Climate Migrants/Refugees: An Open Wound

In the executive summary of the 2009 Care publication In Search of Shelter: Mapping the Effects of Climate Change on Human Migration and Displacement I read the following statement: “Policy decisions made today will determine whether migration becomes a matter of choice amongst a range of adaptation options, or merely a matter of survival due to a collective failure by the international community to provide better alternatives”. Climate migrants or refugees – the vocabulary seems still undecided and constitutes a juridical debate which should, in my opinion, take into account the intimate connection between climate change and the violent conflicts it involves, thus making the expression “refugees” adequate – are already on the move today and some estimate their number may grow to 200 million by 2050. They represent an enormous challenge to the international community and (will) call upon the resources of many humanitarian organizations, amongst which the Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS).

The JRS mission statement with its threefold focus – to accompany, to serve, to advocate – may provide us with some insight as to how to address the realities of climate migrants/refugees. These three verbs do not only indicate that we have a responsibility to care for refugees, to assist them in their own experiences and to make their voices heard. They also point out that the encounter with refugees and their experiences changes all of us, that refugees and migrants in their pain reveal the need to change our world if they are to live with dignity, that their experiences as if through a broken prism shed light on steps that we all can and have to take to build a more dignified and sustainable world. This is also the case with people who are on the move because of climate change and environmental deterioration: they show us what an inhospitable environment means for people and how it involves them in conflicts over meager resources, they remind us of the conditions to be put in place to make this earth a home to all of us: we have to mitigate not only our greenhouse gas emissions but also our exorbitant and selfish consumerist ways of life as well as our tendency to create safe havens for “our” people as over against the “others”; we have to share burdens in working out adaptation resilience, particularly for those who suffer most. Environmental refugees or migrants, therefore, are not merely a barometer indicating the facts and realities of climate change, they also point towards greater solidarity and sustainable patterns of life and show us that, one day, each one of us may become one such refugee for forgetting our embeddedness in nature and the fact that we depend upon one another for dignified life. By being present with the refugees, by listening to their experiences, by learning to speak their voice, JRS people transmit an experience of conversion that may change the world. Climate migrants/refugees lead us into a similar experience of conversion that will help us to address climate change in a very real and effective way. In the wound, there is blood of life.

Travelling on a Train Stimulates Thought

For various reasons, I had decided to return today to Leuven – by train, a 12 hour affair, which gave me ample time to reflect on the past days in Copenhagen and at the Bella Center. I started by feeling frustrated for having to leave at an interesting moment of the conference: not much has been reached up to now and I am left wondering whether the goals of the talks – reaching two track agreements (Kyoto and UNFCCC) on issues as mitigation, the financing of adaptation and the transfer of technology – are not themselves far below what could be expected in an urgent situation as we face today. I can only hope that in the coming two days, the presence of so many heads of state will allow for some real worldwide leadership and for some strong decisions. I felt also frustrated by the fact that from tomorrow on even more NGO-members, representing the public forum, will be excluded from the Bella Center. I can sympathize with the reasons for this, but it is really bad show, as the presence of critical and stimulating is a creative part of UN meetings as COP.

I did not only feel frustration; gratefully, I also overviewed some of the lessons learnt at COP15. I offer them in no particular order for further reflection and reactions …

(1) – We are facing an urgent and very serious worldwide challenge: the scientists keep reminding us of that and the expression “we are committed to …” that they like to use, indicates that we have to factor in for the near future some very threatening consequences of global climate change, consequences both for human beings and for the planet as a whole. In fifty years from now, the planet will look differently and human beings will live differently.

(2) – Our best available science (BAS) keeps evolving and deepening its insight in the crisis: IPCC V will involve more complexity (e.g. the role of the oceans) and will take more account of the social implications of what is happening. I think that heads of state and world leaders will also increasingly pay attention to the security aspects of global climate change. I feel, for myself, that science has to move to a higher “level,” i.e. finding a way to see the whole and not only analyze its parts as individual bits and pieces: the issue is not only to acquire more precisions on various aspects of the crisis, it is also to find a way to look at the crisis as a whole.

(3) – There is still a lot of skepticism around and – as illustrated by the hacking of the personal e-mails of scientists – the media seem to focus on these issues. In my personal opinion, this is irresponsible, although it takes account of the fact that skeptics exercise a real political influence that is felt at COP15.

(4) – The fact that the Bella Center is overrun by NGOs is a good and comforting sign: many people and organizations – particularly grassroot organizations – have grasped the importance and the significance of the global climate change crisis. And these people are active, they do not give in to despair, they challenge their politicians and they propose alternative life styles and alternative politics. The voice of these people is crucial and, therefore, it is really regrettable that decisions are being taken to limit their access to the Bella Center.

(5) – At a political level, the most important challenge seems to me to be to move out of the framework defined by “I represent my own country or nation”. Where are the politicians who represent worldwide humanity? Where are the politicians who voice the concerns of nature, of disappearing species of plants and animals, of the forests, of the oceans, etc.? Nation-voices are not helpful if they are not embedded in the deep concern for human beings worldwide and for the planet as a whole.

(6) – The worldwide environmental crisis is a social crisis, a crisis of human life on the planet earth, and of justice. The crisis is about people who suffer and give voice to what is happening. It is about the contrast between rich and poor, between those who are responsible for the human impact on climate change and those who most suffer its consequences. Over and over again, at the Bella Center, the poor and suffering people are given a voice, and attention is paid to issues of young people, of migrants, of gender and of indigenous people. Justice is not about the poor and excluded people being better human beings for their poverty and exclusion; it is about the willingness to let their experiences shed light on what is happening, because in them the struggle for life and hope is especially strong and revealing. They remind us that all of us have a responsibility for the dignity and well being of all, particularly of the most forgotten. Their voices may also help all of us to listen to the voices of nature and of the planet, as is illustrated by the strong advocacy for forests and biodiversity from the side of indigenous people. Theologians would point out that here we see the option for the poor at work. This is a crisis about human dignity and about creational dignity.

(7) – Because issues of justice are at stake, COP15 is also about reconciliation WITH reparations – Climate Justice is an important idea and it should inform the discussions about financing mitigation and adaptation. How are we going to find an new equilibrium of equity and justice between developed, emerging and developing countries and people? I feel it as a desolation that at COP15, negotiators seem to think only in strict economical terms and to understand the goal of development as the style of life of the rich countries. Is there no need for a deeper reflection on words as growth and development? The “vision text” seems very crucial from this perspective.

(8) – There remains an important issue of how the place of human beings on this planet has to be understood. Obviously, the climate change crisis is about human beings: they are to a large extent responsible for it, they suffer from the crisis, and the fate of human beings is a core concern of us and of COP15. But, there is more at stake: the crisis is also about the planet and about the relationships between human beings and the planet. Evolution theory may help us out here, to show both human embeddedness in nature, as well as the importance of human beings in nature that has given itself new possibilities and perspectives in human beings.

(9) – There is an important role for religions, although they were but little present at COP15, i.e. in the Bella Center and amidst the negotiations. There have been, of course, some remarkable religious events outside of the Bella Center, and I think especially of Rowan Williams’ sermon in Copenhagen’s cathedral. Religions touch the capacity to face truth and reality (particularly when it has become difficult to face these, as is the case with global climate change), they are spaces for visions and hope, they are intimately connected to cosmologies and worldviews and, therefore, also to nature itself, they use methodologies of discernment that are more holistic than scientific, economic, military, etc. perspectives, they pay attention to the voices of broken people and broken creatures, they can mobilize and motivate people. There is a great need for these religious voices, also amongst politicians and leaders who are facing the current challenges. Leadership at this level and at this moment requires a worldwide perspective and a strong rootedness in constructive and pro-active values.

(10) – I also come home with ideas about the role of the Jesuits and the Ignatian Family. They have a worldwide presence, a universal scope and reach at many levels that they can efficiently interconnect: presence in the field, academic research in universities, the capacity to build local and international institutions (as the Jesuit Refugee Service), possibilities to advocate at political level and in political institutions, a spirituality in which common apostolic discernment plays an important role, influence in the media of communication, etc. To have received these capacities is at this moment of history a very precious gift and puts the Ignatian Family and the Jesuits at a “kairos” in which they can commit wholeheartedly and, in doing so, rediscover who they are.

US President B. Obama’s Nobel Talk and Climate Change

Upon reception of his Nobel Peace Prize on Dec 10, 2009, US President Barack H. Obama held a remarkable lecture on many accounts, e.g. his references throughout what he said and his willingness to discuss hope and religion. What he said will most certainly draw very diverse reactions, particularly his willingness to face squarely the reality of war as inevitable under certain circumstances, as well as the rules to wage war.

Here, I just want to focus on two aspects of the talk that seem important amidst environmental challenges such as global climate change. He addresses the issue directly in a small paragraph that relates to the security issues involved with development, food, water, medicine, education and job availability. B. Obama says: “And that is why helping farmers feed their people – or nations educate their children and care for the sick – is not mere charity. It is also why the world must come together to confront climate change. There is little scientific dispute that if we do nothing, we will face more drought, famine and mass displacement that will fuel more conflict for decades. For this reason, it is not merely scientists and activists who call for swift and forceful action – it is military leaders in my country and others who understand that our common security hangs in the balance.” B. Obama emphasizes the security issues regarding climate change. I agree that is an important element in the discussion, and I have not seen many military issues discussed at COP15, although obviously amongst the consequences of climate change we will find great societal and social disruption and unrest. One could argue that B. Obama does not point out that there is an even much larger security issue facing us: the security of the planet itself is at risk and the consequences of climate change concern the very survival of the human race and of life on the planet as a whole.

The second aspect I want to highlight in B. Obama’s address is his clear focus on his responsibilities as head of a state and, therefore, as responsible for his nation. This is most understandable, of course, but one keeps wondering how the responsibilities of a head of state relate to the concern and the care for the planet as a whole. There is need for worldwide leadership beyond national leadership. This tension is very present in the Bella Center: nations, diplomats, ministers and heads of state stand for their own nations’ interests and needs and they enter into economic and political competition as planetary resources are concerned. The poor and weak who suffer the consequences of a lack of worldwide leadership, remind us of the necessity and urgency of a broader scope than the mere nation.

COP15 – Religion, Climate Justice, the Arctic

COP15 has clearly moved into a new stage. On Saturday, authorities announced that they would limit the number of entries per NGO – new passes, of which only a limited number have been made available, are needed. The reason is, of course, security: ministers and heads of state have started arriving in Copenhagen. And there are a lot of people accredited to COP15 – parties, of course, but also an unprecedented number of press and members of NGO. But the measure is highly unusual in the context of UN organized meetings and some protest has already been voiced.

This morning, people were queuing up in large numbers at the entrance of the Bella Center, already accredited people and people looking for accreditation – many people have shown up for COP15’s second week, overwhelmingly many. Fortunately, accredited people as José Ignacio and myself, could enter quite easily. We went first to a side-event organized by Caritas Internationalis and the World Council of Churches (WCC): “To Renew the Face of the Earth: Climate Justice from a Faith Perspective”. There was first an encouraging talk by Joy Kennedy, a member of the WCC Working Group on Climate Change. Followed an intervention by Rev. Fr. Erny Gillen, President of Caritas Europa and Vice-President of Caritas Internationalis. Tofiga Falani, the President of the Congregational Christian Church in Tuvalu, spoke moving words about the situation of his fellow-citizens. This side event made it abundantly clear that religion has a role to play in the climate change crisis, and that this role complements the work of scientists, economists and politicians by emphasizing the spiritual-theological and moral aspects of people involved in the crisis. It became also clear that there still is a lot of work to do for theologians and specialists in spirituality. Archbishop Rowan William’s sermon yesterday gave an excellent example of how these issues can be addressed, empowering people and at the same time challenging leadership.

Al Gore and Nordic ministers offered a side event on “Greenland Ice Sheet – Melting Snow and Ice: Calls for Action”, which I very much wanted to attend, but the room was overfilled and I was not allowed in (a press conference summarized the issues). Polar ice is melting much faster than has been expected, rendering North Pole summers ice free in about 10 years. This will result in powerful climate feedbacks affecting continents and people far beyond the Arctic itself. It will also result in the Arctic becoming one of the most strategic areas of the globe. The side events here at COP15 have made it clearer to me, that many of the complexities of worldwide climate change are still insufficiently explored. The effects on and of ocean warming and acidification as well as on and of polar ice melting are high on the scientific agenda.

In a conference later on the day, Seán McDonagh reminded me of the importance of climate restitution: rich countries may not having been aware of their actions on global climate, but these actions resulted in harm, that calls for restitution. It is as if unwillingly and unknowingly we would poison our neighbor’s house. Christians would have to recognize the damage their actions have done and they would feel called to do restitution, to repair the damage done. This climate justice and reparation is at stake in the COP15 talks: legally binding agreements would secure this justice both for mitigation and adaptation. African countries today made it very clear that they call for a continuation of the Kyoto Protocol, so as to safeguard at least the existing legally binding agreements. Some of the developed countries and some of the richer developing countries seem to want to undo the KP, including it in one track with the Convention (UNFCCC), which, unfortunately, does not contain such legally binding features.

Archbishop Rowan William’s Sermon at the Ecumenical Service

An ecumenical celebration was organized today in Copenhagen’s main cathedral with the presence of many dignitaries from various denominations and religions. Amongst them the Queen of Denmark, archbishop Desmond Tutu, and the archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, who held a very encouraging sermon. His core idea, crucial for a courageous attitude in the face of today’s worldwide climate change crisis, is that love casts out fear. God invites us to love creation and to commit to it. He distinguishes several forms of fear. There is the fear of spoiling the heritage we have received, the gift of creation itself for which we have been called to take on responsibility. There may also be the fear of many of us to take on our shoulders the cost of the decisions we know we must make or because we feel we have to trust others whom until know we have been viewing as threatening competitors. The challenge is not to fear, but to commit to a love, out of which we will draw the energy to do what is necessary as well as the force to trust. “Don’t be afraid; act for the sake of love”.

Archbishop Rowan William’s ideas are interesting because he offers a systematic analysis, while at the same time emphasizing deep movements in the human soul. This points to a logic of spiritual discernment in which movements of consolation and desolation are translated into experiences of love and of fear respectively. This position remains open for scientific, economic and political approaches, but situates these in a larger holistic perspective and sets us free from a one sided approach of control. In this sophisticated approach religions and the experiences they embody can be of great help.

Archbishop Rowan William’s homily can be found on the web, as part of a full presentation of the liturgy.

“Time” on the Climate e-mail Controversy

In its latest issue, Time magazine presents a “Spotlight” on the climate e-mail controversy, claiming that “Climate change advocates are right on the science – but skeptics may be right on the politics”. Obviously, there is a strong political lobby in the USA to downplay the importance of the climate change crisis – Mss. Sarah Palin being a good example. On 100 US citizens, so claims Time, only 46% are convinced that the climate change crisis is a real problem. 36% see no problem. 18% are not sure. This is very worrying, given that the number one country on the list of those who have to act urgently and decisively, is the USA. Why are the numbers what they are? Is it because people are not sufficiently informed? Is it because vested economic and financial interest try to misinform them? Is it because they are not capable to face the gravity of the situation and the consequences for their lifestyles? In the USA, this certainly is a major political issue.

By the way, why do so many people and periodicals always refer to the inhabitants of the USA as Americans. They are, of course, Americans, but not all Americans are US citizens …

COP15 – Dec 12,2009 – Tuvalu and Climate Action Day

I was most impacted today by an intervention of the delegate from Tuvalu during today’s first plenary session. It can be viewed on the COP15 website (from 0:02:53 to 0:09:30). It was a passionate and emotional intervention, but at the same time it was very clear: the situation is very serious and our survival is at stake, but an answer depends upon us all, and more particularly upon decisions made in the US Senate. This insistence on the seriousness and urgency of the climate change crisis, in which life and death are at stake, touches me deeply. Moreover, Tuvalu’s delegate admitted, and he had tears in his eyes when he said it, that he got up this morning weeping – this is a crisis that moves us profoundly, touches our guts and, therefore, can bring the best, the most vulnerable, but also the worst and the most aggressive in us to the surface. These inner movements have become part of the debate. To me this indicates that the climate change crisis is, at its core, a process of decision making that requires not only necessary and sound science, economics and politics, but also discernment at the level of what we deeply want and what deeply fits us as human beings sharing a planet, and even better: as a planet that has given in itself through a long evolution the capacity to discern and decide.

CAN (Climate Action Network) is a network of NGOs involved in climate change work and an important non-party actor in COP15. Amongst COP15 webcasts, one finds also the daily CAN International Press Conference. They are worthwhile following, as they present us with the evolution of the conversations, consultations and diplomatic efforts. They also offer a kind of benchmark program on what to work towards for the negotiations in COP15. In today’s press conference, they stressed the importance of “Global Climate Action Day”, held all over the world. These events show a worldwide commitment to addressing the climate change crisis and signify a real call to COP15 and the politicians who will take the decisions.

My impressions after one week in Copenhagen are difficult to formulate precisely. It seems that negotiations are going on and it is a fact that some draft texts circulate. I feel frustrated because of the one sided and narrow economic and market logic that is being used here, but I am also happily surprised that there are voices reacting against this and pointing out that more will be needed to reach a sustainable agreement that will allow all of us to mitigate our climate change drivers and to adapt to the consequences of climate change that we cannot anymore avoid. At the same time, I think that what was originally planned as a conference of parties, has – because of the seriousness of the crisis – grown into an event of worldwide significance and into a summit of world leaders and heads of state. At this moment, it looks as if there are very high expectations and as if everything is still possible; ultimately, these heads of state will commit. This reveals at a “higher” level something that is clear at grassroot level (cf. the worldwide actions today): we face a serious, threatening worldwide crisis, which requires worldwide collaboration for its resolution. Moreover, although many of the concerns at COP15 are economic and political, I am convinced that in the course of the next week moral leadership will play a far greater role than has been the case until now – that is also the main reason in my eyes why it is important that world leaders and heads of state be present in Copenhagen. This moral leadership will be necessary to push forward difficult and painful decisions that acknowledge the limits of our planet and seek to heal the injustices that have grown out of greedy and consumerist behavior that has lost its value bearings. The moral leadership will also be necessary to face the consequences and sufferings that have already become unavoidable (the scientists would say: “to which our world is already committed”) and that are already very real as the climate refugees and the inhabitants of Tuvalu do not fail to tell us.

Well, let’s say that this is what I hope. Therefore, I think it is a pity that religions are only marginally or tangentially present in the Bella Center – they do not seem to be a serious conversation partner at the level where decisions are being taken. The issue is not that there should be a religious conversion, but rather that the resources found in religious experiences for discernment, vision, hope, planetary connectedness and the art of dealing with deep suffering, may offer opportunities for developing a shared vision and commitment, may help us to address worldwide injustice, and may lead us to change profoundly and rapidly our unacceptable life styles and worldviews.

COP15 – Puzzling Thoughts 4/4 – Eucharist

Yesterday, Dec 11, I attended various side-events to COP15, and I am left with some puzzle pieces of thoughts.

 (4) José Ignacio and myself participated in a eucharistic celebration at the roman catholic St. Ansgar cathedral in Copenhagen, presided by the archbishop of Kampala and organized by Caritas Internationalis on the occasion of COP15. Although Roman Catholics are a very small minority in Denmark, this eucharist reflected a very lively and welcoming community. The youth choir was impressive.

Participation in the liturgy reminded me how important a eucharistic celebration can be in the context of the worldwide climate change crisis: this celebration connects us globally – the eucharist is celebrated worldwide; there is time to take in reality, our responsibilities and our mistakes in reality; we celebrate the beauty of our world and thank God for it; we participate in God’s work in creation and bring this on the table, where this shared work shapes us into a church; the readings, and particularly the gospel reading, remind us that we belong to the world, as in the incarnation the Lord belongs to the world – our faith is not about moving out of the world into some other kind of world, but about moving into the world to move with it into its full future, the Reign of God; there is celebration of communion with God, with our fellow human beings and with the world; we are reminded of our mission into our world and of the fact that this mission leads us into total commitment – that we may be celebrating the eucharist as Christ did, on the eve of his passion. All of these are crucial attitudes today, in the midst of a growling world, as Pierre Teilhard de Chardin in his “Messe sur le Monde” was well aware of. I refer to him here, because his writings and those of Thomas Berry, accompany me here, and I am glad to have those two beacons with me in Copenhagen.

Egied Van Broeckhoven, a Flemish Jesuit priester worker in Brussels during the second half of the nineteenth century, parts of whose diary have been published also in English, describes this double movement of incarnation as participation in the work of a growning world, a world that struggles against injustice and inhumanity; as well as as intimate encounter with God precisely in this world. His holy ground was the factory, our holy ground today is our planet.

COP15 – Puzzling Thoughts 3/4 – The Hadley Centre

Yesterday, Dec 11, I attended various side-events to COP15, and I am left with some puzzle pieces of thoughts.

 (3) The third side event in which I participated was the presentation of the prestigious Met Office Hadley Centre. The combination of presentations was brilliant, but we were given a very grim – nearly apocalyptic – image of the future, up to the point that one can wonder how these scientists “feel” about these issues, once they are facing their children and grandchildren and have to leave behind the cold rationality they rightly use in analyzing the facts … It is frightening and questions arise as to what kind of adaptation will be realistic and how hope can be generated in the face of such realities and out of such realities. Tackling global climate change, therefore, is not only a scientific, economic and political issue; a much broader and holistic strategy is necessary, in which the so-called human sciences and religions will play an important role. While wondering about strengthening people’s capacity to cope with these challenges, I was reminded of Aaron Antonovsky’s “sense of coherence” (SOC), but also of my own religion’s capacity to generate hope in desperate situations and to deal with situations of immense pain and suffering (e.g. the pest, or Dietrich Bonhoeffer in Nazi-Germany). There certainly is work to be done here, and urgently. Again, it is a pity that religions and their theologians, or that human sciences such as social psychology, are but tangentially present at COP15.

COP15 – Puzzling Thoughts – 2/4 – REDD and Indigenous People

Yesterday, Dec 11, I attended various side-events to COP15, and I am left with some puzzle pieces of thoughts.

 (2) The idea of REDD is to reduce GHG emissions from deforestation and forest degradation – a plan with enormous implications for the vast rainforests in Latin America and Africa. A side-event organized by COICA, the Coordinadora de las organizaciones indigenas de la Cuenca amazonica, illustrated the complexities of REDD in the face of the indigenous people in the Amazon region. The tone was aggressive and passionate: among the indigenous people, the fear exists – and I can understand them when I see how the whole COP15 focuses on economic and market solutions to the climate change crisis – that this will lead to mercantilise the rain forests. They fear that forests will be turned into plantations, in the hands of industrial interests and aimed at maximizing financial gain. But, plantations are not an alternative to forests, their significance and the special care that indigenous people have for them and for the biodiversity they harbor, necessary to life on earth. Plantations reflect an economic market logic, that does not reflect the real life of a forest, but takes it on as a consumer object. The indigenous people from the Amazon region also fear, that in this market process, their human rights will not be respected, as is already the case – people have been killed for defending the forests against logging. The deepest lack of respect for the human rights of the indigenous people lies in the fact that they are turned into mere economic actors in a market that stimulates greed and murderous competition. REDD, therefore, is linked to indigenous human rights as it is linked to biodiversity.

These passionate discussions pose the issue of the place of economic measures in addressing the global climate change crisis. I was thinking how, in the crisis situation born out of cruel world wars, the European Union has been constructed by building up a common market, by an economic strategy. However, this economic strategy was combined with a strong emphasis on values, particularly on the value of solidarity. Precisely, in Europe today the debate on values has become crucial, since the market logic seems to tempt people away from the important values that should frame economic and market logic. The indigenous people of the Amazon region offer us a plea for a set of values: the value of forests and the special care for them, the value of biodiversity, the values of human rights, … Economic and political strategies should not be blind and they need a framework of values to do their work in a constructive and positive way – a fact of which religion reminds us. It is, therefore, frightening that religions are present only on the fringes of COP15: it is high time to ask decision-makers for the motivations, values and beliefs they hold dear and want to turn into decisions for our planet. Yesterday, Rowan Williams in a sermon reminded us precisely of this: religion is not some eccentricity or oddity with regard to politics – it touches the core of what it means to be a politician.

COP15 – Puzzling Thoughts 1/4 – Climate Debt

Yesterday, Dec 11, I attended various side-events to COP15, and I am left with some puzzle pieces of thoughts.

(1) Historical or Climate Debt: In a side-event organized by Christian-Aid on justice and the outcomes of Copenhagen, in which also Tom Athanasios from Eco-Equity spoke about greenhouse development rights, Satheesh on the Indian People’s Manifesto on Climate Change grown out of a participatory grass root movement, and Shirley Bolinos on her work with the coastal communities in the Philippines, Naomi Klein referred to the concepts of historical or climate debt and historical memory (http://www.naomiklein.org/articles/2009/11/climate-rage). The developed countries have built up and continue to build up their wealth and industry at the cost of the (colonial and neo-colonial) developing countries, that today suffer most of the climate change impact, are least resilient to climate change, and have an impressive development arrear (at least as “development” is understood in the economic market logic sense. An historical, climate debt has accumulated that should incite and oblige the developed countries to commit to legally binding GHG emissions restrictions and to providing adaptation funds for developing countries.

This idea of a climate debt is contested by the US government: when in the process of industrialization, the now developed countries were not aware of the global climate change their development would bring about. Indeed, I can agree that the developed countries, when beginning their industrialization and changes of lifestyle, were not guilty of anthropogenic climate change. Of course, they are responsible, as it is their activities that have introduced current GHG levels in the atmosphere. However, today, the responsibility for GHG emissions implies guilt: we know what is happening and we should change our lifestyles, attitudes and behavior. Moreover, knowing about our responsibility in the so-called West and realizing how much western development has lead to global inequalities and injustices, it seems at least fair that the western world carry its load of the burden, and that load is bigger, much bigger than the load of the developing countries. There is a call, not only to protect the weak, but also to restore equity and justice on a global scale. Therefore, this is not only about repairing a historical fact from the past, it is also about deciding how to live equitably and justly today. The latter implies the former.  I think Naomi Klein is correct in her assessment of climate debt, I also think that this argument cannot be isolated from the larger reality of today’s global injustice.

COP15 – Dec 10, 2009 – The Strength of Youth

The number of people in Bella Center is increasing. My collection of documents has grown to the point that I will not be able to carry all of it to Belgium. It is easy to be overwhelmed by the complexity of issues and to drown in all that is on offer, without really touching the essentials. Veterans of the COP meetings advise to keep a focus and to stick to some reliable sources of information, such as CAN . Personally, of course, I am interested in the religious dimensions of this whole process … but here, I feel frustrated. Religion is only marginally present in the Bella Center. There is a group that refers to a Supreme Master; it is very vocal at the entrance of the Center, but is not precisely my cup of tea. Someone told me today that he thought religion should be more visible, particularly through statements of its leadership: “you do not really market your product, Father, and it is a good product that could be put to good use here.” There is a challenge … Of course, I know that religions are speaking and that at grassroot level many Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus and others are passionately committed to environmental issues, to the point of giving their lives. But, are we really present amongst those who are governing our world and making the important decisions?

Today, I decided to join the side events concerning youth and young people. The climate change crisis is of particular importance to them. On their orange T-shirts (paid for by the Dutch government), one can read: what will be your age in 2050? In the meetings I attended, young people were well aware of their creativity and energy, and they asked to be taken seriously. Politicians and negotiators, amongst whom Yvo De Boer of UNFCCC, challenge them to exercise even more pressure than they do now and to engage in politics. These young people know that they will have to change their lifestyles, that the world in which they live today will have changed profoundly by 2050. They also have a much more global sense than people of my generation: the earth is their home, they have friends all over the globe, and they are using all the means available to communicate globally – some of them continue to talk and listen to their computers (they use SKYPE) while they are walking in the corridors. This is refreshing in a context where nationalities and country boundaries dominate the discussions.

There was an interesting contribution by Tracy Bach, a Vermont professor of law, on intergenerational equity and justice. She referred to Edith Brown Weiss’ 1989 book “In Fairness to Future Generations” to point out three criteria to be included in lawmaking: keep open the options for future generations, preserve the quality of the world to be passed on to next generations, and secure equal access to public resources. However, in my eyes, the most interesting contribution came from Aman Jain, the president of an international student association, AIESEC. He was dynamic, enthusiastic, challenging and clear in his presentation and he stressed the importance of leadership, political action and commitment in an intergenerational perspective.

These young people and their commitment represent a great contribution and asset to COP15. As the indigenous people, to whose voices I paid attention yesterday, the young people know their future is at stake, they are willing to commit to change matters for the best, and they offer new perspectives and approaches. Both these groups give me hope and strength. I want to work with them. Karl Rahner spoke in a Christmas homily about “die ewige Jugend Gottes” (the neverending, eternal youth of God); I felt something of that today.

Glocal Realities and the Elephant

I feel a constant tension at COP15. On the one side, the climate change crisis is complex and global, it affects people everywhere in various ways. Therefore, the narratives of these many people are interesting: their experiences contribute to a better understanding of the crisis. These voices, and particularly those of the most affected people, carry seeds for imagining and designing a sustainable life together on our planet. Each particular voice is worth listening to. On the other side, the COP15 discussions very often reflect the particular interests of countries and nations that enter in power games with one another. Although the clash of these particular interests highlights some very important aspects of the crisis and in that sense is constructive, the game of particular interests becomes destructive for the whole, if it is not set against the background of a worldwide concern. In that sense, some call for global, worldwide structures of governance.

The tension balances between a force downwards (the need to pay attention to individual experiences) and the need for a broad force field that can act effectively on a worldwide scale, beyond the power games of national interests. Such a “glocal” (global & local) approach represents a new challenge to our ways of doing politics. Is there a way to give due respect to personal narratives and experiences, while at the same time focusing on the world as a whole? I am not sure that the politics of negotiating between nations is the best way to proceed? Who are the real parties at the table of negotiation?

The situation is even more complex. This “glocal” tension looks at the crisis from a very anthropocentric perspective: it is a crisis of humanity before being a crisis of the planet as a whole. There is, indeed, an elephant in the room: the voice of the planet as an actor who confronts us with limits and with reactions that move beyond our control. To me, it was symbolized by a loose butterfly in the “Niels Bohr” room, an animal that should not be there at this moment of the year, an animal that had entered the Bella Center without accreditation and without passing through the necessary controls. There may be danger that the human parties at COP15 try to answer in just and equitable terms (for human beings) the challenge to live together, while forgetting to take into account the limits and uncontrollability of our one natural resource, the earth. Who at this conference is advocating for the elephant party in the room?

Allow me a theological reflection on COP15 realities. This triangle of tensions is not unfamiliar to Christians. Indeed, the Christian experience is always located in individual human beings, whose narratives are crucial to understand and to transmit faith. Nevertheless, that faith has a social and a universal scope: it requires the manifold of human experiences to truly unfold as a gift to all of us and to disrupt a self-centeredness that we like to cover up as faith – there is a challenge to justice and equity. Therefore, Christians pay a critical attention to the gift of faith in the poor and excluded, in those who vulnerably maintain their t(h)rust in a dignified future together even amidst the most brutal and inhuman conditions. Church emerges as concrete communities with a universal scope, when these experiences of faith are shared and offer the space for the revelation of the deeper ground or source that – or better: “who” – critically holds and brings us together. However, there is one more critical step to go, lest we should reduce reality to mere human togetherness according to “our” plans (the plans of the most powerful amongst us, who impose their will and interests on others, using even the appeal to objective science and technological control to do so). The source Christians recognize and call God, cannot be imprisoned in the structure of our life together, in our human societies. Reality is larger than human community and society – as reality is larger than the game of countries and nations at COP15. There is an elephant in the room of human life together: there is a world, a universe, to which we all belong and out of which we emerge, and this is a reality that ultimately escapes all human attempts to control and dominate it and that Christians, therefore, call creation. This “escape” of reality is not grounded in its brutal force that would hold us at bay, but, paradoxically, in its vulnerability that lies beyond our control because reality is too poor to yield all that we would want to extract out of it. Reality’s real protection and strength lies in the fact that by destroying it, we destroy ourselves – when the awareness has grown that we can destroy the environment through which we receive life, we become aware of a responsibility that makes us similar to the Creator but that keeps us from replacing the Creator.

COP15: More Is Needed than Financial and Economic Wizardry

A session organized by the delegation of the Netherlands on Mitigation Efforts of Developed Countries – Will It Be Enough?, submerged me in the kind of financial and economic details most probably determine the negotiations at COP15. The various presentations attempted to map and model various strategies for keeping global warming under 2°C, taking into account pledges made by developed countries and the so-called REDD factor, concerned with reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries. More financial and economic wizardry appears, when speakers address the so-called “hot air” generated by the economic decline of Russia and the Ukraine or when they point out that the 17% GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions’ reduction pledged by the USA refers to the baseline 2005 and means a reduction of a mere 3% when the “usual” baseline of 1990 is taken. The overall perspective of the Dutch seemed to me rather pessimistic: many more pledges are necessary if the goal is to keep the 2°C limit …

For a theologian with some background in mathematics, all of this is not easy to grasp, and it is clear that it would be worthwhile to have some specialists in economics and financing amongst us in Copenhagen. My personal frustration is that I have the impression that COP15 is being reduced to finding economic and financial solutions to a crisis, the seriousness of which has been laid out before us by the scientists of the IPCC, who have been asked explicitly to avoid any political interpretation of their measurements and models – the use of the word “urgency” in the IPCC presentation was already too much for some of the journalists present … The crisis is reduced to a technical problem, for which we can design a series of possible solutions among which to choose. Politics seem reduced to applied economics and financing. Ethical questions do not seem to be addressed; religious perspectives have nearly completely disappeared out of the Bella Center. Moreover, I am somewhat surprised not to see military people here – they may be present, but I have not seen uniforms – and there is a growing suspicion in me that at some moment of time the issue of global warming and security needs to be addressed. I hope that there are psychologists and sociologists amongst the negotiators, and not only amongst the representatives of IGOs or NGOs. In short, I miss the interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary environment that seems to be necessary for addressing the worldwide crisis. The narratives of suffering people, such as the indigenous people, remind us of this; the cold calculations of the economists and financial experts – however important and crucial they may be – seem to hide the fact that we are facing questions about just and equitable life styles and about sustainable life together on the planet earth and in close and even intimate connection with it. A complex, interwoven and holistic perspective is required – at least, I think so – that even our best available science cannot yet offer, and that is certainly truncated if only its economic and financial aspects are taken under consideration. I think it is a gift from indigenous traditions but also from religions to intuit and suggest such holistic perspectives and worldviews.

Institutionalized religions, churches and organizations offer opportunities for inspiring spiritual depth as well as the means of spaces in which experiences of concrete people, political reflection and advocacy, broad and interdisciplinary scientific reflection, and mobilization of public opinion. As a Jesuit, I feel that there is a task here for the Society of Jesus and for the Ignatian Family. As a Roman Catholic, I feel that a clear voice from those who have the most universal and broad perspective, is urgently needed to complement and strengthen the many initiatives that are already functioning at local levels. There are already some cautious declarations. More is needed. This would undoubtedly enrich the Bella Center and the participants at COP15.

COP15 – The Gift of Indigenous People

Today, José Ignacio and myself participated in a side event organized by TEBTEBBA, where indigenous people voiced their experiences in the midst of the current global climate change crisis. The speakers came from very different geographical areas: the Philippines, Alaska, Norway, Pacific Islands, Peru and Kenya. Nevertheless, their experiences are very similar and there is a feeling that they belong together, even if they come from different contexts and have different backgrounds. They are in pain, because they are amongst the first to suffer cruelly from a crisis they have not caused. They are also in pain because they are not listened to, although they have traditional knowledge on offer about how to live in our natural environments and how to respect them so as to keep them available for the future. Their cultural diversities that all reflect a deep connectedness to the earth and the land are a gift to us all.

It was a refreshing breach of style in what I have seen up until now, that several of them started their intervention with a greeting in their own native language, a greeting with the spiritual value of a blessing for nature and an emphasis on what Christians understand to be the sacramental role of human beings in nature. These very blessings and greetings, this capacity to continue to trust what they have to give to us all, show resilience, cultural and religious strength. This opens a door to other approaches to the climate change crisis than the political and economic perspectives that receive most, if not nearly all, attention in Bella Center. To the indigenous people, the earth really is a home, and not just a consumption product. They take care of their life giving relationships to the many animals, trees and forests, to the environment in general.

The historical experience of indigenous people – and that we heard in all their narratives and voices, however different their backgrounds and geographical contexts may be – is precisely a holistic, ecosystem based approach to life, in which biodiversity, ecosystem resilience and the intimate interaction between human beings and the ecosystem are crucial. Depriving ourselves from these rich and strong traditions by not respecting the human rights of the indigenous people represents, in the context of today’s climate change crisis, a terrible loss.