In Rome, the heads of state and government of the G20 states only passed a minimal consensus on climate protection. In the eyes of many media, this is a bad signal for the climate summit in Glasgow. The press review.
The G20 summit in Rome came to an end with a signal to the UN climate conference in Glasgow. In their final declaration on Sunday, the world’s strongest economies backed the 1.5 degree target. But while Chancellor Angela Merkel (CDU) and Italy’s Prime Minister Mario Draghi were satisfied with the summit results, climate protectors expressed their disappointment. UN Secretary General António Guterres also spoke of “unfulfilled hopes”. The commentators of international media mostly take the side of the critics:
Guardian, UK: Glasgow needs to bridge the gap between talking and acting
“COP26 is unlikely to make a dramatic breakthrough like the one in Paris, but the conference needs to pave the way for concerted global action to accelerate emissions reductions. Concrete measures are in areas like phasing out coal, cutting back methane emissions, maintaining carbon sinks such as forests and peat bogs, and financing climate change in developing countries. As host of COP26, the UK will be responsible for running the conference for the next two weeks. It is regrettable, to say the least, that Prime Minister Boris Johnson is beating the drum for states to take more action, but his own government is calmly moving on to grant new licenses to North Sea oil fields, and it is precisely this rhetoric-action gap that needs to be addressed in Glasgow if the conference is to be a success It’s not a game l space more available. What will or will not be done in this decade will determine the fate of future generations. “
“Politiken”, Denmark: We have to find hope in hopelessness
“Californians are fleeing forest fires, New Yorkers are drowning in flooded subways and basements, German towns, houses and cars are washed away by floods overnight, Arctic glaciers are melting quickly, and drought and unbearable heat make large parts of the Middle East almost uninhabitable. Against this gloomy and dystopian background, the heads of state and government of the world must now try to reach agreement on a final declaration that can oblige the countries to take seriously the reduction of global CO2 emissions Finding hope. The big difference between Glasgow and all previous climate summits is that there is no way around radical solutions if we want to leave a reasonably habitable earth for our children and grandchildren.
“Tages-Anzeiger”, Switzerland: Glasgow offers an opportunity for the future
“For many, Glasgow is the last chance. From a climate research point of view, however, that is the case for any conference in the last twenty years. In optimistic terms, this year’s conference is the chance for the future. In Glasgow, the States parties must make it clear over the next two weeks that they are in favor of more ambitious goals, for transparent, comprehensible climate plans for the next ten years, and they have to guarantee that the promised money will go where it is needed.
The development towards the post-fossil age has long since been heralded, there is no reason to slow down, just a quick forward. “
“NZZ”, Switzerland: Transparency is important for climate protection
“The main work of the conference will be devoted to the further elaboration of a set of rules for international cooperation, the main features of which had only been decided in Paris. There are two main issues. so that these are internationally comparable and can be correctly counted. Second, rules are needed to facilitate cross-border trading of emission reductions. Both are important for climate protection. Trustworthy transparency of emission reductions achieved at home and abroad is a prerequisite for governments to They can be held accountable for their promises. Here, too, the negotiators of the conference have to struggle with various disruptive maneuvers, mostly large issuers who have little interest in transparency. The conference can only pass resolutions by consensus, so everything is progressing slowly it is not as spectacular and clear to communicate the rules of the UN conference as the 1.5-degree target. But it is no less important. “
“Rossiyskaya”, Russia: Russia could be tough at climate conference
“Europe, which is confronted with a severe energy crisis this year, mainly due to its rashly quick departure from fossil fuels, expects our country to increase gas and coal deliveries, but has so far not taken any accommodating steps. Russia will join Europe’s green agenda unlikely to oppose, especially since it is planning CO2 neutrality by 2060. But it can definitely stand up for its positions at the summit in Glasgow, since our country’s budget revenues depend on oil, gas and coal production – and also of their export. “
“La Repubblica”, Italy: G20 summit accomplished two basic tasks
“Anyone who expected a revolution in the fight against climate change was likely to be disappointed. But the G20 summit under the Italian presidency had two basic tasks: to bring all of the” big players “on a common line against global warming and thus create a basis for doing so the COP26, which starts in Glasgow, can take another step. And these two projects were achieved in the end. “
“De Tijd”, Belgium: Historic international agreements are possible
“Of course the dispute is not over yet. There are still too many tricky details, too many exemptions, too many discussions about what exactly belongs to taxable profit and what doesn’t. In addition, the agreement in each country still has to pass through parliament. But the international train has picked up speed. But the meaning of this G20 agreement lies elsewhere. It shows that a political counterforce can be built up in the face of economic globalization, that after all the Pandora Papers, Panama Papers and other leaks, a greater sense of justice is emerging creeps into international tax policy. That international diplomacy is not dead even after the Trump years. And that despite difficult advances in climate protection goals, it is still possible to conclude truly historic international agreements. “
“Neue Osnabrücker Zeitung”: “The big industrial nations have failed”
“What a bitter disappointment: When it comes to climate protection, the 20 large industrialized countries failed at the summit in Rome. Instead of improving their plans and agreeing on fixed targets for phasing out coal-fired power, the heads of state and government just wrote an ineffective document of hesitation and hesitation. The prospects for the World Climate Conference, which opened in Glasgow, have deteriorated significantly, and the analysis is clear: If the climate is not protected very quickly, the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees will very soon no longer be achieved One could also say: The world is on fire. But instead of putting out the fire immediately with all their might, some countries are still waiting with the major alarm for the fire brigade. “
“Volksstimme”: “Climate protectors demonstrated their powerlessness”
“Above all, one result will remain from the G-20 summit: It has shown climate protectionists and states with serious climate protection intentions that they are impotent. Instead of the planned ‘net zero emissions’ by 2050, the final paper only takes China and Russia into account The talk is still vague about the “middle of the century”. That leaves too much open. And it is a blow to the climate meeting in Glasgow. If the G20, which stands for 80 percent of global greenhouse gases, shirk their responsibility in this way, it threatens Meeting in Scotland to degenerate into a debating club. Local protests will change little. Beijing, for example, which is responsible for around 30 percent of global CO2 emissions, will hardly be impressed. The summit is important anyway, because climate change is coming. In the best case scenario it leads pioneers like the EU to act faster. This also offers a technological opportunity. That would also call China back on the scene at the latest. “
“Westfalen-Blatt”: “The powerful could hardly have provided a worse template”
“Sobering, disappointing, discouraging: That is how the results of the G20 summit on climate protection must be described. The” strong signal “in the direction of the World Climate Conference was given – but it turned out very differently than hoped. China and Russia were not at all only appeared, the other leaders caught in their particular interests: It will be difficult to turn this trend around in the 14 days of Glasgow. The great and powerful of this world could hardly have provided a worse template conjured up, but when things get down to the nitty-gritty, things quickly look different. “