“If I am confident that all of the countries involved are bargaining in good faith and we are on the brink of a meaningful agreement and my presence in Copenhagen will make a difference in tipping us over edge then certainly that’s something that I will do,” Obama told Reuters in an interview.
I had written back on October 9, after the Nobel Peace Prize announcement, that it looks like Obama will be going to Copenhagen after all.
The only question is whether there will be enough progress to motivate him to come. Reuters notes that the President remains optimistic n spite of the too-slow movement in the Senate:
Obama, who has faced resistance from opposition Republicans and even some fellow Democrats to setting caps on greenhouse gas emissions, acknowledged that the U.S. Senate would not pass climate change legislation before Copenhagen.
Delays in the U.S. Congress have rankled European allies and added to questions about how significant the deal that emerges from Copenhagen will ultimately be.
But Obama insisted he remained optimistic that the December 7-18 summit could yield a “framework” agreement.
“I think the question is can we create a set of principles, building blocks, that allow for ongoing and continuing progress on the issue and that’s something I’m confident we can achieve,” he said.
Finally, it has been obvious for a while that a framework deal between the U.S. and China was key to enabling both domestic and international action (see “Does a serious bill need action from China?“). The Administration has been pursuing it aggressively for a while (see “Exclusive: Have China and the U.S. been holding secret talks aimed at a climate deal this fall?“).
Now the president has publicly stated he expected such a framework deal to be achieved this month:
Obama made clear he considers his talks with Chinese leaders during an Asia tour later this month to be crucial in clearing remaining obstacles to some kind of accord.
“The key now is for the United States and China, the two largest emitters in the world, is to be able to come up with a framework that, along with other big emitters like the Europeans and those countries that are projected to be large emitters in the future, like India, can all buy into,” he said.
“I remain optimistic that between now and Copenhagen that we can arrive at that framework,” he added.
If he succeeds, then I do think Copenhagen will achieve what is needed to advance the prospects for international deal, the President will come and a global framework will be agreed to — with a follow-on global meeting set for six months later — then the U.S. Senate and then the entire Congress will pass a climate bill, and we will finalize the international agreement by the end of next year.
Previous in TP Climate Progress
Language Intelligence: Lessons on persuasion from Jesus, Shakespeare, Lincoln, and Lady Gaga
OT – the NSIDC graph of Arctic sea ice extent that you cited in a post here:
climateprogress.org/2009/11/08/arctic-multiyear-sea-ice-nsidc-david-barber/
has just become worse:
nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_timeseries.png
It looks like a new record low.
How strange it is that World leaders are so iffy about attending a conference that they themselves say is vital to the future. They’re apparently afraid of being associated with failure. It’s like players on a ball team who won’t show up unless they are sure of victory. Seems so weak.
(Mark, I believe that if you include the “http://www” headers, that will come up as a link rather than text. Someone else mentioned having difficulty copying and pasting from the blog here; I too am having that problem. Which means the only way I can go to that link is by manually typing it in first, since I’m unable to copy and paste it.)
the China Obama Deal is a done deal…….period!
this is the time and place for Obama to change the future of our mother earth and getting China to sign is paramount for change……if CHINA signs, our dumbas$ congress MUST come into alignment on a cleaner world or else China is going to run past us in GREEN JOBS an GREEN REVENUES for a GREENER world!
Inhofe, (the dope goes to Cope to say nope and dissing hope) is going, we need to counter with someone…
(sorry, regaining my composure after the supermodel post…)
Joe-
“I had written back on October 9, after the Nobel Peace Prize announcement, that it looks like Obama will be going to Copenhagen after all.
The only question is whether there will be enough progress to motivate him to come.”
In the meantime you have posted dozens of reports on how nothing will happen at COP15, and how the postponement of this legislation until next year (in the US at least) might actually be a good thing.
C’mon! You can’t have it both ways. Nothing will happen in Congress in the next 30 days, and nothing will “motivate” Obama to go to a conference where an agreement to agree to an agreement is the best that can be hoped for.
[JR: That's silly. Who could have thought that after 8 years of obstruction, team Obama could negotiate a final deal in under a year!]
Couldn’t we persuade some young person (Inhofe’s grandkids?) to “hide” his passport at a crucial moment to keep him home?
Or could we schedule a key Senate vote he needs to filibuster during that time frame?
Sigh.
This whole post frustrates me. My reactions below may come from the fact that I am not over the gut punch of Copenhagen dissolving into a pale image of what it was to be, and you are clearly ready to move on.
1.) How nice of Obama to drop by if he can make a little difference when things are close. I wouldn’t want to sully his schedule or have him waste any time on any old meeting that is now bleeding profusely. God forbid we ask him to be a serious ass-kicker about it right now, when it needs it. That would just be unseemly. And what if it didn’t go well after he was there? His suit might get dirty. God, I hope we can meet his criteria for when its “important”.
The statement Obama made may actually be very practical, but the messaging it sends is this: WE ARE NOT LEADERS ON THIS. It is limp-wristed sounding at best.
2.) Why is the fact that this is no longer a real legally binding treaty-meeting being spoken about as an afterthought? Why should I be so happy about Obama showing up at the end of a procedural meeting about a framework for for a future treaty? There is no THERE, there.
[JR: Obama can't get 67 votes for a treaty in the Senate, so a different strategy is needed.]
3.) How does Joe know about the six-month and one-year future meetings (where a real treaty is supposed to happen)? Where is that announcement? Where can I read the U.N. press release about that?
[JR: I am surmising. It's been done by the UNFCCC before.]
4.) The back-room talks with China. Doesn’t this undermine the legitimacy of the U.N. framework? Why would I, as Brazil for example, sign on to anything in Copenhagen if other deals are being made without me?
[JR: The U.S. and China are the two biggest emitters. Until this administration, we were the biggest obstacle, and now, China could be the biggest obstacle, although I don't believe they will be. The point of the talks is to make an international deal possible. I can't imagine why Brazil would care, other than to encourage anything that leads to a final deal that includes strong efforts to protect forests.]
I feel like this post is about trying to put a positive spin on a massive failure that just happened over these past few weeks. I understand the psychological purpose in it, and I guess I thank Romm for trying. Positive attitudes do help. But Copenhagen was a known goal for years, and we missed it, and I’m pissed off about it. I guess thats why I’m not in Diplomacy.
[JR: Bush and now the conservatives in Congress have killed any chance of having a final deal in Copenhagen. Who cares where the final deal is -- only that it is achieved within the next year?]
Look, here was the scene just two years ago in Bali. Remember?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HeTA1S7TXM
Gore had to rush down from Oslo to help save the collapsing talks. After spanking the U.S. for holding up the talks, he could not have been more clear about the role and goals of the coming meeting in Copenhagen, two years in the future. It was perhaps the best speech of his career and during a dramatic moment in Bali. It was a moment when people made promises. How can I listen to this video today, and not see this past month as a humongous failure, and Obama’s statement above as a wet paper-towel moment (even if there is a practicality underneath it — which remains to be seen).
-Christopher
Unfortunately, the U.S. failed to pass a climate action bill THIS year despite the best efforts of Nancy Pelosi, the House Democrats and a handful of brave and honorable House Republicans (not President Obama). This probably means that the rest of the world will move forward at Copenhagen without trying to make much effort to acommodate the U.S. or our President’s delicate political position. They are tired of waiting for the U.S. to lead.
They had hope for the U.S. after last November, but a year later they can see that was over optimistic. Yes, we in America have had decades of obstructionism, but that’s our problem. The rest of the world is sick and tied of it being their problem as well. They are no longer in a mood to cut us any more slack because of our own internal political stupidity.
If President Obama really wanted to reestablish U.S. leadership on this issue, he would go to Copenhagen on Day One with no preconditions or “if this… if that…” jive and let the world see that he is truly committed to climate change action. This wait and see approach he is adopting will not doom Copenhagen to failure. Instead it will make the U.S. more irrelevant than ever and galvanize the rest of the world’s 6.5 billion people to move forward without the United States.