The first week of climate agreement negotiations came to an end on Saturday. Laurent Fabius, the President of COP21, had demanded that the negotiators from 195 countries submit an interim text to him by noon on Saturday. This has now been done. We can now measure what has been achieved and, above all, what remains to be done in the second week, this time with the ministers at the negotiating table.

 

Ae text of the agreement handed over on Saturday is the fruit of four years of foot-to-foot negotiations by a technical working group specially dedicated to this task. This "draft "This version serves as the basis for the decisive negotiations. The text has been considerably shortened, from 55 pages at the start of negotiations to 21 pages in this version. The result is a more digestible, better-structured text. It includes numerous compromises that were the subject of long nights of bitter discussion. However, many options remain uncertain, and no fewer than 939 points of divergence remain (there were 1685 as of yesterday).

There are still many points to be negotiated, and the ministers meeting on Monday will have their work cut out if a universal climate agreement is to be signed as planned next Friday.

Despite the difficulties, French negotiator Laurence Tubiana is seeking to encourage the players gathered at Le Bourget on Saturday: ". The work isn't over yet, with major political issues still to be decided. We will need all our energy, intelligence, capacity for compromise and far-sightedness to achieve our result. ". She adds philosophically: " We could have been better, we could have been worse. The important thing is that we have a text, we want an agreement and so do all the parties. ".

Generally speaking, optimism was the order of the day on Saturday. For example, Chinese delegate Su Wei, quoted by the Expressthe negotiators brought together " all the ingredients and seasonings to make a recipe". Next weekit's time to move into the kitchen "He added, referring to the work of the ministers. For her part, the chairwoman of the G77+China group, which comprises 134 emerging and developing countries, believes that the group is " ready to negotiate as far as possible on the basis of this text" . She added: " As Nelson Mandela said, it always seems impossible until it's done. ".

 

 

According to the Nicolas Hulot Foundation, the question of financing is the subject of 18 points of divergence. This issue is the North-South divide, and there is still a long way to go. In 2009, the rich countries pledged in Copenhagen to help developing countries in their fight against global warming by creating a "Green Fund" endowed with $100 billion a year from 2020. At Le Bourget, the countries of the South are stepping up the pressure, demanding assurances that this aid will continue beyond that date. They also want guarantees and transparency on what will and what will not be included in this sum.

 

Cyclone in Vanuatu REUTERS/UNICEF Pacific/Handout via Reuters

 

This is where the issue of "adaptation" comes into its own. The principle of adaptation involves helping the most vulnerable countries not to develop, but to cope with the disastrous consequences of global warming. How can we do this? For example, by building dykes to prevent rising waters from submerging a town or island, or by constructing buildings capable of withstanding violent climatic events. For developed countries, these are unprofitable expenses that come under the heading of humanitarianism. Yet the countries of the South, led by India and South Africa, want the treaty to include a commitment that at least half of the 100 billion allocated to the "Green Fund" will be devoted to adaptation.

 

The principle of differentiation is another stumbling block in the agreement. This principle assumes that the countries most responsible for global warming should make greater efforts to mitigate and repair the damage they have caused. However, the United States, the world's biggest emitter of greenhouse gases, is holding back. The Americans fear that if they accept their "historic" responsibility, they will have to face up to the consequences in court, as some countries that have suffered climate disasters are sure to do.  

In addition, certain countries that are not classified as "rich" but as "emerging", such as China and Brazil, are refusing to include in the agreement a commitment to help the poorest countries in their fight against global warming, in the name of the principle of responsibility.

 

Finally, the third sticking point concerns the 2°C warming target. Many countries - 110 out of 195 to be precise - want to set a long-term warming target of 1.5°C. Australia is leading this movement, which will carry a lot of weight in future negotiations. Australia is leading this movement, which will carry considerable weight in future negotiations.

 

Laurent Fabius will have to demonstrate a great sense of diplomacy to allay the fears of some, force others to abandon their blocking points and bring everyone into a logic of voluntary compromise.

 

Laurent Fabius (AFP)

 

 

 

It's a tough task, but the COP21 president seems determined and optimistic, as he sees a global shift in approach to the climate. In an interview with the newspaper Les Echos he declares: " The change in approach is real. Until now, the fight against climate change has been caught in a kind of vicious circle: many companies and financial players were sceptical and waited for political decisions before taking action; governments, for their part, were waiting for companies to get involved.. ". For Laurent Fabius, the situation has clearly changed. He observes that " most governments are now committed ". He adds: " Many companies are integrating climate action into their activities. Insurance companies, bankers and rating agencies are committed to integrating climate action into their investment decisions. More and more investment funds and pension funds are deciding to decarbonize their portfolios. It's a powerful movement, and one that's set to grow even stronger. ".

 

 

It seems certain that a change in mentality is underway. Civil society, business and even financial circles seem to want to play along. But let's not kid ourselves. The international agreement will not be signed by civil society or business. It is the governments that are negotiating, and they will have the last word. Will they remain deaf to the echoes of changing mentalities?

 

American actor Sean Penn defends forests during "Action Day" at COP21 in Le Bourget on December 5, 2015.
He alerted his audience: "Lhe time for illusions has given way to the time for action "( AFP / ERIC FEFERBERG )

 

 

The French government, organizer of this COP 21, made no mistake. Alongside the governmental negotiations, it has organized all kinds of events from civil society and local organizations. Such was the case on Saturday with Action Day, a forum reserved for companies and non-governmental organizations to showcase their initiatives. This was also the case on Friday, with the reception of 700 mayors from the world's major cities, who pledged to produce 100 % of the electricity their cities need from renewable energies. This is also the purpose of the Solutions Gallery, which has been on show at the Grand Palais in Paris since Friday, and which attracts a very large audience.

For Laurent Fabius, "It is the convergence between the commitment of governments and that of business and civil society that constitutes the turning point of this COP21.. »

 

However, the road ahead in the second week is still strewn with pitfalls. Carole Mathieu, researcher at the French Institute of International Relations (Ifri), interviewed by France TV Info explains: " During the first week, it's in everyone's interest to wait, hoping that someone else will make the compromise. ». La partie de poker menteur à laquelle se sont livrés les négociateurs est maintenant terminée. Le Réseau Action Climat appelle les pays « à abattre leurs cartes maintenant ». Tout est possible, le meilleur comme le pire.  Toutefois, l’espoir demeure car, comme le souligne Carole Mathieu, « Aucune partie n’a envie d’être tenue pour responsable de l’échec. On sent une disposition à faire avancer le collectif et ça a une grande valeur ". 

 

Charles-Elie GuzmanUP' Magazine Columnist