A movement for people and the world.

“There is no satisfaction whatever at any time. There is only a queer, divine dissatisfaction, a blessed unrest that keeps us marching and makes us more alive than the others”.

-          Martha Graham quoted in Blessed Unrest by Paul Hawkin

How do I sum up my first experience of COP into a measly blog post? Does the complexity of language used, action seen, colours viewed, emails exchanged, conversations had, thoughts entertained over the past two weeks even lend itself to being described? I now sit, post-Durban, in front of my computer screen and try to envision what I want to say.

I had wanted this post to summarise nicely what happened in Durban. Did the nations agree, what was the impact of us being there? However, my experience of COP was too complex, too volatile. It can’t be described simply. At times over the last two weeks I found myself wondering, why am I doing this? Am I making an impact? Dangerous thoughts weaselled their way into my brain, challenging my dedication and impact in the world. What if I’m misguided in my struggle and could concentrate my energy more productively to making the world a better place?

Maybe I felt this way because it was almost impossible to quantify what my being there actually achieved. There are so many people. So many youth. So many vegetarians. So many loud voices. So much enthusiasm. At the same time, there is intense fragmentation. Different claims. Different solutions. Different organisations. Different approaches.

Many people who I’ve spoken to about the experience agree when I describe the paradox of COP17: it felt so fragmented, so complicated, but at the same time, the reason we were all there seemed so simple: we want to address climate change, to stop the damage we’ve already done.

On the last Friday of COP17 I took part in a demonstration. After a clash with some UN police and last minute phone calls to ensure that we had “permission” for our event: Wearing our “Green Police” overalls, we walked backwards, holding signs which asked “why are we going backwards?”. The ridiculousness of the last two weeks seemed nicely symbolised by that action. It was innocent and simple, and our message was clear. But even to do it – to walk backwards – we were caught up in a chain of bureaucracy, layers of protocol; so much so that we were confined to one area, a time limit, and what we were allowed to do.

Does COP feel like an impossible task because of the way in which environmentalists, youth, and even well-meaning politicians are restricted by bureaucracy, by the “politics of knowledge”? And if so, what does this mean for our fight: do we continue, do we fly all the way to Qatar next year? And if so, what do we achieve?

Despite these questions, which still need a lot of mulling over in my head before I attempt to answer them, I can say this: COP made me realise that I am part of something big, something fundamental. The environmentalist movement spans all levels of thought, social injustice, political ability and articulation. It spans all races, ages, occupations. There’s something profoundly human about it, some recognition that we’re not doing stuff as well as we could, and a deep desire to change that.

And if for all the fragmentation of the movement, we’re relentlessly working towards something better, then, well: I’m in.

“Then finally,
we opened the box, we couldn’t find any rules.
Our heads were reeling with the glitter of possibilities, contingencies...
but with ever increasing faith we decided to go ahead and just ignore them,
despite tremendous pressure to capitulate with fate”

-          The Books, Smells like Content

Experiences from the “People’s Space”: C17

8am, Howard College, 28 November 2011. I arrive at Howard College once again, following the weekend of madness that was COY7. Set up on the hill, spatially and symbolically far from the COP17 proceedings at the ICC, it felt strange to be on the side of civil society whilst Juli and Nick (along with Jacob Zuma) were down in the official space below.

Expecting to find the C17 more organised than the weekend, we were surprised to find the campus a hub of disorganisation – the programme and events were unclear, and the “youth space” which we headed to eventually was spectacularly empty. I couldn’t help but feel a sigh of disappointment. I could just imagine the politicians in their protocol-controlled sessions tut-tutting and saying, “typical”.

But despite this, we eventually stumbled upon a joint Eskom-UJ working group for youth on “Paradoxes of climate change: the green economy and sustainable development”. The delegates in the working group were actually there as part of a programme which will spend the next 10 days of COP working on this problem: addressing a workable solution to the “green economy” question. After the craziness of the first few days of COY, which – while amazingly educational – were pretty ideological and complex, finding ourselves in a space which was not only talking about the actual issues at hand but actually doing something about it was a great breath of fresh air. 

After taking part in this workshop, I started to understand a bit more about what the C17 space is about: providing workable solutions to the issues at hand. And as much as politicians feel indignant about the civil society’s disorganisation, so do many NGOs about what the “Conference of the Polluters” achieves, because they are actually already working out solutions to the issues at hand, but don’t have the political support needed to make larger changes.

And during this event, which is like a “global brainstorm” about a world-wide problem, one has to ask, why is there division between those thinking about what happens on the ground and those doing stuff on the ground?

To some extent, the fact that there is a separate “people’s space” to the “negotiator’s space” for COP17 points to a larger, more subtle problem. The separation of political rhetoric and what actually happens on the ground seems to be the status quo everywhere. Why is this? And could addressing this start to solve the political deadlocks and lack of progress over the last 16 COPs?

COP17 opening ceremony

Just to give everyone a bit of background to set the scene of what happens at a COP. After being body searched and sent through a scanner upon arrival I walked around for a while trying to get my bearings. The amount of people is overwhelming, everyone is there for buisness and has a definate goal they are trying to acheive. Is amazing how insignificant you can feel walking amongst all the international delegates and representatives. Nick and myself watched the opening ceremony from the room next to the offical delegation room (which no NGOs were allowed into)- in our 'non-offical room' there must have been around 3000 people- the scale of this conference and volume of people is mind-blowing. App, 40 000 people have flown into durbs for this.

Every person gets a set of air phones so they can hear any translations so mis-understandings are not a factor. We heard Jacob Zuma, President of Chad and Vice-president of Zambia speak which was fascinating. Jacob Zuma spoke exceptionally well I thought and kept reitterating how SA should be aiming for a Green Economy. He also spoke about projects which are in the works for SA such as hydrological schemes and wind energy capture. The most interesting thing he said which I didnt know is that one small island state, Grapati, has already started being evaculated due to sea-level rise. So we have already began losing countries of the world due to human action :(

The hardest thing for myself and Nick to get used to was the formalities and protocol which goes into the whole process. Each speaker takes 5 min to welcome everyone correctly before he/she can even begin speaking...it seems crazy that time is wasted on formalities when there are so many issues that have to be tackled the next two weeks. The conference could probably be one week if there were not so many protocols. Also the countries which oppose a point which arises on the agenda also do so in such a polite, correct way. It is amazing to see such benign interaction among states with such different interests. Maybe the next few days will heat up with developing countries trying to make their voices heard.

And so it nearly begins...

Nick and myself registered for COP17 today and boy oh boy are we in for a treat. There are two massive exhibition halls- the AFRICA section where all the African countries have their stalls I assume is amazing. They have split the section into the different ecosystems found in Africa. For example, there is a Rainforest area, Desert area (i think) and other ecosystems- will check properly tomorrow when we are actually allowed in.

Today at COY was great. Hearing Kumi Naidoo speak was wonderful- he is the executive director of GreenPeace international so it was amazing hearing such an inspirational man speak. The video who Bill McKibben (founder of 350.org) recorded for us was great. What an amazing man- he has spent more days in jail this year then in his own bed because he has been campaigning for environmental issues. Go Bill- you are my hero. I also went to a wonderful, informative workshop on the Green Climate Fund which am so glad I did. I feel like I knew of the Green Climate Fund but it was great hearing all the details about it and hearing people talk about it who have been studying it since inception. I very long story short- the Green Climate Fund was started to raise funding ($100 billion) which will be used in adaptation and mitigation measures for developing countries. It is one attempt at climate justice but unfort it is still in draft form because at the last Tranfer Committee meeting in October the USA and Saudi Arabia would not sign off on the report and it therefore won't be finalized this COP, as was hoped :( Dam! is a pity considering the other 38 countries agreed on the report and because of 2 countries yet another attempt to combat climate change and empower vulnerable countries won't happen :(

COY is over but there is so much to come. Between COP and the civil proceedings (C17) I think the next 2 weeks are going to be JAM PACKED. Well done to all the COY people who partied til 3am and still made it today...very impressive!

The Meaning of Activism

"This is the largest social movement in all of human history. No one knows its scope, and how it functions is more mysterious than what meets the eye. What does meet the eye is compelling: coherent, organic, self-organised congregations involving tens of millions of people dedicated to change."  - Paul Hawken in Blessed Unrest.

 I'm writing this after making a giant polar bear head. True - after googling "climate change activism", creating a wire frame, some sketches, and some fluffy white material later - I'm the owner of my own polar bear. In stitches of laughter, I ramble around the house. My sister is sceptical. "Is this what COP17 is really about?" she sighs, clearly embarrassed at my antics.

"Of course! If you're serious about protesting about climate change, you have to dress up as a polar bear!" I laugh, ironically. But it's a good question: What the hell does dressing up as a polar bear mean in protesting about climate change? How does the average African citizen relate to such an expression, if at all? 

Indeed, polar bears and melting icecaps - which have somewhat characterised the environmentalist movement in the past - have little relevance for personifying the movement in Africa. Still, there’s something special about getting ready to be part of the global “climate camaraderie” around COP17. Wearing a polar bear outfit seems something of a rite of passage into the world of environmental activism; a ritual of solidarity in a global environmental movement. 

It’s a sad thing, I think to myself, that we still seem to thinking about climate change and sustainability in such ice-cap-melting metaphors of the West. Does our dressing-up point to larger systems of hegemonic dominance? And if so, what does it mean for me to adopt this system when representing Africa at COP17 in a week’s time?

Yes, the movement in Africa is manifest in ways much more practicable and appropriate than melting ice-caps. Our “polar bear” is more: it’s blood-red sunsets, it’s gorging rivers, it’s Wangari Maathai’s muddy hands, it’s seeds, and roots, and animals. Mostly, it’s hopeful, and diverse, and fundamental. 

And yes, I’ve made a polar bear. But it’s not necessarily a subservience to the west that made me do it. It’s a sign of solidarity; a connection to the global movement, which doesn’t take away from the fact that the movement in Africa is as alive and relevant – in fact, quite the contrary. 

In a weeks time Africa’s youth will join hands for what they believe in, and if it’ll help to be dressed as a bear, then that’s how they’ll do it.