RELEASED INFULL 9nHarlan- Watson Senior ClimateNegmiatorigmd Spec-i311 Representative US Department of State National A 9 iati9 19f Manilfacturers - 1 DC - - UNITED STATES DEPARTMENTQF STATE REVIEW AUTHORITY THEODORE It - 13 291908458 UNCLASSIFIED Outline COP l9 Venue and Schedule 'Ministerial Segment December 10 1 1_ 9 Overall Expectations Major COP 19 Issues UNCLASSIFIED - UNCLASSIEIED - COP 19 Venue and Schedule Venue Milan Italy Dates 9 Ninth Session of the Conference 0f the Parties to the UN - Framework Convention on Climate Change - December 1 12 Ministerial Segment December 10-11 WSB 19 19th Sessions of the Subsidiary Body for Implementation 19 and the Subsidiary Body for Scienti c and Technological Advice SBSTA 19 held in conjunction with COP 9 December 1-9 1' HungariandEnvironment Minister Mikl s Pers inyi served as COP 9 President UNCLASSIFIED COP 9 Ministerial Segment December 10 11 Three sequential round-table discussionsmeach co-chaired by a minister from a developed and deveIOping country open to participation by all ministers and heads of delegation Climate change adaptation mitigation and sustainable development Technology including technology use and development and transfer of technologies Assessment of progress at the national regional and international levels to fulfill the promise and objective enshrined in the climate change agreements including the scientific information policy and nancial aspects 1 Ministers spoke for average of 3 minutes each relatively good give-and-take Capacity-building synergy and possible future steps as well as the need to increase awareness of vulnerability and adaptation were key cross- cutting issues for all three round-table discussions UNCLASSIFIED - COP 9 Overall EXpectati'on-s 3 - Broad perception that COP 9 would be less eventful than recent or future COPS 3 No Ministerial declaration expected Ministerial focus on round-tables with no formal outcomes breather before negotiations on post-Kyoto approach scheduled to begin in' 2005 a Very few political issues compared to other COPS 3 Parties focusing on con dence building a US Delegation focused on getting our message out on US climate policy Department of Commerce Administrator Conrad Lautenbacher NOAA Deputy Assistant Secretary Bill Brennan m- Department of Energy US Bob Card AIS Dave Garman Larisa Dobriansky and Climate Change Technology Program Director David Conover Department of Transportation AIS Emil Frankel - w Agency for International Development DAA Jacqueline Schafer UNCLASSIFIED 1 Signi cant 19 Agenda Items SBI 19 - 2004-2005 Biennium Budget Special Climate Change Least Developed Countries Funds - COP 10 813 2 Venue and Dates SBST A 19 - Third Assessment Report TAR - w Sinks Issues I Research and Systematic Observation UNCLASSIFIED 'f Signi cant COP 19 Agenda Item 2004-2005 Biennium Budget Achieved clear distinction between Convention costs and Kyoto costs Also achieved clear understanding from all Parties'that US will contribute only to Convention costs US will withhold funds for Kyoto elenien'ts of Convention s core budget U S pro rate share 21 349 to be withheld will total over $700 000 in 2004 05 - 3 LS will not contribute to other Kyoto costs in the Trust Fund for Supplementary Activities Convention s budget about $17 4 million per year or $34 8 million over the biennium will increase by 6 percent over the previous biennium this compares well with the 29 percent increase originally proposed by the secretariat Note Secretariat maintained that it would need a I4 percent increese just to stay even in light ofthe dollar 3 slide against the euro U S efforts helped identify Kyoto s price tag over $17 4 million in the 2004-05 period Japan with US support originally called for no increase in the Convention s core budget the EU called for an increase of 9 percent UNCLASSIFIED - Special Climate Change Least Developed Countries Funds COP-53 adopted decisions relating to two new developing country funds agreed in Marakkech as part of a package including the rules for Kyoto Special Climate Change Fund The COP decision provides guidance on funding of technology transfer and adaptation activities Mitigation and economic diversification activities will also be allowed countries submit views on these with a view to a decision at COP 10 3 Least Developed Country Fund Guidance on the operation of the Least DeveIOped Countries Fund provides for certain adaptation activities 'on a full-cost basis unlike GEF which only funds portion relating to global bene t taking account funds available The US has indicated it will not contribute to either fund as they were are part of a Kyoto package in which the U S Idid not participate UNCLASSIFIED COP 21 Venue and Schedule 8' Venue Buenos Aires Argentina 1' Dates N0vember29-4December 10 2004 UNCLAS SIFIED SBSTA 19 Agenda Items TAR Focus on work on two new agenda items mitigation and adaptation which will begin at June 2001 '1 Because these agenda items will be a place countries position themselves for future negotiations scope of work was sensitive EU wished to set broad agendas including discussions about atmoSpheric concentrations and national burden-sharing US and many other countries including developing countries Australia and Japan sought a focus on a bottom-up discussion on practical opportunities and solutions to climate change Final SBSTA decision re ects thelhmore practical approach and will lead to a more useful exchange of information among Parties and experts over the coming several years - UNCLASSIFIED - - - UNCLASSIFIED - SBSTA 19 Agenda Items Research and Systematic Observation SBSTA approved a draft COP decision that will help to further our efforts to monitor environmental conditions around the planet SBSTA focused on climate observations but the decision is being implemented in the largercontext of and has several references to the ad hoc Group on Global Earth Observations GEO effort initiated at the Earth Observation Summit in Washington this July UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED - - Agenda Items Sinks issues a A decision on treatment of Sinks in the Clean Development- Mechanism of the Kyoto Protocol was a major issue for many countries U S participation in the negotiation of the decision was limited as we will not become a Party to the Kyoto Protocol i t i as he U S had concerns With European proposals on genetically modi ed organisms GMOS which we made clear to others In the nal package GMO reference was moved to a preamble The decision does not impose limits on GMOS or contain - requirements to undertake any new GMO-related procedures The US allowed the text to go forward on the basis that it pertained only to Kyoto Parties and did not represent any precedent with respect to GMOs UNCLASSIFIED This document is from the holdings of The National Security Archive Suite 701 Gelman Library The George Washington University 2130 H Street NW Washington D C 20037 Phone 202 994-7000 Fax 202 994-7005 nsarchiv@gwu edu