As Jamie reported yesterday, nongovernmental organization (NGO) delegations inside the Bella Center may have been dramatically reduced, but that doesn’t mean they can exclude our voice. We’re running lean, mean operations both inside and outside the conference center.
In my post yesterday about REDD, I mentioned that the US and Colombia had received a “Fossil of the Day” award for moving talks backwards. So we put together a little rapid response direct communication outside of the Colombian embassy calling on President Uribe to “Save the forests, don’t kill the climate.”
We also did the direct communication aimed at the US delegation yesterday morning, which I wrote about already.
I’m sure you got enough of the technical details about REDD negotiations in my post yesterday, but I was just reading an update from a member of our political team and thought it was perfectly illustrative of the type of really detailed policy wonk work they’re doing. Allow me to simply quote:
The critical issue of national vs. subnational must be resolved by ministers and we are depending on the EU, Brazil, and others to maintain a strong position on this. Our ask on this is very simple. In Section 5 [of the draft REDD agreement text] (natl v subnatl) we want: "the 3 Ands." I.e. having subnatl only as supplemental to national, not as a substitute for it. This means leaving "and" in 5a, replacing "or" with "and" in 5b, and replacing "with" with "and" in 5c (and deleting the phrase "optional interim measure").
For more on the distinction between national vs. subnational REDD projects and why we’re pushing for the national approach, check out my post, “Code REDD.”
By demanding a deal to save the climate both inside and outside the conference center, we have multiple means of leveraging our voice into the conversations happening right now about the future of our planet. So it’s like Jamie said, they can try to shut us out but they can’t shut us down.