Posts in category: Uncategorized

President Nicolas Sarkozy had some kind words to say about the Swiss the other day, in the wake of the surprising referendum banning the future construction of minarets in the Confederation. The French intellectual class, in the main, however, jumped all over him.

There are indeed some kind things to say about the Swiss. They are an example of an inter-cultural modus vivendi. Of the Confederation’s total population of 7.7 million, 72.5 percent are German speakers, 20.4 percent are French speakers, 6.5 percent speak Italian, and 0.5 percent are speakers of Romansh (an obscure Romance language). All four are recognized as national languages.

The Swiss gladly accept husbanding others’ money. They also husband their immaculate and picturesque farmlands. Their cities are clean, well ordered, and well policed. They also don’t like outside interference. They have a sturdy, almost totally conscript army to back this up. In the late Middle Ages, Swiss soldiers were considered among the best warriors in Europe. Perhaps this might have something to with the fact that Switzerland has not been in a state of war since 1815. Recently, the Swiss image has become tarnished, as the country’s position as a tax shelter for the super-rich has been criticized during the recent recession, and as the emergence of a far-right party has exposed a streak of intolerance in Swiss public opinion.

But back to the minarets, of which there are four currently in Switzerland, where the Muslim population is 400,000. By a strong majority (57.5 percent) in a November 29 referendum, the Swiss said there shall be no more.

What exactly did President Sarkozy say that caused such a typically French intellectual dither? First, that a referendum (“yes or no”) was not a good medium for such a complex subject. (The recourse to the referendum, however, is constitutionally mandated in the Swiss Confederation). Second, that rather than rail against the Swiss, one should look deeper into the motivation behind the rejection vote. Third, and most saliently, Sarkozy noted that while no one is seeking to discourage the free practice of religion, Muslims should be aware of Europe’s Christian heritage and France’s Republican traditions and therefore should not be overly provocative, choosing rather to practice their faith with “humble discretion.”

It’s a little ironic. The world has gathered at the climate conference in Copenhagen to talk about the weather, but few people are aware of, well, the weather. Not weather trends, mind you. There’s plenty of discussion about that. I’m talking about the fact that it’s snowing now in the Danish capital—lightly, beautifully.

This is more than poetic musing. Both Freud and Jung said that the world’s problems can’t be solved with the same type of thinking that created them. Recent psychological studies suggest that humans cannot solve environmental problems through logic alone, divorced from the environment we’re trying to protect. We have to also feel ourselves to be part of nature.

Take the example of one Latin American delegate I met here. She has been working until 2am every night; and she wakes up at 5am to begin work every day. “Can she make good decisions without any sleep?” a colleague asked, rhetorically, to a group of us here in the gargantuan, windowless media room.

An ethos of total work reigns in Copenhagen—not unlike the one that’s consuming the world’s finite resources at unsustainable rates and spewing out tons of greenhouse gasses. Blackberrys vibrate away as participants race from meeting to meeting, stopping only to gulp down a double espresso.

Meanwhile, I discovered a “meditation and prayer room” here, and walked inside today. Of the 40,000 participants, only one was there in the silent space, amid a half dozen potted trees. In a business suit, he was stretched out of the floor, asleep.

I’m not suggesting delegates chant “ohm” all day or hug trees instead of hammering out solutions to climate change. Global warming is already contributing to floods and hurricanes, severe droughts, and spreading diseases like dengue fever and malaria. The need for work is urgent—the world must act.

But if we’re to achieve equilibrium in our ecosystem, shouldn’t we also foster equilibrium in our lives? Here’s a modest suggestion for the delegates: work hard, but also step outside once in a while and catch a snowflake on your tongue.

I know at least four leaders from Bhutan who are probably doing just that.

It’s winter in Europe: time for snow, St. Nicholas, and the annual Russia-Ukraine dispute over natural gas supplies. On Wednesday, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev warned his counterparts in Ukraine not to try to modify a 10-year gas supply contract between the two countries. It’s a warning not to take lightly—last January, Russia turned off the taps to the Ukrainian pipeline network over what they said was a billion dollar debt owed to them by Kiev and claimed the Ukrainians were siphoning off gas bound for countries further west in Europe. (For their part, Kiev blamed the missing gas on their leaky, outdated pipeline network rather than theft).

Last January’s shutdown had drastic effects. Europe receives about 20 percent of their natural gas supplies from the Russian pipeline network. Countries in the former Soviet-controlled East though get half, or in some cases almost all, of their supplies via Russia. The Russia-Ukraine gas feud shut factories, chilled cities, and provoked a crisis across much of Europe.

Russia has the second-largest known reserves of natural gas in the world; Turkmenistan is thought to have the third-largest reserves, and other Central Asian states have significant stocks of their own. Europe would like to tap into these gas fields with pipelines that avoid Russian territory. Moscow, meanwhile, is eager to lock these Central Asian supplies into new pipeline networks that they would build and operate, knowing that control over a big chunk of Europe’s energy supplies provides a huge amount of political leverage.

Pipelines have thus become a big political issue for Europe. And in the race to build new pipelines, lately Russia seems to be edging into the lead.

COPENHAGEN—Under the vaulting sloped-glass roof of Copenhagen’s Bella Center, the excitement is palpable. I’m here for the two-week long “COP 15,” or the Fifteenth Conference of the Parties of the UN Convention on Climate Change. The world’s environment ministers have arrived in advance of the historic gathering of 110 heads of state coming next week.

It’s been a rollercoaster ride so far. On Friday, spirits lifted after much uncertainty that any sort of deal could be struck, when a draft agreement that seemed to have some consensus finally circulated. It said that—using 1990 levels as a baseline—all countries together should reduce emissions from 50 to 95 percent by 2050, with rich countries cutting emissions from 25 to 40 percent by 2020.

But then at a ministerial meeting on Sunday, the United States dropped a bomb: it couldn’t commit to a legally binding target for emissions reductions because Congress hasn’t approved the proposal. Not surprisingly, Canada and other rich nations followed suit, saying essentially, “well, then we won’t either.”

“When that happened, the whole dialogue broke down,” said Papua New Guinea Minister Kevin Conrad, who was present. In rebuff, lesser-developed countries basically told the rich world to “sort out your problems internally and then you come back and talk to us about the things we can do.” Then they walked out, stopping negotiations for most of today.

By Monday, the conference chair, Danish Minister Connie Hedegaard, had managed to overcome the deadlock through some quick diplomacy. But the peace is fragile, and there’s an increasingly pessimistic sense among a number of country delegates and representatives from non-governmental organizations about the possibility of any significant deal being struck here.

The pessimism is understandable, given the vast differences in perspectives. For example, last week Washington scoffed at the idea that there exists a “climate debt” that industrialized countries owe to the world (an idea based on the inconvenient fact that wealthy nations have caused the vast majority of the current problem). But in a developing world press conference I just attended, cries were made for “twenty-four trillion dollars in reparations for climate change damages, as well as a radical reduction of emissions in the North.” Meanwhile, 1,200 protesters were taken into police custody over the weekend. Some of them held up signs that read, “Blah, Blah, Blah. Take Action!” referring to the perception that nothing of substance had come of last week’s negotiations.

Against this backdrop, the world’s leaders will soon arrive to try and hammer out the contentious bargaining issues like financing and exactly how deeply to cut emissions. It’s only going to get more interesting.

Over the weekend, representatives from countries in West Africa and Europe met in Burkina Faso to address the quickly deteriorating political situation in Guinea, which was exacerbate