Climate Change - Bali

America holds the key to climate talks
Published: December 2 2007 19:12 Last updated: December 2 2007 19:12
Bali has a big billing. The Indonesian resort will this week and next play host to planeloads of ministers and officials from around the world. Apart from leaving a big carbon footprint, they will attempt to thrash out the terms of a possible United Nations deal to save the planet from global warming. With climate change high on national political agendas, expectations of what the talks could achieve have increased. They should be lowered. Agreement may be elusive.
Few now dispute that emissions of greenhouse gases must be cut for the world to avoid potentially disastrous changes to its climate. Tougher, more ambitious policies need to be in place for when the existing UN-sponsored Kyoto accord expires in 2012.
The biggest stumbling block to any deal is Washington. The US is the world’s biggest emitter of carbon dioxide. It is also the only signatory nation that still does not intend to ratify Kyoto, which committed countries to stabilising emissions. The absence of US support for the accord has stripped the commitments of much of their value. It means, too, that a successor treaty will stand no chance if it fails to take the US with it.
America’s backing is doubly important now. Unless it supports the swingeing cuts in global emissions that are envisaged for the new treaty, it is inconceivable that the fast-growing economies of China and India will also agree to limits.
Bali, therefore, should be about a set of principles that gives Washington room for manoeuvre. George W. Bush may remain implacably opposed to mandatory cuts in emissions, but those negotiating with the US should not antagonise him. Since it will fall to Mr Bush’s successor to follow the route map, they should create a framework that is flexible enough to accommodate a change of president in 2008. Voluntarism and an emphasis on national policies may need to be part of that.
Given the American stance, ideas circulating in European capitals are over-ambitious. Some proposed topics – afforestation and measures to adapt to rising sea levels – will be uncontentious. But talks on curbing global aviation and maritime emissions will be more controversial. Legally binding international cuts in emissions, while desirable, are clearly unlikely to gain traction.
If Kyoto does not continue in some form, another global accord could take a decade or more to negotiate. The imperative for politicians must be to reach a consensus. If that means a limited range of options that enjoy US support, then so be it. A modest success will be better than none at all.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
// Do not remove comment
"FT" and "Financial Times" are trademarks of the Financial Times. Privacy policy Terms