Monday, December 14, 2015

Swiss authorities arrest two Syrians with traces of explosives in car

Two Syrian nationals were arrested in Geneva on Friday and traces of explosives were found in their car, the local newspaper Tribune de Geneve and Swiss television said.

The newspaper gave no details on the identity of the two men or the circumstances of their arrest. It said it was unclear whether the arrests were linked to a heightened security alert Geneva authorities had declared last Thursday. It remained in effect at level 3 on a scale of 5.
"Two men of Syrian origin were arrested in Geneva on Friday," Swiss television said on its nightly news broadcast. "Traces of explosives were found in their car."
Geneva officials were not immediately available to comment, but a source close to the case told Reuters that two men had been arrested, without giving any details.
Swiss media and Reuters have reported that authorities are looking for four men believed to have been in Geneva this week. A van with Belgian plates and two men entered Switzerland from France via the Jura mountains on Tuesday and went back to France after a few hours, Swiss television said.
Earlier on Friday, Swiss President Simonetta Sommaruga said that Swiss federal authorities had putGeneva on a high security alert this week after getting a tip from foreign authorities about a suspected Islamic State cell in the region.
Two sources confirmed to Reuters that the Central Intelligence Agency had provided a photo of four men to Swiss authorities on Wednesday, saying they could be on Swiss territory.
The photo, published in Swiss newspapers, showed four bearded men seated, with their faces blurred and index fingers raised in the air. A CIA spokesman in Washington declined to comment on Thursday.

What would happen in a region ruled by France's far-right?

The far-right's rising star Marion Marechal-Le Pen might well walk up the steps of the world-famous Cannes Film Festival in southeast France next spring as leader of the region, if she wins elections there on Sunday.

Her National Front (FN) pulled off a historic win last weekend, topping the vote in the first round of regional polls, in a breakthrough that shook up the country's political
landscape before 2017 presidential elections.
If it wins one or more regions in Sunday's run-off, that would be a first for the party, leaving the French public and much of the wider world to contemplate: what would happen in a region ruled by the far-right?
The anti-Europe, anti-immigration party certainly plans measures to please its grassroots supporters; regional subsidies to charities helping migrants would be axed, for example, while schools would be restricted in offering alternatives to pork in their canteens.
Marechal-Le Pen - who is more conservative than her aunt, FN leader Marine Le Pen - has said she would scrap aid to family-planning organisations.
The actions of FN politicians who became town mayors last year might also offer clues - David Rachline took down the EU flag from the front of Frejus town hall in southeastern France, while Steeve Briois ended the practice of giving a human rights
group free use of municipal premises of Henin-Beaumont in the north.
But any changes are likely to be largely symbolic. The FN aims to use any regional wins as a platform in its quest for national power in 2017 - so it will not seek to implement its national manifesto, but rather seek to prove it can responsibly govern large constituencies, and offer stability.
"The key word will be pragmatism, not ideology," Marine Le Pen told a last campaign rally on Thursday evening, after opinion polls showed her party's prospects have waned since the first round and that tactical voting could keep it out of power in its key target regions.
Since Le Pen took the FN over from her maverick, ex-paratrooper father Jean-Marie in 2011, she has strived to build a base of locally elected officials to help "de-demonise" the party and target the 2017 national elections.
"High schools will still be built, trains will still run, vocational training will still be carried out," political analyst Joel Gombin, a specialist of the far-right, said of the French regions' main areas of responsibility.
"But to attract attention and strengthen their political hold they are set to carry out symbolic decisions that cost nothing but are highly visible. They will stage the 'FN against the system' line," he said.
'Respect the law'
While regional councils have no direct powers over France's migration policy, the FN's top candidates have said they would act the only way they can at that level, by putting an end to any subsidies for non-governmental organisations (NGOs) that help migrants.
"It makes no sense economically that public money goes to help foreign workers and migrants in a region where unemployment is higher than national average," Marechal-Le Pen told Reuters in an interview last month.
She said she would also scrap development aid subsidies and use the money instead to boost exports for French firms. Along the same lines, her aunt Marine's electoral leaflets deride the northern France region's financing of schools in Africa, calling them "unbelievable" examples of wasted money.
Marechal-Le Pen has also said that she would stop subsidies to family-planning charities, which she accuses of being politicised and of promoting abortion.
But while symbolically significant, such subsidies are but a small share of regional budgets.
A detailed list of the subsidies handed out last year by the Provence-Alpes-Cotes-d'Azur region where Marechal-Le Pen is the main FN candidate shows about 68,000 euros ($75,000) of subsidies to three migrant workers' associations. And about
190,000 euros went to NGOs that advise women on issues such as contraception and abortion.
That's out of a total annual budget of around 2.2 billion euros for that region.
In the northern France region where Le Pen is a candidate, for each 100 euros of the region's budget this year, 65 go to transport, schools and vocational training, 5 to economic development, 5 to subsidies, 4 to culture and 2 to sports. The rest goes to various other projects.
Education Minister Najat Vallaud-Belkacem said this week she was worried about what would happen to high schools if the FN won regional power. Regions have no power over the curriculum but are in charge of everything else, from maintaining buildings
to organising canteens.
Vallaud-Belkacem said she feared debates over school canteen food would resurface - with the issue of whether alternatives should be offered when pork is on the menu - and worried FN-led regions could discriminate against non-French children.
Le Pen's 115 page-long programme for the Nord-Pas-de-Calais-Picardie region says French secularism would be "strictly implemented". Schools that currently do not offer
alternative menus should not introduce them, according to the plan. Those that do should only be allowed to continue doing so if there are "nutritional reasons", it says, without elaborating.
But the FN will not go further than such steps, party officials and analysts said, as it is keen not to repeat the mistakes made in the 1990s, when illegal measures such as one municipality giving handouts only to European children were struck down by courts and damaged the party's credibility.
"We will absolutely respect the law until we are in government at the national level and can change it," said Marechal-Le Pen.

Scientists hopeful but cautious on Paris climate deal

While global leaders hailed Saturday’s Paris agreement as historic some scientists have warned that the cap on warming, and the deal’s timetable for phasing in greenhouse gas reductions, may yet fail to avert catastrophic climate change.

US President Barack Obama said the Paris deal is ‘the best chance we have to help save the planet’.
"We came together around the strong agreement the world needed. We met the moment," he said.
One of the crucial points of the accord was to place a cap on warming to ‘well below’ two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels, and to "pursue efforts" to limit the increase to 1.5°C.
But findings from the UN's own climate science body, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) conclude that to have a two-thirds chance of limiting warming to two degrees, emissions would have to fall by 40-70 percent by mid-century.
And to reach the 1.5°C target also embraced in the new pact, those mid-century cuts would have to be even deeper: 70 to 95 percent.
"This is an historic agreement," said Steffen Kallbekken, director of the Centre for International Climate and Energy Policy.
"But this ambitious temperature goal is not matched by an equally ambitious mitigation goal," he said, using the scientific term for the drawing-down of heat-trapping gases.
Without these hard numbers -- dropped from an earlier draft -- the climate pact "does not send a clear signal about the level and timing of emissions cuts," Kallbekken cautioned.
Some scientists also voiced concern about the fact the new deal allows several years to pass before ramping up emissions reduction efforts.
"For all that is encouraging in the agreement, the time scales -- or the lack thereof -- are worrying," said Ilan Kelman of University College London. "Little substantive will happen until 2020 whilst clear deadlines for specific targets are generally absent."
Jean Jouzel, a leading French climate scientist and contributor to the UN's Nobel-winning climate panel, questioned the feasibility of hitting at 1.5°C target, saying it could only be achieved by overshooting the mark and then pulling back, which could take decades or longer.
Doom fossil fuel industry
However, some environmentalists said the Paris agreement was a turning point, predicting the 1.5°C goal would help to doom the fossil-fuel industry.
"That single number, and the new goal of net zero emissions by the second half of this century, will cause consternation in the boardrooms of coal companies and the palaces of oil-exporting states," Greenpeace International chief Kumi Naidoo said.
On the crucial financing issue, developed countries agreed to muster at least $100 billion (92 billion euros) a year from 2020 to help developing nations.
However, following US objections, it was not included in the legally binding section of the deal.
While nations most vulnerable to climate change lobbied hard for the wording to limit warming to 1.5°C, big polluters, such as China, India and oil-producing giant Saudi Arabia, preferred a ceiling of 2°C, which would have enabled them to burn fossil fuels for longer.
China's chief negotiator Xie Zhenhua said the pact was not perfect.
"However, this does not prevent us from marching historical steps forward," he said.
The crux of the climate change deal is the elimination of fossils fuels such as coal, oil and gas, to be replaced with renewable energy options and the creation of carbon markets to enable countries to trade emissions.
In an effort to get countries to scale up their commitments, the agreement will have five-yearly reviews of their pledges starting from 2023.
But scientists say that, even if the pledges were fully honoured, the Earth will still be on track for warming far above safe limits.
"This agreement is a turning point for a world transformation within a 1.5-2°C safe operating space on Earth," said Johan Rockstrom, director of the Stockholm Resilience Center.
"But now we need action consistent with science to reach decarbonisation by 2050," he said.

Russian destroyer 'fires warning shots' at Turkish ship

A Russian destroyer in the Aegean Sea on Sunday used small arms fire to prevent a collision with a Turkish vessel, Moscow said, adding it had summoned Ankara's military attache over the incident.

"The crew of the Russian patrol ship Smetlivy which was located 22 kilometres (13.7 miles) from the Greek island of Lemnos in the northern part of the Aegean Sea avoided collision with a Turkish seiner," the defence ministry said, adding that the crew had fired small arms to warn the boat.
At 0603 GMT the Russian warship, which was at anchor, spotted a Turkish fishing boat some 1,000 metres away, the defence ministry said, adding the boat had been approaching it from the right.
"Despite numerous attempts by the Smetlivy, the crew of the Turkish seiner would not engage in radio contact and did not respond to special visual signals," the ministry added.
Moscow said the crew had to fire small arms in the direction of the boat at "a guaranteed survivability distance" when there were some 600 metres between the two vessels "to prevent the collision of the ships."
"Immediately after that the Turkish vessel drastically changed course and continued its movement past the Smetlivy at the distance of 540 metres without engaging in contact with the Russian crew," the ministry said.
Deputy defence minister Anatoly Antonov summoned a Turkish military attache, it added.
The latest incident came after Turkey downed a Russian bomber at the Syrian border in November, leading to the biggest crisis in ties between the two countries since the end of the Cold War.
After the downing of the warplane, which led to the deaths of a pilot and another serviceman who attempted to rescue him, Russia introduced economic sanctions against Turkey and beefed up its firepower at its airbase in Syria.
President Vladimir Putin on Friday delivered a thinly veiled warning to Ankara and told his forces in Syria to take tough action against any threats.
"I would like to warn those who would once again try to organise some sort of provocations against our servicemen," Putin said.
Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said on Friday that Ankara's patience with Moscow after the downing of the warplane was "not unlimited", urging Moscow to react calmly.

EU set to unveil controversial border force plan

The EU is set to reveal on Tuesday controversial proposals for a new border force which will be sent to trouble spots along the 28-nation bloc’s frontiers, even in cases where member states do not ask for its presence.

The European Commission, the EU’s executive arm, wants to be able to deploy personnel from a new European Border and Coastguard Agency without, as currently required, the consent of the state concerned, EU officials told Reuters in early December, reflecting frustration with Greek reluctance to seek help with migrants.
European Union officials call it a largely theoretical “nuclear option” and stress that any infringement of national sovereignty would be balanced by the power of a majority of member states to block Commission intervention – similar to checks agreed during the euro debt crisis.
The Commission will set out the plans on Tuesday, following a commitment to an EU border guard in September by President Jean-Claude Juncker, but is likely to face stiff opposition from some EU members who feel their sovereignty could be threatened.
“This idea will face opposition from most member states,” one EU diplomat told Reuters. “We believe such a solution would interfere too deeply in member states’ internal competences.”
“The Commission is testing our limits,” said another.
He compared it to the Commission’s push to oblige states to take in mandatory quotas of asylum seekers, which set furious east Europeans against German Chancellor Angela Merkel.
A Polish source told AFP that "Poland is pretty much objecting to the very idea of such a border guard".
"It would remove responsibility for protecting borders from a member state and might serve as an alibi for inaction,” the source said on condition of anonymity.
"The proposal seems to be an excessive intervention in the internal competences of a state," he added.
Defending the EU’s borders
However, failure to strengthen the EU’s external borders, senior officials argue, will see more states re-impose frontier controls inside the bloc as the continent struggles to cope with a vast influx of refugees and migrants mostly from the Middle East and Africa.
They fear this could wreck the EU’s cherished free movement area, known as the Schengen zone, and foster the rise of anti-EU nationalists like France’s National Front.
Dimitris Avramopoulos, the European Commissioner in charge of migration policy, told a Mediterranean security conference in Rome last week that national authorities had been overwhelmed by the unprecedented numbers of asylum seekers and other migrants arriving in Europe, creating the need for a pan-European solution.
"National authorities manage to do their best but they were not prepared," Avramopoulos said. "We need something more comprehensive and better structured."
He said the new agency's tasks would include defending and protecting EU borders, providing migrants with support and carrying out search and rescue operations.
It would have a staff of around 1,000 and be authorised to intervene whenever national authorities could not meet their responsibilites for border security, Avramopolous added.
In comparison, the EU’s current border agency, Frontex, has just 400 staff and around half the budget that would be granted to the envisioned new border force.
A new Returns Office that would be charged with deporting those who fail to qualify for asylum will also form part of the proposals.
In addition, the border guard force would be able to draw on a pool of around 1,500 personnel placed on standby while still working for national border forces in the Schengen area. These would form a rapid reaction force, able to deploy within days.
Unlike Frontex, the new agency would be able also to operate outside the EU - for example, in Balkan states such as Serbia - and organise joint patrols with non-EU forces, such as Turkey.
Intervention would typically be triggered by a member state asking for help but the Commission could also initiate action. At that point, it could be blocked by a majority of member states. However, another senior EU diplomat said his government would prefer that full unanimity be required in such a case.
“With unanimity, it might be possible,” he said. “But I don’t think member states will give a mandate to the Commission on this.”

Far-right National Front fails to win single region in French elections

Despite leading in the first round of regional elections last week, Marine Le Pen’s anti-immigrant National Front party (FN) failed to gain a single region in the second round of voting in France on Sunday.

The head of the FN, Marine Le Pen had hoped to make history on Sunday night by gaining control of a region for the first time. But after winning 28 percent of the nationwide vote in the first round of elections, the FN was pushed back in the second round as voters rallied behind the conservative Les Républicains party and President François Hollande’s ruling Socialist Party (PS).
The FN had been riding high, exploiting an unprecedented wave of migration into Europe. The party came out on top in six of France’s 13 newly drawn regions in the first-round vote a week ago. But that initial success failed to translate into any second-round victories.
The FN was defeated in three key regions where it had come in first place last week: Nord-Pas-de-Calais-Picardie, Provence-Alpes-Cote d’Azur and Alsace-Champagne-Ardenne-Lorraine. The Socialists had pulled their candidates out of the Nord-Pas-de-Calais-Picardie and Provence-Alpes-Cote d’Azur races to defeat the FN and it appears that many of their voters cast ballots for conservative candidates.
Le Pen won around 42 percent of the vote in the Nord-Pas de Calais region, while rival conservative Xavier Bertrand took around 58 percent.
Le Pen’s niece, Marion Marechal-Le Pen, won about 45 percent in the southern Provence-Alpes-Cote d’Azur region against conservative Nice Mayor Christian Estrosi, who received around 54 percent.
In Alsace Champagne-Ardenne Lorraine, the Socialist candidate, Jean-Pierre Masseret, had refused to pull out of the race, even after trailing in the first round of elections. Despite that refusal to follow the Socialist Party’s orders, the FN candidate in the region, Florian Philippot, was defeated by Les Républicains candidate Philippe Richert, earning 36 percent of the vote against his 48 percent.
After her defeat Sunday night, Marine Le Pen insisted that the National Front was the first party of France. She said the election results would not discourage the “inexorable rise, election after election, of a national movement” behind her party.
“Nothing can stop us now,” Le Pen said after polls closed. “By tripling our number of councillors, we will be the main opposition force in most of the regions of France."
Equally defiant, her 26-year-old niece Marion Marechal-Le Pen, who ran in the southern Provence-Alpes-Cote d'Azur region, urged supporters not to be disappointed. "We will redouble our efforts," she said. "There are some victories that shame the winners."
The National Front has racked up political victories in local elections in recent years, but winning the most seats in an entire regional council would have been a substantial success.
The election was seen as an important measure of support for Le Pen ahead of 2017 presidential elections.
Tactical voting boosts Sarkozy's Les Républicains
Former president Nicolas Sarkozy’s party won seven of mainland France's 13 regions, giving them the largest share. However, it’s almost certain Les Républicains would not have been as successful without the tactical support of the ruling PS.
Conservative candidate Xavier Bertrand acknowledged as much in a speech after his victory against Marine Le Pen in Nord-Pas de Calais-Picardie.
“I thank the voters for protecting our beautiful region,” said Bertrand. “I also want to thank the voters of the left who clearly voted to create a rampart (against the FN).”
FRENCH REGIONAL ELECTIONS 2015 SECOND ROUND ESTIMATES
Perhaps the biggest genuine win for Les Républicains came in Ile-de-France, the country’s capital and most populous region, where the conservative candidate, Valérie Pécresse, came in first.
The major question that Les Républicains face after this election is the role Nicolas Sarkozy will play in the 2017 presidential election. Sarkozy, current president of Les Républicains, had hoped these elections would validate his leadership and guarantee his nomination as the candidate for Les Républicains.
Prominent conservative Nathalie Kosciusko-Morizet took a swipe at Sarkozy, saying: "If voters had applied the neither/nor rule, we would have lost (against Le Pen and her niece).” The comment referred to Sarkozy’s neither/nor ("ni/ni") decision not to support left-wing candidates who had a better chance of beating the far right.
Alain Juppé, one of Sarkozy's biggest rivals for the conservative ticket in 2017, spoke of "changing course" in a speech that almost made him sound like he was already a presidential candidate.
Socialists: ‘Success without joy
Despite losing seven regions to Les Républicains, the Socialists can still claim the election as a victory. The party had come in a poor third place in the first round but managed to keep five regions overall.
In his remarks on Sunday night, Socialist party chief Jean-Christophe Cambadélis set a bittersweet tone.
“These results are a success without joy,” he said, referring not only to the sacrifice of Socialist voters who backed Les Républicains, but also to the fresh memory of last month’s terrorist attacks in Paris. The attacks, which killed 130 people and were carried out by agents of the Islamic State group, played into the FN’s anti-immigrant, isolationist platform.
“People’s aspirations do not reflect xenophobia,” Cambadélis said. The party head called France’s left to work together, and to look to the cooperation seen during Paris’s historic COP21 climate accord as an example.
French PM Manuel Valls – who had warned of a “civil war” in France should Le Pen come to power – hailed the FN’s defeat, but warned that French voters should feel “no relief, no triumphalism”.
The “danger of the far right remains”, Valls said.
Voter turnout
Voter turnout played a huge role in the elections, rising sharply from the first round on December 6, and suggesting that many voters had cast ballots to prevent the National Front from gaining power.
Turnout figures were around 10 percent higher than for the first round of the elections, with 58.6 percent voter turnout, according to the interior ministry. The second-round turnout at the same time five years ago was 43.4 percent.
Candidates tried to lure to the ballot box the nearly 50 percent of those who failed to vote in the December 6 first round, and those votes appeared to have been decisive.
(FRANCE 24 with AP and REUTERS)

World leaders make history with climate deal in Paris

Delegates from 195 nations reached an unprecedented agreement on global climate change on Saturday in the French capital after years of often fruitless negotiations for a legally binding deal to limit carbon emissions.
French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius brought the historic UN negotiations in Paris to an end as relieved ministers stood for several minutes to applaud.
"I see the room, I see the reaction is positive - I hear no objection. The Paris climate accord is adopted," Fabius declared, officially ending the summit with a knock of a little green hammer. 
"It may be a small gavel but it can do big things," he said.
The landmark deal comes after negotiators from key nations - including China, the United States, and India - gave their approval to a draft accord presented by host France earlier in the day.
The legally binding pact limiting greenhouse gas emissions provides the world a road map for breaking away from fossil fuels that have powered the global economy since the Industrial Revolution.
The deal - to take effect from 2020 - ends years of disagreement between rich and poor nations over how to carry out what will be a multi-trillion-dollar effort to slow down global warming and deal with its consequences already occurring around the planet.


"We have opened a new chapter of hope in the lives of seven billion people on the planet," said India's Environment Minister Prakash Javadekar.
"We have [the planet] on loan from future generations. We have today reassured these future generations that we will all together give them a better Earth."
Cap on greenhouse gases
The Paris accord sets a target of limiting warming of the planet to "well below" 2 degrees Celsius compared with pre-industrial levels, while aiming for an even more ambitious goal of 1.5°C.
To do so, the emissions of greenhouse gases will need to peak "as soon as possible", followed by rapid reductions, the agreement states.
The Earth has already warmed almost 1°C, which has caused major problems for many people around the world - particularly in developing countries - such as more severe storms, droughts, and rising seas, according to scientists.
Developing nations had insisted rich countries must shoulder the lion's share of responsibility for tackling climate change as they emitted most of the greenhouse gases since the Industrial Revolution.
The US and other rich nations countered that emerging economies must also do more.
 Who is responsible for what's happening to our planet?
On the crucial issue of financing, developed countries agreed to muster at least $100bn a year from 2020 to help developing nations.
However, following US objections, it was not included in the legally binding section of the deal.
US Secretary of State John Kerry called it "a victory for all of the planet and for future generations".
"This is a tremendous victory for all of our citizen... We have set a course here. The world has come together around an agreement that will empower us to chart a new path for our planet, a smart and responsible path, a sustainable path," he said.
Environmental groups said the Paris agreement was a turning point in history and spelled the demise of the fossil fuel industry, pointing particularly to the significance of the 1.5°C goal.
"That single number - and the new goal of net zero emissions by the second half of this century - will cause consternation in the boardrooms of coal companies and the palaces of oil-exporting states," Greenpeace International chief Kumi Naidoo said.

World seals historic deal in Paris to stop global warming

World seals historic deal in Paris to stop global warming

© Francois Guillot, AFP | Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius (centre), with UN chief Ban Ki Moon and French President François Hollande (right) after the adoption in Paris, on December 12, 2015
Text by NEWS WIRES
Latest update : 2015-12-12

To rousing cheers and tears of relief, envoys from 195 nations approved Saturday an accord to stop global warming, offering hope that humanity can avert catastrophic climate change and usher in an energy revolution.

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius ended nearly a fortnight of gruelling UN negotiations in Pariswith the bang of a gavel, marking consensus among the ministers, who stood for several minutes to clap and shout their joy.
"I see the room, I see the reaction is positive, I hear no objection. The Paris climate accord is adopted," Fabius declared.
Turning to a little green hammer with which he formally gave life to the arduously-crafted pact, he quipped: "It may be a small gavel but it can do big things."
The deal, to take effect from 2020, ends decades-long rows between rich and poor nations over how to carry out what will be a multi-trillion-dollar effort to cap global warming and deal with consequences already occurring.
With 2015 forecast to be the hottest year on record, world leaders and scientists had said the accord was vital for capping rising temperatures and averting the most calamitous impacts from climate change.
Without urgent action, they warned of increasingly severe droughts, floods and storms, as well as rising seas that would engulf islands and coastal areas populated by hundreds of millions of people.
The crux of the fight to limit global warming requires cutting back or eliminating the use of coal, oil and gas for energy, which has largely powered prosperity since the Industrial Revolution began in the 1700s.
The burning of those fossil fuels releases invisible greenhouse gases, which cause the planet to warm and change Earth's delicate climate system.
Ending the vicious circles requires a switch to cleaner sources, such as solar and wind, and improvingenergy efficiency. Some nations are also aggressively pursuing nuclear power, which does not emit greenhouse gases.

Ambitious global warming limit
The Paris accord sets a target of limiting warming of the planet to "well below" 2.0 degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) compared with the Industrial Revolution, while aiming for an even more ambitious goal of 1.5C.
To do so, the emissions of greenhouse gases will need to peak "as soon as possible", followed by rapid reductions, the agreement states.
The world has already warmed almost 1C, which has caused major problems for many people around the world particularly in developing countries, such as more severe storms, droughts and rising seas, according to scientists.
Environment groups said the Paris agreement was a turning point in history and spelt the demise of the fossil fuel industry, pointing particularly to the significance of the 1.5C goal.
"That single number, and the new goal of net zero emissions by the second half of this century, will cause consternation in the boardrooms of coal companies and the palaces of oil-exporting states," Greenpeace International chief Kumi Naidoo said.
Enduring money battles
Developing nations had insisted rich countries must shoulder the lion's share of responsibility for tackling climate change as they emitted most of the greenhouse gases since the Industrial Revolution.
The United States and other rich nations countered that emerging giants must also do more, arguing developing countries now account for most of current emissions and thus will be largely responsible for future warming.
On the crucial financing issue, developing countries agreed to muster at least $100 billion (92 billion euros) a year from 2020 to help developing nations.
However, following US objections, it was not included in the legally binding section of the deal.
Ahead of the talks, most nations submitted voluntary plans to curb greenhouse gas emissions from 2020, a process widely hailed as an important platform for success.
But scientists say that, even if the pledges were fully honoured, Earth would be on track for warming far above safe limits.
In an effort to encourage countries to improve their ambitions, the agreement will have five-yearly of their pledges starting from 2023.
Nations most vulnerable to climate change lobbied hard for wording in the Paris pact to limit warming to 1.5C.
Big polluters, such as China, India and oil producing-giant Saudi Arabia, preferred a ceiling of 2C, which would have enabled them to burn fossil fuels for longer.
Nicholas Stern, a former chief economist for the World Bank who has become a prominent global advocate of climate action, also hailed the deal.
"This is a historic moment, not just for us and our world today, but for our children, our grandchildren and future generations," Stern said.
"The Paris Agreement is a turning point in the world's fight against unmanaged climate change, which threatens prosperity and well-being among both rich and poor countries."