Midnight, August 6, 2010: “Link, wake up! Water is coming in from the roof!” My mother and I were in Leh, Ladakh, staying at “Eco-Homestay,” the house of Mr. Sonam Gyatso and family, in Lower Sankar. The house was made in a hybrid of traditional and modern construction techniques: the main hall in the house was concrete, while rooms surrounding it were made of sun-dried mud bricks, and roofed with Poplar beams, a mesh of willow branches, and a thick pad of fine clay-like mud. The house incorporated passive solar building techniques, such as a direct-gain room, and a Trombe wall, and had solar-powered lighting. It had been raining since evening, and by midnight the clay roof was saturated and began to leak.

Prayer Wheels near the Leh Gate.

Two nights previous, Nubra (a nearby town) had suffered significant damage from a cloud burst, and radio had reported some 12 deaths. On the morning of the 6th, the radio was silent and phones unresponsive, so Mr. Gyatso went out to take stock of the situation. When he came back, he was in shock. ”The BSNL office, the Bus Stand, the Hospital, everything below the [entrance to Leh] gate… all gone.” That’s all he could say. He had never seen anything like it, nor had anyone else in living memory. (The entrance to Leh is grandly decorated by a colorful and ornate Buddhist gate over the road, with prayer wheels and chortens on either side.) Apparently, a cloud-burst had happened in a ravine above the Leh Gate, causing a huge torrent of water to rush down the ravine into the road, picking up stones, mud, bricks, cars, people, and houses as it went. All communication channels were taken out — no electricity, no telephone, no radio, no internet.

The remains of the BSNL office. I'm told that it was quite a large building. All communications were knocked out.

Many of the fatalities have been blamed on poor planning: due to the mad influx of “development” to the region, many houses were built in places where, traditionally, no building should stand. We call it “tradition” and scoff at it, but in truth we are mocking a set of codes that have been developed and refined for thousands of years. A Ladakhi saying goes to the effect that “Water must have it’s way,” essentially, that the flow of water must not be blocked. Had this simple command been heeded, much of the destruction could have been avoided, but today’s globalization pattern eschews and destroys anything and everything that doesn’t fit the consumer mono-culture — it ignores the Earth upon which it stands.

A car smashed against a building destroyed in the flood. Helena Norberg-Hodge is visible in this photo.

Mom immediately swung into action, and she and I headed out by 9 AM with a shovel, some water, willing hearts, and two hands each. When we got to the gate, we saw unbelivable devastation. The flood had left behind mud about a story deep, buried houses, toppled steel-and-concrete structures four stories high, crunched cars… it was much like the Tsunami of 2004 in South East Asia. Numb with shock, a crowd of people were helping a JCB (backhoe) dig at the top of the pile, looking for survivors. We helped there a bit, then continued down the hill towards the hospital. The destruction became more and more massive as we went. The air was dry, causing passing vehicles to raise clouds of dust from the now-dry mud.

This is the new hospital building. Note the height of the mud on the sides: over one story high.

A fire truck was positioned near the hospital, and supplied water to wash off the various pieces of equipment that were salvaged from the old wards: oxygen and nitrogen tanks, suction machines, X-Ray machines, beds, streachers, etc. Once washed, the equipment was dried and immediately put to use. After a bit, I too went to the wards, and got involved in dressing wounds. Most of the patients had full-body cuts and scrapes, about 90% of their skin scratched or missing, with head injuries, and many broken ribs.

A picture of the Candlelight Procession.

Ladakh has been an interesting case-in-point since it was opened to “modernization” in 1975. It is a microcosm of what happens to a people, culture, and ecology, when the consumer mono-culture and globalization hits it without consideration of ancient wisdoms for living with Mother Earth, and regulated intelligent development. The crises that has now hit Ladakh will, most unfortunately, hit again and again, and is not necessarily confined to Ladakh. If humankind does not learn from the increasing incidence of natural and man-made disasters, we have nothing to look forward to but mass extinction. If we seek to change our ways, the only real way to look is towards Localization — the bringing together of producer and consumer, and the creation of ethically-oriented communities, not to be confused with backwardness and isolationism. We need to think globally, and live locally, if we seek genuine development —true globalization.

Candles at the end of the procession.

On the 11th night, the Ladakh Buddhist Association (LBA) organized a candle light march from the petrol pump at the bottom of the hill to the LBA grounds in the Leh Market, in prayerful support of the people affected. Vehicles were stopped to limit the dust, but the wind blasted everyone with it anyway. Going down to the hospital before it started, clouds were gathering quite menacingly at the head of the valley, and it looked as if it was raining heavily in the next valley over, causing no slight misgivings among all the people! We bid farewell to all our friends in the hospital, and joined the march by the Leh gate. Angmo-le, Mr. Gyatso’s wife, was with us and sang a beautiful Buddhist chant as we went, as did many other groups. The procession culminated at the top of Market Road, placing all the candles in a circle, with everyone’s collective prayers for peace and harmony.

But while people debate whether it is right or wrong, we must remember that, after all, the Science of Climate Change does not matter that much.

What really matters is:

Monsoons are failing, crops are failing,
droughts are prevailing, along with floods.
People are hungry, children are wailing,
“development” is sucking our Earth’s blood.

I cannot drink the water in the streams,
nor eat the snow that falls from the sky,
some would have be believe that nothing has changed,
but I know that the worst is yet to pass by.

I visit the city and can’t see the next block,
the smog is choking, people’s hearts are locked.
In the countryside too, the problems exist:
people struggling hard, just to subsist.

The river that flows past my friend’s house,
once over his head, he remembers,
Is now but a brook, the flow only seasonal,
Ten years of change have thus rendered.

The rice which once grew aligned with the season,
now withers and dries before harvest.
The rain comes without pattern or reason,
lays waste to the crop and farmers divest.

Bees, the very pillar of food production,
are gone from a whole district in China,
are disappearing fast, abandoning their function
poisoned by our toxins in the clima.

The Coral, the treasure-chest of beauty and life,
is bleaching and dying before our eyes.
Killing ecosystems – do we have the right?
We don’t! Yet we do it; ask yourself “Why?”

“Develop!” is the cry of the bygone age.
It’s farce and inequity now bare,
To increase in prosperity at the expense of the Earth,
Is not just, not right, not kind, not fair.

To Survive we must remember that which sustains us,
and give thanks to the many on who’s efforts we live
From Aardvarks to Zorillas, they all live in service,
Creating the global web that our Ecosystem is.

Why do we, as humans, break the sacred chain,
create waste for which no other life has use?
Our chemicals are found everywhere, even in the rain,
our behaviour has become inter-species abuse!

Our plastics are choking the ocean,
smothering out huge swaths of life.
Toxic, inedible are the fish that lie therein,
among so many life forms deformity is rife!

Our style of living has a visible cost,
hidden only by our willfull blindness.
Cancer and disease, to us are now tossed,
our body’s symptoms of environmental unkindness.

The way to redemption is clear, clean, and pure,
“Simple Living, High Thinking” – true development for sure,
The rights of all people to eat, drink, live, and think,
The same for all is our duty to ensure.

I pray that this poem will have an effect:
Remember that life is not just to get.
Now you are here, now do you live,
But when you lie dying, you will think:
“What did I give?”

Reposted with Permission from Tale of Grace.com

Very few of us.

When I think of people going hungry for weeks on end, I think of the people on this planet who are living in drought ridden land which won’t yield the crops they have been waiting for. I think of those people who are thwarted by the changing monsoon patterns who can’t predict when to plant their seeds. I think of people who have been victims to a hurricane or flood and have loss access to food and water. I think of the victims of climate change: past, present and future. 

But that’s not all.

When I think of people going hungry for weeks on end I also think of determination, dedication, vision and sacrifice. I think of the hunger strikes lead by Gandhi in India’s fight for independence from a British oppression. I think of civil society rising up and reclaiming their power and asking for what is just, what is right. I think of non-violence, of peace and of love. 

And now, I think of the Climate Justice Fast.

Many of us across the planet, especially young people are at points of frustration, despair or disempowerment with the state of politics and action in response to the climate change threat. Even though entire countries predicted to go under water, hundreds of millions losing access to water, massive food shortages, extreme weather events, these issues are being treated as if we are approaching another trade agreement. The result many people feel like they can’t change anything, that they’re voices aren’t being heard, they don’t know where to start, or that they may as well live life now since they will be screwed later. 

It is this desperation, frustration and desire to be heard that is instigating a group of people from across five different countries to fast for the future. Every day people who care about the future of their children, who care about the millions of lives that will be lost, who care about the future of humanity, will be conducting a hunger strike up to 40 days long.

They don’t want to waste their time in frustration or petty politics, but want to drive home that no matter what the implications of taking action on climate change, nothing is more costly than compromising justice and basic human life and rights. No amount of loss in GDP will bring back the lives of those who have died due to the impacts of climate change. 

The idea of a hunger strike may seem scary, and that’s ok. It’s not the only way a person can take action. You can choose whether you want to be an innovator, or a policy maker, a community worker or a consultant, a mother or a teacher, you can be a young person taking action on campus, their religious community or school. You can organise a flash mob, or a climate concert, a meeting with your local politician or a protest. However for some of us it is time to take things up a notch.

So for those of you tired of trying to negotiate with decision makers that the survival of humanity is not negotiable, join the climate justice fast. You can fast for a day, a week, a month or the entire 40 days. Each fast will count.  

Check out the website www.climatejusticefast.com and join us as we fast to ensure that justice and the human rights are ensured.

Protecting Our Future:

Chinese, Indian, and United States Youth United for a Strong Climate Agreement

We stand at a historic moment in our response to climate change. World leaders will meet in Copenhagen this year to reach an agreement on a global effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Our countries’ economies represent past, present, or future significant source of the emissions threatening our planet. While there is potential for strong partnerships between our nations, our leaders are constrained by vested interests in their desire to protect their people, blaming each other’s lack of commitment as a reason not to contribute to a global solution that could benefit us all. Youth recognize that we each have a common but differentiated responsibility to contribute to solutions to the climate crisis. We are united in our belief that global emissions reductions must begin. There is no time to lose.

As youth, we will be alive in 2050 to experience the success or failure of our leaders’ effort. We are direct stakeholders to this process. We have come together to state our vision for the opportunities that our countries must take advantage of to help mitigate and adapt to climate change, as well as the support that each ought to receive to effectively participate in a shared solution to the climate crisis. We are the inheriting generation of today’s decisions about climate change, and our future is in the hands of our governments’ negotiators. At the same time, we recognize that our future is also our own responsibility. We are ready to make the long-term commitments we outline here, not just ask others to do it for us. We are speaking up for our future. As youth, we are united in our belief that joint action to reduce climate change is a singular opportunity to enable sustainable development in communities throughout the world. We recognize this historic opportunity as a unique chance to celebrate our interdependence and realize mutual benefit by effectively and collaboratively responding to climate change.

Although separated by distance and language, and without the money, power, or time that our leaders possess, we have succeeded in agreeing on a vision for cooperation amongst our countries. If youth can share a vision for a secure future and a healthy planet, we hope that our governments can cross the same barriers that we have crossed, and work together on a mutually beneficial agreement for the protection of our climate, our nations, our generation, and generations to come. Divided, we will surely all suffer. United to prevent the inequities of the future, our nations can succeed and prosper.

Agreed Principles

• Emissions Reductions
  • As the largest historical emitter and one of the top two emitters today, youth agree that the United States must take the lead in reducing its emissions below levels that will give us more than a 50% chance of stabilizing carbon dioxide equivalents below 350 parts per million, the safe upper limit in our atmosphere according to the latest science. This means more than 40% reductions from 1990 levels by 2020, and more than 80% reductions by 2050.
  • As the world’s largest emitter, and with quickly growing emissions, youth support a commitment from China for more than 50% reductions of carbon intensity and 60% reductions in energy intensity from 2005 levels by 2020, and establishing appropriate mitigation policies that would begin reducing its emissions, and increase the scale of its emissions reductions, as its share of world emissions continues to increase.
  • Although not one of the largest contributors to emissions today, India’s growing emissions will soon make it a large contributor to future climate change. Youth understand the issues of equity inherent in India making commitments to emissions reductions when developed countries fail to do so. However, in a scenario where developed countries at least maintain their previous emissions reduction commitments, and take on progressive new and long-term emissions reduction targets based on 1990 levels, youth believe that India also has a strong role to play without constraining its development path. Youth support a commitment from India to stop the growth in its emissions as soon as possible, with other developing countries reducing their emissions from “business-as-usual” levels.
• Technology Transfer
  • The wealthiest nation on the planet, youth agree that developed countries like the United States must help enable emissions reductions in poorer, less well equipped nations. The United States should seize the opportunity to invest in the future of its own youth by helping to reduce emissions around the world. The U.S. should be prepared to invest jointly in research and development projects that will ultimately prevent countries’ lock-in to a high carbon development pathway. This will benefit the U.S. by avoiding expensive and damaging climate impacts. Nations partnering in technology transfer must work to provide institutions, infrastructure, intellectual property sharing, and human capacity that will allow them to put these technologies into action.
  • As a large receiver of technical and financial support for mitigation, China should be ready to spend increasing shares of its own growing wealth on emissions reductions. As it begins to succeed in reducing its emissions, China must closely collaborate with the United States on joint mitigation projects, and both nations should begin to pass on their results to less developed countries.
  • As India is one of the largest partners in technology transfer in our vision, we see it implementing large scale technological solutions to decarbonize its economy. We envision that technology transfer will not happen through technology created in one country and simply shipped to another. We envision intellectual property sharing by all countries, removing trade barriers on clean technology to allow easy and cost-effective technology transfer. We see the U.S. playing an active role in capacity building in India through funding R&D, education, and training of people to produce and deploy clean technology. We see India participating in joint ventures with China and the U.S. to create the clean technology required for low carbon development.

• Adaptation
  • The United States must also contribute, as part of its funding toward the climate change agreement, to supporting some of the adaptation needs of other nations to the climate change damages that the United States’ own emissions have partially caused. Adaptation funding is necessary to ensure a commitment by other nations to reduce their emissions, and this global agreement will ultimately benefit the U.S. by reducing the climate damages that the U.S. already experiences, and will increasingly experience if no agreement is reached.
  • China and other emerging economies should also take up appropriate responsibility to help less developed nations with adaptation.
  • Adaptation is a primary reason for India to take leadership domestically, regardless of what happens internationally, because India has already been, and will continue to be, severely impacted by climate change. Although India should be a recipient of adaptation support, it should also take appropriate action to mitigate and minimize its emissions – emissions that will increase its own need for adaptation efforts.

In 2050, I’ll be 77, and given the pace of the climate talks in Bonn these two weeks, I’ll likely spend most of my retirement either under water or on fire.

If finalized in the next climate agreement, the weak targets offered so far by developed countries virtually ensures that greenhouse gas concentrations (and sea levels) will rise to levels well beyond what science says are safe limits to ensure the survival of peoples and nations. Over 100 youth from 6 continents (the Antarctic youth called in sick) participated in the Bonn negotiations, watching our leaders draft an increasingly costly and damaging climate for us to live through.

Daily at the negotiations, youth have shown our governments how vulnerable our generation will be to the warming and climate change they are creating with their short-sighted proposals. We literally brought two camels and tons of sand to the negotiation entrance to highlight the drought and desertification many of our countries increasingly experience. We rapped and rhymed about the threatened survival of nations and developed countries’ weak financing proposals. Youth tracked key negotiators to remind them the next generation is watching, and blogged to their peers in multiple languages.

We supported indigenous rights and opposed deforestation and forest degradation. Global North and Global South youth played an UNfair (sic) game of football (the Americans insisted on playing soccer) to highlight the unequal negotiating position of developing countries. They also worked to raise money for their developing country members to participate with them in the Copenhagen talks. Fifty Chinese, Indian, and United States youth wrote the 1st collaborative statement (in two languages so far) by youth from these three countries on a shared vision for our nations’ roles and opportunities in cooperating on an agreement.

In the end, it is clear that negotiators have largely ignored the perilous position they have put their children in, and ignored the science as well. Japan’s 8% reduction from 1990 levels in 2020, and Russia’s, Switzerland’s, and New Zealand’s lack of any specific targets raises the chance youth will grow up suffering through climate tipping points and accelerated warming. These “commitments” put an incredible burden on our countries’ future leaders to create post-2020 cuts necessary to reach 2050 reductions.

Despite continued leadership by President Obama, and skilled diplomacy by lead Bonn negotiator Dr. Jonathan Pershing, industry lobbyists have ensured that weak domestic legislation will prevent the U.S. from honestly offering strong international commitments in Copenhagen. At best, the American Clean Energy and Security Act as written would let the U.S. achieve a 3% reduction in 2020 and create only a fraction of the clean energy jobs Americans desperately need. At worst, 1% is likely given offsets and other loopholes.

[JR:  The 3% reduction is compared to 1990 levels, as the link makes clear.  I assumed, given how this paragraph is written, that Kyle also meant 1% reductions compared to 1990 levels.  If not, I'll let him clarify.   I can't see a plausible scenario where ACES as currently written, coupled with Obama's other clean energy and GHG-reduction investments and mandates, doesn't take us to 1990 levels or below by 2020 (see here).]

While Bonn failed to deliver the protections to peoples, species, and generations youth know are needed, they renewed our commitment to redefining what is pragmatic and possible. Delegates should expect to hear from us again soon.

So what actually happens at UN climate talks? Well I can tell you one thing,

A lot of talking… and not so much listening!

The talks opened this morning as they always do with a plenary session. That’s when all the countries sit behind their name plaques in big long rows, along with many other observers in the room, some of us even sitting on the floor. A panel sits on the stage and open the talks then lots of different groups and countries make statements from their chairs. Mostly it happens in English, though I did get excited this morning when Bolivia started speaking and we all had to put on our headphones and listen to the translation! It’s a good job we did too as from what I understood Bolivia basically said that they want to get rid of the draft text we have on the table and start writing all over again! This is something quite a few countries are also asking for. With so few months left until Copenhagen things could really get scary if this is called for more and they are listened to.

Plenary Filling Up

I also enjoyed plenary today when Russia got politely asked not to speak for so long next time! It was like being at school but everyone was being over polite! Then there was some ‘banter’ over how long their statement had been in relation to the EU’s, it seems even the UN can have in-jokes!

But the highlight of the plenary was when, after a representative spoke for the Alliance of Small Island States, led by the youth and with a few other participants, a round of applause was given for what they had to say (this is definitely not normal behaviour in these kind of meetings). The Alliance of Small Island States are…well exactly that! A group of small islands who group together to get their voice heard on a global scale! So evidently they have a huge amount to loose if these negotiations do not come up with a good deal. The basic points of their speech today were that time is running out. They are already experiencing the impacts of climate change and for them any deal is a matter of survival! Insufficient actions on mitigation, adaptation, finance and technology, will undermine their existence. For them the agreements will not be just words, but LIFE! (Thanks must go to Andrea who was taking much better notes than me at this point!)

So I hope I gave you a bit of an idea about how these talks work in real life. Basically a few people were saying good stuff this morning… and a few not so good.

But what I really wonder as I think back over the session, is how much any of them were really listening to each other. It seems to me that we’ve all put our plates on the table and no one wants, or is willing, to move. When someone is pleading for their countries mere survival how can you seriously listen and then not respond with action!

Which begs the question…why we call them negotiations at all?

I have come with 500 young people from around the world. Youth have been coming to the UN climate negotiations since the first COP. However traditionally they have worked on domestic policy and lobbied their own countries. Traditionally they have been from the developed world.

This year we’ve broken tradition. I’ve come with the first ever Indian Youth delegation, along with many other representatives from the global south. We are 500 young people from 50 different countries; and we’ve managed to unite under the banner of equity and survival.

Unite in a way our leaders have failed.

We started this conference in hope that perhaps we’d be able to sway the positions of the developed world. Allow from some progressive commitments, but soon realised the unlikelihood of such happenings. So we shifted focus, if we couldn’t shift the developed countries, to listen and act upon our moral requests, we thought, why not support and strengthen the voice of the developing nations. Youth have always recognised the significance of equity and justice, the right to adequate representation of all countries, especially those that are most affected. Hence we decided to support delegations that were under represented and the most severely affected – the Island nations (AOSIS) and least developed countries (LDCs).

You see, delegations of the smaller and poorest countries of the world have one, two, maximum four members on their delegations. They have to write their entire policy position, cover multiple areas of concern, working night and day from before the negotiations even start. They barely have enough time to eat or sleep, and to make matters worse, the accommodation they’re provided is far away from the COP venue (unlike accommodation given to the more affluent countries). The consequence is, they participate in the negotiations tired and hungry, and if they leave the room for a toilet break or to grab lunch, the voice of that country goes unrepresented.

In COP14 youth have supported these underrepresented countries. We’ve helped them in their policy formulation, bought them lunch, coffee, photocopied for them and arranged their taxies home. This quickly lead to the formation of a friendship between youth and many LDC and AOSIS nations, and resulted in a humble request. The message from these countries was that they were appreciative of youth helping them at the COP, however what was of utmost importance to them was that their voices weren’t being heard.

An unofficial alliance was formed and the common goal of “survival” was realised. The voices of the poorest nations weren’t being heard, just like that of the youth. We as young people, future inhabitants of the earth with face very real survival challenges, as were the island nations and poorest countries of the world. My neighbours in Bangladesh soon enough will be submerged underwater, with millions left without homes. It will be a fight for survival. A fight for the poorest of our nations. A fight for the young people in these nations.

Forget the future, its happening today!

In the Sunderbans, off the coast of West Bengal, people have been drinking saline water for over a year, their crops have been continually ruined, the fish have died due to contamination from aline water, and boils and sores all over their body.

That’s not living, that’s survival.

My bhaiya (brother) in Alwar district, Rajasthan tells me that they don’t have any more water, that the rich have their water supplied from other regions, whilst the poorer deal with water contamination.

That’s not living, that’s survival.

My family in Bhadrak Orissa were victims to the ’99 Orissa cyclone, at a magnitude rarely seen. They describe stories of walking in neck deep water, of rotting animal carcasses and human corpses flowing down the street and filling the air with a bloody stench. Of my uncle saving a friend from drowning and of sand submerged buildings on the shore. Over 10,000 people died and thousands left homeless.

Thats not living that’s survival.

We are going to see more of this, especially those of us living in poorer parts of the world. The poorest nations and poorest people of the world shouldn’t have to deal with this. The youth of the world shouldn’t have to deal with this.

We all have a right to survival.

In the past 24h we have gotten the signatures from over 50 different countries committing to the pledge of “safeguarding the survival of all countries and people”. We have gotten the support from all AOSIS nations, from many LDC nations, and even countries like Italy and Austria. However we need the commitment of all countries. We can’t move forward or come to an equitable Copehagan agreement unless the underlying principles are equity and survival. I call upon each and every country to commit, that we don’t leave Poznan without committing to the goal of survival – that nation will be left behind.
(note: we ended up with over 80 countries in 48h)

So come join us in getting our countries to commit, and build a world we want to LIVE in, not merely survive.

“I, the undersigned, commit my delegation to to a global climate treaty that: safeguards the survival of all countries and peoples.”

Within 48 hours we mobilised over 80 countries into signing the pledge, along with well known figures including Dr R.K. Pachauri, Nicholas Stern and Tim Flannery. Almost 10 ministers made this statement in their ministerial speech, with Australian Federal Minister of Climate Change formally acknowledging the “international youth delegation”. And to top it off we got our message in section 5 of the 2 page ministerial document (the key document with the outcomes for the UN Climate negotiations). Saying

“Participants at the round table expressed the need for international solidarity in embarking on a low emissions path that safeguards the developmental aspirations and survival of the most vulnerable countries and people.”

I write this after returning from UN Climate talks in Poland, where one thing became heartbreakingly apparent: for some people, these negotiations weren’t just about numbers and compromise and diplomacy. For some people, these negotiations were about survival. People toss around a lot of lofty words at the UN, so let me be clear. I’m not talking about “survival” as an abstract concept, or some distant problem for future generations. I’m talking about countries and peoples getting quite literally wiped off the map within decades. I’m talking about human lives and livelihoods being destroyed by the impacts of climate change here and now.

The countries facing the biggest impacts of climate change are also the countries most poorly represented here in the United Nations. Two weeks ago 49 of the world’s most vulnerable countries endorsed the 350 target that the latest science calls for. Instead of recognizing the importance of this call, some EU leaders and Australia backpedalled on their already weak climate commitments. Hence the 500 young people present from around the world decided that it was to change the conversation in Poland, to send one clear message that cut through the static.

Survival is not negotiable.