The world summit on sustainable development at Johannesburg finds ample space in the major European dailies, concerned above all with reflecting on the real prospects for “success” of the summit in the face of decisive challenges for the future of the planet. “ A parody of globalisation” is how the Herald Tribune (3/9) defines the South African summit during which participants discussed such themes as “ population growth, urbanisation, and pressures on the environment and climate arising from these phenomena. (…) Like globalisation itself, the conference is so big that no-one governs it“. Stressing the comparison with globalisation, the daily observes: “ In order to make it possible, governments, above all, have had to take a step back. They have eliminated controls on trade and the flow of capital and have allowed the communication revolution to unite the world. But in order to protect the earth’s resources, governments must take a step forward. They must reach international agreements to protect forests, fishing grounds and the atmosphere“. It is still too early to tell whether the Johannesburg summit will produce more results than that of ten years ago in Rio de Janeiro. This is the subject of an editorial article signed by Bruno Frappat writing in La Croix (3/9). In his opinion “ contrasting the responsibilities of rich and poor countries in an endless hierarchy of obligations is the surest way” not to achieve any result. Hervé Kempf ( Le Monde, 4/9), on the other hand, pauses to consider the bitter exchange over the subject of abortion: “ The text of the plan of action being discussed evaded the demographic problem and made only indirect mention of ‘reproductive health’. The expression ‘respect for cultural and religious values’ presages the victory of States that reject abortion. (…) In an attempt to modulate this position, Canada, supported by the European Union, proposed adding the expression ‘in keeping with the rights of man and fundamental freedoms’“. The Johannesburg summit on sustainable development is also the focus of numerous comments in the German press: “ War against the poor” reads the headline of the weekly Die Zeit of 29/8. Bartholomäus Grill writes: “ the North speaks of the free market while practising protectionism. (…) The obscene gap in wealth between the two hemispheres prejudices global stability because the movement of refugees grows and uncontrollable pressure builds up on the strongholds of wealth; together with desperation, the anger of people in the South is growing“. Brigitte Kols, writing in the Frankfurter Rundschau of 3/9, comments: “ Whoever wishes to alter the destiny of Africa by the market rather than by aid must suspend the policy of agricultural subsidies” in industrialised countries. “ Hunger and politics are indivisible. This is above all true for the fundamental question of how to put a lasting stop to poverty“. On the subject of renewable energy, the Süddeutsche Zeitung of 4/9 writes: “ It is truly sad that many developing countries pronounced themselves against it. This shows that the broad consensus reached at the summit of Rio de Janeiro is weakening. If developing countries insist on repeating the old mistakes of the industrialised world“, the paper concludes, “ they themselves will be the greatest sufferers from the inevitable consequences of climate change“. “ A modest result“, is the title of a comment by Manfred Schäfers published by the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung of 4/9: “ The agricultural subsidies of the North are still some seven times greater than their official aid” observes the author who noted in the summit “ a change of emphasis” in favour of world trade agreements rather than of environmental questions. Alongside its cover story dedicated to the upcoming anniversary of the attacks of 11 September, Der Spiegel no. 36 of 2/9 continues to concern itself with the recent floods that also struck Germany: “ The victims of the flooding desperately await the promised aid, but politicians and bureaucrats are still discussing the method for distributing the funds” write Christian Reiermann and Andreas Wassermann. An article by Steffen Winter tells how the search for those responsible for errors committed during the rescue operations has already brought the first requests for compensation: “ The water level in the devastated areas around the Elba has not yet completely fallen and already strong criticism is being raised against those who handled the emergency: the waters recede and the lawyers arrive“.
