Intolerable heat, unpredictable high intensity rain, floods, cyclones, and increased beach erosion are some symptoms of changing climate patterns. The neighboring Maldives, Bangladesh and pacific islands like Tuvalu, and Kiribati already feel the effects of the rising sea level. Cyclone Nargis killed over 100,000 Burmese and affected more than 2.5 million people in 2007. Floods and cyclone Sidr in Bangladesh killed over 3000 people and affected over 900,000 families in 2007. Floods in Sri Lanka in 2008 affected over 200,000 people and killed a few. During the drought of 1999-2001 in Afghanistan, the FAO suggests that about half of the population was directly or indirectly affected by drought. About 3 to 4 million people were severely affected and another 8 to 12 million were under threat of famine. There are similar stories across the globe.

Although there is a dispute about the increase in temperature, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change(IPCC) report published in 2004 shows that rising temperature has a direct connection to the increase of Green House Gases such as CO2, Methane, NO2, CFC and even water vapor. Methane is produced by nature as well through animal husbandry. One of the most famous climate slogans appearing in the UN COP 15 are "Meatless Mondays Keep the Warming Away" and "Be a Vegan - Save our Beautiful World". CO2 which is result of burning "fossil Fuel" is a major reason for retaining heat within the atmosphere which results global warming.

It is estimated that the increase in temperature will be 2 – 5 degrees Centigrade at the end of the century. Some expect a more severe temperature increase and 40 cm sea level rise by 2080. Some assessments state that the rise of average temperature by 4-5 degrees Centigrade will raise the sea level by 3-5 meters with the breakup of ice caps in Greenland and Antarctica. Greenpeace says the breakdown of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) alone will release enough water to increase the sea level by 5 meters and if all ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica melt entirely, the sea level will rise by 70 meters. Although developed countries (except the United States) signed the Kyoto protocol, which agreed to reduce CO2 emissions, none have fulfilled this obligation yet.

It is expected that the Obama administration will unveil the target for reducing carbon dioxide emissions at next month’s climate conference in Copenhagen. The United States has been under great pressure from the international community to present its target at the summit, because it is the only industrialized country that still hasn’t revealed a plan to reduce emissions. The United States presented its domestic targets in August 2009 which is 14 percent from 2005 levels by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050.This is only less than 4% of the 1990 level which is far less than what other countries have been pushing for. Meanwhile, total emission cuts so far agreed by the entire Annex I countries excluding the US are only 14 percent to 17 percent from the 1990 targets. However the US and other Annex I countries argue that China, India and Brazil need to bring its CO2 emission levels down too. Although the US is responsible for the highest historical levels of carbon emission, China’s per capita CO2 level is number one at the moment.

According to climate scientists, at least 40% of the 1990 levels should be achieved by 2020. This level is necessary if we are to maintain the 2 degree centigrade temperature rise and keep the CO2 level at 350 ppm. Any further increase of the CO2 level in the atmosphere will severely affect the sea level. It is estimated that over 200 million people will become climate refugees at the end of the century due to the impact of climate change. In a conservative estimate, it is calculated that inaction in cutting emissions drastically by developed countries would cost around 40-70 billion annually. I believe the question is not where to find this money. During the US recession the United States bailout package for its corporations was over 3 trillion. The total fund requirement to reduce the CO2 level is 250 billion only.

The more important issue for the people in the developing world is how the climate debate will affect our development. The current development trend in Sri Lanka is not correct and not sustainable. The Electricity Generation plan recently unveiled by the Ceylon Electricity board has over 3200 MW generated by coal power plants which will be based on imported Coal from Cheaper sources. This cheaper coal has more than 1 percent sulphur and more ash content. These coal power plants will emit CO2 1.9 Metric Tonnes per capita which almost same as the sustainable level of CO2 emissions by 6.5 billion people living in the world today.

The argument of the Coal power agents today is that Sri Lanka’s per capita CO2 emission is only 600 Kg and we have ample space to increase Co2 emissions. But we have increased this by 230 percent since the Kyoto protocol was signed. Burning coal which is imported from other countries cannot be justified as sustainable. On the other hand the problem today is the wrong development paradigm of the industrialized countries. Copying the same would be a complete disaster for us.

We have the right to development the same as any other nation. As part of environmental justice the developing nations now fight for climate justice. The developed countries owe an ecological debt to the developing countries for overconsumption of our atmosphere, environmental space and natural resources. It is clear that their development has deprived us of development. Climate debt is owed for the historical overproduction of GHG emissions by developed countries that saturated the atmosphere, thereby reducing the environmental/survival space available for developing countries.

Sri Lanka’s position in the climate debate is also requesting the settlement of the ecological debt that developed countries owe us. The Sri Lankan Government has signed the Bolivian proposal to request settlement of the ecological debt. As we believe, wealthy nations have accumulated a huge debt through centuries of exploitation of the natural resources of poorer nations. The ecological debt, including the climate debt must be paid not only in financial terms. This has to include the unconditional cancellation of all the unfair debts that the impoverished countries have accumulated through the implementation of colonial and neoliberal policies. Liberali-zation practices imposed through the international financial institutions causes the degradation of the environment; and thus exacerbates vulnerability to climate change. Liberalization creates unequal access to goods, reducing opportunities for the poor to build resilience to climate change.

Being part of the G77 cluster, Sri Lanka also strongly supports the request from Annex I countries to cut emissions, mitigate the damage, assist adaptation, request climate finance through a United Nations managed fund and transfer technologies to combat climate change. The African nations and the small island states have an almost similar approach. Yet the negotiations are not easy.

In a worst case scenario, there would be no deal in Copenhagen. Annex I countries are trying to kill the Kyoto Protocol and it’s likely that they will discuss the shared long-term vision only. There is a great debate on climate financing. Developed countries are planning to distribute climate finance through ‘climate criminals’ such as the ADB and the World Bank which have increased by more than 100 percent their funding for coal based power generation in recent years. The much opposed ‘carbon trading’ due to failures in the recent past may still continue since that is the only way for business corporations to make money. Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in developing countries (REDD), and the much opposed carbon offset mechanism supported by the UN will continue since that is the only money available for developing countries.

In terms of total emissions, China leads with 21.5% the United States 20.2% and European Union 13.8%. Except the United States, all other countries have effected some emission cuts. There is very little chance that Annex I countries will agree to some emission cuts. There will be no deal without the US committing to reduce its emissions. US domestic emission cut is 17% by 2020 from the 2005 level which is only a 4% reduction of the 1990 levels. Also there will be no deal without China, India and Brazil taking action to cut domestic emissions.