Indaba

It is the third to last day. Ministers have arrived and the high-level segments have begun.

I stand dithering outside the doors to the Baobob plenary room. Do I go in? Do I attend one of the many side events? Do I do to the alternative conference altogether? I decide its time I paid some attention to the formal COP and walk past the security guards and through the two sets of double doors into the plenary room.

Unlike in Copenhagen, the high-level sessions are open to observers. The reason for this is simple. Few heads of state have bothered coming to this meeting and no-one expects much to come from them anyway. The plenary room holds roughly 1000 people, most of which is dedicated to country delegations. Less than a quarter of the countries have delegates present, and the observers are crowded together behind rows of empty seats. One by one ministers, deputy ministers and the occasional head of state arrive at the podium, give an impassioned three minute speech to the almost empty room and rush off. There are no questions. There are no responses. This is not a forum for negotiation.

Observers may watch the ministerial speeches, but they are excluded from most negotiations and now the Indabas. One of the roles of the host country of the COP is to supply the COP president. Most of the negotiation process follows long-established rules but the president has the mandate to assist the negotiations however she or he feels will be most productive. In Copenhagen (COP15) the Danish presidency decided to hold closed door meetings with a very small sub-set of countries. This resulted in the Copenhagen Accord but the deeply non-participatory aspect of it wrecked havoc – afterall, in theory the UNFCCC is a consensus based institution. In Cancun (COP16), the Mexican presidency paired developing and developed countries, and assigned each pair a key issue on which they were to consult with others and facilitate agreement.

When COP17 president Maite Nkoana-Mashabane introduced the Indaba, she explained that it is a venue designed to “establish a common mind or a common story that all participants can take with them. In successful Indabas, participants come with open minds motivated by the spirit of the common good, listening to each other to find compromises that will benefit the community as a whole”

In this spirit the initial Indabas were entirely open, but after the first two they disappeared off-site and became off-limits to everyone except the head and deputy negotiator from each delegation. For some, the relocation and closure of the Indabas was contrary to the spirit of open negotiation within a community, and failed to recognize the contributions of civil society. “WTF”, my friend sputters, as we discover we can't even see when the Indabas are to be held, “whatever happened to transparency?”.

For others, establishing boundaries of place and participants was necessary to facilitate honest conversation among parties in a situation characterized by little trust and no movement. The UNFCCC is ultimately a UN body, and while observers are allowed entry, decisions ultimately rest with the parties – who are by definition countries.

The problem is of course, that countries do not seem to be able to see themselves as a global community capable of undertaking actions for the common good. After listening to minister, after minister, after minister establish the reasons why their country is not to blame, and why they are not the ones preventing successful negotiation I give up. I walk out of the plenary, out of the ICC, across the leafy cafe, through the gate and into the DEC where I find myself in a side event.

The youth associations of China and the United States have decided to meet. This is the third time they have done this, and the goal is to build bridges now so that long-term cooperation will be easier. As I watch these young people organize themselves, I think of the stalled negotiations in the building across the way. Perhaps countries can't think of the common good or the global community but people can, and these young people didn't need a closed Indaba to help them do so.