Crowning Achievement

Climate change negotiations at the APEC conference in Sydney have been an enormous diplomatic breakthrough, acting as a catalyst for future action, Foreign Minister Alexander Downer says.

Enormous! And completely original! Un Tour de Force Diplomatique!

Good work, Bunter! Well done, that boy!

The Sydney Declaration on climate change was signed by the 21 Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) leaders on Saturday.

Predictably enough, John Howard referred to these people as the “leaders of 21 economies” – in clear contrast to leaders of “people” – human beings, you know?

Economies — as we have learnt from John over the last, long, 12 years of grey, Calvinistic drudgery — are much more important than people. If the economy is doing well, how people feel is irrelevant – except that they ought to feel pathetically grateful.

This breakthrough “in-principle” agreement which has sent the pulses of world economies racing with its audacity and originality commits the countries to working towards a long-term “aspirational” goal of reducing global greenhouse gas emissions after the Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012.

In principle.

The agreement which has been signed is an agreement – nonbinding – to consider taking some steps towards imagining what a – nonbinding – aspirational goal might be for a particular “economy”.

This is a cardboard box full of empty air.

Without the box.

What is this agreement on an “aspirational” goal? It is a commitment (in principle) to consider hoping that something good will happen.

What is a commitment to working towards hoping – at some unspecified time in the reasonably distant future – that some dream or other will come true?

It is nothing.

And what does it require?

Nothing. No action is called for or called forth.

So in a time when every month of the next ten years is said to be critical in terms of planning and action taken (in fact), Messrs Downer and Howard are pleased with themselves that they have come up with a plan, which everyone could agree on to, in principle, do nothing.

No wonder the Chinese and Americans were happy to sign such an agreement. A vacuum has more substance.

Or to unquote Dusty Springfield:

Wishin’ and hopin’ and thinkin’ and prayin’
Plannin’ and dreaming each night of his charms?
That won’t get you into his arms…

But doesn’t “aspirational goals” sound ever so positive? Why, it’s almost pretty enough to fool a nation full of stupid people. Unfortunately John has still to discover that Australians aren’t stupid.

As George Bush once carefully explained, “Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can’t get fooled again.”

Please may we now get on with replacing these people with people who have committed to actually setting targets inside an actual timeframe?

Oh, and by the way, “aspirational goals” for climate change measures was a Bush vision, as the amazing Steven Poole of Unspeak¹ discussed in June:

At the end of May, George W. Bush attempted to pre-empt the G8 on global warming with an alternative vision for reducing carbon emissions. Jim Connaughton, Chairman of the Council on ‘Environmental Quality’, was challenged by a sceptical reporter:

 

Q Now I’m confused. Does that mean there will be targets for greenhouse gas emission reductions and that everybody will be making binding commitments to each other about greenhouse gas reductions – or, at the end of the day, are those just voluntary commitments?

CHAIRMAN CONNAUGHTON: The commitment at the international level will be to a long-term aspirational goal –

Q Voluntary.

CHAIRMAN CONNAUGHTON: Well, I want to be careful about the word “voluntary,” because we do these kinds of goals all the time, international agreements. It’s the implementing mechanisms that become binding.

 

One should always be careful about the word ‘voluntary’, in case it gives the right impression. Still, aspirational goal is a lovely coinage. ‘Aspirational’ is a glossy-magazine lifestyle fantasy of fast cars, large houses and single-malt whiskies. And aspirations are always virtuous, even if they are – almost by definition – not actually going to be accomplished. As the poet said, a man’s reach should exceed his grasp, or what’s a heaven for?

¹ Unspeak.net is well worth a visit and adding to your list of favourites, not only for Steven’s clear, clever and entertaining writing but also for both his depth of analysis and his sense of fun. And the book is also very well worth reading – even purchasing. Or you can check out this helpful video: