An Inconvenient Truth

Yesterday for the Law & Policy of Aquatic Resources class, the lecturer, Ms. Zahaitun, brought a VCD to have the students watch Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth". It was quite suprising as I thought it would be another day of lecture. For some, it would probably their first time viewing the documentary. As for me, well I've seen it more than a couple of times since I've already downloaded the movie. The facts that Al Gore presented were logical enough to raise eyebrows as to why the current administration in the US are not ratifying the Kyoto Protocol. Then again, do the students in that class seem to understand as to why the US are reluctant to do so?

To understand their perspectives, it's common sense that one must research for answers. So for the sake of those who wish to understand American's arguments to this case, do read on.

Economy
The US fears that by signing the Kyoto Protocol, the economy would be heavily affected. This is true since the biggest world trade partner consume the highest amount of energy. President Bush puts the national economy first as he understands that the benefits of the Kyoto Protocol does not outweight the cost. In doing so, he also argues that the Kyoto Protocol leaves too much errors and there is lack of justification with the policy.

Fairness
We all helplessly believe in democracy, and that everyone is born equal and should be treated fairly. However, this does not apply in the Kyoto Protocol as it promote unfairness among UN member countries. The Kyoto Protocol has exempted China and India from fulfilling the agreements that was set in the treaty. President George Bush argued:

"This is a challenge that requires a 100% effort; ours, and the rest of the world's. The world's second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases is the People's Republic of China. Yet, China was entirely exempted from the requirements of the Kyoto Protocol. India and Germany are among the top emitters. Yet, India was also exempt from Kyoto … America's unwillingness to embrace a flawed treaty should not be read by our friends and allies as any abdication of responsibility. To the contrary, my administration is committed to a leadership role on the issue of climate change … Our approach must be consistent with the long-term goal of stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere."
The Whitehouse (2001-06-11). President Bush Discusses Global Climate Change. Press release.

So as we can see here, the US would never ratify unless they are assured that the developing countries would carry out the responsibilities as well. However, there are some developing countries that still has not ratify the Kyoto Protocol such as Brunei, Taiwan, and Turkey. With their beliefs in democracy, the US will never ratify the Protocol.

Plan of Action
Just because the Kyoto Protocol has not been ratify, doesn't necessarily mean the US are not committed to reduce their carbon emission. The US has established some efforts to held talks in multilateral terms with Asian-Pacific countries like Australia, China, India, Japan and South Korea. Together, they have come to an agreement in producing the Asia Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate. Initiated in January of 2006, this agreement focus on clean energy capacity building and market formation. The difference this agreement has over the Kyoto Protocol is that each of the members are allowed to carry out their greenhouse gas emissions individually without any mechanism of enforcement. Due to this fact, many has criticized the credibility of this agreement and that this is nothing but to neglect the call of ratifying the Kyoto Protocol.