How many nations secretly conceal a dagger and intend to join the countries in Durban hoping to kill Kyoto off?
Will the Kyoto protocol suffer the same fate as Julius Caesar? Photograph: Cine Text/Allstar/CINETEXT
Just one day into the Durban talks and, as we expected, we are witnessing the assassination of the Kyoto protocol. Canada has let the cat out of the bag with its environment minister, Peter Kent, saying: "Kyoto is the past" and suggesting that formally pulling out of the treaty is an option.
If Canada – once Kyoto's friend, now its undisguised enemy – were to withdraw, it would probably be a death blow to the only international treaty that obliges by law rich countries to reduce emissions. The world can just about live with the US outside the treaty, but to have Canada formally outside too, really signals the rich countries' diplomatic flight from the treaty that the world signed up to only 15 years ago. Japan and Russia are set against the treaty, leaving the EU as the only rich grouping of countries which is hedging its bets.
It all reminds me of the assassination of Caesar in Julius Caesar. In the play, Caesar's friends and colleagues hide their weapons before ritually stabbing him together, thus sharing the responsibility for his death. The US may be the country that has plotted the end of the treaty but Canada now has the dagger in its hand.
For anyone unacquainted, here's how Will Shakespeare might have re-imagined it (with apologies).
Sir David – a scientist with canny political antenna whose views frequently mirror those of the government, proposed that countries did not need a legally binding agreement to reduce emissions, but that pledges and voluntary cuts by all would be sufficient. Porritt made the point well that no country will feel committed to meet any target if it is not obliged to meet in law.
We are edging to the crunch point, the moment when the senators crowd around Caesar, the daggers go in and Kyoto stumbles and dies. Developing countries – like Porritt – fear that any new treaty that might emerge will be much weaker than the existing Kyoto protocol regime, with a voluntary and domestic "pledge and review" system nowhere near strong enough to force countries to act. Any new treaty which might emerge after the death of Kyoto, they say, would be a complete re-writing of the UN convention where historical responsibility and the principles of equity are disregarded.
Developing countries profess to be Kyoto's friend, but how many of these in the wings secretly conceal a dagger and intend to join the throng of rich countries in Durban hoping to kill Kyoto off in the next two weeks?
The reality of international diplomacy is that, like the senators in Julius Caesar, countries follow power, hide their weapons, watch which way the wind is blowing, and then back who they expect to be the winner.
If Canada – once Kyoto's friend, now its undisguised enemy – were to withdraw, it would probably be a death blow to the only international treaty that obliges by law rich countries to reduce emissions. The world can just about live with the US outside the treaty, but to have Canada formally outside too, really signals the rich countries' diplomatic flight from the treaty that the world signed up to only 15 years ago. Japan and Russia are set against the treaty, leaving the EU as the only rich grouping of countries which is hedging its bets.
It all reminds me of the assassination of Caesar in Julius Caesar. In the play, Caesar's friends and colleagues hide their weapons before ritually stabbing him together, thus sharing the responsibility for his death. The US may be the country that has plotted the end of the treaty but Canada now has the dagger in its hand.
For anyone unacquainted, here's how Will Shakespeare might have re-imagined it (with apologies).
The Tragedy of KyotoThe stakes are incredibly high and the choices being put to countries were well expressed in today's short spat between Sir David King, former UK chief scientist, and Jonathon Porritt, former head of the Sustainable Development Commission on the Today programme.
Enter UNITED STATES, CANADA, JAPAN, BRITAIN, RUSSIA followed by throng of AFRICAN and other poor countries including ALBA, AOSIS
COUNTRIES: We will be satisfied; let us be satisfied.
UNITED STATES : Then follow me, and give me audience, friends.
Canada, go you into the other street,
And part the numbers.
Those that will hear me speak, let 'em stay here;
Those that will follow Africa, go with it;
And public reasons shall be rendered
Of Kyoto's death.
UNITED KINGDOM: I will hear America speak.
EU: I will hear Africa; and compare their reasons,
When severally we hear them rendered.
Exit AFRICA, with some countries
UNITED STATES goes into the pulpit
JAPAN: The noble AMERICA is ascended: silence!
US: Be patient till the last.
Nations, countrymen, hear me for my
cause, and be silent,
If there be any in this assembly, any dear friend of
Kyoto's, to him I say, that my love to Kyoto
was no less than his. If then that friend demand
why Canada rose against Kyoto, this is my answer:
– Not that it loved Kyoto less, but that it loved
the United States more.
Enter UNITED KINGDOM, NEW ZEALAND and others, with KYOTO'S body
UNITED STATES: Here comes Kyoto's body, mourned by the rich: which though they had no hand in his death, shall receive
the benefit of his dying.
EU: Methinks there is much reason in its sayings.
AUSTRALIA: If thou consider rightly of the matter,
Kyoto has had great wrong.
AFRICA: Has it, masters? I fear there will a worse come in his place.
Sir David – a scientist with canny political antenna whose views frequently mirror those of the government, proposed that countries did not need a legally binding agreement to reduce emissions, but that pledges and voluntary cuts by all would be sufficient. Porritt made the point well that no country will feel committed to meet any target if it is not obliged to meet in law.
We are edging to the crunch point, the moment when the senators crowd around Caesar, the daggers go in and Kyoto stumbles and dies. Developing countries – like Porritt – fear that any new treaty that might emerge will be much weaker than the existing Kyoto protocol regime, with a voluntary and domestic "pledge and review" system nowhere near strong enough to force countries to act. Any new treaty which might emerge after the death of Kyoto, they say, would be a complete re-writing of the UN convention where historical responsibility and the principles of equity are disregarded.
Developing countries profess to be Kyoto's friend, but how many of these in the wings secretly conceal a dagger and intend to join the throng of rich countries in Durban hoping to kill Kyoto off in the next two weeks?
The reality of international diplomacy is that, like the senators in Julius Caesar, countries follow power, hide their weapons, watch which way the wind is blowing, and then back who they expect to be the winner.
没有评论:
发表评论