The Success of the Climate Summit Depends on the U.S.
A new round of the world-renowned United Nations Climate Change Conference is about to begin in Denmark’s capital, Copenhagen. Unlike previous climate conferences, this meeting has attracted more attention and bears the largest expectations. The debate about this conference kicked off early, but whether a new agreement regarding the Earth’s future will be reached at this conference — with the participation of most government leaders — or continuation of the Kyoto Protocol will be upheld lies in the U.S.'s approach. The conference is once again putting Obama’s abilities to a critical test; the significance of the test’s results matches that of the response to the world’s financial crisis.
The U.S. is the biggest contributor to global warming. The International Energy Agency's survey results indicated that the U.S. is the world leader in carbon dioxide emissions, at approximately 20 tons per capita, accounting for 23.7 percent of the world’s total emissions. But in response to global warming, the U.S. attitude has been ambiguous and the least dynamic.
According to an estimate by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the mid-term emissions reduction of developed countries should be 25 to 40 percent, in order to avoid reaching a dangerous level of global warming. But even the European Union, the self-proclaimed “standard-bearer” in response to climate change, is still far from reaching a 20 percent emissions reduction. The Obama administration’s “responsible” announcement revealing the U.S.'s long-awaited goal was no better: to reduce emissions 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020, which is only a 4 percent reduction of 1990 levels. This goal not only falls very short of the European Union goal, but does not even compare to the Kyoto Protocol’s initial pledge of a 7 percent reduction, being only three percentage points lower than originally stipulated.
In regard to the issue of emissions reduction, America’s attitude has continued to be passive. The U.S. remains the only developed country not associated with the Kyoto Protocol, an agreement that will expire in 2012. Despite minor adjustments after Obama took office, there has not been a significant change in the nature of the U.S.’s position.
Since the U.S. is the country most responsible for global warming, its approach to climate change has a large effect on the outcome of the current conference. If the U.S. does whatever it pleases, other countries may in turn choose to ignore the limits of international rules as well. Japan, Australia, Canada and New Zealand, among other nations under the umbrella of U.S. protection, all proposed to add additional conditions to their respective reduction goals. These conditions violate the climate change negotiations following the “joint but differentiated” principle, which insists that some developing countries participate in the reduction of emissions.
According to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, as well as the Kyoto Protocol, there are certain “common but differentiated responsibilities," that should not initially be undertaken by developing countries. But to deal with the problem of climate change, some developing countries recently declared that independent action must be taken. China, India, Brazil, and others have announced encouraging goals to reduce emissions, showing a proactive attitude in assuming responsibility regarding the Earth’s future, resulting in praise from the international community.
The fact that the planet urgently needs to “reduce its fever” has already reached a consensus. In order to rouse the attention of the leaders of big countries, the Maldives held an underwater meeting with cabinet members and Nepal held a cabinet meeting on Mount Everest at an elevation of more than 5,000 meters. The Copenhagen conference is not merely a simple gathering of leaders, but a meeting to secure mankind’s future. In order to maintain his “star” effect and the U.S.'s insistence of its status as the “great nation”, Obama and the U.S. must truly have courage and dare to assume responsibility for climate change. If the world had more fairness and justice, there would be more harmony among mankind.
The U.S. is the biggest contributor to global warming. The International Energy Agency's survey results indicated that the U.S. is the world leader in carbon dioxide emissions, at approximately 20 tons per capita, accounting for 23.7 percent of the world’s total emissions. But in response to global warming, the U.S. attitude has been ambiguous and the least dynamic.
According to an estimate by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the mid-term emissions reduction of developed countries should be 25 to 40 percent, in order to avoid reaching a dangerous level of global warming. But even the European Union, the self-proclaimed “standard-bearer” in response to climate change, is still far from reaching a 20 percent emissions reduction. The Obama administration’s “responsible” announcement revealing the U.S.'s long-awaited goal was no better: to reduce emissions 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020, which is only a 4 percent reduction of 1990 levels. This goal not only falls very short of the European Union goal, but does not even compare to the Kyoto Protocol’s initial pledge of a 7 percent reduction, being only three percentage points lower than originally stipulated.
In regard to the issue of emissions reduction, America’s attitude has continued to be passive. The U.S. remains the only developed country not associated with the Kyoto Protocol, an agreement that will expire in 2012. Despite minor adjustments after Obama took office, there has not been a significant change in the nature of the U.S.’s position.
Since the U.S. is the country most responsible for global warming, its approach to climate change has a large effect on the outcome of the current conference. If the U.S. does whatever it pleases, other countries may in turn choose to ignore the limits of international rules as well. Japan, Australia, Canada and New Zealand, among other nations under the umbrella of U.S. protection, all proposed to add additional conditions to their respective reduction goals. These conditions violate the climate change negotiations following the “joint but differentiated” principle, which insists that some developing countries participate in the reduction of emissions.
According to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, as well as the Kyoto Protocol, there are certain “common but differentiated responsibilities," that should not initially be undertaken by developing countries. But to deal with the problem of climate change, some developing countries recently declared that independent action must be taken. China, India, Brazil, and others have announced encouraging goals to reduce emissions, showing a proactive attitude in assuming responsibility regarding the Earth’s future, resulting in praise from the international community.
The fact that the planet urgently needs to “reduce its fever” has already reached a consensus. In order to rouse the attention of the leaders of big countries, the Maldives held an underwater meeting with cabinet members and Nepal held a cabinet meeting on Mount Everest at an elevation of more than 5,000 meters. The Copenhagen conference is not merely a simple gathering of leaders, but a meeting to secure mankind’s future. In order to maintain his “star” effect and the U.S.'s insistence of its status as the “great nation”, Obama and the U.S. must truly have courage and dare to assume responsibility for climate change. If the world had more fairness and justice, there would be more harmony among mankind.
Next article![]( "Pakistan Is A Target And Not A U.S. Ally")
