五千年(敝帚自珍)

主题:这里的黎明静悄悄 -- 唵啊吽

共:💬66 🌺413
全看分页树展 · 主题 跟帖
家园 我是这样看的

President Obama’s proposed “Copenhagen Accord” aims to shift from developed

to developing countries the balance of “common but differentiated responsibilities” that have been bedrock principles of equity in the United Nations’ Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), reaffirmed in the 2007 Bali Action Plan’s carefully constructed negotiating mandate for the

Copenhagen conference.

“共同但有区别的责任”这是联合国气候变化公约框架的原则。说奥巴马移动了这个原则在发达国家和发展中国家之间的平衡,是把能力和结果混淆了。哥本哈根会议上奥巴马曾经想退出共同的无区别的责任,但是发展中国家坚持了框架原则。这段的真实性在于哥本哈根协议只是个开始,附件还没有人填入减排目标,即发达国家还有颠覆这个原则的后手。这是布局阶段,可以说是发达国家和发展中国家的胜负高下还无法估计。把哥本哈根协议说成是发达国家胜利的开端,可能是这个机构唯一可能的政治上正确的表达了。

If agreed, it would—in addition to enshrining scientifically unsound

emission reductions and promising entirely inadequate finance for poor

countries—establish new obligations on developing countries. The result

could be the removal of the linchpin on a raft of new responsibilities on

developing countries’ policies at a time when the US itself has yet to enact

any of its own obligations assumed almost two decades ago.

见仁见智吧。说至今美国还没有实现二十年前承诺的减排目标,哥本哈根开了增加发展中国家责任的门了。实际上,是中国承诺了出乎西方意料的大力度减排目标,而且是在会议之前就宣布的。这是将了美国一军,文章反过来说是发达国家请发展中国家入瓮,投西方读者所好吧。其一,游戏规则变了,有77国集团联盟了,虽然最好这个联盟被奥巴马率先宣布五个协议而动摇了一下,但是,这个联盟不是就被分裂了。附件难道就只要求发展中国家填,发达国家尤其是美国可以不填?这不是不可以,结果是话语权鹿死谁手的问题。

One indication of the new obligations to be imposed on developing countries

is the mere amount of text: almost three times more detailing specific

obligations for developing than developed countries.

我不知道文章这个结论从何而来,我印象中是中国坚持GDP比例减排,美国坚持绝对总量减排,而至今没有法律约束的协议。整个协议短得和这片文章差不多,不知何来细节责任规范。

Essential to what would be new for Non-Annex I Parties to the Convention are that “Mitigation actions taken by Non-Annex I parties will be subject to

their domestic measurement, reporting, and verification the result of which

will be reported through the national communications every two years…with

provisions for international consultations and analyses” (President Obama underscored this last phrase four times in his brief remarks).

这段是关键,是定期的报告和核查。文章认为这个开端使得哥本哈根协议有可能像WTO和IMF一样最终变为发达国家主导国际秩序的工具。也算是警钟吧。

The WTO counterpart to this proposed UNFCCC process would of course be the

Trade Policy Review Mechanism, which is sort of a policy police for each

countries’ trade measures and practices. International reviews with

determine if countries policies are in compliance with world trade rules.

While the current proposed Copenhagen Accord does not go that far it may

extend to similar disciplines eventually. Earlier drafts said that, “A consultative process, the Periodic Forum, is hereby established which will

compromise all parties convening regularly to consider the climate policy

and practices of parties. The consultative process shall be based on the

report of the national authority which will include its national inventory.”

这段解释为什么哥本哈根协议会成为WTO那样的发达国家工具的机制。时代不同了,同样是强权政治,但美国手中的牌是越来越少,中国手中的牌是越来越多,虽然是和WTO同样的论坛与核查机制,到时谁玩谁还没准呢。WTO和IMF在这次金融海啸中已经臭了。为什么东盟与中国建立自由贸易区,因为WTO和IMF靠不住了,金融海啸中西方是保护主义,中国是继续开放。

Obama’s UNFCCC move must be seen in the context of the same power dynamics

in play at the World Trade Organization, where developed countries promised to reduce export subsidies and increase market access upon WTO’s

establishment of a legally binding deal in 1994. But 15 years after developing countries opened up their farming sectors to subsidized imports from developed countries (that undercut small farmers in developing countries and threaten food security), the United States still has not implemented its commitments, even after losing to developing countries several WTO legal challenges. Now, as a precondition for concluding the current Doha round of world trade talks, developed countries are demanding that developing countries “pay twice” by opening their markets even more in exchange for implementing what was already agreed before.

这是正论,文章这里还有点良心。总结了WTO对发展中国家是硬约束,对发达国家是软约束,即WTO是发达国家统治国际经济秩序的工具,不是什么法律面前国国平等的法律文件。这次77国拒签法律约束性文件原因就在于此。

Resolving the global climate crisis means the world must move from a

competitive to a cooperative style of international relations, where

President Obama lives up to his prize-winning multilateralism and United

States pro-actively builds trust with developing countries.

文章这里提出一个良好的愿望,暗贬了奥巴马一下。

全看分页树展 · 主题 跟帖


有趣有益,互惠互利;开阔视野,博采众长。
虚拟的网络,真实的人。天南地北客,相逢皆朋友

Copyright © cchere 西西河