TO ALL intents and purposes, negotiators at the latest round of climate change talks in Bonn over the last two weeks seem determined to put behind the chaos and disappointment that emerged from last December’s Copenhagen summit and look towards the Cancun December meeting with some sense of hope.
Although it’s quite unlikely that the summit in the Caribbean tourist resort of Mexico will conclude with a legally binding treaty, negotiators want to avoid a repeat of Copenhagen, where leaders, failing to reach consensus on the fundamental issues that will form the substance of a legally binding international agreement, settled for an accord that fell far short of its stated goals.
Mexico’s Climate Change Ambassador to the United Nations, Luis Alfonso de Alba, perhaps sensing that a comprehensive agreement may not be reached because of lagging and unresolved issues in the negotiating text, suggested that countries can go forward with adopting some decisions that can be legally binding, while more steps can be built at subsequent meetings.
But in a sharp retort, Ambassador Collin Beck, Vice-Chair of the Alliance for Small Island States (AOSIS) described it as “disturbing” that a country can begin making pronouncements before giving the negotiating process a chance.
The AOSIS and Least Developed Countries (LDCs) are holding out hope for a comprehensive agreement from Cancun, but many other countries are not under any such illusion, given the complex unresolved issues.
Reaching agreement is fundamental and important.
According to UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Mankind has already added enough greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere to raise temperatures to a dangerous level, and this is already leading to increased incidences of drought, heat waves, and heavy storms.

The purpose of an ambitious and effective international climate change deal is to avoid catastrophic climate change, and to help the most vulnerable countries adapt.
The world, according to the UNFCCC, has only a very narrow window of opportunity to undertake a first dramatic shift towards a low-carbon society, and to prevent the worst scenarios of scientists from coming true.
Although there are wide and varying views about the expectations and outcomes from Cancun, the atmosphere at Bonn is far friendlier than what existed in Copenhagen.
Many of the negotiators — including China’s Special Representative for Climate Change, Ambassador Qintai Yu, and Lawrence Graff, Chief Negotiator of the European Commission — felt rebuilding and restoring trust and confidence lost in Copenhagen was essential in Bonn.
Ambassador Yi told journalists that prior to the Copenhagen talks, some countries departed from the path of cooperation and dialogue, and resorted to coercion and pressure.
And while countries will always differ on issues, it should not deter the negotiations from expanding into areas of consensus and strengthening the basis for future cooperation in fighting climate change.
But it has not been all smooth sailing in Bonn.
Island nations experienced a major setback when AOSIS failed to get support for the climate change secretariat to prepare a technical paper on the options for limiting global average temperature increase to below 1.5 degrees Celsius and 2 degrees Celsius.
Saudi Arabia, who led the opposition, suggested cynically that vulnerable countries can use Google if they want more knowledge about the scientific findings relating to their survival!
We all remember the 1.5 degree Celsius campaign the Caribbean and other regions of the world waged prior to Copenhagen for mitigating the effects of climate change.
Carlos Fuller, Deputy Chairman of the Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre (CCCCC) points to historical data already showing a 1 degree rise in temperature in the Caribbean.
Climate change impact, he told me on the sidelines of the Bonn meeting, is already occurring in the Caribbean, and referred to the bleaching of corals, powerful and damaging hurricanes, reduced annual rainfalls, and devastating flooding when it rains.
The biggest shocker for developing countries is what many are calling the imbalance of the new draft text document, issued Friday, which omitted many important points contained in the old text, and which seems to undermine the Kyoto Protocol.
Developing countries and many non-governmental groups accuse the US, Japan and Russia of railroading the negotiations by rejecting the need for binding emission cuts, which could lead to climate catastrophe on millions of people in the developing countries.
According to WWF International, the new negotiating text could put delegates attending the next two rounds of climate change talks in August and October in a position to turn trust into action in Mexico.
It may be wise for countries to reflect on the parting words of outgoing UNFCCC Executive Secretary, Yvo de Boer who cautioned that the world cannot afford to postpone more stringent action much longer to halt the increase of global greenhouse gas emissions in the next ten years.
The 2-degree world is in danger, and as a result, the door to a 1.5-degree world is rapidly closing.
Using a football analogy to emphasize the urgency of reaching consensus on climate change issues, including global greenhouse gas at the December Cancun summit, he said the world received a yellow card in Copenhagen.
If countries fail to deliver in Cancun, they may be handed a red card from the referee; the referee being the millions of poor and vulnerable people who face a real threat by climate change.