Is America Satisfied?

Brookings released a statement at the beginning of this year that Obama’s Ambassador to China, Li Kanru, will go to China to propose a collaborative approach to combat climate change. The best model will involve cooperation between China and the US to establish a basic standard, to have the OPEC countries join in, along with the EU countries, and then to expand the scope to the rest of the globe.

In the scope of China’s studies, it’s not that there is no market for this way of handling things.

I remember when a conference convened at Qinghua University, Professor Hu Angang said the United Nations will be able to do absolutely nothing about climate change.

Looking at today, the situation is more and more like what Li Kanru and Hu Angang said. Each side has worked hard for 2 years, however executive efforts have yet to lead to a pact in Copenhagen. Everyone feels that the attitude China and America have towards agendas and results have a decisive influence, of course maybe including Sudan and Venezuela.

So what do we do next? What will happen at next year’s COP16, first at Bonn in Germany and then in Mexico City

If we follow two China-US experts’ point of view, obviously America is Copenhagen’s winner. First off, America not cutting CO2 emissions has yet to be addressed. Of course everyone also believes that because of Congress’ influence, Obama doesn’t have the means to make any more promises, and that promises are hard to achieve. Secondly, the general assembly is also beaten under similar circumstances, and the UN really has no way to deliver.

But China, China stays strong on their position. Developing countries, it would appear, have not lost anything in their right to develop. On midnight of the 18th, some conference delegates were told they would soon need China’s representatives to do a circuit of news conferences, but afterward there was no time to rest. At midnight, all parties involved attend, and China’s representatives don’t utter a single word. It would appear, no disadvantageous situations are going to emerge for China.

Actually, the first agreement was drafted required China and America to work together and an expansion on a similar method, but only with one method outside of the UN, and one method within. But deciding this point, possibly in the Kyoto Protocol. Developing countries clearly persist on this, but America did not agree, the UN’s method is apparently a very difficult method to achieve results.

Perhaps, establishing a two-track negotiation process towards one agreement really is the only solution. Both sides need a way to sidestep, need compromise, and even more, they must not – in either name or substance – negate the Kyoto Protocol.