EDITORIAL: COP16 negotiations

International negotiations on a new climate treaty have stalled. The outlook is thus bleak for the 16th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP16) to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, which is being held in Mexico.

There is a serious flaw in the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, the current framework for international efforts to stem global warming; it requires only industrial countries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions during its first commitment period of 2008-2012.

The Kyoto pact puts no limits on emissions by China, the largest emitter. Neither is the United States under any obligation, because it never ratified the treaty.

Last year, this problem came close to being solved. The United States returned to the negotiation table under the Democratic administration of President Barack Obama, who displayed greater zeal for the environmental challenge.

Negotiators were moving in the direction of creating a new framework that differs from the Kyoto Protocol in that it would oblige countries like the United States and China to set targets for emission cuts.

But the talks broke down. No forward-looking agreement was reached in the COP15 meeting in Copenhagen late last year.

This year, the Obama administration tried but failed to enact ambitious domestic legislation to introduce an emissions credit trading system. Then, in the U.S. midterm elections, the Democrats were defeated by the Republicans. As a result, enthusiasm for climate talks evaporated both in the United States and the rest of the world.

Behind the ebbing of momentum was the global economic crisis. China and other developing countries that are loath to be obliged to reduce their emissions are calling for an extension of the Kyoto Protocol to ensure that industrial countries will cut their emissions further. Japan, Russia and Canada are opposed to any extension that imposes emissions curbs only on industrial countries.

The European Union has indicated its willingness to consider an extension if the United States and China commit themselves to emissions targets. Washington, meanwhile, has repeatedly ruled out its return to the protocol.

With such wide disagreements among major countries, chances are that there will be a blank period after 2012 when no country is subject to international obligations for reductions.

Japan has a significant role to play to break the impasse. The government stance for COP16 is to oppose setting the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol and to create a single regulation framework that covers all major emitters, including the United Sates and China.

Indeed, a treaty will not be effective to curb global warming if it imposes new targets only on Japan and the EU. Countries need to figure out a system that binds both the United States and China to some sort of obligation to slash their emissions.

Japan should firmly commit itself to promoting effective global regulations while trying to protect its own interests. Japan needs to redouble its efforts to make sure that COP16 will produce an agreement that leads to a major achievement in the next conference.

At home, the government should seek to introduce three key instruments: an environmental tax, a domestic system to trade emissions credits and a program to buy power generated from renewable energy sources.

The current situation has many parallels with the situation that prevailed after the U.S. administration headed by George W. Bush pulled out of the Kyoto Protocol in 2001. At that time, the protocol was pronounced as "dead." In Japan, a chorus of opposition to Japan's ratification of the treaty arose within the government and the business community.

But the world put the protocol into force without U.S. participation. This action has engendered the current global trend toward energy conservation, wider use of alternative energy sources and a low-carbon society.

What is needed now is international cooperation based on a clear vision for a cleaner future.

--The Asahi Shimbun, Nov. 30