Not only is the United States federal government on the brink of a shutdown over failed negotiations, but the international climate negotiations are also struggling to move forward. One of the most controversial remarks this week came from U.S. climate envoy Todd Stern who expressed doubt to Bloomberg over the future of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) negotiations.
“A lot of what was bound up in the very high expectations at the start of this whole
process was unrealistic,” Stern told Bloomberg in New York. “I don’t think it’s necessary that there be internationally binding emission caps as long as you’ve got national laws and regulations. What I am saying is it’s not doable.”
During the week when delegates are meeting and at least attempting to make progress, this statement did not go down very well.
UN climate chief Christiana Figueres fired back during a press conference.
“There is no other venue where every country is at the table. There is no other venue where the most vulnerable country is at the table where it needs to be. There is no other venue equipped to take decisions,” said Figueres.
“I very much encourage everybody to look for every other opportunity to work on climate change,” she said. “Everything they achieve will enhance our process here at the United Nations because, as I have said, this is the only place where they can actually take decisions.”
She added that international agreements should be “complimented” by domestic actions, but should not replace them.
Later, Jonathan Pershing, U.S. deputy special envoy for climate change, held a press conference where he carefully maneuvered around the Stern remark, but was also rather pessimistic about progress.
“Progress is slow and we are concerned. Parties are debating whether to move the agenda forward or to rehash issues we were unable to agree on in Cancun and unlikely to agree on in Durban,” he said. “Our view is that Cancun was a success. It created momentum we must seize as we move forward to Durban.”
However, some of those rehashed issues in Cancun are still alive and well. Pershing remained behind the U.S. position that all large economies – a wink and a nudge directed at China – need to agree to symmetrical commitments, including measurement, reporting and verification (MRV).
“We cannot allow ideology to stand in the way,” he said. “We hope that the next time we get together in June, we will get back to work on substance.”
Figueres tried to paint a rosier picture. She said that no country is fundamentally opposed to a second commitment. Yet, she went on to say that, “whether they participate or not is a different issue.”
So with one week of negotiations over, the same disagreements remain.
Developing countries would like to address the bigger picture, while developed countries want to work on the smaller agreements that were made in Cancun.
The next round of meetings takes place in Bonn, Germany in June, and parties can discuss some of the issues on the table through other venues in the meantime.
But as Pershing said, “There is no time to waste. We have a lot of work to do. We need to get started.”
