The world has taken an important step toward controlling climate change by agreeing to the Bali Action Plan at the global negotiations in Indonesia earlier this month. The plan may not look like much, since it basically committed the world to more talking rather than specific actions, but I am optimistic for three reasons.
First, the world was sufficiently united that it forced the US to end its intransigence.
Second, the road map marks a sensible balance of considerations.
And third, realistic solutions are possible, which will allow the world to combine economic development and control of greenhouse gases.
The first step at Bali was to break the deadlock that has crippled the global response to climate change since the signing of the Kyoto Protocol a decade ago. This time the world united, even booing the US lead negotiator until she reversed her position and agreed to sign the Bali Action Plan.
Likewise, the unwillingness of major developing countries such as China and India to sign on to a plan also seems to be ending, though considerable work remains to craft a global agreement to which both rich and poor countries can agree.
Doing so requires balancing many concerns. First, we must stabilize greenhouse gases in order to avoid dangerous human interference in the climate system -- the key goal of the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the global treaty under which the Bali negotiations took place. Second, we must accomplish this while leaving room for continued rapid economic development and poverty reduction. Poor countries do not and will not accept a system of climate control that condemns them to continued poverty. Third, we must help countries adapt to the climate change that is already occurring and that will intensify.
The Bali Action Plan addresses all three concerns. The plan's main point is to establish an Ad Hoc Working Group to reach a detailed global agreement by 2009 that will set "measurable, reportable and verifiable" commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Such commitments are to be taken in the context of "sustainable development," meaning that "economic and social development and poverty reduction are global priorities." The plan also calls for knowledge transfer to enable poor countries to adopt environmentally sound technologies.
The great question, of course, is whether stabilization of greenhouse gases, continued economic development and adaptation to climate change can be achieved simultaneously. Using our current technologies, no; but if we develop and rapidly adopt new technologies that are within our scientific reach, yes.
The most important challenge is to reduce, and eventually nearly eliminate, carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels such as oil, natural gas and coal. These fuels are at the core of the modern world economy, supplying around four-fifths of the world's commercial energy. Such emissions can be eliminated by either shifting to renewable forms of energy or reducing the emissions from fossil fuels.
The key insight is that roughly 75 percent of our fossil fuel use goes for just a few purposes: to produce electricity and heat at power plants, to drive automobiles, to heat buildings and to power a few key industries such as refineries, petrochemicals, cement and steel. We need new environmentally sound technologies in each of these sectors.
For example, power plants can adopt solar energy or capture and safely dispose of the carbon dioxide they produce with fossil fuels -- as can large factories. Automobiles can be engineered for much greater mileage through hybrid technology combining battery power and gasoline. Buildings can reduce their heating needs through improved insulation or by converting from heating oil to electricity produced by clean technology.
According to the best economic and engineering estimates, if each key economic sector develops and adopts environmentally sound technologies in the coming decades, the world will be able to reduce carbon emissions dramatically for less than 1 percent of annual global income, thereby avoiding long-term damage that would cost far more.
In other words, the world can combine economic growth with declining emissions of carbon dioxide. And rich countries will be able to afford to help poor countries pay for the new, cleaner technologies.
To reach agreement by 2009, we must move beyond current generalities by which rich and poor countries argue about who should be blamed for climate change and who should pay the costs. We will need a true global business plan that spells out how the new technologies are developed, tested and adopted on an expedited basis worldwide.
We must ensure that all countries adopt a verifiable strategy for environmentally sound technology, and that rich countries fulfill the Bali Action Plan's promise to provide "financial and other incentives" to enable poor countries to adopt the new technologies.
With so many crises afflicting our world, there is cynicism that yet another global conference did little more than promise to continue talking. But let's see the positive message instead: 190 countries agreed on a sensible plan, and the underlying science and technology gives us realistic hopes for achieving it.
There is considerable and difficult work ahead, but the situation is better as a result of the deliberations in Bali. Now it's time to role up our sleeves and achieve what we've promised.
Jeffrey Sachs is professor of economics and director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long been expansionist and contemptuous of international law. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the CCP regime has become more despotic, coercive and punitive. As part of its strategy to annex Taiwan, Beijing has sought to erase the island democracy’s international identity by bribing countries to sever diplomatic ties with Taipei. One by one, China has peeled away Taiwan’s remaining diplomatic partners, leaving just 12 countries (mostly small developing states) and the Vatican recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation. Taiwan’s formal international space has shrunk dramatically. Yet even as Beijing has scored diplomatic successes, its overreach
In her article in Foreign Affairs, “A Perfect Storm for Taiwan in 2026?,” Yun Sun (孫韻), director of the China program at the Stimson Center in Washington, said that the US has grown indifferent to Taiwan, contending that, since it has long been the fear of US intervention — and the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) inability to prevail against US forces — that has deterred China from using force against Taiwan, this perceived indifference from the US could lead China to conclude that a window of opportunity for a Taiwan invasion has opened this year. Most notably, she observes that
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
Since being re-elected, US President Donald Trump has consistently taken concrete action to counter China and to safeguard the interests of the US and other democratic nations. The attacks on Iran, the earlier capture of deposed of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and efforts to remove Chinese influence from the Panama Canal all demonstrate that, as tensions with Beijing intensify, Washington has adopted a hardline stance aimed at weakening its power. Iran and Venezuela are important allies and major oil suppliers of China, and the US has effectively decapitated both. The US has continuously strengthened its military presence in the Philippines. Japanese Prime
RSS