Sounds like the fallout is that the developing world will get a couple seats at the table (Russia, China, India, Brazil) and the actual poorer countries (basically most of Africa and various island nations) will get the scraps. Since that has always been the most sensible way to address the policies needed, at least from the perspective of the countries who would be required to make significant changes, the mainly industrial and developed nations, I don't understand why they even bothered with this sort of tokenism that permitted large scale frustrations to be voiced so that the few wealthy and potentially wealthy nations of the world could get together in one place and come up with some tentative agreements of their own. I suppose you could argue that the backdrop of activists and a few angry dictatorships demanding bribe money was helpful to producing some consensus on the broader points. But if they persist, as I think they should, in making what amount to backroom deals amongst the poker table friends consortium of rich pals then it becomes increasingly unlikely that the ire and anger of protesters and poorer nations will be a present and visible motivation to accomplish things. And it will be increasingly necessary to make some accommodation regardless of whether there is an accompanying external motivator. So from a purely strategic view of negotiation, it was either a not very promising sign of future deals or a not wise use of external motivation to start out with it rather than to employ it to get past later and actual deal-brokering points.
I found Chavez's speech to be particularly funny, given that his entire economy only functions because it sells oil to richer nations. At least the Saudis know they're about to be screwed and are trying to get some money for it, which I disagree with having to do (they should have spent their oil money more prudently because no single resource dollar lasts forever on which to base an entire civilization), but at least is perfectly sensible cartel behavior. Chavez is sort of odd in that way though. He doesn't seem to mind being the dog that bites the hand in his rhetoric.
22 December 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment