The 64th session of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) meeting commenced at the United Nations Headquarters in New York City on September 23 and lasted until September 30, 2009. Around one hundred twenty heads of state are expected to attend. According to the United Nations, those world leaders would deliberate on the Millennium Development Goals, world financial and economic crisis, climate change, disarmament, reform of the United Nations, and appraise the Peace-building Commission and the Human Rights Council. These are, indeed, major international issues that require coordinated global responses. This article, however, focuses on only one of them: climate change.

Climate change has been a contentious subject among the world’s industrialized countries and those that are aspiring to follow their footsteps. Although global consensus is gathering momentum on the need to cut the current high levels of greenhouse gas emissions, the world’s rich and emerging economies appear less likely to make serious commitments in that direction. But their failure to do so wouldn’t diminish the severity of the challenge. As the United Nations Climate Change Conference draws near-December 7 to 18, 2009-scientists are warning the world. They say the main problem over the next decade is to keep the temperature at about 2 degrees Celsius above its pre-industrial levels. Heeding this warning, the United Nations Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, is making a desperate call for world leaders to save the plant. On their part, poor countries are expressing their discontent at the lack of considerable progress to replace the Kyoto Protocol, and even blame the rich and emerging countries for dragging their feet on negotiations.

So, how are world leaders reacting to the looming crisis and same the planet call? Before the official beginning of the 64th session, on September 22, some leaders-representing both the rich and emerging countries-addressed the climate challenge. In a clear break from his predecessor, the U.S. President Barack Obama declared his administration will not downplay the challenge of climate change. Despite reiterating his campaign promise on creating more green jobs, however, he hinted his country’s ability to accept on mandatory emission cuts hinges on domestic laws. On his turn, the Chinese President Hu Jinto, promised his country would take some steps to curtail its carbon dioxide emissions by 2020, but failed to provide exact figures. What the U.S. and China are saying is this: yes, climate change is a huge problem and we are aware of that, but we also have our own national needs that might be negatively affected should we take serious majors to curtail our emissions. It’s an irony that the U.S. and China being the world’s biggest polluters–for emitting 40 percent of the world’s greenhouse gases-couldn’t make serious commitments. Nevertheless, a different tone was struck by Japan’s newly elected Prime Minister, Yukio Hatoyama. Although Japan generates only a little more than 4 percent of the world’s greenhouse gases, Hatoyama promised a 25 percent cut from 1990 levels by 2020. In addition, he promised financial and technical assistance to poor countries to cut their emissions. Unlike the U.S. and China, Japan appeared to be more serious in its commitment by delineating a timeline and the amount of greenhouse emissions it wants to cuts.

What do the discussions on climate change at the UN headquarters mean for the world’s emerging economies and the poor? Well, the discussions signify that the entire globe, rich or otherwise, has a stake when it comes to climate change. According to the Economist print edition of September 17, poor and middle-income countries aren’t less guilty in polluting the environment. The report indicates that these countries already account for just over half of total carbon emissions. For instance, Brazil produces more CO2 per head than Germany. The lifetime emissions from these countries’ planned power stations would match the world’s entire industrial pollution since 1850. A similar argument is put forward by Fareed Zakaria in his newly published book, The Post-American World and the Rise of the Rest. Zakaria states demand for electricity is projected to rise over 4 percent a year for decades and that electricity will come mostly from the dirtiest fuel available-coal. And China and India will build eight hundred new coal-fired power plants-with combined CO2 emissions five times the total savings of the Kyoto accords.

The figures provided by the Economist and Zakaria make the impact of global warming very vivid. And that is why rich countries and emerging economies-for instance China and India-need to take serious measures to face up to the challenge. If they are really interested in saving the planet, they can do it. They just have to cut their greenhouse gas emissions, provide financial and technical assistance to poor countries so that these countries don’t follow their footsteps and cause much damage to the environment. However, the overall situation right now brings to reality the topsy-turvy nature of the world. Why? Because while rich and emerging countries squabble on how to reach a deal, poor countries and their people have to bear the brunt of all kinds of natural disasters; some of them which might be caused by global warming.