As a student of Global
Governance I was intrigued to observe the Occupy COP17 protest about an hour ago
here in the ICC in Durban. I could start talking about non-sate actors,
ideational power and transnational networks, but most of you probably don’t care
about these academic concepts. So let me stick to a more practical issue: Does Occupy
COP17 have any effect on the climate talks?
Their techniques for peaceful
civil disobedience – repeated speech, collective arguments and decision-making,
singing – are interesting, and the disruption certainly created some excitement
here at COP17. But watching the scene for about half an hour, it was sad to
conclude that the group had about zero impact on the UN negotiation process.
Their shouts were heard in a small part of the ICC, they disrupted some
movement on the lower floor for a relatively short time, and the people
stopping to watch were either media or people with a yellow observer badge,
most of them in their twenties.
But the negotiators were unimpressed.
Even worse, they were not even interested what the “voice of the 99%” had to
tell them. People kept having coffee and chatting with each other right outside
the protest site, others simply walked by with little more than a glance at the
little crowd, and most probably did not even notice that something was going
on.
UN Security gave the group a
choice: Either you protest outside the ICC building (=move 20 meters) as long
as you want and as loudly as you want, or you stay and get evicted. Those who
decided to stay suffered eviction and will not be allowed to return to this or
future COPs.
The media loved it, but I doubt
the media is the primary or ultimate audience for Occupy COP17.
So, what’s the point?
nice
ReplyDelete