Posted on 12/15/2007 9:22:53 AM PST by TheEaglehasLanded
NUSA DUA, Indonesia (AFP) — World climate negotiators set a 2009 deadline Saturday for a landmark treaty to fight global warming after two weeks of intense haggling led to a climbdown by an isolated United States.
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, who flew to the Indonesian island of Bali for a late appeal for flexibility, praised the deal as a "pivotal first step" to confront climate change, "the defining challenge of our time."
Following gruelling all-night talks, the conference of 190 nations finally launched a process to negotiate a new treaty for when the UN Kyoto Protocol's commitments expire in 2012.
It comes after a year of stark warnings from Nobel-winning scientists, who say millions of people will be at risk of hunger, homelessness and disease by 2100 if temperatures keep rising at current rates.
The United States, the only major industrialised nation to reject the Kyoto treaty, reached a compromise with the European Union to avoid mentioning any figures as a target for slashing greenhouse gas emissions.
The deal instead only makes an indirect reference to scientists' warnings that the world must sharply cut back its emissions to prevent what could be a catastrophic rise in temperatures.
But after the summit went into an unscheduled 13th day of talks, the United States said it would not accept the statement as it wanted developing countries such as fast-growing China to make tougher commitments.
The senior US negotiator, Paula Dobriansky, said she had heard "many strong statements from many major developing country leaders on a greater role in helping to address urgently this global problem."
It "doesn't seem it's going to be reflected in our outcome here in the declaration," she said, explaining why the United States would reject the draft.
Dobriansky was loudly booed by other delegations, and a US environmental activist representing Papua New Guinea said to rousing cheers: "If you're not willing to lead, please get out of the way."
After repeated verbal lashings, Dobriansky again took the microphone and said that Washington would "go forward and join consensus," to the cheers of the conference.
German Environment Minister Sigmar Gabriel, a strong critic of US President George W. Bush's climate policy, said he was ready to ask through his mobile telephone for Chancellor Angela Merkel to intervene with the White House.
"I had already typed the SMS after Dobriansky's first statement but then I was able to cancel it," Gabriel said.
"In the end, nobody wanted to have a failure," including the United States, Gabriel said.
"We have achieved more than we could have expected previously, but it is less than what is needed to meet the urgency of the problem."
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown called the agreement "a vital step forward for the whole world". He added: "I am delighted that after two weeks of intensive talks the world's nations have agreed on a Roadmap to achieving a new global framework for tackling climate change. The Bali Roadmap is just the first step."
And German Chancellor Angela Merkel said the Roadmap "opens the way to real negotiations on effective measures to protect the climate, and for binding targets" on reducing CO2 emissions.
"Of course, the road to an agreement to succeed Kyoto is still paved with obstacles," she said, adding that she was "convinced" that Bali will bring real progress.
"The joint stance of the Europeans was an important foundation for this good result. Without it, success at Bali would not have been possible."
The agreement came after extraordinary scenes in which UN chief Ban jetted in for a last-ditch appeal, the UN's exhausted climate chief nearly broke down in tears and conference chair Indonesia apologised for a disastrous procedural mix-up.
"What we witnessed today was an incredible drama," said Alden Meyer of the US-based Union of Concerned Scientists.
"I've been following these negotiations for 20 years and I've never seen anything like it."
Yvo de Boer, head of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, said the deal showed global commitment and broke down the divide between countries with Kyoto obligations and those without.
"In that sense, what we're seeing disappear here today is what I would call the Berlin Wall of climate change," he said.
Hans Verolme of conservation group WWF accused the world of bowing to US pressure and removing a scientific punch needed to fight global warming.
But he also said the Bali talks would inspire environmentalists and activist nations until the end of Bush's mandate in January 2009.
"We have learned a historic lesson. If you expose to the world the dealings of the United States, they will ultimately back down."
Bush has argued that Kyoto is unfair as it does not require fast-growing emerging economies such as China, the second largest emitter after the United States, to meet targeted emissions curbs.
BTTT
Well .. maybe not .. but since he’s an underling .. I doubt it would be public. I’ve never known Bush to berate anyone in public.
Yep, the US Senate rejected the Kyoto Protocol in 1997. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=105&session=1&vote=00205
And that’s a fair take on it IMO. I would expect some clarification if that were the case though.
The problem for me is that there doesn’t seem to be anyone pleading the case of reason at these conferences. Every nation on the planet lines up behind blithering loonacy and even we seem rather timid to stand up and say this is nonsense, and here are the reasons why.
How can we ever prevail using this tactic?
We should be lining up scientists by the thousands to lay out an alternative view on all this. Instead we scamper around like church mice trying not to be noticed.
No we didn’t sign on, but we made it look like it’s only a matter of time before we will.
UNANIMOUSLY,95-0.
At least he wasn't spending any more of my bucks on socialists programs. He sees a buck, he wants to spend it. He's drunk with spending power.
Well .. the state dept has always believed they were superior to any American President - and therefore they are willing to challenge Bush’s authority - as far as I’m concerned, it’s just more of the Bush-derangement syndrome.
But .. even if somebody at the meeting had “signed on” - wouldn’t Congress have to ratify such an agreement ..?? And .. if that’s true .. “signing on” could end up being worthless.
What a brilliant move by Bush. This is actually a play from the Clinton 1997 play book. In 1997, the Senate, in a 95-0 vote, acknwledged that global warming was bogus and Kyoto was an economic disaster if allowed to be enacted. However, Clinton sighed the treaty and was able to say he did his part.
If Bush can negotiate a treaty similar to Kyoto before his term expires, he will force the Democratic controlled Senate to act, or react. In other words, it puts the Dems in the hot seat as to either ratify the treaty and guarantee economic disaster or run away from it and thus infuriating their base.
If Bush is as smart as I hope he is, he will quickly sign a Kyoto type treaty in 2008 and “give in” to the demands of Algore and the UN warm mongers and force the Dems’ hand. It would be fun to watch how the Dems agonize over this political hot potato.
>>>Did anybody even READ the article? It has got JACK to do with Bush and basically the U.S. committed to NOTHING. Good Lord, take your conspiratorial, nonsensical rantings back to DU where they belong. The brainpower and reading comprehension on this forum is all but gone. It would be laughable if it weren’t so freakin sad.
Hear Hear! I’ve read multiple threads on this story and each one is the same. People read the headline and stop, collapsing into paranoid hysterics over the “betrayal” of making a deal at Bali. That it was a “deal” that agreed to absolutely nothing of substance goes over their heads.
Have most everybody who can critically read a story been banned, or just given up.
As long as the Senate refuses to ratify this or any other treaty, this is meaningless. Clinton signed on to Kyoto I, but nobody in the Senate voted for it. That’s the key to this nonsense.
That’s actually debatable. Our Congress did not sign off when Clinton signed us on to the International Criminal Court. It depends on how the whole thing is framed.
BTW, I agree with the tone of your State Department Comments. Most of the State Department stays on through administration after administration.
I doubt that you are very encouraged to hear that our rep stated that we will be signing on down the road. I sure wasn’t.
According to Rush’s comments the day after the event, our agreement “was only an agreement to agree later” .. with no timeframe involved. I don’t think the Bali group got as much from us as they think they got.
If by chance Fred Thompson gets in - I’m hoping (but not holding my breath) that he will have learned the errors of the Bush admin and do some major housecleaning.
Also .. I heard Hugh Hewitt talking about Mitch McConnell - and saying he’s really the leader in the senate and that the 70bn the president wanted - Mitch delivered - and without a timetable. Some of the repubs are doing a great job in congress.
In fairness, some of Bush’s failures haven’t been his alone. We’ve had a tag-team of sorts, with presidents passing the buck on down the road. Still, it has been quite frustrating to have ‘our guy’ in there and watch as some of this has taken place. My hope about Thompson seems the same as yours. Keeping my fingers crossed...
~~Anthropogenic Global Warming ™ ping~~
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.