Das Ergebnis des G8-Gipfels (und des vorangehenden G5-Gipfels) hat Südafrikas Umweltminister Schalkwyk in einer bemerkenswerten Presseerklärung kommentiert und interpretiert (Hervorhebungen im Original):
Statement by Marthinus van Schalkwyk, South African Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, G8, Japan, 9 July 2008
WEDNESDAY, 09 JULY 2008: This week provided an opportunity to clarify positions in support of the multilateral negotiations. South Africa appreciates the opportunity to be part of discussions in this format. Though it cannot replace the formal UN negotiations, it does contribute towards an improved understanding that takes us closer to solutions.
During this week, it became clear that there are two proposals on the table which we will continue to discuss in the formal negotiations, namely:
- the G8’s proposal for a long term global goal for emission reductions of 50% by 2050 without a base year and without mid-term targets. We would argue that this proposal does not meet the required-by-science criteria. It is based on the lowest common denominator in the G8 grouping; and
- the G5’s more detailed and more ambitious proposal, also supported by many G8 countries, which essentially has three elements:
- developed countries should take the lead with ambitious and absolute emission reductions of between 80% and 95% below 1990 levels by mid-century;
- quantified emission targets under the Kyoto Protocol toward the upper end of the range of 25% to 40% below 1990 levels by 2020 for all developed countries; and
- deviation from business-as-usual emission trajectories in developing countries, supported and enabled by technology and financing.
For South Africa this comes as a political package. To be meaningful, a long term goal must have a base year, it must be underpinned by clear, unambiguous and ambitious mid-term targets for developed countries and it should be based on an equitable burden-sharing paradigm that reflects historical responsibility for the problem. Without a base year and mid-term targets a commitment to ‘50% by 2050′ is an empty slogan without substance.
We are disappointed that some G8 countries continue to reject the ambitious package that we strive for. We would have liked to see much more from the G8 this week. If they accept this package it would pave the way for significant progress in the current climate negotiations.
The developing world gave two steps forward. The ball is now in the G8’s court to respond and to deal with the reality of the lowest common denominator between them.
We remain committed and convinced that a comprehensive outcome for the negotiations is possible in Copenhagen in 2009. The real negotiations continue in the UN process where we meet in a transparent way without excluding any countries.
Das ist deutlich: Die Entwicklungsländer haben sehr klare, und ausgesprochen vernünftige Vorstellungen wie ein zukünftiger „Global Deal“ aussehen kann. Sie insistieren, dass die Industrieländer ihrer Verpflichtung zu sehr ambitionierten Klimazielen nachkommen, und sind dann auch bereit, ihren Teil beizutragen. Dabei ist eine faire Lastenteilung, die die historische Verantwortung für das Problem einbezieht, eine Voraussetzung. Ich bin sicher, dass Schalkwyk das Greenhouse Development Rights Framework mit Interesse zur Kenntnis genommen hat.