News / Brèves
Copenhaguen Summit / Sommet Copenhague
Back to previous selection / Retour à la sélection précédente

Obama Fails Utterly In Copenhagen—Once Again!

Printable version / Version imprimable

(LPAC)—What Obama got in Copenhagen wasn’t a weak deal,— it was no deal at all; there was NO agreement. In the new era after the China-Russia agreements of October,— transitional to the era of LaRouche’s Four-Power agreement,— China and India jointly refused to give an inch on their national sovereignty, and a much-weakened Obama’s genocidal errand for Tony Blair and the British Monarchy ended in complete failure. Obama called it "a fundamental deadlock on perspectives." After breaking into a meeting of China, India, Brazil and South Africa (BASIC) on Friday evening, Dec. 18, Obama was totally unable to move the group, and all five of them jointly signed a paper called the "Copenhagen Accord," which reflected absolutely no movement from the "red lines" previously agreed on by China, India and the others. But then, when this agreement was brought to the 190-nation plenary session that night, after most national leaders had left, other nations, including British Commonwealth stooges, refused to sign on. Negotiations stretched into the morning, but all that was achieved was that the conference "took note" of the agreement, while neither joining nor endorsing it.

And what’s in this so-called "agreement" which was not agreed to? Or rather, what’s not in it, because of Chinese and Indian objections? There is no commitment to a binding treaty next year, or at any other time. There are no long-term emission targets: no commitment to 50%, or any other specific reduction by 2050, and no targets for 2020. There is not even an agreement on deforestation, a particular baby of Prince Charles’ and Gordon Brown’s, which Obama also stuck into Hillary Clinton’s handbag. And, of course, absolutely no outside "MRV," or measurement, reporting and verification, of any voluntary measures by developing countries. This was the most basic of the Indian/Chinese "red lines:" national sovereignty.