COP27, a cop-in or cop-out?
AMONG its many characteristics, I will always remember Eswatini as the land of the speed-bumps. It would be fair, perhaps, to add the label ‘land of the acronyms’. We use lots of those: ERS, NERCHA, ENPF and so on. So all emaSwati will promptly convert ‘COP 27’ into Conference of the Parties No 27. It’s a United Nations-driven climate change conference held annually, this year in Egypt.
A cop-out is defined as avoiding a commitment or responsibility. A compelling link creates the question – was this year a cop-out or a cop-in? The world is divided on whether commendable progress towards improved climate control was made at COP27, or whether far too little was done to avoid our world overheating. Most in favour of giving COP27 a success tag, may be those who actually attended it; wanting to return to their home countries glowing with pride rather than creeping in shame. If honest with themselves they should have felt a bit of both.
Well, what did COP27 actually achieve? It was part cop-in and part cop-out. Firstly, the Summit reached a historic agreement on a fund to compensate damaged and vulnerable countries for loss and damage. Such a fund – most likely administered by financial institutions, though financed by the rich
Ihave never been fooled that under the Tinkhundla System, the Legislature has any real power as one of the arms of government. By design, this institution is meant to legitimise the political mandate and design of the Executive. It can huff and puff about certain things and deceptively give an impression that it has the power to give direction to Hospital Hill, but history has showed us repeatedly that this institution is only as good as it toes the line. The arrest of the two Members of Parliament (MPs) on trumped up charges is testament to that. We learnt recently that the Speaker in the House of Assembly has been mandated to have an audience with the country’s authorities, ostensibly in relation to the political upheavals in the country. Several MPs have been vocal on the need for a national dialogue but who has listened?
Earlier this year, Nkilongo MP Timothy Myeni was reported to have spoken an undiluted truth that emaSwati have to reflect on; that Parliament has failed the electorate and ought to resign. Myeni could not be any more spot on here. The Legislature has failed the people dismally. The national budget countries – will need to show far more progress than the previous financial commitments to poorer countries for creating renewable energy systems.
But, secondly, there was a clear and regrettable failure to achieve any progress in the cutting of greenhouse gas emissions. That failure means ‘our planet is still in the emergency room,’ the UN Secretary-General had warned; with continuous global warming having catastrophic consequences. And it will be an utter waste of time providing funds to damaged and vulnerable countries if the higher temperatures then cause countries to become deserts or get washed away by excessive rains. Every small fraction of a degree matters, because the more the warming increases, the less our current tools for reducing climate change will be effective. For example, some trees that are planted to extract carbon dioxide from the atmosphere are simply unable to survive warmer conditions and would therefore become ineffective at tackling climate change.
Ignore
So COP27 did at least achieve climate justice for damaged and vulnerable nations. But it cannot count as having achieved much when you give pain-relieving treatment to the patient and ignore what’s causing the problem in the first place. That’s where we stand with the failure to reduce the use of fossil fuels and resultant carbon emissions. Many countries have said they felt pressurised to give up on agreeing to tougher targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, in order to achieve the landmark deal on the Loss and Damage Fund. One prominent negotiator, when asked whether the compromise was for the sake of the deal, replied: “Probably. You take a win when you can.”
But if we continue failing, then the world will not hit the essential target, in only seven years time, of a 1.5C average temperature increase compared
was passed with glaring gaps right under the watch of an institution that it is supposed to be there to look out for interests of the ordinary liSwati.
The Executive has allowed the country to descend into a state of uncertainty and insecurity never seen before and this, due to its hard-line approach to the subject of national dialogue and Parliament, which should be exercising an oversight role over the latter had not been stern enough. This shows that in the perking order of our political architecture, the Executive is the most powerful over Parliament, which should give vent to the aspirations of the people.
Allowed
These are only a few examples of what the Legislature has allowed the Executive to get away with, at the expense of the electorate. During debates, you can tell that there is such glaring lack of capacity in the overwhelming majority of the honourable ones to comprehend the process. Only a few actively engage while the rest of them made unintelligible statements and opted to make silence golden.
This, however, is not just to be construed to be a failure of the Legislature alone; it is a failure of the Tinkhundla System of Government in its entirety. The system, in current configuration, ensures that in the popularly elected house, any Tom, Dick and Harry can get in under the individual merit card. This allows for the swelling of the august House with people who have no capacity to understand the machinations and nuances of governance. We have in that house, populists and people who see politics as a source of livelihood. They only get exposed to a few days of induction and, with no comprehensive political mandate in the form of a manifesto, they fumble through the five years and have no idea with pre-industrial times. The world is currently on track for the figure to be nearly 3.0C by the end of the century. “That is not a livable planet,” one leading figure commented. “We’re bowing down to the fossil fuel lobby.” Last year’s Glasgow agreement requested countries to strengthen their 2030 emissions reduction plans by the end of 2022; but only a small number did so. This year’s text “clearly protects oil and gas petro-States and the fossil fuel industries,” said Laurence Tubiana, a key architect of the landmark Paris Agreement in 2015. The German Foreign Minister expressed frustration at “the overdue steps on mitigation and the phase-out of fossil energies being stone-walled by a number of large emitters and oil producers.” There you have it.
Standardised
The Paris Rulebook from 2015 standardised how each country that signed the Paris Agreement would reduce their emissions. But the countries have not respected that. “We had to fight relentlessly to (even) hold the line of Glasgow,” a visibly frustrated Alok Sharma, architect of the Glasgow deal in 2021, told the summit. Efforts to include a phase-out, or at least a phase-down of all fossil fuels were thwarted. That’s cause for real concern. Perhaps a clear reflection, nevertheless, of how difficult, practically and politically, it is to get unity of direction and commitment from 190 countries. The lack of legally binding agreements, country-specific requirements and strict dates to work towards, may mean that we can continue to expect empty promises rather than real action.
Eswatini is a small player in the game, entitled to use fossil fuels if absolutely necessary in order to obtain the economic and social development the high income countries have historically enjoyed from greenhouse gas emissions. But emaSwati still need to be fully briefed from our representatives at COP27; especially on what we can do to limit emissions. It will be useful to get the full page media report that former Prime Minister Barnabas Dlamini used to present.
what game they are in until it’s time to figure out how they can have another run in the gravy train. It’s just how the system operates.
That way, the Executive, with a ‘superior’ mandate, can run roughshod over them any day. We are talking here about MPs with no advisers, no offices and virtually no tools to work with. It really is unfair to expect much from them. In terms of the Constitution, all a person needs to be in the august House is to be a citizen of the kingdom, have attained the age of 18, be a registered voter and be tax compliant. Forget any level of education or exposure to politics. I am certain that in both houses, we have parliamentarians who have no idea what GDP is and cannot even cite a single international instrument the kingdom is party to.
That said, it really would be a huge statement if even as much as two MPs can resign on the basis of failing the electorate. It would be an unequivocal vote of no confidence in the system of governance. Section 98 (1) (b) of the Constitution allows for the resignation of MP or senator by way of writing to the Clerk to Parliament.
So, Parliamentarians, there is a way out for you. Do the honourable thing and shame the devil. If you continue to occupy those seats, drawing a salary hereafter will be dishonourable of you as emaSwati and Christians and will be thugery at worst. We now need to test the honour in you in those among your lot who share the sentiment that you have failed. If not, be happy with being lumped with the rest of those who are guilty of running a capable country to the failed State we will become in the not-sodistant future.