Political barriers on the road to climate change control

When the 1997 Kyoto Protocol covering 180 nations did not include China and India, there was political backlash in the U.S. David Sandalaow was on President Clinton's negotiating team. He says now going forward, "Only agree abroad to what you can implement at home."
Kyoto remains largely a failure. The U.S. never joined it. Members that did join have not met their carbon reduction targets. But if any agreement is reached in Copenhagen in 2 months it will have to reflect the current American political climate. Kenichi Kobayashi, of the Japanese foreign Ministry says the Kyoto framework must be abandoned for a totally new program, citing changes in the 12 years since Kyoto.
One of the biggest developments is that China has overtaken the U.S. as the worlds top carbon emitter. China and the U.S. contribute nearly half of global carbon emissions. Copenhagen won't work without each of them coming to the table. China, India and Brazil emit far more carbon now than they did when Kyoto was agreed upon. The International Energy Agency says that 97% of increased carbon will come from the Emerging World in 2030.
Such projections sway Moderate Senate Democrats like Evan Bayh (Ind) to balk at legal limits on U.S. carbon emissions. "I could not ask the American people to sacrifice and not solve the problem of global warming because the developing world was not participating," he said.
India's Minister of Environment Jairam Ramesh said the U.S. short term carbon reductions remain too low. "The stalemate in negotiations has not been caused by China and India," Ramesh said. "The make or break issue is emissions cuts. If there is no agreement on that, there's no agreement in Copenhagen."
The U.S. is slow to use provisions in the House Climate Change Bill passed in the late spring for a framework of the U.S. position at Copenhagen, such as firm U.S. emission targets and investment and aid to Emerging Nations for forest preservation and Green Technology transfer. Many top environmental leaders say because of the U.S. failure to act on Kyoto we must now act more aggressively in Copenhagen.
Friday, Carol Browner, Obama's Climate Change czar said it is "not likely" that the U.S. will have a Climate Change bill passed and signed by the President in time for Copenhagen. The U.S. will not endorse international goals the U.S. has yet to accept at home, according to Todd Stern of the State Department.
The alternative to break the stalemate going into Copenhagen under discussion by both the U.S. and India is nationally binding targets that would be capable of international scrutiny.
Jim Connaughton, a top Bush environmental adviser said that what comes out of Copenhagen may look a great deal like what Bush had promoted. " What countries came to realize after Kyoto was it was hugely problematic to have international environmental negotiations establishing domestic economic and energy policy without first forging a domestic consensus," Connaughton said.
"What all major economies realized this time around is that they need to establish a domestic consensus on an agreed level of effort as a stronger basis for the commitments they make internationally and as a catalyst for international cooperation."
The promise of flexibility at Copenhagen signals not the end of discussion on Climate Change control but the real beginning.