WHAT does the future hold after The Hague debacle? The talks are now
technically suspended and will resume in Bonn next year, at another round of
meetings scheduled for the last week of May. By then, however, the political
landscape will have changed irreversibly and many doubt whether even the
鈥渄eal-that-almost-was鈥� will survive the hiatus.
Politicians came close on a number of deals; a promise by the Russians to
invest proceeds from the sales of unwanted pollution permits into clean energy,
a commitment by industrialised countries not to claim carbon credits for
investing in nuclear power in the developing world; and the US abandoning
demands for developing countries to accept emissions targets.
However, next year the US will have a new president. Commentators also expect
Britain to hold a general election in early May. 鈥淚t鈥檚 very difficult to see how
we will get the same circumstances [as those in The Hague] in six months鈥� time,鈥�
says James Cameron, an adviser to Britain鈥檚 Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook.
Advertisement
The failure is also bound to reignite debate about how much political
treaties matter. Cameron said the deal鈥檚 success 鈥渃ould have been measured in
new investment in clean technologies鈥�. Corporations had been gearing up to make
big profits out of clean-energy technologies鈥攊nvestment that is now in
jeopardy.
But others disagree. Glenn Kelly, director of the US industrial lobby group
the Global Climate Coalition, who is a long-time opponent of the Protocol, says:
鈥淎ctually this failure won鈥檛 matter much. It is business, not government, that
is developing the new technologies. And business is being pushed by strong
consumer demand, irrespective of governments or regulations.鈥�
The most optimistic scenario sees consumers continuing to demand
energy-efficiency innovations, while the temporary collapse of the Kyoto talks
chokes off the rush to invest in planting trees and buying up carbon
credits.
But even such optimism was very much a minority view in The Hague last
weekend.
