China's accusation of 'historical' guilt no longer applies

WORLD China's accusation of 'historical' guilt no longer applies Daniel Wetzel 9 hrs ago | The success of the 26th climate conference will be measured by many criteria. Is the global community still ambitious enough in saving CO₂? Are the financial transfers that enable developing countries to transform their economies in a climate-neutral way working? "In the end, only one question will be decisive in climate protection: What is China doing?", writes WELT author Daniel Wetzel. Environmental activists are demonstrating by the thousands in Glasgow's streets, demanding "action instead of words" and a "change of system", but they always target only the Western industrialised countries. That will not be enough. Because in the end, only one question will be decisive in climate protection: What is China doing? While CO₂ emissions are already falling in the developed OECD countries, the People's Republic has multiplied its emissions within a few years. It now stands alone for around a third of global emissions and - together with India - for practically the entire increase in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. The country also emits more per capita than the citizens of the European Union and wants to increase emissions even further by 2030. After head of state Xi Jinping promised before Glasgow to reduce the country's CO₂ emissions to net zero by 2060, the euphoria was initially great. But now disillusionment is spreading: Xi was absent from the meeting of 120 heads of state at the opening of the conference. In Paris in 2015, China was represented by 326 delegates, but this time Beijing sent only 60 to Glasgow, half as many as, for example, Germany. China did not sign the celebrated declarations of intent to phase out coal use and reduce methane emissions. China's role in climate change As the mouthpiece of the emerging countries, China always used the argument of "historical guilt" at the UN climate conferences: the West was solely responsible for global warming through its industrialisation - and had to answer for it. Transfers of billions of dollars to developing and emerging countries could be justified in this way, as could China's own braking in climate protection. But now China's role is changing. The accusation of historical guilt no longer holds water when put forward by a country that will soon overtake the USA economically, dwarf the growth rates of the West and buy up infrastructure worth billions worldwide for a "new Silk Road". Without strong emission reductions, China is likely to be the main contributor to climate change by mid-century, even measured in terms of all historical emissions. In the absence of a superior power, only the game of "shame and blame" works in the anarchist world of states. The prospect of being disgraced and pilloried before the world public for doing nothing was successful in Paris in 2015: China supported the global climate agreement at the time. A similarly clear confrontation is not taking place today. China's "droning silence" at the World Climate Conference is rather ignored - so far also by the demonstrating climate activists on the streets of Glasgow.