Did Copenhagen talks open door to a new global order?

At Copenhagen, five world leaders – four from countries outside the usual post-World War II power brokers – nailed down the final details. That "may encapsulate the kind of shift that we see" in other arenas, Mr. Diringer says.

One of those arenas involves international finance. During the current economic crisis, world leaders recharged the International Monetary Fund's fiscal aquifer with $1 trillion. Hard bargaining by countries such as China, India, and Brazil in the run-up to that decision translated into receiving a 47 percent share of the voting rights in the body.

"And that is likely to rise to 50 soon," said Jonathan Lash, president of the World Resources Institute, during a press briefing last week in Washington.

At a time when such institutions are becoming increasingly involved in a range of issues, including climate, "developing countries are demanding a much greater say," he said. That's more in line with what one might expect from a Copenhagen 5 than the G-8 group of industrial countries, he added.

The new world order?

It's not yet clear how solid any new alignment is, says Sarah Ladislaw, an energy and national-security analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

The China-India-Brazil-South Africa bloc at the climate talks did something new, she says. The four countries were not negotiating on behalf of the larger bloc of developing countries, as they might have in the past, she adds. Instead, they were negotiating based on their own interests as developing countries with rapidly growing economies.

That led to cracks in the firewall that the Kyoto pact establishes between developed to developing countries – a firewall that allows for no shift in status from developing nation to developed nation, says Ms. Ladislaw.

Further divisions appeared in the fragile developing-country bloc when the US offered to take part in setting up a $30 billion "fast start" fund over the next three years to help developing countries adapt to global warming and grow on a more climate-friendly path. Countries with the most to lose from global warming urged support – if sometimes grudgingly – for the final agreement, while five developing countries refused to support it.

The key question now is whether Copenhagen 5 become the nucleus for future climate negotiations.

"India always has a little bit of a problem playing second fiddle to China, and Brazil and South Africa have separate interests as well," Ladislaw says.

More will come clear after a meeting between the four coming up next month, she adds.

-----

Follow us on Twitter.

Previous

1 | 2