Unlike the high octane Copenhagen summit that took place last December, the UN Climate Change Conference 2010 being held in Cancun, Mexico, is a rather subdued affair. Expectations are very low after the disappointment of Copenhagen when world leaders collectively failed to agree on a strong and legally binding treaty to curb carbon emissions. “I think we might actually clinch an agreement here, because expectations are so low and there is no pressure on anyone,” pointed out Joydeep Gupta, a journalist and analyst who has been attending these climate change talks for several years now.

Right now, the atmosphere is certainly one of unhurried optimism. There is a laid back feel to the breezy turquoise and white sand beaches of Cancun’s holiday resorts, developed mainly for American tourists (thousands fly in each year for their vacations). The conference itself is taking place in one of the larger hotels complete with an 18 hole manicured golf course and picturesque views of the Caribbean Sea. The Moon Palace, as the resort is called, is far removed from the grime of downtown Cancun, located way past the hotel strips on one end of the peninsula.

It is in these overly air conditioned halls of Moon Palace that delegates from over 190 countries who have signed up to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) are going to decide whether they are serious about controlling global warming. Scientists have already made it clear that if the earth warms to more than two degrees this century then we are headed towards catastrophic changes in the climate. We have seen this summer how an increasingly erratic monsoon caused such devastation across Pakistan when an abnormal amount of rainfall fell in just four days. Right now, however, negotiators still have to close the gap between current emission reduction pledges and what the science tells us we need to do to stop dangerous climate change.

The US continues to insist that the large emerging economies like China, India and Brazil do more to control their emissions while refusing deeper cuts in its own emissions. In fact, the concept of historical responsibility (rich countries caused climate change through the industrial revolution, not developing countries) is something they have consistently refused to acknowledge. The US is also keen to see the end of the Kyoto Protocol (which they did not sign) — it is the only legally binding instrument the world has to limit carbon emissions in industrialised countries. They would much prefer a voluntary, pledge based system like the one they proposed under the ‘Copenhagen Accord’ — the weak and controversial accord that attempted to salvage the Copenhagen Summit.

Although at the time the emerging countries like Brazil, South Africa, India and China (called the BASIC group) agreed to the Copenhagen Accord under pressure from President Obama, who personally approached their leaders while they were having a closed door meeting on the last day of the summit, they have now distanced themselves from the accord and gone back to the UN process. According to Kate Horner of Friends of the Earth US, “The United States must stop attempting to bully other countries into accepting a pledge-based system where emission reductions can be set without regard to science or justice. We’ve seen where this would get us — to as much as five degrees (Celsius) of warming. That is unacceptable.”

It is understood that a number of Heads of State, largely from developing countries, will also attend the talks this week but it will not be a repetition of the Copenhagen Summit when almost every head of state flew in during the last few days.

They have sent their ministers instead and these ministers will take the key decisions on finance, forests, and the future of the Kyoto Protocol. They still have to decide what to do with the $30 billion promised to developing countries as fast start finance (of which the US has only committed 1.7 billion — peanuts for them!). This 30 billion was supposed to be ramped up to 100 billion in the years to come.

According to a statement made by Greenpeace, “These Ministers have a choice: make the right decisions for the climate — or let the ‘emitters anonymous’ take centre stage and water down agreements for the sake of the fossil fuel industry rather than the climate.” There is plenty at stake here in Cancun. The fear is that if a decision is not made here and deferred until next year, then the whole process may become derailed. “Many donors would just lose interest in continuing to support a very expensive process that is not yielding results,” pointed out a UNFCCC press official. That would be disastrous — not just for the UN but all the countries of the world suffering from climate change who can at least have their voice heard in these annual talks and play a role in the negotiations. The future of the human race on planet earth must be decided by all countries and not just a handful of nations who control the world’s economy.