UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2010-06143 Doc No C17528290 Date 01 15 2014 3 fl l RELEASED IN FULL 5 December 1997 To Please see attached listing From USDEL Kyoto - Mark G Hambley Subject Thlrd Conference of the Panics to the Climate Convontion Update No 6 Rep0rt on Activities Meetings on December 4 5 1997 This unofficial and uncleared report covets arious activities and meetings at the Third Conference of the Parties COP-3 which is being held in Kyoto between November 30 and December 11 1997 ·This edition cove rs events from the evening of December 4th through December 5th Although it is not classified this report is not intended for the use or distnoutlon outside of the U S Government This ort contains a copy of the Earth Negotiations Report for Dec 4 plus JepOrt on the meeting of Senator Baucus with the head of the Chinese delegation Other USDEL reporting plus the Dec 4u edition of ECO is bcing sent as part of n supplement to this update Some pertinent papers including New Zealand's proposed language for a follow-on process beyond Kyoro a re also included TM final paragraphs of this repon may be used as a summaxy as appropriate or desired COP-3 Update No 6 Dec 4 S Just Say No Becomes G-77 Mantrn In Post-Kyoto Process Debate Outlook on this Front b Grim Negotiations continued during the afternoon and evening of Dec 4th with discussions on quantified limitations reduction objectives Ql LROS sinks policies and measures institutions and continuing to advance commitments under Article 4 1 all getting th cir time at bat The Committee of the Whole the COW met in the evening for a stocktaking session with the iiim of polishing the results of several outstanding contact groups Details of these meetings arc adequately covmd in the attached Earth Negotiations Bulletin a copy ofwhii h is attached for reference Whal this paper details is why progress is so very slow Outlook Loolting Somewhat Bleak M clinda Kimble led senior USDEL mernbers Gardiner Hales Hambley to a meeting with a large group of G-17 Chlnn representatives on Dec 5 They politely listened to measured and informed statements about U S policy objectives with regard to developing oountries We were purposely careful not to sound either intimidating and were excruciatingly polite The comments we received after the disoussion all dealt with genersr issues such as the need to build confidence and to transfer technology No one rnised any question to us about either our views on various flexibility mechanisms Article 10 or on the post-Kyoto process New Zealand BraveJy Opens a Hornets' Nest At the COP plensry - which was in the view of many the last time a11ailablc to introduce ideas on a follow-on process to Kyoto •W finally arose on Dec 51r1 our 1n working out our joint approach with the EU it was decided tllatwe would request New Zealand to introduce its proposal for a follow-on process whlch largely encnpsulates the kind of evolutionary tlrinking which we found attractive Key roscANZ countries including the U S Canada Nonvay Japan and even Switzerland all indicated they would support - if not the Kiwi proposal directly- then the concept of a follow-on process - more jREVIEW AUTHORITY Alan Flanigan Senior Reviewer UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2010-06143 Doc No C17528290 Date 01 15 2014 ' UNCLAS I U_ - '2 P2 e 1 oJ_ ta Case No F-2010-06143 Doc No C17528290 Date 01 15 2014 ¼' 'j generally The EU promised to do likewise The EU also had a text which given its much milder stance wns to be held in abeyance in 1he hopes that it might be introduced at a later date if wananted After accepting this honor the New Zealand delegate Daryl Dunn said he was nded of an episode from the British TV series Yes Minister in which the Minister wl10 routinely proposed to undertake risky or merely stupid endeavors was encouraged to do so by his senior advisors only to return form the battle in bloodied fonn · Dunn said be was conoerned abcrut becoming the Minister Just Say No In the event Dunn w almost right on the mark His long carefully crafted intervention which calls for a negotiating process with a set tune-limit for crafting quantified emissions limitations for all Parties by a certain date was well-drafted albeit on the tong side Dunn emphasized thst the targets for developing countries with the exception of the LDCs were probably gtowth targets which took into account the development needs of the non-Annex l countries This i11tcrvention d rew an e - 1 ected virulently critical response from·the G-77 and Clrina The only unusual aspect was the breath of the response from some 40 countries and the unusually bitter attacks by some Parties and especially from Argentina Brazil India and China Opening the three hour debate was Tanzania speaking for the G•77 Cltina Tanzania began by stating that tile ConventiM had been built with a great balance in mind The delegate mentioned that eradicating poverty is the leading issue which the G· 77 would like to address He lamented the inability of the Annex 1 Parties to Jive up to their commitments under the Convention In a line whioh caused the audience to -oar with applause the Tanzanian said that his response to the New Zealand proposal is a simple one We say know Help Thy Neighbor Help Thy Frlcnd Supporting the New Zealand proposal or in some cases only a more general follow-on process were the t S Canada Australia and Japan The EU also provided a us statement which emphasized the importanee of adhering to the Berlin Mandate but which nonetheless calls a followon process Switzerland did likewise but Nonvay- fellow JUSCANZ member - failed to raise its flag for despite a promise to do so Slovenia also made a very weak endorsement of a follow-on process but it was Hungary and Poland thnt deserve gold stars Both of these countries indicated that-• even though they as economies in transition arc among the least prosperous members of Europe-· they also recognize the value of actively considering taldng on Annex I conunitments Until You Deliver We Won't Discuss Fully 37 countries thcn took to the floor eitl1er to criticize any kind of follow-on process orto chastise Nc w Zealand by name These included China Colombia Iran Thailand India Brazil Malaysia Saudi Arabia Uruguay Slovakia Central African Republic Chile the Plillippines Morocco Kenya Peru Venezuala Bangladesh Costa Rica Honduras Nigeria TrinidacJJTabago Zimbabwe South Africa Saudi Arabia Nicaragua Greruida Syria Bahrain Mali Botswana Laos Kuwait and Mali Despite their critical nature several of these addresses stood out either for their overly critical or personnliied nature For example Brazil claimed that this idea had crept in through the back door and ended his appeal by stating ''Until you dciiv r we won't discuss Malaysia and Philippines ho th lamented that they now no longer have any cntl 'Usiasm for the proposed protocol while China claimed that New Zealand was trying to limit survival emissio11s while the West maintains glutton emissions Instead of just one no China added three 1 no to tlle proposal 2 no to launching a proposal and 3 no to · setting up any contact group to study the idea Almost all of the Latin American Panies spo out UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2010-06143 Doc No C17528290 Date 01 15 2014 · UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2010-06143 Doc No C17528290 Date 01 15 2014 5 ' against tho New Zealand proposal including Costa Rica Chile and Argentina Speaking for the latter Ambassador Patricia Kelly emphasized two points 1 no consultations on this matter and 2 she asked New Zealand to withdraw its proposal Argentina was suxprisingly the only country to call for this latter action Extended Bureau Planned To take this process to its next step or more likely to attempt to quash it once and for all the Prcsici t of the COP Minister Ohki indicated that he would consult his Bureau We urged Ohki to expand this bureau to include other friends of the chair and thereby help to guide this meeting more effectively The Japanese delegation promiSed to do so The first meeting is tentatively scheduled to ·meet on Monday Dec 8 A oopy of the bureau plan is attachod to this report Yu20sla- ia Put to Bed- For Now The Secretariat read out a report from UN Headquarters which basically says that Yugoslavia is entitled to take its ·seat because it has deposited its letters of ratification to the UN Yugoslavia which was not in the room during this meeting could be kept from being seated only if an unanimous decision were taken by the COP In the event Ohki called upon the body to ask Yugoslavia to be barred from participation from the meeting until its status is rectified The motion passed Comment This was only possible due to instructions from the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office to its delegation and to the active support of both Japan and the Russian Federation who worked out a solution based on the NPT experience End Comment Military Provl ion Also Suffers Serious Setback We also had our last opportunity to insert our desired military provision language into the protocol when the methodologies paragraph came up for approval on Friday morning Following a careful rel1earsnl of who would do what when with COW Chairman Ambassador Raoul Estrada we presented our proposal Although the reaction was hardly an uproar both China and Russia objected Iran curiously did not The proposed decision failed to pass The Chair called for additional consultations We have had them with the Chinese who quite expectedly agreed to the concept with a some word additions and changes The Russians may be another Iru1 tter1 but we will have a better picture of the situation tomonow For the record it should be noted that the EU was not particularly helpful We were told this is because of Swedish Ambassdor Bo Kjellen and German misgivings Argentina and New Dates Locked In Buenos Aires was oonfinned as the next site for COP-4 The conference will be held from Nov 2-13 1998 - thereby avoiding an overlap with Thanksgiving- a distinct probability if the COP had to be held in Gcm1any · Comment ThC1J outlook for any kind of immediate follow-on process at next week's high level segment looks very bleak While some G-77 countdes were undoubtedly using the issue as a tactic for le- -erage others appeared to have draMt a line o£ tbeir own in the proverbial sand These countries include China India Bra zil and Malaysia With ut their active i upport or minimally quiet acqulesence the re can be no follow-on decision or mandate on developing country issued at COP·3 End Comment UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2010-06143 Doc No C17528290 Date 01 15 2014 UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2010-06143 Doc No C17528290 Date 01 15 2014 Ut l l ' lb '' j J _• ' CHI U ' J lJIC t- '-VI _I ' JI - f · _ _ The following p 1ragrapbs cnn be wed 2S a rummary as desired or appropriate COP- 3 Updllte No ti Dec 4 5 Just Say No Becomea G-77 Marttra in Post•Kyoto Process Debate Outlook on this Front ls Grim Negotiations continued during the afternoon and evening of Dec 4U with discussions on quantified limitations reduction objectives QELR OS sinks policies and measures institutions and continuing to a vancc commiunents under Article 4 1 all getting their time at bat The Committee of the Whole the COW met in the evening for a stocktaking session vnth the aim of polishing the results of several outstanding contact groups M elinda Kimble led senior USDBL members Gardiner Hales Hambley to a meeting with a large group of G-77 China representatives on Dec s They politely listened to measured and informed statements about U S policy objectives with regard to developing oountries We were pmposely cateful not to souncl either intimidating and were excruciatingly polite The comments we received after the discussion all dealt with general issues such as the need to build confidence and to transfer tcohnology No one raised any question to us about either our views on various flexibility mechanisms Article 10 or on the post-Kyoto process At the CQP pleruuy •· which was in the view of many the last time available to introduce our ideas on a follow-on process to Kyoto -- finally arose on Dec sill In working out our joint approach with the EU it was decided that we would request New Zealand to introduce its proposal for a follow-on process which largely encapsulates the kind of cvolutionazy thinking which we found attractive Key JUSCANZ countries including the U S Canada Norway Japan and even Switzerland all indicated they would support- if not tbc Kiwi proposal directly- then the concept of a follow-on process -- more generally The EU promised to do like ise The EU also had a tC 't which given its much milder stance was 10 be held in abeyance in the hopes that it might be introduced at a later date if warranted Now Zealand's long1 carefully crafted intervention whioh s for a negotiating process with a set time-limit for crafting quantified emissions limitations for all Parties by a certain date was welldraftcd It emphasizes that the targets for developing countries with the exception of the LDCs were probably growth targets which took into aocount the development needs of the non-Annex I countries This intCl'Vention drew an 8'-'l ected virulently critical response from the G-77 and China The only unusual aspect was the breath of the response from some 40 countries and the unusually bitter ·attacks by some Parties and especially from Argentina Brazil India and China Opening the three hour debate was Tani uni a speaking for the G-77 China Tanzania began by stating that tl e Convention had been b lt with a great bnhince in mind The delegate mentioned that eradicating poverty is the leading issue which the 0-77 would like to address He lamented the inability of the Annex I Parties to live up to their commitments under the Convontion In a lino which caused the audience to roar with applause the Tanzanian said that his response to the New Zealand proposal is a simple one We say know '· Supporting the New Zea and proposal or in some cases only a more general follow on process were the U S Canada Australia and Japan The EU also provided s useful statement which emphasized the importance of adhering to the Berlin Mandate but which nonetheless calls for a followon process Swiuerland did hxcwise but Norway never raised Hs placard Slovenia also made a very weak endorsement of a follow-on process but it was Hungazy and Poland that deserve gold stars Both of these countries indicated that -- even though they as economies in transition are among t11e least prosperous members of Europe - they also ret'Ognized the value of actively considering taking on Annex I oon1mitments UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2010-06143 Doc No C17528290 Date 01 15 2014 UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2010-06143 Doc No C17528290 Date 01 15 2014 -- - -- -· -- ···#·· -- --- --· - -· - -- ---- 11 3 Fully 37 coW1tries then took to the floor either to criticize any kind of follow-on process or to chastise New Zealnnd by name These included China Colombia Iran Thailand India Brazil M' alaysia Saudi Arabia Uruguay Slovakia Central African Republic Chilo the Philippines Morocco Kenya Peru Venezuala Bangladesh Costa Rica Honduras Nigeria Trinidad rabago Zimbabwe South Africa Saudi Arabia Nicaragua Grenada Syria Bahrain Mali Botswana Laos Kuwait and Mali Despite their critical nature several of these addresses stood out either for their overly critical or personalized nature For e aimple Brazil claimed that tllis idea had crept in through the baok door and ended his appeal by stating Until you deliver we won't discuss '' Malaysia and Philippines both lamented that they now no longer have any enthusiasm for the proposed protocol while China claimed that New Zealand was trying to limit ''survival emissions whila the West maintains glutton emissions Instead of just one no China added three 1 no to the proposal 2 no to launching a proposal and 3 no to setting up any contact group to study the idea Almost all of the Latin American Parties spoke out against the New Zealand proposa including Costa Rica Chile and Argentina Speaking for the latter Ambassador Patricia Kelly emphasized two points 1 no consultations on this matter and 2 she asked New Zealand to withdraw its proposal Argentina was surprisingly the only counuy to call for this latter action Hambley UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2010-06143 Doc No C17528290 Date 01 15 2014 UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2010-06143 Doc No C17528291 Date 01 15 2014 D b '' J l JJ • 'lfHl I u 1Jc 1 _ v · - -- ---- Statement of the United States of America December 5 1997 RELEASED IN FULL We wish to support the statement made by the New Zealand delegation We fmnly believe that all Parties have a responsibility to fulfill the ultimate objective of the Convention and this proposal could provide a way forward We intend to demonstrate our seriousness by agreeing to a legally binding emissions target at this Conference Such a first step by us and others will enable developed countries to divorce gro Vth in their economies from growth in greenhouse gas emissions We encourage developing countries to join us The New Zealand proposal recalling the preamble to the Convention calls on all Parties to participate in an effective and appropriate international response in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and capabilities It also suggests that there s hould be further legally binding commitments for all Parties within the coming years · AB we made clear in our statement on Monday the United States supports strong economic growth in developing countries I want to reiterate that the commitments that we foresee for all Parties other than the least developed must allow for economic growth while simultaneously protecting the environment The United States has pledged to reduce its emissions in the second budget period and we warit developing countries to adopt emissions targets which seek to abate the increase in their emissions In the context of Article 10 and or as a result of the negotiation proposed by the New Zealand delegation we also envision that commitments by developing countries could be differentiated in light of respective responsibilities and capabilities We look forward to working with other Parties in this regard We have an historic opportunity here to start on the path toward a more climate-friendly future Kyoto may be a small step for us but will be giant step for generations to come REVIEW AUTHORITY Alan Flanigan Senior Reviewer UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2010-06143 Doc No C17528291 Date 01 15 2014 UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2010-06143 Doc No C17528292 Date 01 15 2014 J Jl_ C JV JI _ _ • • • •• • -- --- - f113 RELEASED IN FULL MEMORANDUM December 4 1997 From To Bo o °n ' Melinda Kimble Mark Hambley Subj Senator Baucus s Meeting with Liu Zhenmin On December 4 Senator Max Baucus met with Liu Zherunin acting head of the Chinese delegation The meeting had a substantially different tone than Liu's meeting with Senator Hagel's delegation largely because Baucus quick ly steered the conversation toward China's energy situation He noted that the fficiency of many of China's pow plants was only about 16o o compared to developing country plants at 33 % and that China would still be 60·80% coal fired well into the future He asked if we might cooperate in the clean coal technology area to-help solve China's problem Thi$ approach moved Liu away from his standard opening dissertation on Chinese poverty and into a dis Cussion of China's energy strucrure which he termed not so good Be said that China was trying to diversify into other technologies such as nuclear but that technology and money were a problem He promised to send Baucus a list of the key technologies that China believed it needs to develop either · domestically or with foreign assistance Liu said that China could slow its rate of emissions increase bui that an increase was inevitable as China developed and tried to bring a measure of prosperity to its poor population Liu added that China's annual per capita electricity consumption was only 700Kwh and that over 100 million people had no electricity While acknowledging that China was a large GHG omitter Liu pointed out that its per cs pita emissions were quite low Baucus acknowledged that this was true but also was irrelevant since GHGs are a global problem and had to be addressed by all He stressed that this clement of fairness i e all countries sharing the burden of a global problem would drive the Senate's dt cision o n whether or not to approve a climate change treat ' Baueus said that he had sensed some flexibility in this regard with some of the G-77 countries with which he had spoken At the same time Baucus assured Liu that there was no intention on the United States' part to slow Chinese economic growth Liu said that the climate change issue was Rlso a sensitive domestic issue for Chinese leaders since China was only at the beginning stagl s of development and the leadership must deliver a higher Jiving standard to the people Liu expressed the opinion that it was mote difficult to be a Chinese leader than to be an American leader Note This meeting obviously produced nothing that will advance our agenda at COP-3 It may have a long term benefit however The da y before the meeting with Liu I talked to the senator about potential USO-sponsored clean coal projects in China He was receptive co the idea and made it the starting point of his discussion with Liu If Congress ever entertains the notion of putting some money into environmental projects in China under JI or some other rubric Baucus will probably support it End note REVIEW AUTHORITY Alan Flanigan Senior Reviewer UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2010-06143 Doc No C17528292 Date 01 15 2014