Climate change in Bali?

A coincidence put in extraordinarily sharp relief the disappointing end to the Bali talks on negotiating a fresh treaty to curb global warming. A week after Al Gore and R.K. Pachauri, on behalf of the IPCC, received their Nobel Peace Prize, the international political leadership took the fortnight-long Bali talks to extra time before finding what is in essence a postponement mechanism. Certainly, the major groups among the participants return home with something each can claim as a victory. But, put together, the small sum of these victories shows how difficult it could be to tackle what Gore has termed the greatest challenge of this generation.

Climate change 8212; now that the numbers have been crunched, beyond dispute 8212; requires cooperation and coordination of an order not adequately in evidence at Bali. Consider the parameters for satisfaction in the Bali Roadmap finally produced at the summit. The US is happy that it survived the acute pressure by Europe that rich countries commit to cutting by 2020 their greenhouse gas emissions 40 per cent below 1990 levels. Europe can be satisfied that the US at least has, against its longstanding isolationism post-Kyoto, committed to staying on board for the roadmap and working towards 8220;a long-term global goal for emission reductions8221; by 2009. Developing countries have won the promise of financial and technological assistance to take actions that would bring 8220;measurable, reportable and verifiable8221; emission cuts in an overall programme of sustainable development.

The Bali Roadmap is to deliver by 2009 a successor protocol to Kyoto. A lot has changed since Kyoto. Not only has the expectation of global warming been enhanced, there is now extraordinary public support for measures to curb it. America8217;s stalling tactics have allowed the rest of the world to escape binding commitments. But popular opinion shows that there is a moral advantage to be gained by individual countries unilaterally considering domestic action. Besides this developing countries, especially India and China, need to be much more pro-active in pressuring rich nations to commit faster to binding cuts.