Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
Download MP3
Anchor Marco Werman speaks with British environmental activist Mark Lynas about China’s actions in the Copenhagen climate summit. Lynas wrote an article in today’s Guardian’s called “How do I know China wrecked the Copenhagen deal? I was in the room.”
Read the Transcript
This text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.
MARCO WERMAN: China’s government also came off as something of a heavy at this month’s Global Warming Summit in Copenhagen. The 193 nations at the conference failed to reach a legally binding accord, and some are blaming China. One of them is British environmental activist Mark Lynas. He was an advisor to the Maldives government at the Climate Change Summit. Lynas wrote an article in today’s London Guardian Newspaper about what he saw there. It’s called, “How do I know China Wrecked the Copenhagen Deal? I was in the Room.”
MARK LYNAS: What I saw was the Chinese delegate, which was not the Premier Wen Jiabao, but the delegate, who was acting on behalf of the China in that heads of state meeting, arguing and insisting that all of the major meaningful targets and the numerical targets be taken out of the text, in particular, that the target for industrialized country mission reduction. So what rich countries like the U.S. and European countries should do also be removed, so the fact that the 80 percent cut by 2050 is not in there, came down to the insistence of China.
WERMAN: Now, you were there in this room with just 50 to 60 people, including the heads of state, and you were representing the government of Maldives. There were several people, I think, from the west representing smaller governments. Is that your role there?
LYNAS: I have been the advisor on climate change to President Nasheed of the Maldives, and he was in there negotiating with the other heads of state. I should say for the record, that my impressions should not be confused with Maldives government policy. What I say is entirely at my behest.
WERMAN: Now, I found really interesting in your Guardian piece the way you described the actual physical setup in the negotiating room, and who in fact, was there, and where they were sitting. Describe the scene, and why you think it was all, each of these little components were kind of critically important.
LYNAS: Well, it was a square table, essentially, with President Obama on one side. Opposite him was Kevin Rudd, Prime Minister of Australia. Between them was the Ethiopian President, the Danish Prime Minister, who was chairing the whole thing, and Ban Ki-moon, who’s Secretary General of the United Nations, presidents from Mexico, Angela Merkel from Germany, Sarkozy from France, Gordon Brown from the U.K., India, Saudi Arabia, a few other countries. In total, I think it was about 25 countries represented.
WERMAN: And the Chinese are represented there, but it’s Wen Jinbao despite all these other heads of state in the room, right?
LYNAS: No, it wasn’t Wen Jinbao. I didn’t set eyes on him. To my knowledge, he was having sort of bilateral, so the other heads of state would have to go meet him separately, so he was sort of holding court in a nearby hotel. And this, I think, was interpreted by everybody as a diplomatic humiliation for President Obama that he was forced to sit opposite a sort of mid-level official, who in fact did say, “I’m just a civil servant.” And every time anything difficult came up, he had to go and talk to his superiors, and make various phone calls, and all the other heads of state had to sort of sit there tapping their fingers on the table waiting for him to come back.
WERMAN: I mean, and yet in the lead up to Copenhagen, the big drumbeat about the world uniting, seemed to be pretty positive, and the Chinese are actually making great strides in renewable green energy is what we’ve been hearing. So why would the Chinese do this?
LYNAS: Yes, I think we should acknowledge that China was the leader in many areas, particularly, in wind and solar power. And I think China takes its own local pollution problems very seriously. But the point is that the Chinese leadership will not accept any limits on its own growth, and its growth is based mainly on coal. I mean, the Chinese economy doubles every ten years, as does its presence, and its political power on the world stage. So I don’t think they want to meddle with that formula, and I don’t think global warming is sufficiently high up their agenda that they’re prepared to decarbonize or even to envision decarbonizing at this stage.
WERMAN: If what you saw, was the Chinese setting up the Copenhagen talks for failure, why then are a lot of people pointing fingers at Barack Obama? I mean, when you were in the room there, did you think you saw leadership coming from Barack Obama?
LYNAS: Absolutely. Not just from Barack Obama, but from Gordon Brown, and from Kevin Rudd, in particular, and Angela Merkel of Germany. I mean, you just form impressions, and my impression was that they were desperate for a deal. They did not want to walk out of there empty handed, and they were desperate for a deal, actually, which was meaningful, and which would do something to reduce emissions, and would actually have some significance globally. And they were faced with – well, not just one country because India was sort of trying to block as well, but they were faced with the major developing countries saying we won’t just have this, and that put them in a very difficult position.
WERMAN: Mark, final question. I mean, these were closed-door meetings in Copenhagen. Why did you come out publicly with what amounts to a leak, and something that could threaten the candor and success of future talks?
LYNAS: With great reluctance. I’ve spent days thinking about this, and days worrying about whether I should say it, and what the implications would be, but I just felt that I couldn’t sit there in possession of this knowledge, and not. I mean, you can leak it, but that doesn’t really have much significance because everyone’s leaking everything, and no one’s to know who’s telling the truth. I thought well, of all the people who are in the room, I was probably the only one in that position, actually, to come out publicly, so that’s what I’ve done, and I’m prepared to face whatever repercussions come. But I did think it was important to get the truth out there, as I saw it.
WERMAN: Mark Lynas in Oxford, U.K. He wrote the article in today’s Guardian Newspaper, How Do I Know China Wrecked the Copenhagen Deal? I was in the Room. Thanks very much, Mark, I appreciate it.
LYNAS: Pleasure.
Copyright ©2009 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org.
This is an extremely important piece of information and should be disseminated as widely and quickly as possible. The policy implications are great: A China that wishes to impede progress in the name of national stakes is a China that need be dealt with in a much different manner than previously thought. This information could stimulate policy in this country to compete on a much greater scale for renewable energy markets.