Colombia officially launched, within the framework of the COP16 on biodiversity, a Declaration of Peace with Nature. Held in Cali, an event that brought together world leaders and mobilized thousands of people, puts at the center the climate crisis and its impact on the species that inhabit the world.
What Peace with Nature entails
The declaration was made at COP16. (Photo: EFE).
This initiative seeks to jointly address the challenges of climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution, as reported in the official statement of COP16.
It was called “The Peace with Nature Coalition marks a milestone at COP16“.
“This coalition calls for a profound change in the relationship with nature and, therefore, it is not a technical declaration, but a political one with a deep-rooted basis,” Muhamad stated.
Peace with Nature declaration: Common’s observations
“Although it is impossible to predict the results of the coalition, we are very skeptical that it will achieve anything significant,” observed Common Initiative.
And they grouped, as part of an extensive document, three broad reasons:
1. Does not add any value in terms of content compared to the CDB, the KMGBF, or the Agenda 2030.
“The declaration does not bring anything new (aside from a framework around peace, but see the next point) compared to existing political frameworks on sustainability, or even more specifically on biodiversity,” they expressed.
“At best, it paraphrases, in less precise language, the commitments made in the KMGBF.”
COP16 on Biodiversity is taking place in Colombia.
2. A framework under peace that has no connection, not even in spirit, with international humanitarian law.
“The declaration does not reflect the fact that the environment should not be used as a means of war, nor does it recall the responsibilities and obligations of countries regarding environmental protection during armed conflicts,” they argued.
3. The declaration does not create conditions for peace
“Building peace cannot be a free-for-all, it must gather actors truly committed to implementing measures that allow for a truly lasting peace,” they argued.
“And therefore, a coalition for peace must establish clear requirements and limitations on who can join and who cannot,” they emphasized.
In that line, they indicated: “In its current state, the coalition can include countries and actors involved in armed conflicts or supporting them (directly or indirectly).”
Additionally, they explained that it does not focus on resolving the key conflictive issue of the CDB: reforming economies to mobilize biodiversity financing in a way that reduces global and internal inequalities.
Have you already visited our YouTube channel? Subscribe now!
