Notes From Xi'an 西安随感

Two days ago in Xi’an, while workmen were planting pine trees into the central reservation of the new upgraded Chang’an Road, I could hardly make out the tall television tower a short distance behind them for the polluted air that surrounded it. However, while today the workmen were still planting trees, the TV tower, itself recently refurbished, was sparkling white and clear in a beautiful blue sky.  And there was I, led to believe that those Copenhagen talks were “at best flawed, at worst chaotic” or even worse a “climate crime scene”. Not so, by the looks of the results on the ground here in happy, naturalistic China.

Now, maybe there is no call for the use of such a jocular tone towards what is obviously a very serious issue. An issue with an agenda that, in recent weeks, has drawn much brow beating and finger pointing from members of government and civil society alike. However, I have also attempted to consider these issues a little from the perspective of having lived in China for a few years.

 

The first thing to note, that pollution in China, for the Chinese, is a serious issue. (Documentary Photography: Pollution in China). Second, the recognition, that the processes adopted and the new relationships involved in the decisions taken at an inter-state level are of fundamental importance going deeper into the 21st century. Third, it would be better for all concerned in such inter-state processes, such as those that took place in Copenhagen, if the participants were able to recognise their own personal/cultural perspectives, attitudes and circumstances, and the context that defines them and that the same situation with different sets of conditions exist for others. Finally, it is good to see so many trees regularly being planted around this sprawling urban centre of Western China!

Pollution in China for the Chinese

So, the first thing to note is that although the scale of China’s carbon emissions is a world problem, it is still first and foremost a Chinese problem, for the Chinese people. It is due to centuries of development and historical levels of emissions across the globe, that China’s present position has been placed into such sharp relief.  There are at least a couple of strands to this. The first is that in taking into account China’s historical sense of isolationism and self-determination, any debate and dialogue is perhaps best understood within the context of responsibility, for and by the Chinese people. This might not be liked by some but is maybe a necessary perspective to recognise. This may explain why such an emphasis is placed by Chinese negotiators on “domestic statistical, monitoring and evaluation”, and is not in fact a de facto form of dis-responsibility.

 

Secondly, that the security of China’s Developing Economy, especially in this unclear and unstable economic time, will be seen to be of great short-medium term importance and not something to be guided by a global summit agenda, especially one hammered out through sleeves-rolled up, back slapping, back room agreements. Wen Jia Bao expressed this tricky dichotomy between Economic Development and Environmental Salvation, when he noted that: “China is now at an important stage of accelerated industrialisation and urbanization, and, given the predominant role of coal in our energy mix, we are confronted with a special difficulty in emissions reduction…we have set the new target of cutting carbon dioxide emissions per unit of GDP by 40-45 percent by 2020 from the 2005 level.”

It must be noted that the jump we are expecting these developing nations to take, is not a small step, as alluded to, again by Wen Jia Bao: “To reduce carbon dioxide emissions on such a large scale and over such an extended period of time will require tremendous efforts on our part.” It is also not a process that we had to face in our own development, or certainly not one we had the foresight to recognise or, as is more likely, were willing to address. It is easy to take the moral high ground, on the basis of scientific data and impending planetary/ humanitarian doom; it is another to actually be those in power who have to make those decisions. It might seem clear to some but they carry different cultural, social and political baggage. Like it or not, disappointment and indignation will not get you very far, though of course natural reactions. 

Global Groupings and the Maintenance of State Sovereignty

If the United Nations wasn’t discredited enough during the shenanigans leading to the conflict in Iraq, then Copenhagen may shine a brighter light upon how we are going to be able to decide globally significant issues between existing sovereign states. Especially states like China, that have such a strong sense of national identity and autonomy. We also need to consider what would be defined as “legally binding” in this context. Remember that Kyoto has been held up in recent days as a legally binding Climate Agreement but that it was comprehensively written off at the time by environmentalists as not going far enough and was not even signed by the US. Legally binding it might have been but it doesn’t seem to have carried much weight.

Going forward, there of course needs to be what existed in Copenhagen: the main players getting around the table or teleconferencing suites and discussing these issues further. Politicians can talk of being held to ransom and not letting agreements be dominated by minority members, but if those members are the US or the Chinese then there is not a lot that can be done: they need to be onside and that needs to be remembered when the bitter lessons, drawn from the recognition of impotence, are learnt. Like it or not, vis-à-vis Climate Change the US has never really come on board; we may just find, in the time we still have, that the Chinese are more willing.

Contextualisation, Indignation and Tree Planting

 

Perhaps, only by understanding the Chinese context and attitude and giving space and room for understanding and dialogue, will the greatest polluter the planet may well ever know, continue to sit at the table. Though I suggest there is a greater sense of responsibility there than Copenhagen suggests. This is not simply a doffed cap approach to diplomacy but a recognition of reality. It seems to me that by allowing ourselves to issue ‘Demands’ and letting our own indignation get the better of us, we do nothing but antagonise those we are appealing to. Life isn’t what we expect or even what we desire and very rarely is it or should it be made up of demands made on others, even if those demands are made from our own earnest sense of responsibility. Life, or one that takes a peaceful, harmonious path, tends to be made from holding a light to ourselves, as well as to others.

Finally, I am jolly happy to regularly see new parks appearing, tree lined avenues created and sometimes even prime real estate land becoming wooded city centre oases. Now, by no means is China about to be defined as a neo-naturalistic landscape but if we can but see the light or the potential for photosynthesising light at least, in the polluted darkness that often shrouds the street scapes of down-town Chinese cities, we can see the light elsewhere and we can move forward.

Belief And What’s Left

Maybe time isn’t on our planet’s side but indignation, insults and socio-cultural subjectivity aren’t going to keep the Chinese at the table, and they need to be there. If the European Union nations and the US had shown more of the selflessness that, in reality, is now being expected to some degree from the Chinese, then we wouldn’t be here worrying so much. And please, don’t kid yourselves that a turn to democracy in China would make these issues and decisions any easier, at least in the short-term, I don’t believe it would. This is not a case against reform just a note that, it would one, not necessarily be the all seeing and doing saviour that one might like it to be, and two, such political reform here, in my opinion, is a very long way off, maybe even something for another world or life- time. If I have become anything since living in China, it is a realist, though with a still hard to extinguish belief in humanity, and from my own anecdotal and generalising experience, a belief in the Chinese people, at least as much as I have in humanity generally. As many Evangelical- Missionary Christians here might tell you, belief is all we have, but as I might add, the rest is up to us. The Chinese, I might proffer, recognise that more than most.

____________________________________________

Tags: China News, Environment China

This entry was posted on Saturday, December 12th, 2009 at 23:16 and is filed under China News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.