| The UN climate change summit will open today at Copenhagen, Denmark. Delegates from 192 countries and regions will get together to discuss a new global climate treaty to replace the Kyoto Protocol and push global cooperation on coping with the climate change.
Here is a roundup of the positions of the main players.
America's weak policy
The US is the world's biggest economy. It accounts for a quarter of global Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and that share is growing. Its attitudes and actions are crucial to international cooperation on climate change. The Obama administration sees the Copenhagen Summit as an opportunity to restore US influence in the global negotiations.
In 2001, the Bush administration refused to sign the Kyoto Protocol. In 2007 and 2008, Bush hosted three Major Economies Meetings on Energy Security and Climate Change, involving the U.S., Great Britain, France, China and India. The meetings did not yield any practical results apart from displaying the US intention to set up an alternative framework to the UN climate change talks.
Since Obama took office, he has sought to enhance the US role in climate change talks. He included a new energy development plan in his economic stimulus package. In June the house approved a Clean Energy and Security Act. Internationally, the U.S. has pursued close contacts with China, India and other emerging economies, hoping to establish bilateral agreements on clean energy and environmental protection.
On November 24, The US government announced a target to reduce US emissions by 17 percent by 2020. But there are doubts globally about its meaning and practical significance. The US congress failed to complete work on federal legislation on climate change in advance of the Copenhagen Summit. This shows continuing conflict among interest groups in the U.S. and will impact US performance at the summit. Without congressional support, its pledges and commitments risk being empty words like those signed by Al Gore at Kyoto.
EU proposals
Despite the EU's ceaseless effort to strengthen international cooperation on climate change, many of its proposals have been frustrated since the Bali Meeting. EU leaders reached agreement on a climate change package in 2008 to deliver its ambitious 2020 objective of slashing greenhouse-gas emissions and boosting renewable energies by 20 percent. However, the economic slowdown in Europe is a severe obstacle to its realization.
Second, the EU agreed to allocate 150 billion US dollars in 2009 to help developing nations reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but the different economic levels of the EU nations hampered its implementation when cost sharing was discussed. Nine Central and Eastern European countries, with Poland at the lead, proposed that cost sharing should be based on a country's GDP irrespective of its greenhouse gas emission.
Third, the EU intended extend the EU emissions trading scheme (EU ETS) through a third period (2013—2020) and expand its scope. But many commission members applied for exemptions and attempted to revise the trading rules in their own economic interests, which hampered the EU's ambition of establishing a model carbon trading market.
Developing countries unite to defend their rights
In recent years, developing countries such as China, India, Brazil and Mexico have joined the ranks of high emitters of greenhouse gases due to their rapid economic growth and rising energy-consumption.
A series of activities concerning emissions cuts and cooperation on climate change have been launched in China and India in accordance with each country's national plans for coping with climate change. But cuts in discharges have not been quantified because of their focus on economic growth and poverty reduction.
How to handle emissions reductions in the future framework of climate change has become a focus of the Copenhagen talks. After the Bali Conference, developed countries have taken a similar stance on this issue, and have tried to put pressure on developing countries, especially China and India, to commit to emission cuts by placing conditions on technology transfer and funding. Although there are differences among the developing countries they have stuck with the framework of the Group of 77 in talks with their developed counterparts. The attitude of the group of developing countries is that talks should be held within the framework of United Nations and that basic principles can not be abandoned.
China and India have both published emissions reduction goals, showing their willingness of take on international responsibilities. China, India, Brazil and South Africa have opposed a tentative proposal from about emissions cuts and presented their own alternative.
Prospects for the summit
The reduction of greenhouse gas emissions will affect the energy structure, energy utilization, efficiency and security of all nations. It goes right to the heart of national economies. Solving the problem of climate change will inevitably cause clashes readjustment of interests at home and abroad, and may reshape international relations. Domestic factors and international factors do not work independently. All factors are interwoven and can interact. The interaction of domestic and international factors will determine the policies and attitudes of negotiating parties.
The top priority of Copenhagen Summit is to establish an emissions reduction goal for the international community. The responsibilities of developed nations and developing nations group must be clearly distinguished in order to achieve the goal. However, the international political and economic environment is quite different from that of ten years ago.
During the conference, the key point is whether the Kyoto Protocol will be respected by the negotiating parties. Meanwhile, it is urgent for the international community to take the current situation into account. In order to break the deadlock of the negotiations, the international community needs to take an open approach to negotiation with constructive principles as the basis of the discussion. In the short term, it is difficult to overcome many major obstacles so as to reach an agreement in the mid-term.
However, climate change is a challenge for the whole of humanity. We need to do our best to reduce and eliminate the negative influence of climate change on our society and our economy, because it is relevant to the welfare of people all over the world. All nations should coordinate and cooperate together in order to facilitate Copenhagen Summit. No one wants to see this opportunity missed and the Copenhagen Summit end in failure.
Therefore, a framework international agreement may be achieved during the two weeks summit. By establishing principles in core issues such as reduction goals, capital assistance and technical transfer, the agreement can facilitate subsequent negotiations and strengthen the basic framework of cooperation. Based on the agreement, the international community can continue negotiations after the Copenhagen Summit and specify concrete plans for cooperation.
The author is the vice-Director of the Department for Information and Contingencies Analysis at the China Institute of International Studies |
