EU accuses U.S. undermine the Copenhagen agreement

Key differences between U.S. and European countries in the approach to solving climate change could undermine the conclusion of a new agreement on global warming that would replace the Kyoto Protocol

The conflict between the countries of the European Union and the U.S. administration about the way that should prevent further deterioration of climatic events and to regulate emissions of gases, may prevent the achievement of a new agreement which should be discussed at the December summit of the United Nations in Copenhagen, said in a London journal Guardian.

According to sources, "The Guardian", a major dispute about the structure of the water agreement and the new way to limit the level of greenhouse gases that each country should broadcast. While the EU countries want to remain in force structure and system established in the Kyoto protocol, the applicable international agreements climate change, U.S. representatives have notified that the position of Obama's administration should be down almost the whole system and create new, according to their proposal.

According to the current agreement limit emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases that cause greenhouse effect is part of the international system that controls the calculation of emissions, buying "carbon credits" and the contributions of some sectors such as forestry.

Instead, the U.S. wishes to each country individually establish its own rules and unilaterally decide how to achieve goals.

The European side is considered to approach the U.S. could undermine the new agreement and weaken the ability to reduce worldwide emissions.

Summit in Copenhagen many see as a last chance to save the planet and to prevent further warming, and the growth temperature of two or more degrees Celsius, which European countries believe could lead to very dangerous consequences.

From "The Guardian" close to the EU negotiating team said that the chances that this happens more if world powers fail to reconcile their positions and determine the rules that all countries comply.

News of the differences in the attitudes of U.S. and Europe was published at the time of increased concerns that the negotiations in Copenhagen will make the necessary progress.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon told the Guardian that negotiations are stopped and that it is necessary to continue.

On the eve of UN summit in New York scheduled for next week, in which the nearly 100 heads of government to discuss climate change, Ban said that leaders of these countries hold in their hands, "the future of all mankind." "We are deeply concerned that the negotiations do not show a great progress and that is absolutely crucial that the leaders show the political will and leadership."

European officials do not want to openly criticize Obama administration, which recognized that engaged in solving the problem of climate change on the way in which former U.S. President George W. Bush refused to act. They, however, fear that the U.S. move could destroy efforts to reach a new agreement in Copenhagen.

States have not ratified the Kyoto protocol while on their heads was Bush, because no demands have placed China. European negotiators knew that the U.S. will not accept the agreement, but hoped that they will be the basis for a new agreement.

If the Kyoto Protocol fails, it would take several years to establish a new framework for further negotiations, and that could delay a final blow to the efforts of the task to prevent the dangerous consequences of climate change. From "The Guardian" says that Europe wants to further the strategy builds on the Kyoto Protocol, but the U.S. proposal to disabled. "If we had to start from scratch, you should us a lot of time and just might 2015th and 2016th was able to achieve something."

He believes that it is unlikely that European countries oppose Washington. "I'm not sure that the EU really has the courage to deal and it is perhaps a problem."

U.S. plan on climate change is likely to cause dissatisfaction of developing countries that would like to stay for the Kyoto Protocol obligations imposed by rich countries.

Although Washington has yet to detail how to present such a system should work, the document that Obama's team gave the UN in May, said to reduce emissions, "conducted in accordance with the law" in that country.

Legal experts believe that the sentences the way to the U.S. protection of international pressure to enforce the decision with which they disagree. Farhana Jamin, a lawyer at the Institute for Development Studies, who worked on the Kyoto protocol, conducting such a situation seen as backward, and that the danger is that the domestic factor begins to overcomes international.

Another senior European official believes that this move reflects the "prehistoric" level debate on climate change in the U.S., as well as concerns members of the Obama administration that the new international treaty to be ratified in the U.S. Senate, what will be required two-thirds majority. States have not ratified any important international agreement on the environment since 1992. , and U.S. President Bill Clinton never sent for approval to the Kyoto Protocol, after the unanimous vote in the Senate, which indicated that the agreement was rejected for economic reasons.

The aim of the U.S. proposal on unilateral determination of rules of each country aims to "something to be adopted in the Senate, considered the source of" The Guardian ". He, however, "there is no feeling that the U.S. is thinking well what it means for an agreement in Copenhagen".

Stuart Eisenstadt, who was in the American negotiating team in Kyoto, said that there was a "major changes in the U.S. compared to the problem of climate change and the new president is very committed to this issue. The EU, however, must understand the limitations of the United States. The real that is impossible for my successor to the Copenhagen negotiate something outside the law on emissions that Congress approved in the United States. "

Nigel Parvis, also a member of the American negotiating team, believes that "the construction of the Kyoto Protocol should not have any superior status. Many decisions are then made in the absence of the United States, and incorporating design of this Protocol in the new agreement could have a bad consequences.

Parvis not believe that this move could weaken Washington's new agreement. "It is important that the United States negotiate an agreement that can be applied, because the second agreement that would include the U.S. unazadio efforts on climate protection. Is weaker system that applies to multiple countries? I do not think," said Parvis.