Skip to comments.Global warming pact set for 2009 after US backs down (Pres Bush caves to PC crowd again)
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.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
I’m going to start sleeping with my jock strap on.
I say this in the nicest way I can CyberAnt. Please ping me to the thread when it is reported Dobrianski has been fired by her disapproving boss, President Bush.
Who do you suppose will be holding the pen come Jan 2009?
China is also a major industrialized nation that is having none of this greenie weenie nonsense. The leftists excuse and ignore China for reasons of their own, but the fact that China has hundreds of millions of impoverished peasants in addition to its industry does not render China as anything other than a major industrialized nation.
Yep, and even most of the Dims won’t touch these treaties with a 10 foot pole ....
That was my take also.
We just kicked the alleged problem down the road.
In a couple of years Global Warming might be seen in a different light. - Tom
at some point in time, we as a country are going to have to decide if we are (P)olitcally (C)ommunist, or FREE
Let's see...we pay and fight with blood sweat and tears against fascists, we work and sweat to make a better life for our families, we give to hungry children across the globe. We pay for Medicare and Medicaid to help the guy down on his luck and now we have to help China as well to keep the world bankers afloat with their plans for a world government?
You know what...our government and business elitists are a bunch of out of touch spoiled brats. They don't know anymore from whence they came.
If they are not bright enough to figure out that the world socialists want us to become like China then I give up. Where the H@ll are the Americans?
``We’ve got a historic breakthrough here in Bali today,’’ U.K. Environment Secretary Hilary Benn told reporters. ``The world is waking up to find that all of the nations have agreed for the first time ever that we are going to embark on negotiations to agree to a deal to cope with and overcome dangerous climate change, and to do so within two years.’’
We can spin it all we want, but Bush just sold the farm - even the Brits are bragging, talk about taxation without representation; we’s outnumbered, guys.
Well, I “acknowledge” global warming, too. It’s part of nature’s cycle.
But if you mean that the President has been a coward and caved to the scumbag Demmocrat and UN alarmists who blame man, then I would like to see a source for that. (Don’t get me wrong - - nothing the former George W. Bush does these days surprises me.)
From the way that I read the Adaptation Fund agreement, I think it is a done deal. Certainly the closing statement seems to say that it is now "firmly" launched. I could be wrong, but I don't believe that anything else in the way of agreement is necessary for it. The document lists all of the elements necessary to put it in place, including funding (points #24 and #28.)
It's true that the actual target emission figures have been moved out of the text of the roadmap, but I believe that our agreement in principle to something as agreed science when it clearly is not agreed science is not wise. Are we later going to retract our agreement?
New!!: Dr. John Ray's
Ping me if you find one I've missed.
I’d offer what a great disappointment Ban has been in falling in line with this charade, but that would be an understatement.
We are talking about the UN , after all. ;-)
Bush passed the buck on this one. Not surprised.
I don’t begrudge him that, he did kind of have his hands full his first term as is with a crisis or two.
The brainpower and reading comprehension on this forum is all but gone. It would be laughable if it werent so freakin sad.
and it t’was Global Varming that dun it. ;-)
Great letter. I found this statement particulartly striking:
“On top of which, because attempts to cut emissions will slow development, the current UN approach of CO2 reduction is likely to increase human suffering from future climate change rather than to decrease it. “
This echoes a point I have made before. To attempt to rectify perceived “man-made global warming” mankind would spend precious resources on the wrong thing. Instead mankind should be developing and girding its loins for inevitable future climate change - either hotter or colder. Mankind should also be thinking about low lying areas and what to do about these cities.
OR if mankind is worried about us breathing in pollution (as I am from a health perspective) then we should focus on cutting real pollution elements instread of CO2. They are focusing on the wrong element which is not even a pollutant.
“If Australia does not count”
Australia was taken over by Gore-bots in the recent election. Insanity marches forward.
(politics is NOT helping my soul, I want to swear all the time and that isn’t normal...maybe I should stop reading about it.)
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.