Doha climate deal: EU, USA, Russia, Brazil, Africa & Pacific Island reaction
Oleg Shamanov, Deputy Russian negotiator (on objections to texts being overruled at last minute)
It has to be clearly stated that this is an outrageous violation and absolutely unacceptable conduct of business.
The way those decisions were adopted, extremely seriously undermines the legitimacy of the regime and trust between the participants.
We are absolutely sure that, it would inevitably have very serious legal consequences for efforts of the countries and for ratification processes.
UNFCCC Executive Secretary, Christiana Figueres
The voice of Russia was heard today very clearly by all countries, before and after the adoption of the text. The objection was very clear to everyone, but it would have been a change to the text that would not have allowed for those texts to be adopted.
Ironically what we understand is that what Russia wants and needs is actually in those texts so my recommendation to our good Russian colleague is to take the time to read these texts – now granted, all of these texts came out today and it was very difficult for anyone to read all these texts, but I am confident that when he gets home and reads the texts that he will know that Russia’s best interests are quite faithfully reflected in the texts.
Peter Altmaier, German Environment Minister
The Qatari President did a remarkable job. Many people criticised him but from a technical point of view he was perfect. The political ideas were sometimes doubted but my personal impression was that Qatar was not impressed by big or rich countries, but that it was interested in a compromise.
Ed Davey, UK climate and environment Secretary
It was clear at this COP that the need to take action on climate change is increasingly urgent, there was recognition of that both in the debates and the text.
It’s a modest step forward, but we are paving the way to a legally binding treaty in 2015, and that’s the goal we are working for. It makes sure everyone is involved. Here in Doha we charted the way to 2015, and included a review of ambition before 2015, because I do think we need more measures before 2020.
Kieren Keke, Nauru Minister of Foreign Affairs on behalf of AOSIS
We have not seen any increase in the commitments needed to achieve the global temperature goal, ensure we meet our ultimate objective of the Convention, keep global average temperature below 1.5 degrees and ensure the survival of all islands.
There is no new finance on the table, only promises that something might materialize in the future. Finance was missing in Durban and it remains missing here in Doha.
It is difficult to see how we can continue this process unless we mobilise the necessary financial resources to enable the urgently needed funding for mitigation and adaptation. In light of the inadequate mitigation ambition, the need for a loss and damage mechanism is even more urgent. We look forward to the establishment of the international mechanism next year.
Pa Ousman Jarju, Gambia (On behalf of Least Developed Countries)
We are targeted towards dangerous climate change, as has been indicated by science, and what we have is low levels of ambition, and we need to redouble our efforts, and we hope the discussions that we have had and the agreements concluded, particularly with respect to raising the level of ambition pre 2020, will give us an opportunity of bridging the gap – but definitely what we have adopted is inadequate both in terms of finance and ambition.
Connie Hedegaard, EU Climate Commissioner
Obviously this gets criticised because steps forward get criticised for not being even more forward, but imagine had we not agreed tonight, what would then have been the situation? Where would we have gone next month to discuss international climate policy. This is not perfect, but it is a modest and important step in the right direction.
RE Poland & AAUs. The only thing I will say is that a decision [before Doha] was not for lack of trying. Maybe it needed a conference to get people moving from rather locked positions and I am looking forward very much for a council meeting on December 17 when we do not have AAUs on the agenda.
Todd Stern, chief US negotiator
In Durban we said if we are going to do CBDR, we say that that should include evolving circumstances and represent wherever you are , 2012, 2020, rather than CBDR 1992. We said fine, include CBDR but put a reference to evolving circumstances.
This was supposed to be a transitional year and that is what it was. No one expected big deliverables on the Durban platform, that was the nature of this COP. I’m not shocked that the COP turned out to be contentious. They always are.
There should be time and space to have serious discussions this year about how to understand equity and CBDR in the new world that we are trying to negotiate for.
In the first instance that should happen in the ADP. The reason I welcome this conversation is because it is clearly going to be at the heart of the Durban Platform.
Ambassador Andre Correa Do Lago, chief negotiator, Brazil
There is a very sad disengagement of developed countries on their obligations. On the other side we have to keep the Climate Change regime alive, this is essential, and KP2 is a key element of this process.
So obviously the developed countries who have committed to the second commitment period have shown that in spite of the crisis they are engaging to strengthen the regime.
I hope we reach the point where we are tired to negotiate the way we are negotiating this, and with the ADP we give a year of thinking so we restart the process that will involve business, civil society, because we cannot fight climate change just as governments – we have to involve everybody – we cannot have a Convention where nobody can participate because they are so complicated, so specific, so technical. All this technicism is to hide political priorities.