Geo-political Shifts

A New Power is Rising in the East

It is safe to say that the overwhelming view of Copenhagen is that it was distinctly underwhelming. From the Climate Change zealots to the opportunistic conspiratorial capitalists, the consensus is that it was a failure. In the end, it was much ado about nothing. Jonah Hull, blogging in Al Jazeera gives us a sense of this:

Mid-afternoon on Saturday December 19 and Yvo de Boer, the UN's chief climate negotiator, has just uttered the words that perhaps best describe the nature of the deal here.

Asked what it means that the Copenhagen Accord has been 'taken note' of by the parties, he replied: "'Taken note' means that it has been recognised by the parties without anyone actually having to subscribe to it."

That is the shape of success at Copenhagen.

Hailed as an "essential beginning" by UN secretary general Ban Ki-Moon, the accord is little more than a guideline for future talks. It commits no single party to any single firm action. There are no precise targets, no accountable promises, no deadlines.

Certainly, it is success clawed from the jaws of defeat. But it is an expedient success that will be trumpeted by a few as far more than it is.

In reality, this conference simply could not afford to be deemed a failure. The global momentum to recognise and act against climate change - however long that action may be in coming - stood to be lost or irretrievably damaged.

Copenhagen could not be allowed to fail. Therefore, the political spinmeisters would have called it a significant step forward if all the delegates had stood on their heads for twenty minutes, chanting Kumbaya. But the reality is that its declarations were nothing more than a gesture, and a hollow one at that.

Nevertheless, substantial change occurred--changes that will shape the world for decades, even centuries to come. No, we are not referring to the delicious divine irony which saw He who sits in the heavens laugh at the conspiracies of kings and rulers to re-establish the Tower of Babel and a united, one-world government. (Psalm 2:1--4) All Christians understood the significance of a massive snow storm unleashed upon the West--that is, Europe and North America--just when Copenhagen had reached the zenith of its gaseous windbagging.

Yes, it is true that we had to smile seeing the mighty President of the United States, who had strutted forth on to the stage at Copenhagen, assuring the world (with a unfortunate turn of phrase) that he had come to Copenhagen "to act", only to beat a hasty retreat, fearing that he might not be able to return to Washington if he did not arrive before the worst of the snowstorm hit.

And, yes, the inconvenience and frustration of Eurostar commuters notwithstanding, we had to smile at seeing the mighty trains using the Chunnel grind to a halt in that blizzard, because it appears they had been engineered inadequately for such cold weather--the coldest, we are told, in living memory--at least the living memory of the design engineers, even as President Martinet Sarkosy was irritably stamping his feet at the failure of the world to listen to his hectoring jeremiads about global warming.

These things were ironic and deliciously so. Christians joined with the Lord of heaven and earth in laughing at the arrogant hubris of the men of straw, the hollow men. But Copenhagen was also a harbinger of things to come. The global balances of power are shifting to the east and the south of the globe and Copenhagen proved a demonstration of the case.

It emerged soon after the debacle that the West regarded China as the bete noire of the summit. It destroyed the vaunted hopes of West, leaving them in tatters. Ed Miliband fulminated against China, accusing it of destroying any possibility of an agreement. Jonathan Pearlman, writing in the Sydney Morning Herald, reckons that at Copenhagen, China took a "great political leap forward". He says that the older international doctrine of Deng Xiaoping has been superseded by a new willingness to "go it alone".

Deng Xiaoping set forth a so-called 24-Character Plan for securing China's place in the world. ''Hide our capacities and bide our time; be good at maintaining a low profile; and never claim leadership," the then Chinese leader espoused early last decade.

But this year will be remembered, say analysts, as the year China abandoned its diplomatic quietism and Beijing displayed a clout on the international stage to match its global economic weight; the year Deng's maxims were renounced.

The lesson for Australia and the United States, as China's audacious diplomatic manoeuvring at Copenhagen demonstrated, is that they will increasingly have to accept a world in which China is willing - and able - to assert interests at odds with those of the West.

''Until now it has been possible to say that China's economy has been growing but its political power has been lagging behind,'' says Hugh White, a professor of strategic studies at the Australian National University and a visiting fellow at the Lowy Institute.

''Not any more - 2009 has been the year in which China's growing political power has become an inescapable fact of international politics … The idea that we can dictate to China its position on issues is an anachronistic fancy. Copenhagen has been a demonstration of that.''

The recent global credit crunch probably proved the death knell of the old Deng Xiaoping doctrine. China has had to face up to the risks and consequences of being the major owner of US debt: it inevitably has realised that the borrower (the US) is the slave of the lender (China). Consequently, although the West hailed China's moves to support the West in what was essentially a Western problem, it has become more and more clear that it was doing so for its own reasons, not out of deference or respect for the West. Copenhagen confirmed the point.

A dramatic show of China's willingness to exercise global leadership occurred during the financial crisis, says Professor White, when its role was largely welcomed and encouraged by the West.

But Copenhagen has demonstrated - to Western eyes - a less agreeable side to Chinese assertiveness.

Across the developed world, China's brazen stonewalling of efforts to reach a legally binding treaty on climate change was greeted by a stunned, angry and almost visceral response.

Australian officials, led by the Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, were understood to be irate.

The US President, Barack Obama, was reportedly stood up by Wen Jiabao and barged in on a meeting that the Chinese Premier was holding with other leaders.

The British climate change secretary, Ed Miliband, showed even less restraint, accusing China of ''hijacking'' the summit.

''The last two weeks at times have presented a farcical picture to the public,'' he wrote in The Guardian. ''This was a chaotic process dogged by procedural games … We cannot again allow negotiations on real points of substance to be hijacked in this way.''

Malcolm Cook, the Lowy Institute's program director for East Asia, says that for the first time the world is experiencing the emergence of global powers - China and India - that are also developing nations.

As if to underline the point, the Indian Environment Minister has openly acknowledged that his country worked with China to scuttle the West's self-righteous, vaunted hubris.

India says it worked with China and others to thwart pressure from the developed world to agree to binding emission targets at the Copenhagen climate conference last week.

Environment minister Jairam Ramesh says all of Delhi's concerns were safeguarded, including resisting calls for global reductions in carbon emissions.

He says the BASIC group of countries comprising China, India, South Africa and Brazil, have emerged as a powerful force in climate change negotiations, in the face of what he called relentless pressure from richer countries.

Geopolitical power is moving relentlessly to the south and the east. This will carry its own threats and challenges, but one thing is to be celebrated: at least the self-loathing of the Western elites, the hatred of their own historical roots, and the deep guilt over their inherited blessings, will no longer hold the globe in their thrall.

Far more enlightened national self-interest will likely return and that has got to be a much better outcome than the vacuous pretensions holding sway in the West which seek to make all countries follow the West's dubious example. The West is a paper tiger. Its Babel-like attempts to build a brave new world upon the foundations of human rights are not just empty vainglory--they have proved dangerous and deadly. Beware when an arrogant nation tries to tell other peoples what they ought to be doing.