JONATHAN AND OTHER VOICES ON RIO
President Goodluck Jonathan said one thing, while critics said another. It’s all about Rio+20. It is the conference on the environment that took place in Brazil. One does not even need to mention critics at home. The President’s spokesperson and the nation’s Information Minister have said such criticisms are politically motivated. Right there in Rio de Janeiro, the president was all for the Conference although critics at home were not. So he had congratulated his host.
It was about the successful hosting, and he was on the podium, talking to the world, when he did. Talking how to preserve the earth from further degradation was the reason for the Conference. UN that organized it called this round of talks Rio+20, because it had been twenty years since the last of such took place in the same city. US Secretary of State had also thanked President Dilma Rousseff for hosting it, although critics said Brazil simply wanted to show off her city ahead of World Cup and the Olympics that it will host later. Not everyone agreed though. Nigeria’s leader is one of them. “I also commend the Secretary General and staff of the United Nations for organizing this Conference, which marks the 20th Anniversary of the Earth Summit,” he had said in Rio.
President Jonathan thought global cooperation is imperative to ensuring sustainable development throughout the world. It was the core of his message. And in line with the chosen theme for the Conference, he believed leaders that gathered in Rio owe an obligation to the coming generations to eradicate poverty and employ green economy in sustainable development programme. Of course, he remembered Africa, his continent. The Green Economy that some had gathered at the venue to protest against, he said, is an agenda for growth, wealth creation and employment generation. He did note however that the promotion of a Green Economy must be underlined by clear national objectives, social and economic development imperatives and the attainment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). And he recognized the constraints posed to sustainable development in Africa by emerging challenges such as the global financial crisis, migration, rapid urbanization, the energy and food crisis, low resistance to natural disasters, desertification and the loss of the eco-system resulting from climate change.
He went ahead to give an example of what he meant. The Lake Chad in West and Central Africa which used to be the 6th largest Lake in the world. This body of water that is a major global resource, he said, has become endangered to the extent that it has shrunk from about 25,000 sq kms in 1964 to less than 2000 sq kms today. He expressed his concern that at this rate, if nothing is done promptly to salvage the situation, “this world heritage will disappear within 20 years.” But he gave a report of what his government has done about it so far. A feasibility study on the Inter-Basin Water Transfer from the Ubangi River in Central African Republic (CAR) to Lake Chad has been embarked upon, he stated. And his nation has committed US$5 million out of the US$6 million earmarked for the studies, although he made it known that efforts to save the Lake is not within the capacity of the contiguous states. The enormous resources required is the reason. He appealed to the international community to support this project that he tagged a global responsibility.
His administration is much concerned about the sustainability of the environment, so it has also promoted the Great Green Wall for Sahara Initiative as an integrated approach to checking desertification and depletion of natural resources in the Sahel. The wall starts from the West Coast and ends in the Horn of Africa. He stated the purpose. It is to develop a regional strategy and national implementation plan that would lead to selection of country and cross-border projects for financing by the countries. Again, he appealed for support of outsiders because Africa cannot do it by herself. But Nigeria, he pointed out, takes the matter as a national priority. Therefore, in her sustainable development agenda, and under her medium to long term National Plans, the nation has developed several sectoral initiatives in agriculture, petroleum, solid minerals, power supply, renewable energy, trade and investment, water and sanitation, which accord priority to environmental and wider development issues. The goal of the president’s administration along this line of thinking is simple: Create more jobs and opportunities in order to raise people out of poverty, and create wealth to ensure sustainable development.
He returned to the matter of appealing for help from outsiders nevertheless: “While we recognize that the developing countries have primary responsibility for implementing their own sustainable development agenda, there is no doubt that they need the support of the international community to achieve these objectives.” So for him, Rio+20 can only be seen to be successful if the thorny issue of the means of implementation is adequately addressed. He thought there is a dare need to bridge the gaps undermining the fulfilment of international commitments on sustainable development, especially in areas of finance, external debt, trade and investment, capacity building and technology development. And he had returned to his conviction that Rio+20 was a fabulous idea. The Conference is “historic because it marks a defining moment, both for humanity and for our planet,” he said. Those days, June 20-22, he said, provided a unique opportunity to reshape the future and redefine the relationship between human advancement and environmental sustainability. So he hoped the outcomes of Rio+20 will mark that turning point in history. He was talking about the same conference about which some observers had looked up, and heaved a sigh.
Critics had buzzed, and protesters had swarmed venue of the Rio+20, as they had done during past conferences. Critics said for the past twenty years, environmental summits have fundamentally failed to deliver. The first Rio and the Kyoto process that it launched are often claimed to be a climate policy success – but Rio and Kyoto have delivered no measurable reduction in ever-increasing CO2 emissions. The 2009 Copenhagen climate summit in itself was a spectacular failure. The text that leaders signed at the end of Rio+20 runs to nearly 50 pages, and it had inspired anger and disappointment.
Environment groups say it should have contained commitments to phase out fossil fuel subsidies, and to increase the global share of renewable energy. It did propose setting up sustainable development goals, however. That was rather like the Millennium Development Goals, but without details and timetable. At the Conference, the predominant feeling was that governments had missed an opportunity to change the course of human development.
Yet others insisted that though the document does not entirely match ambition or meet the challenges the world faces, it is a step forward. There are hopes that in about two years, there shall be a post-Rio conference. It is for those willing to commit more strongly on environmental governance.
Written By Tunji Ajibade
[email protected]