EW DELHI, Friday, Nov. 1 — When India's
prime minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, finished speaking at the
international conference on climate here on Wednesday, the
fissure between richer and poorer countries over how best to
tackle global warming could no longer be papered over.
In his speech, he argued that poorer countries could not be
expected to invest money in tackling the causes of global
warming. They bear little responsibility, he said, producing
fewer greenhouse gases than industrialized countries, and yet
have been hit harder by the natural calamities, from drought
to floods, caused by climate changes. They have weaker
economies, and with pressing needs in everything from health
to education, can little afford to invest in clean-air
technologies.
Advertisement
|
|
|
His speech articulated sentiments — resentments, in some
cases — widely shared among developing nations. So while it
produced little new of substance, the conference, the eighth
since the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change was adopted in 1992, illuminated the challenges in
crafting a global response to global warming.
It highlighted a divide between north and south, between
the industrialized and developing worlds, over who should bear
the obligations and burdens of trying to reduce the emissions
that cause global warming.
But on several points, the south found itself with an
unlikely ally: the United States, which under the Bush
administration has also blanched at joining efforts to reduce
emissions.
Instead, the United States joined India and other
developing countries in encouraging a focus on developing the
technology and finding the resources to adapt to climate
change.
India and others argued that developed countries should
offer technical and financial assistance to help developing
countries adapt.
It was not clear whether the conference's final
declaration, which was still being negotiated this morning,
would contain a reference to the Kyoto Protocol, the 1997
climate pact completed last year and endorsed by most of the
world's countries.
The Bush administration had rejected the pact, saying that
fulfilling its requirements to reduce emissions of
heat-trapping gases could hurt America's economy. The United
States is the largest producer of greenhouse gases, and many
believe its rejection of the pact has undercut its potential
effectiveness.
A draft declaration drawn up earlier this week did not
mention Kyoto at all. But the latest version included an
innocuous reference that said that parties that have ratified
the protocol should encourage those that have not to do so "in
a timely manner."
The pact must be ratified by at least 55 countries and by
the industrialized nations that emitted at least 55 percent of
the industrialized world's carbon dioxide in 1990. With the
United States out, that number can only be reached if Russia
ratifies the treaty. At the conference, the Russian delegation
indicated that ratification was eventually likely, but only
after Parliament passed a law in favor of ratification.
If Russia has been hesitant about ratifying the Kyoto pact
because of the withdrawal of the United States, India may have
been emboldened by America's rejection of formal commitments
to reduce emissions of warming gases.
"We do not see targets and timetables as realistic for
developing countries," the head of the American delegation,
Paula Dobriansky, the under secretary of state for global
affairs, said in an interview today.
Instead, the American delegation here repeatedly sounded
two themes: that adapting to climate change is as essential as
preventing it, and that economic growth is the key to
environmental progress.
The European Union and Japan, accordingly, have been
pressing developing nations to commit to reducing the emission
of warming gases.
But it was exactly such pressures that seem to have
contributed to the estrangement between north and south. A
member of the Indian delegation said that the pressure from
the European Union and Japan had crossed the line from
"persuasion" to "aggression." Mr. Vajpayee's speech was partly
in response.