One of the critical issues facing Copenhagen negotiators is the amount of money (and technology) that will be transferred from wealthy states to developing countries so that the latter won’t burn fossil fuels and thereby create future emissions that could effectively cancel out any reductions achieved by rich states.
A recent report indicated that President Obama had finally made a security policy related decision—not on his Afghanistan strategy which is yet to be announced– but rather on whether or not his administration would seek to have the US sign the treaty banning the production and use of anti-personnel land mines, a treaty that 156 other nations have already signed.
Whilst the European media is full of stories about the new President of the European Council and the High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs, the third development of an EU Ministry of Foreign Affairs appears to have fallen off the radar, despite fierce turf wars erupting across Brussels as to its proper role.
The Copenhagen climate summit is now less than one month away and observers are not optimistic that states will agree to a deal cementing either specific greenhouse gas emission reductions or increased environmental assistance to the developing world so they can meet the standards without threatening growth vital to fighting poverty.
Cutting through the friendly appearance and conciliatory rhetoric of the Obama administration does not detract from the reality that regarding the Middle East, nothing of substance has changed as the Iranian President asserts.
However big the political odds are, a rational-pragmatic input by the FDP could constructively impact the foreign policy discourse in Europe’s largest country
As I’ve hacked my way through the thicket of the Great Debates these thirty-odd years past, I’ve increasingly wondered what my students must have made of my passion for ideas which appear at odds with the lives they lead – even, indeed, the countries they have come to know.
President Obama has deemed this an era of ‘extended hand’ diplomacy, in which the United States must reach out to its adversaries in an effort to build on mutual interests and respect. In doing so, U.S. diplomats have promised to utilize a strategy of smart power. The ability of such a strategy to meet U.S. needs and global problems now faces its first real test as the U.S. undergoes negotiations with Iran concerning their uranium enrichment program.
How can a new treaty ensure more potent action? Further complicating matters is the fact that European governments are said to favor a new Kyoto-style agreement that sets relatively firm emissions targets. The news this week was confusing, but much evidence suggests that any new agreement on climate change will have to wait until 2010.
The economic crisis has brought about a transformation in international governance, signalling a break with the established economic architecture. While at the outset, measures taken appeared in an ad hoc or temporary manner, the decision at the recent Pittsburgh Summit to institutionalize the Group of 20 leaders’ summit reflects a decided shift in economic leadership. New players, new institutions and new issues have moved to the centre of the agenda.
Before you download your free e-book, please consider donating to support open access publishing.
E-IR is an independent non-profit publisher run by an all volunteer team. Your donations allow us to invest in new open access titles and pay our bandwidth bills to ensure we keep our existing titles free to view. Any amount, in any currency, is appreciated. Many thanks!
Donations are voluntary and not required to download the e-book - your link to download is below.