Tel: +(7 095) 1692430
Fax: +(7 095) 1600831
E-mail:  Yu.Izrael at g23.relcom.ru

and as an appetizer see the following:

The journal Russian Meteorology and Hydrology recently published a new kind of geoengineering study whose lead author is the journal’s editor, the prominent Russian scientist Yuri A. Izrael.

Izrael and his team of scientists mounted aerosol generators on a helicopter and a car chassis, and proceeded to blast out particles at ground level and at heights of up to 200 meters. Then they attempted to measure just how much sunlight reaching Earth was reduced due to the aerosol plume.

This small-scale intervention was effective, the Russian scientists say. And in an accompanying article on geoengineering alternatives, Izrael and colleagues note that “Already in the near future, the technological possibilities of a full scale use of [aerosol-based geoengineering] will be studied.”

——————

Above leads to brain storming:

Billionaire airline tycoon Richard Branson baldly told the press last year, ‘If we could come up with a geoengineering answer to this problem, then Copenhagen wouldn’t be necesary. We could carry on flying our planes and driving our cars.’

And what do you know – there is already a clear reaction to the geoengineering ideas:

But on the eve of this year’s UN-designated International Mother Earth Day, over 60 national and international organizations launched Hands Off Mother Earth (H.O.M.E.). The global campaign, now supported by the Ecologist, includes a website  handsoffmotherearth.org) where signatories upload photos of themselves with their hands up in a ‘stop’ gesture.

The campaign insists that a halt be placed on geoengineering experiments and that the ‘rights’ of Planet Earth be respected. ‘Not just human beings have rights, but the planet has rights,’ asserts Evo Morales, Bolivian president and host of the recently concluded Cochabamba Climate Change Conference in Bolivia. The first right, he says, is ‘the right for no ecosystem to be eliminated’. The second, ‘for Mother Earth to live without contamination’. The final statement by the 35,000 people attending Cochabamba called out geoengineering as a false solution to the climate problem.

If the world continued to send 40 gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent into the atmosphere each year, it would be a disaster.

Bolivian Ambassador Pablo Solon, his countries climate change negotiator, told June 16th those ready to hear at UN Headquarters, that the final text produced by the Chair of the Ad-Hoc Working Group on cooperative action held this June in Bonn – has set the process back by erasing suggestions of as many as 40 countries that complained at the end of that meeting.

About Bolivia, the Ambassador pointed out that the April 20-22, 2010 Cochabamba People’s Agreement consensus-based document with substantive proposals – a product of 35,000 participants from 140 countries – was left out from the Chair’s paper and as such that paper was rejected by 30 to 40 countries at the closing plenary in Bonn.

The Ambassador added that the next step was another working text which was due by mid-July. “We have given the Chair of the working delegation a third chance,” he said.

His parting remarks were that climate change is coming and in 20 years there will be nothing left to negotiate.”

——————

Asked about results from Mr. Ban Ki-moon meeting President Evo Morales of Bolivia, the UN Associate Spokesman for the UNSG. Mr. Farhan Haq, knew to say:
“The Secretary-General is doing what he can with the results that were agreed to, and theses were results that were agreed to by member states, and he is doing what he can to strengthen this, to make sure that the various concerns that have been brought on board – which he is been listening to assiduously ebe since the Copenhagen conference – that those can be dealt with as we go onto the road towards Mexico.” Such words, if they were true water would make the desert bloom!

But seemingly, the incoming Executive-Secretary of the UNFCCC, that is the UN Secretary-General’s top Climate person, Ms. Christiana Figueres, said that – SHE DOES NOT EXPECT THERE TO BE AN AGREEMENT, FINAL AGREEMENT, ON CLIMATE CHANGE IN HER LIFETIME, – she said this to the press. But the Associate Spokesperson for the UNSG refused to take ownership of that statement when asked by a journalist. if not the UN – one or two journalists are waking up to the issue.

Further, the UN material from DPI did not even spell her name correctly. We wonder if what the world will be dished out from the UN will be additional portions of smiley-face – SEAL THE DEAL!

At UN, Bolivia’s Morales Hits Obama “Blackmail” and Lack of Change, “Sign Kyoto”

UNITED NATIONS, May 8 — “Maybe the color of the skin of the U.S. President has changed,” Bolivian President Evo Morales told the Press on Friday, “but nothing else has changed.” Video here, from Minute 47:45.

Inner City Press asked Morales about reports in the Latin American press that the U.S. had “blackmailed” Bolivia and Ecuador by cutting off aid for not signing the Copenhagen Accord on climate change. Video here, from Minute 26:24.

Morales confirmed that “Ecuador lost $2 million, and Bolivia lost $3 million,” but said these were more than made up for by money from Venezuela and Brazil. “They took away the Millennium Account,” he said. “We don’t have any trade preferences any more. But we’re better off than before.”

Last month Morales convened an alternative Copenhagen meeting in Cochabamba, Bolivia. Morales contrasts the non-binding Copenhagen Accord with the previous binding Kyoto protocol. On Friday he said the U.S. is “making a mistake” by cutting aid, that they could cooperate if the U.S. just “signed the Kyoto Protocol.”

Evo Morales at UN, change he can believe in not shown

To Cochabamba, the UN sent its Under Secretary General for Latin America, Alicia Barcena, to attend. She was reportedly booed as she read a statement from Ban Ki-moon, then offered “if you don’t want us here, then we will withdraw … we also represent peoples.”

Inner City Press asked Morales if, as requested in connection with the Cochabamba “cumbre,” he had raised the issue of the U.S. blackmail to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, and if so what Ban had said. Morales did not answer this part of the question.

Since Ban is focused on obtaining a second term, which could be blocked by the U.S., France, UK, Russia or China, it is unlikely he would issue any criticism of the U.S., even about cutting off aid to countries like Bolivia and Ecuador. Millennium Development Goals, indeed.

One issue that was raised in the Morales group’s meeting with Ban was the upcoming naming of a new head of the UNFCCC, to lead the UN climate change talks into Cancun. Last week Inner City Press reported, based on tips from well placed Ambassadors, that the UN’s short list of four consists of the candidates from Costa Rica, India, South Africa and Hungary. The last is an inside candidate who already works for Ban Ki-moon, Janos Pasztor, who has recused himself from much of his work while seeking the UNFCCC post. We’ll see.

Footnote: given Evo Morales’ direct attack on Barack Obama, in a televised and well attended UN press conference, one might have expected the US Mission to the UN to have issued some response.  But so far, there’s been no statement from the US.

from the UN DAILY NEWS from the
UNITED NATIONS NEWS SERVICE
7 May, 2010 =========================================================================

CLIMATE CHANGE TOPS UN CHIEF’S TALKS WITH BOLIVIAN PRESIDENT.

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon discussed climate change today with Evo Morales Ayma, the President of Bolivia, which recently hosted a major civil society conference on the issue.

Before a private meeting with the Bolivian leader, Mr. Ban met with Mr. Morales and representatives from civil society organizations that participated in the World People’s Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth, held from 19 to 22 April in the city of Cochabamba.

In a message sent to the conference, the Secretary-General had called on all governments, businesses and citizens of the world to give the Earth the respect and care it deserves, and emphasized that the wise management of the Earth’s resources must be an integral part of efforts to reduce poverty and hunger and improve health and human well-being.

Mr. Ban told Mr. Morales that he was pleased that the conclusions of the Cochabamba conference had been submitted to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the one universal forum where all nations and peoples come together to resolve climate issues.

He added that the voices of civil society and indigenous peoples must be heard, according to information provided by Mr. Ban’s spokesperson.

In addition, he welcomed all initiatives that can contribute to a comprehensive, equitable and effective global response to climate change, which the Secretary-General has described as the “defining challenge of our era.”

Climate Protection Movement Coming Together – From 350.org to Pachamama’s Children.
by Jan Lundberg

There is good news on the climate activism front, based on first hand information coming in to Culture Change. But first, some necessary background:
The global struggle to save the climate and ensure our common survival takes various forms. The movement is not limited to just a few well known approaches, such as “politically realistic” legislation, conferences, or boosting renewable energy. As an example of a new force post-Copenhagen, there is momentum from last month’s Bolivia gathering, particularly since the title of it included the Rights of Mother Earth.

It’s a good sign when folks can look beyond their own areas of emphasis and bond with others offering something else that also holds promise. Networking and coalescing have always been a priority, but the growth of the grassroots movement has been hindered somewhat by separate groups sprouting up and vying for attention to themselves. That trend may no longer hold sway.

The climate protection movement includes millions of diverse people fighting for a better world: better than what we will end up with if big industry and big money have their way. And better socially than the unjust, oppressive system that has prevailed and given us “oil company weather.”

Those involved in this movement embrace or anticipate a less materially wealthy lifestyle. Some see advancement of technology as an indispensable source of convenience for more comfortable living than humanity’s salad days of tribal, natural living.

A Green Party activist and professor once told me, “I’m not gonna live in a f—in’ teepee.”

The climate movement does not include those who feel that maximizing technology represents life itself — they may suffer from fear of nature, and they cannot resonate with simple living that relies on basic skills in a close community context. Such attributes for sustainable living go hand in hand with some affinity for Mother Earth, or Pachamama as she is known here in the Andes.

Many players in the climate change field are intent on appearing concerned, constructive and part of “the solution” but are in reality pushing the status quo of fossil fuels -– as if rejecting them would be as absurd as denying themselves forever the need for water or sex. The U.S. government is in this camp, blithely driving along into petrocollapse. Some of us resist being taken along for that ride, and are jumping out.

The real climate movement has had divisions (analyzed by Culture Change for two decades), but there is no more time for disunity. One reputable nonprofit organization continues to promote “clean cars” while knowingly accepting coal as the primary electric energy source for years to come. Some prominent activists have excelled at describing the real threat of climate change while turning around and falling far short in their approach for a cure: simply cutting energy use takes a back seat to trying to convert the present petroleum-oriented infrastructure for a “greener” consumer economy. This contradictory tendency cannot endure, as the greenhouse effect keeps accelerating and the arrival of peak oil trims expectations for limitless growth of the economy.

But there is a larger wing of the climate protection movement that engages in what can be termed purity and soul, despite the emphasis on the technological fix.

Bill McKibben´s 350.org has drawn a line in the sand for anyone to understand and defend or abuse. If Earth’s atmosphere does not stabilize at 350 parts per million CO2, we are all cooked.  350.org’s growth and public support reflect both renewable energy industry goals as well as individuals’ dreams of a cleaner environment.  350.org has proven to be about a goal rather than an agenda influenced by a bias for a particular means. The group has embraced energy curtailment and lifestyle change as a key element for climate activism. To this veteran campaigner, there just might be a closing of ranks for the struggle to save the planet from a fate like that of Venus.

The Global Climate Race is 350.org’s latest push to involve youth in a new direction for energy production. The kick off date is May 5. The point person is Talia Roselli, from the San Francisco Bay area headquarters of 350.org, who wrote in the April 28 announcement via email that students will be in “competition between America, China and India will rise to the challenge of the climate crisis with the most, and the most creative, clean energy action.”

After receiving the announcement of the program, I wrote back right away in favor of cutting energy use as the preferable means of slashing greenhouse gas emissions. After some back and forth, wherein I made some points about petroleum issues that impinge upon planning for a “clean energy” future, Roselli’s initial reassurances to me about the program’s commitment to energy curtailment were proven real:

Hi Jan,We’ll definitely find a way to include using less energy as part of the competition. In fact, based on your comments we slightly revised the press release:

See the new version here:
prweb.com

And, yes, I’ve passed on your great letter to our team.

For those interested in the background-issues I raised, here is the correspondence. I had informed Roselli I was going to do this article. As “Volunteer” with 350.org she corresponded with professional capability and passion for the cause. My first message was:

Dear Talia, Could energy curtailment please qualify as one of the competing methods of slashing greenhouse gas emissions in the Global Climate Race? We could help with organizing and publicizing this enhancement.

Perhaps it’s not too late to push hardest for curtailment of energy use when it is so much more effective and faster than enlarging upon or installing new systems for renewable energy. The climate crisis demands quick action rather than trying to modify the existing system and culture. I wish you luck with your program, but we need a race such as you are launching to unplug the global warming machine, be it cars, appliances, long-distance food, etc. What do you think?

Renewable energy systems depend on petroleum in various ways, especially when they are for adding power to the grid. As you may know, peak oil is about here now globally, and the implications are that economic growth is about to end and go into reverse.

This will affect the food security system (although there might not really be one) as well as transport. These factors should dictate how we respond to the climate crisis: most rapidly as well as structurally. Collapse of the petroleum-dependent economy is ahead. The need to enhance local economics means we must primarily pursue energy curtailment, especially of corporate or petroleum products, and we must envision renewable energy as a strictly local endeavor for the bare essentials of living (not for a computer/TV/refrigerator in every home). If through such an approach, and planting many more trees, we somehow get below 350 ppm CO2, that´s not just a bonus, but rather essential for our common survival.

One problem with proceeding as if we need more and more energy for a constantly rising population size is that it sets us up for being susceptible to the schemes and propaganda of dirtiest power industries, nukes, coal and tar sands and their politician friends. They argue we need the energy. But do we? Do we really need cars and oil, when bicycles and walking suffice for daily life? I have heard that renewable energy systems for the grid simply enhance the load at certain periods, allowing more consumption, rather than replace base load of dirty fuels.

When Bill McKibben stated, “If we can’t get the biggest polluters and the biggest economies to change, then we’ll never win,” I submit that they probably will only “change” when fuel is no longer available, or when people are starving and rioting. At that point, changing the infrastructure (that is based on cheap oil) can´t happen, as made clear in the Hirsch Report on peak oil for the Dept. of Energy in 2005. But there is hope, because curtailment can put the dirty corporations out of business rapidly, if enough people try.

When I read “Projects are likely to include light bulb exchanges, lowering thermostats, education events, installing solar panels on campus, having a campus president sign on to a climate pact, and more” I believe the “more” must aim at low-hanging fruit, such as car-free campuses immediately, holding classes outside when weather permits so that buildings can shut off all energy systems, and sending the students out into the community to curtail energy use — via civil disobedience as one method of many. Depaving, in order to install food gardens, removes space for cars, thus reducing traffic congestion (it’s true), and cuts down on the urban heat island effect. Doesn’t the climate require these strong actions?

I look forward to hearing from you. Please feel free to pass along these ideas to your students and your colleagues, including Bill McKibben. As a former petroleum industry analyst I would be happy to assist further.

For more information on peak oil and alternative lifestyles visit www.energybulletin.net and www.postcarbon.org, as well as the sites below with which I am affiliated.

Thanks in advance,

Jan Lundberg
in Bolivia post-climate/Mother Earth conference
 culturechange.org/cms/content/view/201/52/

This is the announcement she and 350.org had sent out:

Competitive Web 2.0 Global Climate Race Begins for Students Competitive
Web 2.0 Climate Race Begins for Students WorldwideApril 28, 2010 (Los Angeles, CA) — On May 5, 2010, 350.org will launch the Great Power Race, a clean energy competition between America, China and India. This web 2.0 race will reveal who can rise to the challenge of the climate crisis with the most, and the most creative, clean energy action.

Read the full press release here, or, copy and paste the following URL into your browser:

prweb.com

 350.org, in collaboration with global partners, will launch the Great Power Race, a clean energy competition between America, China and India. This web 2.0 race will reveal who can rise to the challenge of the climate crisis with the most, and the most creative, clean energy action.

“Youth across India are already working on solutions to the climate crisis. The Great Power Race will be an opportunity for us to highlight and build on their efforts.” – Roselin Dey, 350.org Indian Organizer

Los Angeles, CA (PRWEB) April 28, 2010 — Students in America, China and India leverage social media and take to the streets in the first ever Great Power Race, a clean energy competition pitting country versus country to reveal who can rise to the challenge of the climate crisis with the most action.

Marchers for 350 take to the streets of Hong Kong. The HK 350 Rally is part of the hundreds of actions taking place in China coordinated by Chinese Youth Climate Action Network. This was one of over 5,200 events happening around the world as part of the 350.org International Day of Climate Action on October 24, 2009.

 350.org is coordinating the project with major youth organizations from each respective country: the Energy Action Coalition (US), the Indian Youth Climate Network, and the China Youth Climate Action Network.

 350.org‘s Great Power Race each made investments towards clean energy.

“Every nation is not created equal in this climate crisis,” explains 350.org Founder Bill McKibben. “If we can’t get the biggest polluters and the biggest economies to change, then we’ll never win. ” China’s clean energy investments equaled $34.6 billion in 2009, while America’s totaled $18.6 billion, and India dedicated $2.3 million, according to data released by the Pew Charitable Trusts. “We’re going to focus some particular attention on China, America, and India with a Great Power Race — campuses will compete to see who can come up with the most, and the most creative, climate solutions projects,” continues McKibben.

 350.org Indian Organizer. Students can also track registrations and other Great Power Race statistics on 350.org‘s Great Power Race website launching May 5, 2010. Students will leverage Facebook , Flickr, YouTube, Twitter and other websites to compete, organize and collaborate.

 350.org‘s blog.

About 350.org 350.org is an international campaign dedicated to building a movement to unite the world around solutions to the climate crisis—the solutions that science and justice demand. Their mission is to inspire the world to rise to the challenge of the climate crisis—to create a new sense of urgency and of possibility for our planet. Join 350.org on Facebook by searching for 350.org, and on Twitter @350 and #350ppm.

Media Contact:
Find hi-res photos and videos of clean energy and climate action around the world along with complete contact information at 350.org prweb.com
www.350.org

* * * * *

Further reading recommended by CultureChange:

Bolivia’s Evo Morales: Capitalism and Plastic No, Mother Earth and Indigenous Products, Yes

Bolivia in Contrast: Feeding the Petroleum Industry amidst Local Resilience

Culture Change articles on petrocollapse:
culturechange.org

Culture Change
P.O. Box 4347, Arcata, CA 95518 USA
Tel/fax: 1-215-243-3144

 http://www.periodico26.cu/english/news_w…

Fighting to Save the Planet COCHABAMBA, Bolivia.— The First World People´s Conference on Climatic Change, brought to a close yesterday in Bolivia, declared the Mother Earth as the life source and proposed raising awareness about the protection of the planet, reported ANSA. Nearly 35,000 people from 142 countries convened by Bolivian president Evo Morales met in Cochabamba city in an attempt to raise the voice of the International civil society in front of the upcoming Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climatic Change (COP 16). In this conference, to be held in Cancun, Mexico in November, 2010, the final declaration of the “Acuerdo de Cochabamba” (Cochabamba Agreement) will be presented, which was unanimously adopted at the high-level event. We hope that the upcoming meeting in Mexico is not in vain and that participants take good decisions for everyone,” said Morales on Thursday at the Summit which closed with a popular activity. Attending the act were Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez, Cuban vicepresident Esteban Lazo and Nicaraguan commander Tomás Borge. During the ceremony, Ecuadorian Lina Kawuanski and U.S. Vico Enosti read the main conclusions of the forum in Cochabamba, a document entitled Agreement of the People. The declaration states that “The Mother Earth is injured and the future of humanity is at stake.” It warns that if the global temperature rises by over 2 degrees, there is a 50 percent chance that the damage will be irreversible.” The document also points out that the capitalist system “has imposed a logic of competition, unlimited progress and growth,” in efforts to get profits without limit by separating man from nature, establishing a logic of domination and turning every resource into goods.” “The capitalist system model is going through a crisis and peoples have the alternatives in their hands,” said the Bolivian president. “Developed countries—–considered the most responsible for environmental pollution—–have been asked to pay their debt for overuse of the atmosphere and implement legal actions toward those who don´t fullfill their obligations,” the text states. A multilateral agency to manage environmental issues was created. This agency will also care for the international recognition of the Mother Earth’s rights, the non-privatization of knowledge, immigrant’s protection and full respect toward the freedom and guarantees of the indigenous groups. As a response to the harmful capitalist policies on the environment, this document proposes a new model based on solidarity, equity, collective well being and a just balance of economic, social and environmental needs in harmony with Mother Earth. It also calls for recognition of people for what they are and not for what they have. In this order, IPS reports that a World Referendum on Climate Change was approved at the closing meeting on Thurday, to be held in April, 2011 for the people of the world to have a say on the situation of the environment on a global scale. VOICES FOR CHANGE At the closing act held at the Félix Carriles stadium, Bolivian president Evo Morales highlighted that the main difference between the Copenhaguen and Cochabamba gatherings on climate change is that unlike Denmark where empires gathered to impose their opinions, in Bolivia all peoples gathered to find solutions, reported DPA. He also said that the Cuban Revolution leader Fidel Castro pioneered this struggle, as in 1992, Fidel said that the developed countries must pay the climatic debt, which was more important than the foreign debt. He also expressed his rejection toward US military bases in the region, as they not only damage the environment but also cause death, as happened in Bolivia. Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez called on social movements and indigenous organizations to participate in the UN World Summit on Climate slated for December in Cancún Mexico in order to avoid the death of the planet. He also urged putting an end to blackmail and double standards. “Cochabamba is the continuation of the struggle started in Copenhaguen in order to save the human race. Remember that unfortunately, due to the US plans, the UN Summit in Copenhaguen was a great failure,” he added, ANSA reports. —————— Evo Condemns Capitalism for Destroying the Planet Cochabamba, Bolivia.- Bolivian President Evo Morales, condemned the capitalist system, which he described as primarily responsible for the destruction of the planet, reports PL. THE PRESIDENT MORALES SHOWS ATTENDEES A PLASTIC PLATE, A PRODUCT HE CONSIDERS A POLLUTER OF THE ENVIRONMENT. At the opening of the First World Peoples Conference on Climate Change, he noted that the consumer system is the main enemy of Mother Earth, for it seeks only profit at the expense of nature. “Capitalism is the bridge of asymmetries and inequalities in this world,” he said. Addressing more than 15,000 representatives from the five continents, gathered in the Esteban Ramirez Ecological Stadium, in the town of Tuquipaya, Morales read a letter to future generations to warn that the planet is sick because of capitalism, which tries to convert everything into merchandise. In the letter, the president noted that an injured Mother Earth gives us warnings; earthquakes, tsunamis, cyclones and droughts, hence the need to protect it. The text also called attention to climate migrants, some 50 million people by 2050, which could rise to 200 million victims of the negative impacts on the environment. He also criticized the earlier 15th United Nations Summit Conference of the Parties on Climate Change in Copenhagen (Denmark) and the so-called understanding of member nations, for there the demands of social organizations and indigenous peoples were not heeded. At the Bolivian event, speakers on behalf of the five continents and 130 countries participating in the Climate Summit, also supported the initiative of Bolivia to conduct the upcoming world referendum on the environment on October 12 and set up an International Court of Climate Justice, which would judge governments and businesses that act against life on the planet. COLORFUL CEREMONY A colorful religious ceremony and Bolivian music opened the Peoples’ Summit on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth. The Committee on Amautas of Bolivia was in charge of the celebration of an ancient wajata, attended by Andean priests and representatives of indigenous peoples of the five continents. The sages asked permission from “Father Cosmos” and “Mother Earth” to advocate for consensus positions in defense of nature and humanity to the sound of pututus, flutes and panpipes, Andean traditional instruments.

From the UN Spokesman for Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, April 22,
2010: The Secretary-General is participating in this hour in a special
commemoration of the fortieth anniversary of Earth Day in Times
Square.  In his remarks, he says that Earth Day has helped create a
sense of shared responsibility for our environment and our one and
only home.  He will say that we must learn to live in balance with the
planet that sustains us and that there is a better, cleaner, greener,
healthier way to do things.
His full remarks are in my office, where you will also find the
Secretary-General’s message marking International Mother Earth Day,
which is celebrated today by the United Nations.

Question:  Maurizio Guerrero from the Mexican News Agency, Notimex.
Maybe you have tackled this issue before, and I apologize, but I
wonder why the UN is promoting the movie Avatar during this Indigenous
Peoples Forum, given that some critics characterize the movie as a
“white Messiah rescuing indigenous people”?  And I am wondering as
well, what is the deal the UN has with the movie studio, if the UN is
benefiting in some way with this deal?

Spokesperson:  I don’t quite follow you, on where and how the UN is
promoting this.  Could you elaborate where this has been happening?

Question:  They are going to screen on Saturday the movie Avatar, and
some people of the UN are calling the correspondents to go the movie
because James Cameron, the director of the movie, is going to be
there.  So for many critics, it would not sound right or correct that
the UN is promoting a Hollywood movie during this Indigenous Peoples
Forum.  So I am just wondering what is the reason that the UN is so
interested in the correspondents going there on Saturday to watch the
movie?

Spokesperson:  I would need to look into precisely who it is who is
inviting, because I am not aware of that.  But I am very happy to come
back to you on that.  I am aware of that.

[The correspondent was later informed that the idea for the screening
came about as the Secretariat for the Permanent Forum on Indigenous
Issues had heard many positive reactions (and some negative comments)
from indigenous representatives on the film and how it was echoing
their own stories.  Through personal contacts of the Secretariat and
the non-governmental organization co-sponsors, they contacted James
Cameron personally regarding the possibility of a screening.]

http://www.un.org/News/briefings/docs/2010/db100422.doc.htm

—————————–

http://www.undispatch.com/james-cameron-and-navi-come-un

James Cameron and the Na’vi Come to the UN

Mark Leon Goldberg – April 22, 2010 – 12:51 pm

In the midst of researching this post, I came across news that AVATAR
director James Cameron will host a screening of the film at the UN on
Saturday, to coincide with an annual meeting of the UN Permanent Forum
on Indigenous Issues. Color me perplexed.  I, for one, though Lawyers,
Guns, and Money blogger SEK was onto something when he described the
film thusly:

“Its fundamental narrative logic is racist: it transposes the
cultural politics of Westerns (in which the Native Americans are
animists who belong to a more primitive race) onto an interplanetary
conflict and then assuages the white guilt that accompanies acts of
racial and cultural genocide by having a white man save the noble
savages (who are also racists).” He wonders why “there is no
possibility for peaceful coexistence” presented in the film.

Well, you know who apparently disagrees with SEK and I?  ’Many
indigenous people worldwide’ — particularly in Latin America. This
from the UN’s press release for this weekend’s AVATAR screening:

The AVATAR movie has been embraced by many indigenous peoples
worldwide, who see it as echoing their own story. Throughout Latin
America for example, indigenous peoples have highlighted the parallels
between the movie and their own experiences dealing with private
sector extractive industries and the development of mega projects on
their lands.

With messages of conservation at its heart, AVATAR dramatically
demonstrates how human invasion almost destroys the indigenous
population’s way of life on the planet of Pandora. The indigenous
population of Pandora – the Na’vi – fights to save their forest and
their traditional way of life.

The event includes a Q and A with Cameron after the screening. If any
readers end up attending, let me know how it goes.

April 22, 2010 – EARTH DAY.
 http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americ…

Bolivian climate summit gets UN nod. Delegates from over 130 countries are attending the alternative climate summit in Bolivia [Reuters] The Untied Nations has backed a Bolivian sponsored summit on climate change, with a representative saying that the gathering was a “great opportunity for the UN”. “Sometimes at the global level, as with what happened with the recent climate change debate, many groups felt excluded and I think it is right to address this,” Alicia Barcena, representative of UN secretary-general Ban Ki Moon, said on Wednesday. “The United Nations secretary general is trying to send a message that we’re completely open to dialogue.” The three-day summit, dubbed the “World People’s Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth”, is being hosted by Evo Morales, the Bolivian president. Nearly 130 countries, including many of the world’s poorest, are being represented at the meeting in a stadium in the central Bolivian city of Cochabamba. Morales was fiercely opposed to last December’s Copenhagen Accord calling it non-binding. New approaches Instead of gathering top diplomats and world leaders, the Bolivian alternative summit is made up of indigenous groups, scientists, activists and delegations from lower income countries. The Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) said that the summit would look at new approaches to climate change. “I believe that the international community is putting in all efforts to reach a global agreement on climate change,” Juan Pablo Bonilla, head of the IADB, said from Washington. “Different areas will be discussed in Bolivia, such as adaptation and the transfer of technology, which of course will result in some important input on the issue.” Opening the summit the Bolivian president said that poor countries would likely bear the brunt of climate change and that all countries should be held accountable for their actions. Morales also called for the death of careless capitalism so that the Earth can live. “Either capitalism dies, or it will be Mother Earth,” he said to around 20,000 people at the summit. “We’re here because industrialised countries have not honoured their promises.” ———- Copenhagen not clear Critics say the Copenhagen Accord which seeks to limit a rise in average world temperatures to below 2 degrees Celsius over pre-industrial times does not specify how this goal will be reached. Developing nations have resisted a legally binding climate treaty, arguing that wealthy nations must bear the primary responsibility for climate change. The Bolivia summit comes after a preparatory meeting between representatives from the world’s leading economies in Washington ahead of the December UN summit in Cancun, Mexico. The US-led Major Economies Forum comprises 17 countries responsible for the bulk of global emissions, but excludes smaller and poorer nations. Morales is planning to propose a world referendum this week to ask up to two billion people how they think governments should tackle climate change, and organisers plan to take the final text drafted at the summit to Cancun. The end of the summit is planned to coincide with Earth Day which is marked throughout most of the world on Friday, April 22.

THURSDAY, APRIL 22, 2010
Save the Planet from Capitalism, Morales Says, & SG’s Speech Booed
Franz Chavez

COCHABAMBA, Bolivia, Apr 21 (IPS) – Activists meeting at the people’s conference on climate change in this Bolivian city booed a message from United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon but cheered at host President Evo Morales’s chant of “planet or death!” A football stadium in Tiquipaya, in the suburbs of Cochabamba, was inflamed Tuesday with temperatures over 30 degrees Celsius and the fervor of around 20,000 environmental activists and delegates from 125 nations.

But although they were invited, presidents from the region failed to show up for the World People’s Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth, which ends Thursday. The stadium, ablaze with the multi-coloured traditional garments of different Andean and Amazonian native communities and the flags of people from different countries around the world that contrasted with the cold formality of presidential summits, served as the stage for Morales, of Aymara descent, to call for an “inter-continental movement” in defence of Mother Earth.

The U.N. secretary-general’s message, read out by the head of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), Alicia Barrcena, on Tuesday, the first day of the people’s conference, was interrupted by catcalls and whistles from activists in protest against the exclusion of grassroots groups from policy-making on climate change. “We came with all respect to listen to the people, you invited us here. If you don’t want us to be here we can leave,” Barrcena said.

“For capitalism, we are merely consumers and a source of labour, and we have the right to say capitalism is the enemy of the planet,” Morales said, buoyed up by the cheers of the thousands of participants who have flocked to the dusty streets of this outlying Cochabamba district that is home to around 3,000 people.

“Justice is only possible with solidarity, equality and respect for the rights of Mother Earth and for the atmosphere, water and the new model of development,” he said.

“Capitalism is the chief enemy of humanity, synonymous with inequality and destruction of the planet,” he said, calling on people to organise at the grassroots level to save the planet.

He suggested starting with simple steps like the use of biodegradable kitchen utensils like clay plates instead of disposable plastic. He also lashed out at transgenic crops and junk food.

Ecuadorean indigenous leader Franklin Columba concurred with Morales, saying that reaching a balance with nature was essential to saving Pachamama or Mother Earth.

“The Council of Wise Elders says that care and love are needed to keep nature clean. That is the true awareness that human beings must achieve,” he told IPS as the delegates to the conference were enjoying Afro-Bolivian and traditional Andean music.

Nicolás Charca, a Quechua Indian from the Canchis province of Peru, talked about unifying the movements, and expressed deep concern over pollution caused by the oil and mining industries.

But “not only the developed countries are to blame,” Mitsu Miura, a Japanese researcher into Andean cultures, told IPS in a friendly tone. “We would be closing our eyes if we only held the industrialised countries responsible.”

Linda Velarde from New Mexico in the southwestern United States, who has been an indigenous rights activist for 40 years, challenged participants to take action now and stop consuming products that pollute.

She said she does not agree with the idea of eliminating capitalism, and pointed out that not everyone in the U.S. is a consumerist and that many are in favour, for example, of reforestation policies.

Another activist from the U.S., Kety Esquivel with Latinos in Social Media, said capitalism has committed “abuses” because money, which was created for use as an exchange mechanism, ended up using people instead.

“I’m gringa, Mexican and Guatemalan,” Esquivel told IPS, describing her multi-ethnic origin and her stance in favour of humanity as a whole.

———————————

From Matthew Russell Lee  – At UN, NGOs Complain of Exclusion.

In attendance amid the drumming, despite many registrants being absent due to flights canceled by the Iceland’s volcano’s ash, were a range of what’s called civil society and that stratum of the UN staff which serve them. Nearly uniformly there was dissatisfaction with Ban Ki-moon’s lack of engagement with non governmental organizations and “regular people,” and about the increasingly lack of access to the UN by civil society.

“He’s taken the place back thirty years,” a UN staffer said. Another wondered, even with the General Assembly building to remain open for the next two years, how long groups like the indigenous would be allowed to use the lobby. The Ban administration, an involved staffer disclosed, has asked that the exhibition walls in the lobby be removed so he can host a high level luncheon during this year’s General Debate. The walls would not be reinstalled, and thus public exhibitions would cease.

A coalition on NGOs recently wrote to Ban to complain about deceasing access and got back what they called a mere form letter.

The Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, Ban Ki-moon not shown

The UN, including under Ban, pays lip service to the value of civil society. But for the past three years, representatives say, it has been implemented less and less. For how much longer, they wondered Tuesday night, will this UN allow the drums to beat?

Footnote: the head of the Secretariat of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, Inner City Press learned on Tuesday night, will be leaving the post this summer. The new chairman of the Forum, for the first time, was chosen by a government rather than civil society within his country. Things are changing at the UN, including at the Forum. Nothing, it seems clear, is Permanent. Reforms can be turned back as much as thirty years.

——————————————————————————————–

From: Culture Change <info@culturechange.org>

Bolivia’s Evo Morales: Capitalism and Plastic No, Mother Earth and Indigenous Products, Yes.
By Jan Lundberg, in Cochabamba
 http://www.culturechange.org/cms/content…

At the People’s World Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of
Mother Earth, the consistent message is ecological, indigenous,
communitarian and anti-corporate. The great majority of speakers sound
radical and have the support of the thousands of attendees. The message is
welcome at the top, in the person of Evo Morales, the indigenous Aymara
former farmer and union organizer who is Bolivia’s president.

Two glaring omissions at the conference seem to be the issues of cars and
proliferation of technology. These are either considered extremely hard to
tackle, or just a byproduct of capitalist excess – as if these problems
will take care of themselves in a socialist, people-centered economy.
Bolivia is plagued by cars and trucks, while bicycling is quite rare. If
bikes were maximized here, this would be good technology that empowers
many at low cost. Instead, motor vehicles, including many buses, are
totally dominant and in need of tune-ups.

One urban professional asked me with hope whether electric vehicles were
advancing in the U.S. (I had to disillusion him and explain why it won’t
happen on a huge scale.) An overt embrace of technology as opposed to
simple, natural living was in the form of a telephone corporation’s ad
slogan prominent at the stadium where Morales spoke: “Technology for a
Better Life.”

An unresolved issue seems to be Bolivia’s petroleum development.
Hydrocarbon industries were nationalized in 2006, and applauding it is
tempting. However, does Mother Earth care who owns and controls the
extracted fossil fuels that change the climate? Bolivia fully intends to
explore and exploit the anti-capitalist petroleum. For what, more fuel for
motor vehicles? Agricultural chemicals? Plastic production?

We shall see how the contradictory sentiments and temptations are
translated into policy. The president of the nationalized petroleum
industries told me he believes the world peak of oil extraction is “Not
yet. 2012 or 2014.” Carlos Villegas Quiroga’s job is to somehow fit the
maximization of oil and gas exploration and exploitation into a Mother
Earth ethic. But with global peak oil here or around the corner, and
climate change accelerating, Bolivia may not have much time to obtain
prosperity.
_ _

To see photos and read the rest of the report, go to
 http://www.culturechange.org/cms/content…

Photos by Bronwyn Lundberg

——————

Culture Change
P.O. Box 4347, Arcata, CA 95518 USA, tel/fax: 1-215-243-3144
 http://culturechange.org

Please send any feedback or questions via email to  info at culturechange.org

——————————–

CLIMATE CHANGE-BOLIVIA
In Defence of Pachamama
By Franz Chávez

LA PAZ, Apr 16, 2010 (IPS) – Through their ancestral knowledge and traditions, indigenous peoples will make a unique and invaluable contribution to the World People’s Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth, which begins Monday, Apr. 19 in the central Bolivian city of Cochabamba.

Julio Quette of the Confederation of Indigenous Peoples of Eastern Bolivia (CIDOB) told IPS that the 74 different indigenous groups who inhabit South America’s Amazon region “have traditionally coexisted with nature and the forests,” and that it is up to the industrialized countries to halt the pollution and destruction of the planet.

For her part, Jenny Gruenberger, executive director of the Environmental Defence League (LIDEMA), commented to IPS that “Bolivia could make an enormous contribution based on the traditional knowledge of the indigenous and aboriginal nations that make up this plurinational state.”

The country is officially known as the Plurinational State of Bolivia, in recognition of the fact that over 60 percent of Bolivians belong to one of its numerous indigenous ethnic groups.

A total of 17 working groups have been organized as part of the World People’s Conference, to address issues such as the structural causes of climate change, living in harmony with nature, and the rights of Mother Earth, or Pachamama.

Other working groups will focus on a proposed global referendum on climate change; another proposal to establish a Climate Justice Tribunal or International Environmental Court; climate migrants; indigenous peoples; the climate debt; a “shared vision” for action (a concept introduced by developed countries under the Bali Action Plan adopted at the 2007 United Nations Climate Change Conference); the Kyoto Protocol; climate change adaptation; financing; technology transfer; forests; the dangers of the carbon market; action strategies; and agriculture and food sovereignty.

Bolivian President Evo Morales, who is an Aymara Indian himself, announced that the conference will be attended by fellow presidents Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua, Rafael Correa of Ecuador, Hugo Chávez of Venezuela, and Fernando Lugo of Paraguay.

More than 15,000 people from 126 countries around the world have registered to attend.

Among the prominent figures whose participation has been confirmed by the Bolivian Foreign Ministry are Alberto Acosta, president of the Constituent Assembly of Ecuador; Miguel D’Escoto, Nicaraguan diplomat and former president of the United Nations General Assembly; and Edigio Brunetto, a leader of Brazil’s Landless Rural Workers Movement (MST).

In addition, more than 50 scientists, social movement leaders, researchers, academics and artists from around the globe have agreed to speak on 14 panels, including Indian environmentalist Vandana Shiva, best-selling Canadian author Naomi Klein, and Uruguayan writer Eduardo Galeano.

“Latin American organisations and governments could acquire all the capacity they need to confront the influence of the industrialised nations and become a centre of resistance against the current development model, but first they need to agree upon a unified stance,” LIDEMA research coordinator Marco Ribera commented to IPS.

Ribera said that it is time for the region’s countries to put aside the “different interests” they each pursue and to use the Cochabamba conference as a forum to build “strong technical and political proposals with a high degree of legitimacy to negotiate at the 16th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.”

Ribera believes the upcoming conference could become a new forum for the struggle in defence of the planet, given the opportunity it will provide for the world’s people to express their views and proposals, “an opportunity they are not offered in official forums for international negotiations.”

Justo Zapata, a Bolivian energy expert, spoke to IPS about one of the issues that will be addressed at the conference: the campaign for the use of “clean” fuels.

Bolivia has the second largest reserves of natural gas in the Americas, with proven and probable reserves of 49 trillion cubic feet. Yet the population continues to consume large quantities of gasoline, liquefied gas and diesel fuel, for which the government spends 500 million dollars annually to subsidise low prices, said Zapata.

Venezuela provides the country with gasoline and gas oil, both highly polluting fuels, while the population of the Brazilian city of Sao Paulo enjoys the clean natural gas exported by Bolivia, he noted.

Rectifying this situation is a matter of both economic and environmental defence, stressed Zapata, who called for large-scale initiatives such as the construction of domestic natural gas pipelines to benefit the population, as well as an end to neoliberal-inspired trade policies that prioritise exports over the domestic market.

————————————————————

New York, 19 April 2010 -

Secretary-General’s remarks at opening of the Ninth Session of the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Distinguished Elders, Distinguished representatives of Indigenous Peoples’ Organizations, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,

It is my great pleasure to welcome you to the Ninth Session of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues.

Many of you have traveled long distances to be here today, and I thank you very much.

Indigenous peoples often live in the most isolated places on earth – from the Arctic to the African savannah.

But the United Nations is working to make sure that indigenous people themselves are not isolated.

You have a unique place in the global community. You are full and equal members of the United Nations family.

And we will continue to support and protect your human rights and fundamental freedoms, and your right to pursue social and economic development.

I attach great importance to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which was adopted in September 2007.

In that landmark document, UN Member States and indigenous peoples sought to reconcile with their painful histories and resolved to move forward together towards human rights, justice and development for all.

I congratulate you once again on this achievement.

———
Ladies and gentlemen,

We have made significant progress on indigenous peoples’ issues at the United Nations over the past forty years.

Apart from the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, other notable achievements include the establishment of this Permanent Forum, the mandate of the Special Rapporteur, and the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Indigenous issues are more prominent on the international agenda than ever before. And yet, we can not even begin to be content with our progress.

The first-ever United Nations report on the State of the World’s Indigenous Peoples in January set out some alarming statistics.

Indigenous peoples suffer high levels of poverty, health problems, crime and human rights abuses all over the world.

You make up some five per cent of the world’s population – but one-third of the world’s poorest.

In some countries, an indigenous person is 600 times more likely to contract tuberculosis than the general population.

In others, an indigenous child can expect to die twenty years earlier than his non-native compatriots.

Every day, indigenous communities face issues of violence, brutality and dispossession.

Indigenous cultures, languages and ways of life are under constant threat from climate change, armed conflict, lack of educational opportunities and discrimination.

Elsewhere, your cultures are being distorted, commodified, and used to generate profits which do not benefit indigenous people, and can even lead to harm.

This is not only a tragedy for indigenous people. It is a tragedy for the whole world.

Slowly but surely, people are coming to understand that the well-being and sustainability of indigenous peoples are matters that concern us all.

Diversity is strength – in cultures and in languages, just as it is in ecosystems.

The loss of irreplaceable cultural practices and means of artistic expression makes us all poorer, wherever our roots may lie.

According to current forecasts, ninety per cent of all languages could disappear within 100 years. The loss of these languages erodes an essential component of a group’s identity.

That is why the special theme of your forum this year, “Development with Culture and Identity,” is particularly appropriate. It highlights the need to craft policy measures that promote development while respecting indigenous peoples’ values and traditions.

We need development that is underpinned by the values of reciprocity, solidarity and collectivity. And we need development that allows indigenous peoples to exercise their right to self-determination through participation in decision-making on an equal basis.

———–

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The United Nations will continue to support you.

I call on all Governments, indigenous peoples, the UN system and all other partners to ensure that the vision behind the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples becomes a reality for all.

I wish you a very successful Forum.

Thank you very much.

——————————————

SYNTHESIS:

While in Cochabamba the talk is of Plurinationalism with States that have even a majority of what is considered Indigenous Peoples belonging to many different Nations, the UN which talks of Member Nations counted by the number of seat made available for UN Membership, regards all those Indigenous Peoples as minorities within the boundaries of the UN Member States. This leads the UN to talk of human rights rather then the community right as represented by the Indigenous Peoples.

Above may have changed somewhat with the acceptance of the the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples but still – the UN Secretary General addresses their leaders by the traditional term “Elders” as he cannot call them Heads of States – at the UN they are neither States nor Nations. Their affairs are basically internal Affairs of the Member States – with the covers having been removed a bit by the declaration. Then the UN has changed the name of the Committee on Granting Independence to Colonial Countries – to “Colonial countries and Peoples” – the subject of “Peoples” slowly gaining ground even at the UN. We will be covering some of the specifics of this year’s Indigenous Peoples UN Forum in further postings.

From Will Bates on behalf of the entire 350.org team.

They announce ongoing activities when looking for more updates from the growing international climate movement.

Stay tuned to our blog, as 350.org staff report from the World Peoples’ Climate Summit in Bolivia this April 19 -24 and report on other global climate news.

Also:  You can get a sneak peak at the Climate MeetUp materials here: www.350.org/meetup-materials

From Copenhagen to Cochabamba.
Franz Chavez

LA PAZ, Mar 30 (IPS) – A different way of fighting global warming will be tried out in the central Bolivian city of Cochabamba when government representatives and thousands of activists gather for the World People’s Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth. The social organisations sponsoring the Apr. 19-22 conference have announced an alternative platform to the efforts of the 15th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP-15), which ended in failure in icy Copenhagen in December 2009.

The defence of Mother Earth, championed by Bolivian President Evo Morales, has the support of more than 240 grassroots and indigenous movements, non-governmental organisations, activists and intellectuals who are calling for a charter of rights for the planet. The main aims of the conference are to organise a world people’s referendum on global warming, draw up an action plan to create an international climate justice tribunal, and agree new commitments to be negotiated within United Nations scenarios.

The agenda priorities are: climate debt, climate change migrants and refugees, greenhouse gas emission cuts, adaptation, technology transfer, financing, forests and climate change, shared visions and indigenous peoples. “We, as activists from different social movements, define the present time by the arrogance of the United States, European Union and transnational corporations, which was expressed at Copenhagen where a very few countries attempted to impose an outcome – that was not agreed at COP 15 – to do nothing to stop rising global temperatures and climate damage,” said the event announcement by leading social organisations.

These organisations include the Hemispheric Social Alliance (ASC-HSA), Friends of the Earth Latin America, the Trade Union Confederation of the Americas (TUCA-CSA), the World March of Women, Campaign 350.org and Via Campesina.

Morales will formally open the conference on Apr. 20.

The organisations identify a “crisis of civilisation” that they attribute to capitalism and the “logic of exploitation, racism and patriarchy,” which they see in “increased military presence and military bases in various parts of the world, and ‘humanitarian’ invasions and occupations” which are actually war, they say.

War, the occupation of markets and territories, and militarisation to control energy resources, water and biodiversity, are pointed out as capitalism’s methods for solving its own crisis.

The World People’s Conference on Climate Change will advocate the right to “live well,” as opposed to the economic principle of uninterrupted growth.

In contrast to Copenhagen, where industrialised countries sought a formula for greenhouse gas emissions reductions that would not imply binding commitments, at Cochabamba it will be the popular sectors that take the lead.

“For a long time, the voices of indigenous peoples and social organisations have not been heard. Their movement has been growing underground, in rural areas and the outlying suburbs of cities,” environmentalist Carmen Capriles, of the Bolivian chapter of Campaign 350.org, told IPS.

Their knowledge, as farmers or livestock raisers, means they can promptly identify the climate phenomena that their way of life and economic wellbeing depend on, she said.

Campaign 350.org is named for the 350 parts per million of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that scientists regard as the “maximum safe limit” for the concentration of this gas, without triggering climate catastrophe.

The conference is distinguished by being “for and with indigenous peoples, unlike any other world conference held to date,” Bolivian economist and environment expert Stanislaw Czaplicki told IPS.

Czaplicki was at Copenhagen as a civil society representative, and coordinated networks of young Latin American environmental activists.

“Indigenous peoples and social organisations have already formed a worldwide movement in defence of the planet, and civil society has a major role in the development of public policies,” he said. However, “women and young people are under-represented,” he added.

In Capriles’ view, new movements capable of generating alternative proposals are needed, and she called for political will on the part of developed countries to make structural changes in their economies.

Czaplicki said there are political movements in Europe that are against models of development that harm the environment, but they do not express anti-capitalist thinking, and neither do they distance themselves from the international financial institutions.

These movements arise in countries that achieved development by environmentally harmful means, not in countries that can still choose their model of economic growth, he said.

In the case of Bolivia, policies opposed to capitalism and polluting industrialisation have not yet changed the model of extracting commodities like minerals and gas, Czaplicki said. As a result, 300,000 hectares are deforested every year, he said.

Theory and practice must come together, he said.

Friday, March 26, 2010, the UN University hosted at the UN Headquarters Professor Alejandro Toledo who tried to practice what he teaches, during the years 2001 – 2006 when as President of Peru for a full term.

The advertised topic of the event that was part of the UNU Current Affairs Series – was:

“SOCIAL AGENDA IN LATIN AMERICA.”

The topic is clearly a very up-to-date issue as it is being presented at the UN by leaders of the ALBA group and Professor Toledo does not see exactly eye to eye with them. Our website has taken the position that it is in the interest of the US to develop a closer rapport with the Latin Rio Group and with ALBA. As such the ideas of a previous Peruvian President, an indigenous American, and this is an extremely attractive proposition, someone who has learned facts of life not just as an academic, and can look back indeed at a quite successful presidency, even harboring the intent for a second term in office, he is clearly someone worthwhile to have over as a guest speaker at the UNU – really the only remaining brain trust or open think tank at the UN.

I posted on SustainabiliTank.info nearly exactly to the day – two years ago, the article:

Former Presidents Cesar Gaviria (Columbia) and Alexandro Toledo (Peru) With Former UNDESA USG Ocampo Conclude, At a Meeting of the Latin American Business Association at Columbia Business School, That Latin America, With Markets Of Produce In China, India, and LA, Could Themselves Become A Market Equal To The US, Provided Their Mestizo/Indio Poor Get The Chance To Become Consumers. Was posted  March 30th, 2008
 http://www.sustainabilitank.info/2008/03…

further postings can be found on http://www.sustainabilitank.info/?s=Alej…

I will first reintroduce here former President Toledo and provide new content, but please look up also the first article. It is extremely interesting to see how Professor Toledo refuses President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, an ALBA leader, left credentials – as this throws light on the incident at the UN, part of yesterday’s event, which I chose best to let you read from the attached reporting by Matthew Lee from Inner City Press.

But before doing what I just said, let me get to say something about the title of the meeting. It is not just the title of a lecture, rather it comes from the title of a meeting that was held in Estoril, Portugal, November 30, 2009, that established a “SOCIAL AGENDA FOR DEMOCRACY IN LATIN AMERICA FOR THE NEXT 20 YEARS.” This lead to “Public and Private Policy Recommendations” and a call for Leadership Beyond Politics and the establishment of a Global Center for Development and Democracy with offices in San Isidro, Lima, Peru; Washington DC: and Madrid, Spain with internet and TV outlets: www.cgdd.org and www.cgdd.tv

The organization has an impressive Board of Directors and an International Advisory Council that though at first look seems heavy on Peruvian former officials, but includes names like Pedro Pablo Kuczynski Goddard and Francis Fukuyama, Shimon Peres, Jacques Chirac, Javier Perez de Cuellar, Muhammad Yunus, Felipe Gonzalez Marquez, Enrique Iglesias, Rodrigo Rato, Nicolas Ardito Barletta, Fernando Henrique Cardoso, Vicente Fox, Lionel Jospin, and many others. Their statements in the Executive Summary could be subject for another posting.

In effect, the Washington office, in the presence of three ex- Heads of State or Government, was inaugurated last night:

Ex presidentes inauguraron oficina internacional del Centro Global para el Desarrollo y la Democracia en Washington DC

Anoche se inauguro con la asistencia de los ex presidentes de Perú, Alejandro Toledo, de México, Vicente Fox, y de España, José María Aznar.

The Address of the Washington office:

505 9th Street N.W, Suite 1000, Washington, D.C. 20004

Teléfono: +1-202-776-7801

E-mail: contacto@cgdd.org

This clearly shows a high level of interest in the UNU meeting of today, Friday.

———————
Dr. ALEXANDRO TOLEDO was democratically elected President of Peru from July 2001-July 2006. He was elected by narrowly defeating former President Alan Garcia. It was Toledo’s second presidential race in just 13 months. A year earlier he ran against incumbent Alberto K. Fujimori. Toledo dropped out of the runoff election amid widespread allegations that the election was rigged in Fujimori’s favor. Months after being reelected, Fujimori fled to his native Japan and resigned via fax after the broadcast of Fujimori’s chief spy, Vladimiro Montesinos, evidently bribing an opposition congressman to switch parties.

Toledo was born in a small and remote village in the Peruvian Andes, 12,000 feet above sea level. He is one of sixteen brothers and sisters from a family of extreme poverty. His father was a bricklayer and his mother sold fish at markets. At the age of six, he worked as a street shoe-shiner and simultaneously sold newspapers and lotteries to supplement the family income.

At age 16, with the guidance of members of the Peace Corps, Toledo enrolled at the University of San Francisco on a one-year scholarship. He continued his education, obtaining a partial soccer scholarship, and making up the difference by pumping gas.

Dr. Toledo started with  BAs in Economics and Business Administration from the University of San Francisco, then proceeded to Stanford for two masters degrees in economics and in Economics of Human Resouces, he earned a Ph.D. in economics with emphasis on Human Resources from Stanford, at that time he met his wife, Elaine Karp and that was a prize also.

They married in 1979. Eliane Chantal Karp Fernenbug was born in Paris, experienced life on a kibbutz in Israel, and did Master’s and Ph.D. work in anthropology at Stanford University, with a minor in Finance and “Economy of Development”.  Karp  first came to Peru in the late 1970s to study Indian (indigenous) communities while working on her Ph.D. Karp speaks seven languages: French, Spanish, English, Hebrew, Dutch, Portuguese, and Quechua, a native Peruvian language. Before her husband was elected president, she gave several campaign speeches in Quechua, which helped her husband’s election campaign. At one rally in the Andean city of Huaraz, Karp declared that the “apus” (mountain gods of Peru’s ancient Indian cultures) had spoken and that Toledo’s election would break a “curse of 500 years” of oppression. When I was in Peru – a friend who knew them both, told me – this is a case of look for the woman that stands behind the man. She gets part of the success but she is also successful on her own. Before going to Peru, at the World Bank she specialized in loans for economic aid programs for developing countries. In Peru, before becoming first lady, she worked for USAID.

Eliane Karp serves on the board of several organizations. She is the Honorary President and Founder of the Fund for Development of Indigenous Communities of Latin America and the Caribbean, and she was once the Honorary President of the National Commission on Andean, Amazon and Afro-Peruvian Communities (CONAPA) of Peru. Karp accompanied Toledo into office with ambitious plans to address social inequality and the needs of Peru’s poor. When she became Peru’s first lady, she promised to shake up the capital’s elite and avoid the socialite duties customary to presidential wives. Toledo later appointed her honorary head of a commission to address multicultural issues.

She published an extensive list of books, papers and articles. During the 2008-2009 academic year, Dr. Karp-Toledo conducted an investigation on the successful struggle of native peoples in three Andean countries to influence the destiny of their nations.
and published a book  on lessons and experiences in implementing public policies that foster the inclusion of indigenous peoples in Latin American countries. She also participates in research on social inclusion and equality in the foundation created by her husband, the Global Center for Development and Democracy  www.cgdd.org). I expanded on this paragraph as Mrs. Karp-Toledo was also present in New York at the UNU event.

Dr. Toledo was able to go from extreme poverty to the most prestigious academic centers of the world, later becoming one of the most prominent democratic leaders of Latin America. He was the first Peruvian president of indigenous descent to be democratically elected in five hundred years.

His most precious dream and work, he says  now, is that other men and women of the large socially excluded Peruvian and Latin American population can also become presidents of their respective countries by having access to quality health care and education.

Dr. Toledo was a visiting Scholar at Harvard University and Research Associate at Wasseda University in Tokyo.

Before becoming President, Dr. Toledo worked for the World Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank in Washington, and the United Nations in New York.

On the stump, like the most experienced politicians, Toledo knows how to work a crowd, whether addressing peasants or potential foreign investors. Seamlessly transitioning from a buttoned-down, eloquent economist to a rebel outfitted in jeans, a t-shirt, and a bandana, Toledo is well versed in international trade and promises to give voice to the labor movement.

Mostly, though, Toledo has preached a centrist platform, pledging to award small-business loans to farmers, balance the budget, lure foreign investment, and create jobs. Toledo’s moderate campaign and carefully selected issues have found broad appeal. Let us also remember the academic institution he is now connected with – Stanford University and the Hoover Institution so let us not expect him to be a chess piece of the left.

President Toledo first appeared on the international political scene in 1996 when he formed and led a broad democratic coalition in the streets of Peru to bring down the autocratic regime of Alberto Fujimori. This coalition had the support of the international democratic community.

During the five years of Dr. Toledo’s presidency, the Peruvian economy grew at an average rate of 6 percent, registering as one of the fastest growing economies in Latin America. Inflation averaged 1.5 percent and fiscal deficit went as low as 0.2 percent. While markets in China and Thailand were opened, free trade agreement negotiations with the United States, Chile, Mexico and Singapore were about to conclude. These markets were generating new investments and jobs for the most poverty-stricken Peruvians.

Nevertheless the fight against poverty through health and educational investment was the internal central aim of Dr. Toledo’s presidency. As a result of sustained economic growth and deliberate social policies directed to the most poor, extreme poverty was reduced by 25 percent in five years. Employment grew at an average rate of 6 percent from 2004-2006. He started the alleviation of poverty process through investments in healthcare and education.

He is currently an economics professor (on leave) at the University of ESAN in Peru. and from Stanford University, and from the Freeman Spogli Institute’s Center on Democracy, Development and the rule of Law.

He is Founder and President of the Global Center for Development and Democracy (GCDD), which studies the interrelationship between poverty, inequality, and the future of democratic governance. The institute   www.cgdd.org) is housed in Latin America, The US, and the EU as we mentioned earlier. Dr. Toledo is currently a Distinguished Visiting Scholar at SAIS/Johns Hopkins University in Washington DC and also senior Fellow in Foreign Policy and Global Economy and Development at the Brookings Institution, and his wife is Visiting Professor in the Department of Anthropology at George Washington University. She teaches classes there on the culture and social organization of indigenous peoples in the Andean countries and their struggle for greater rights and participation in public life and democratic politics. Their base is now in Washington DC.

At the UN, March 26, 2010, Dr. Alejandro Toledo spoke about the relationship between economic growth and democracy – poverty, equality, social institutions – the challenges of achieving sustainable growth.

Democracy is not just about casting votes on election day. The high level of inequality in social institutions leads to low chance to get economic democracy. Poverty undermines economic growth and this in turn will destroy any concept of democracy.

In the streets of Latin America there is discontent that shows up as social unrest which then pushes away investment – everybody loses. Investment that comes in under such conditions has low rate of return. The investors must do their part in conjunction with the local government for their own long term goals.

Dr. Toledo does not share the “trickle down” concept. He wants the government to prioritize and show accountability in transparency conditions. It is all about transparency and education. He says it is not an abstract proposition that one achieves through professorial regression mathematics – it is his own life experience. He says democracy in Latin America is an empty shell to be used only on election day, then discarded – corruption rules and people have empty stomachs. People read statistics and ask – if we do so well – why is my stomach empty?

It takes 18-20 years to train a professional – a lawyer, doctor, engineer. He calls for strong democratic institutions to increase the quality of parliaments and bring about accountability.

He made some populist statements:

- Democracy does not have nationality.

- Human Rights does not have skin color.

- The air we breathe belongs to all of us.

The UN has put forward the goal of reducing poverty by 2015 – some countries will do it. Latin America has the stigma of instability, high inflation, and the foreign debt crisis. Again and again – the Toledo doctrine is that in order to have sustainable growth in Latin America the social aspects of democracy must be tackled in the interest of the people but also in the interest of the investors that are needed to help growth.

From here it opened up to questions and with a lively audience Dr. Toledo showed the hand of a master.

Journalists present wanted to know the Toledo reaction to Chavez and Morales populism and were not disappointed. The answer came that if you get a lot of money because of the increase of oil income – it is easy – but planning gets harder. He does not like the closing of independent TV channels or the jailing of the only opposition leader. This connects to climate change:

(1) But if we compete for investments we have to set clear terms and norms for the environment. You cannot build roads to integrate countries – Bolivia – Peru – Brazil – Paraguay – or build pipelines – without looking on the impact on indigenous people on the way.

(2) We must provide energy for the poor.

(3) But then the alternative to oil – to be cleaner, cheaper and to make the economy less dependent on oil.

Growth based on oil has brought up 3 million people world wide but the fossil crisis brought half a billion down into poverty.

But it could have been even worse if not for new players like Brazil.

Cheap labor is part of growth but the question is the collection of tax. The answer is new economy with indigenous democracy and not neo-liberalism, but without growth it will not work. The arrival of investment starts the chain. Microcredit alone will not do it – though microcredit has helped start small business. One needs then  (a) a project, (b) the microcredit and (c) a market.

Women have proven they can do it and with the result improve the education of their children.

Government and the companies are both responsible for social investment – water, education, more accountability.

Sustainable Development means when people are educated there is environmental concept of quality of life. That requires policies that go beyond political statements and it needs investments – so he talks of environment, less corruption.

If there is corruption, the cost of production increases, the self esteem of the society is lost – there is no faith in government without accountability – this leads to poverty and corruption and corruption is higher in authoritarian regimes.

Now that lead to the Venezuelan intervention that is described further on by Matthew Lee.

I will end here by saying that the Dr. Alejandro Toledo platform is clearly not of the left, rather the Hoover Institution and the Washington houses of SAIS and Brookings. But it is think-tank stuff that can show the way to the ALBA and Rio Groups on how to cooperate with Washington in development of their own people and countries, provided they also put brakes on the deeds of the foreign companies and on their own governments. If this is said in a balanced way, and the corporations want to go to Latin America with long-term goals – not just for the reaping of mineral resources, with responsible governance concepts, a Toledo consultancy in Washington should be weighed in gold. He could thus be more effective there now then at the helm of Peru alone.

I would be interested to get further information from Venezuela of how they would want to be seen as presenters of a different point of view – or simply as defenders of an insulted regime that did indeed jail its opposition and stopped media. But, if they have an argument with those that got silenced, we would like to see how those arguments could improve upon the Toledo presentation.

Regarding the UNU, the event was great. When Venezuela wanted to have its intervention he made it possible and stood firm that in an academic institution there cannot be political censorship – simply said – Venezuela cannot stop at the UN the expression of criticism by anyone – clearly not by another former head of State. Further, it must be noted that when there was a coup in 2003 against President Chavez, then President Toledo and other Latin American Presidents, including Lagos of Chile, spoke up for President Chavez.

* * * * *

At UN, Peru’s Toledo Coy about Election, Blasts Chavez, Draws Venezuelan Protest.

UNITED NATIONS, March 26 — Former Peruvian President Alejandro Toledo, reportedly polling at 11% support in the run up to the 2011 election, spoke Friday at the UN in New York. Inner City Press asked him about his poll numbers and plans, including if he might join forces with the leader of the Partido Popular Cristiano, Lourdes Flores Nano, who polls lower at six percent.

“I understand you are a journalist,” Toledo began. “You do your job and I do mine. I am not a candidate, I’m sorry to disappoint you.” He paused. “At least not yet.”

Toledo went on to describe his “heavy burden” as the first president elected in 500 years from “an Andean background… I’m concerned how to implement, how to change lives.”

Describing his life as a professor, he concluded that he’d “lost him mind” once moving from “academia to politics, I’m trying to be care not to commit the same mistake.”

Toledo was also asked, twice, about Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez. Toledo contrasts a leader flush with oil money with one, implicitly like him, who tries to manage an economy correctly. He denounced the shutting down of media and arrests of political opponents.

A representative of Venezuela’s Mission to the UN ran out into the hallway of the UN’s new Temporary North Lawn Building, clutching his cell phone. Later, a more senior Venezuelan representative, Ms. Medina, entered the room. She was given the last question of the UN University event.

She chided Toledo for criticizing President Chavez without giving any notice to the Venezuelan Mission, calling this “cobardia” or cowardice.

UN’s Ban and Toledo, Hugo Chavez and right of reply not shown

The audience, with many Toledo supporters in attendance, booed the use of this word, and urged the UNU moderator to cut off the question. But Ms. Medina continued, in Spanish, with the colleague who had called her providing a monotone translation.

She said the Toledo had supported the coup against Chavez in 2003. While some argue that it was not a coup at all, Toledo when he responded countered that he had issued a press released condemning the attempt to oust Chavez. He conceded that for a time his popularity had sunk to 8%, but he said this was because he was not “managing for polls.” Ms. Medina rolled her eyes. She said Toledo did not understand democracy.

Afterwards, Ms. Medina was heard to say while in the UN coffee line that “there are going to be problems.” It was unclear if this meant a complaint against UNU. She also told a journalist to be sure to report “objectively.” Or what?

Also after the showdown, sources say that Toledo’s wife complained to the UNU moderator about the Venezuelan intervention, and ask that he deliver a short apology for the camera crew following Toledo. Some surmised a campaign commercial being filmed.

At Friday’s UN noon briefing, Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon’s spokesman Martin Nesirky about the relation between UNU and the UN, and whether UN events held inside UN buildings implied that member states have the “right of reply” as they have in the General Assembly. Nesirky said he’d look into it.

 http://www.innercitypress.com/fccc1figue…

By Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press

UNITED NATIONS, March 22, 2010 —

(1) The embattled chairman of the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change, Rajendra Pachauri, refuses to disclose how much money he makes from his simultaneous consultancies with Deutsche Bank, Credit Suisse and other institutions. Now, a candidate to head the UN’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, Christiana Figueres of Costa Rica, has announced she would cease all outside consulting if given the “full time and a half” post.

Inner City Press asked Ms. Figueres on Monday for her view of Pachauri’s side business and other IPCC matters. “That would not be my choice,” Ms. Figueres said, of Pachauri’s side work for business. She also said diplomatically that “Doctor Pachauri, I believe is at freedom to allocate his time as he sees fit.” Video here, from Minute 27:18.

But shouldn’t Pachauri at least be required to formally disclose who he works for on the side, and how much he gets paid? He has resisted even this.

Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon and his spokesman for the UN view on this lack of transparency. The answer was that the IPCC is not a UN body, and that Pachauri would answer the questions himself. But when he came to the UN, seeking to use Ban Ki-moon as a prop and character witness, neither took any questions from the press.

* * *

(2) Ms. Figueres, the daughter of a former Costa Rican president, is viewed as a serious contender to replace Yvo de Boer, who is moving to KPMG (some are calling it cashing in). Inner City Press asked her if the recent appointment of another Costa Rican, Rebecca Grynspan, to the number two post at the UN Development Program might make it less likely she will get this job.

At UN, climate speakers Sept. 09, 2009 Costa Rica’s president there, gender balance not shown

“It may be a stretch,” Ms. Figueres agreed, that a country of four million people could get two high posts.

(3) India’s candidate is said to also have the support of ChinaInner City Press asked Ms. Figueres about the opposition to the Copenhagen process by the five Latin American countries in the Alba Group. Surprisingly to some, Ms. Figueres responded that the Alba Group was “correct in the moment,” that all now agree with them. An Alba Group-er afterwards said skeptically to Inner City Press, “Costa Rica never gets along with the Alba Group.”

Hey — climate change bring everyone together…

At UN, Ban and Pachauri Take No Questions on IPCC and Outside Income, Transparency Charade.

Back on December 21, Inner City Press asked Ban about Pachauri’s presumptive financial conflicts of interest and failure to disclose, but Mr. Ban did not answer the question.

UN’s Ban and Pachauri at photo op, no questions allowed

Later, Ban’s spokesman Martin Nesirky said that Ban did not have to respond to the controversies surrounding the IPCC, and that Pachauri would answer questions himself.

On Wednesday, Pachauri did not allow or answer any questions, and neither did Ban Ki-moon. What was first advertised as a sit down press conference at 12:30 was converted into a stand up stakeout from which the two men left immediately after speaking. So much for transparency.

Bolivia summit to seek global climate change referendum.
(AFP) LA PAZ — An alternative “people’s conference” on climate change in the Bolivian city of Cochabamba in April will seek to advance an international global warming referendum, organizers said Tuesday.

“The only thing that can save mankind from a [climate] tragedy is the exercise of global democracy,” said Bolivia’s United Nations Ambassador Pablo Solon, a key organizer of the summit.

A priority of the meeting would be discussing the possibility of a global referendum “with the goal of reaching two billion people,” he told reporters.

Thousands of people, mostly members of social movements and indigenous groups, are expected to attend the People’s World Conference on Climate Change and Mother Earth Rights on April 20-22.

Organizers say it is intended to “give a voice to the people” on climate change after the perceived failure of the U.N.-sponsored Copenhagen summit on the same issue.

Solon said he expected participants from 94 countries and representatives from 70 governments to attend, without giving further details.

Bolivian President Evo Morales, who in January issued an open invitation to the conference to governments, scientists, and social movements, has said a number of South American presidents would also attend.

But the outlines of the conference remain vague, and it is so far shaping up to be something between an environmental forum and a political rally. It is expected to tackle many of the themes Morales raised at the Copenhagen summit last year, including creating a “climate court of justice” and the need to “change the system of capitalist consumerism” — proposals that could be included in the suggested global vote.

Solon said the summit’s conclusions would be delivered to the next U.N.-sponsored meeting on climate change, currently scheduled for December in Mexico.

————————–

• Article history

Bolivia’s UN ambassador Pablo Solon-Romero during a press conference. Photograph: Paulo Filgueiras/UN Photo

In the aftermath of the Copenhagen climate conference, those who defended the widely condemned outcome tended to talk about it as a “step in the right direction”. This was always a tendentious argument, given that tackling climate change can not be addressed by half measures. We can’t make compromises with nature.

Bolivia, however, believed that Copenhagen marked a backwards step, undoing the work built on since the climate talks in Kyoto. That is why, against strong pressure from industrialised countries, we and other developing nations refused to sign the Copenhagen accord and why we are hosting an international meeting on climate change next month. In the words of the Tuvalu negotiator, we were not prepared to “betray our people for 30 pieces of silver”.

Our position was strongly criticised by several industrialised countries, who did their brazen best to blame the victims of climate change for their own unwillingness to act. However, recent communications by the European Commission have confirmed why we were right to oppose the Copenhagen accord.

In a report called International climate policy post-Copenhagen (pdf), the commission confirmed that the pledges by developed countries are equal to between 13.2% and 17.8% in emissions reductions by 2020 – far below the required 40%-plus reductions needed to keep global temperature rise to less than 2C degrees.

The situation is even worse once you take into account what are called “banking of surplus emission budgets” and “accounting rules for land use, land use change and forestry”. The Copenhagen accord would actually allow for an increase in developed country emissions of 2.6% above 1990 levels. This is hardly a forward step.

This is not just about gravely inadequate commitments, it is also about process. Whereas before, under the Kyoto protocol, developed countries were legally bound to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by a certain percentage, now countries can submit whatever targets they want without a binding commitment.

This dangerous approach to climate negotiations is like building a dam where everyone contributes as many bricks as they want regardless of whether it stops the river.

The Copenhagen accord opens the dam and condemns millions. Various estimates suggest that the commitments made under the accord would lead to increases of between three to four degrees celsius – a level that many scientists consider disastrous for human life and our ecosystems.

For Bolivia, the disastrous outcome of Copenhagen was further proof that climate change is not the central issue in negotiations. For rich countries, the key issues in negotiations were finance, carbon markets, competitiveness of countries and corporations, business opportunities along with discussions about the political makeup of the US Senate. There was surprisingly little focus on effective solutions for reducing carbon emissions.

President Evo Morales of Bolivia observed that the best way to put climate change solutions at the heart of the talks was to involve the people. In contrast to much of the official talks, the hundreds of civil society organisations, communities, scientists and faith leaders present in Copenhagen clearly prioritised the search for effective, just solutions to climate change against narrow economic interests.

To advance an agenda based on effective just solutions, Bolivia is therefore hosting a Peoples’ Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth on 19-22 April, and inviting everyone to participate. Unlike Copenhagen, there will be no secret discussions behind closed doors. Moreover the debate and proposals will be led by communities on the frontlines of climate change and by organisations and individuals dedicated to tackling the climate crisis. All 192 governments in the UN have also been invited to attend and encouraged to listen to the voices of civil society and together develop common proposals.

We hope that this unique format will help shift power back to the people, which is where it needs to be on this critical issue for all humanity. We don’t expect agreement on everything, but at least we can start to discuss openly and sincerely in a way that didn’t happen in Copenhagen.

• Pablo Solón is Ambassador to the UN for the Plurinational State of Bolivia. He is a sociologist and economist, was active in Bolivia’s social movements before entering government, and is an expert on issues of trade, integration, natural resources and water.

Economics of Adaptation to Climate Change Study:
The Global Report
 hpage at worldbank.org by Friday January 8, 2010