Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Global warming pact set for 2009 after US backs down (Pres Bush caves to PC crowd again)
AFP ^ | December 15, 2007

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.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: agw; bali; bdsyetnocure; bushadministration; caves; dobriansky; globalwarming; goebbelswarming
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-116 last
To: snowsislander

BTTT


101 posted on 12/15/2007 3:16:57 PM PST by I got the rope
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

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.


102 posted on 12/15/2007 3:21:47 PM PST by CyberAnt (AMERICA: THE GREATEST FORCE for good in the world!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: ScaniaBoy
Any treaty will have to pass the US Senate. Remember the League of Nations (and the Koyoto protocol).

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

103 posted on 12/15/2007 3:23:32 PM PST by CDB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: CyberAnt

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.


104 posted on 12/15/2007 3:31:30 PM PST by DoughtyOne (California, where the death penalty is reserved for wholesome values. SB 777)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: CDB

UNANIMOUSLY,95-0.


105 posted on 12/15/2007 3:31:44 PM PST by CDB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: MaestroLC
Bush passed the buck on this one. Not surprised.

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.

106 posted on 12/15/2007 3:33:30 PM PST by RetiredArmy (Better prepare, come Nov 08, we have a Marxist Commissar President and Marxist Congress.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

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.


107 posted on 12/15/2007 3:43:42 PM PST by CyberAnt (AMERICA: THE GREATEST FORCE for good in the world!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: TheEaglehasLanded

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.


108 posted on 12/15/2007 5:28:24 PM PST by UglyinLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnthebaptistmoore
He made this his first priority as Prime Minister of Australia.

His first act was to go to Bali and withdraw Australia's planned CO2 reduction committments. That stunned everyone. We might like this guy.
109 posted on 12/15/2007 7:45:32 PM PST by Thrownatbirth (.....Iraq Invasion fan since 1991.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: L98Fiero

>>>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.


110 posted on 12/15/2007 9:06:11 PM PST by tlb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: L98Fiero
We aren't even having this discussion if the US isn't there. Why were we even there, then ?

If it's not a cave, what does this actually mean ? (The Times of London has a little more info):

Paula Dobriansky, the US under secretary of state for democracy and global affairs, initially said she could not accept it...

Later Dobriansky told The Sunday Times that she had changed her mind after listening to the submissions made by Brazil and South Africa, who had accepted that developing countries should also cut their carbon emissions.

111 posted on 12/16/2007 10:08:31 AM PST by stylin19a
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: TheEaglehasLanded

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.


112 posted on 12/16/2007 10:13:29 AM PST by muleskinner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CyberAnt

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.


113 posted on 12/17/2007 11:42:07 PM PST by DoughtyOne (California, where the death penalty is reserved for wholesome values. SB 777)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

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.


114 posted on 12/18/2007 10:03:54 PM PST by CyberAnt (AMERICA: THE GREATEST FORCE for good in the world!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: CyberAnt

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...


115 posted on 12/18/2007 11:24:00 PM PST by DoughtyOne (California, where the death penalty is reserved for wholesome values. SB 777)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Beowulf; Defendingliberty; WL-law; Normandy

~~Anthropogenic Global Warming ™ ping~~


116 posted on 01/01/2008 7:58:01 AM PST by steelyourfaith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-116 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson