Just before the start of COP26 in Glasgow, Prince Charles, always himself, wielded the trumpets of the apocalypse. If countries did not make herculean advances, he maintained, the world would lose its last chance.
It is a well-known film at these meetings, and has gained urgency in the increasingly aggressive and guerrilla figure of Swedish Greta Thurnberg and fellow activists.
In practice, the pressure has only had an effect on the beautiful rhetoric of leaders like Joe Biden and the inclusion of references to fossil fuels in the conference’s troubled final document.
Of course, the softening of the words in the text and the exclusion of countries from carbon market taxes and targets to reduce the use of coal prove that all may be nothing more than what Greta herself called: “greenwashing and yahoo.”
More than that, from a geopolitical point of view, it maintains the status quo, with the poorest complaining about the richest and life moving forward — with the “poor” in quotes, like India, operating in their interests.
Add to this the curious situation in which China pretends to lead a bloc of developing countries, as if it were not a central actor alongside the United States in the problem and solution of climate issues.
That the planet will not be able to hold the temperature increase at 1.5ËšC until the end of the century, that seems certain, but COP26 brought a geopolitical novelty precisely from its two main participants.
The announcement of an understanding between Chinese and Americans is another letter of intent and should be properly consumed with a grain of salt, to be in the image dear to the English language prevalent in the United Kingdom.
But having taken place amidst one of the lowest points in the relationship between the world’s two biggest economic powers is, in itself, remarkable news that could signal an inflection.
Since 2017, the US has responded to Xi Jinping’s escalation of China’s assertiveness with the so-called Cold War 2.0. Basically, areas of friction have opened up in every possible segment: economic, diplomatic and, to the concern of many, military.
Xi denounces the movement as an unfounded fear of Americans, while other drums, those of war, are played side by side. The movement around Taiwan from October to now has frightened even thoughtful analysts, not because they believe in a war, but in an accident that leads to an escalation.
The US and China are the world’s biggest polluters, and agreeing to work towards targets to reduce coal use and methane emissions is welcome. But no one should think that Beijing will abandon its matrix, the coal plant, overnight
The Chinese, like everyone else, are coming out of the pandemic crisis with many scratches, accentuated by the crisis in their housing market. In practice, the global economy is grateful for the impossibility of a disruptive wooden horse in the energy sector: it takes a world to want to save it, after all.
This reading is clouded by the fact that the immediate need tends to blunt the real possibility of change, returning then to the gretesque blablabla, so to speak.
Xi, by the way, didn’t show up in Scotland, unlike Joe Biden. But both will be in a virtual conversation this Monday (15), proof that perhaps some piece has moved on the congested board in front of the leaders.
Despite being criticized for Xi’s absence, China avoided being considered a villain due to the movements, marketer or not, of his envoy. The same cannot be said of other countries.
Jair Bolsonaro’s Brazil came in losing and, despite the efforts of its representatives to say that it would meet ambitious goals, it did not convince anyone. But the president has been an environmental pariah since the beginning of his term, as the clash with Europeans and Americans during the 2019 Amazon fires attested.
The fact that his envoy minister lied about data and that dismal deforestation figures were released during COP26 did not help, but again, the game was lost. On the continent, Colombia has awakened as a respectable actor to be heard, giving local color to the decadence of a Brazil that was once essential at the tables.
Even domestic politics came into play, with governors such as Bolsonaro’s rival João Doria (PSDB-SP) taking a bite out of the president’s bad reputation in Glasgow and, reinforced by the active presence of climate NGOs, showing that Brazil is not limited to to the federal government.
Australia, on the other hand, empowered by its newly established military alliance with the Americans and the British, managed to surpass the country of Bolsonaro in the global climate antipathy ranking with its emphatic defense of coal and widespread scientific denial.
Due to their weight in the world economy, the US and China are leaving the COP26 protagonists as always, even with a hint of hope.
If this approximation occurs, the meeting will already have had a reason to be remembered, in addition to the tribalist carnival of the apocalyptic and the cynical smile of the integrated, to steal the image of Umberto Eco. of Charles in Egypt, at COP27.
.
