Calling Bush's bluff

by Mark Hertsgaard
The Guardian, Jun 2, 2007

Will his fellow G8 leaders finally call George Bush's bluff on climate change when they gather next week in Germany for their annual summit? Or will Tony Blair, Angela Merkel and other G8 leaders continue to put diplomatic niceties ahead of the need to act now against the accelerating climate crisis?

At each of the past two G8 summits, all of the assembled leaders except for Bush were ready to sign an agreement requiring mandatory, sizable cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. The reason no such "tough targets" were agreed to, according to Sir David King, the British government's chief science adviser, is that "we would not have got all [eight] signatures on the document". The Bush administration simply refused to accept anything stronger than rhetorical expressions of concern and non-binding calls for unspecified "action". Rather than isolate Bush, the other G8 leaders backed down.

Now, it appears that the White House is again trying to derail progress. This time, as described in Bush's May 31 speech, the US is proposing to lead a separate round of international talks that will seek to develop non-binding - White House environmental aide James Connaughton calls them "aspirational" - targets for unspecified emissions cuts in the distant future.

The other G8 leaders know full well that Bush's proposal is a road to nowhere. The question is, what are they going to do about it? Will they go on the record next week in favor of a meaningful commitment to reduce emissions - and dare Bush to oppose it in front of the rest of the world? Or will they once again back down and let the White House continue to weaken the fight against climate change?

Like Exxon-Mobil did a few months ago, the Bush White House is desperately trying to convey a fresh, friendlier image on climate change. The oil giant announced in February that it would stop funding (some of) the climate deniers it had previously supported and it pronounced itself eager to join discussions on Capitol Hill about new legislation. It's understandable that Exxon-Mobil would want a seat at the table for such negotiations. To quote an old Washington saying, "If you don't have a seat at the table, you're on the menu."

The same goes for the White House, which finds itself more isolated on climate change than it is even on Iraq. Domestically, both the biggest city and the biggest state in America have launched ambitious programs for mandatory greenhouse emissions cuts, led in each case by a Republican: New York City's Mayor Michael Bloomberg and California's Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Overseas, even Japan has dropped its traditional subservience to US foreign policy. After strenuous lobbying by Blair and Merkel during his first official trip to Europe, Prime Minister Abe recently came out in favor of mandatory emission cuts of 50% by 2050. Previously, Japan had publicly backed the White House's Asia-Pacific partnership on climate change, another non-binding effort apparently aimed at delaying progress. Now, that fig leaf is gone.

Following the advice that celebrated rightwing pollster Frank Luntz laid out in a 2003 memo for how Republicans could spin their environmental policies to a suspicious public, Bush made a point of invoking the value of climate science in his May 31 speech. But the substance of his proposal ran utterly counter to the scientific consensus, which calls for 60 to 80% cuts in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. Crucially, these cuts must begin sooner rather than later. The momentum of the climate system — the fact that greenhouse emissions remain in the atmosphere for years before dissipating — means that the longer we wait to cut emissions, the more temperatures, sea levels and other impacts will rise. And since every attempt at voluntary emission cuts has failed to genuinely cut emissions, these 60 to 80% cuts must be mandatory, as California and others have recognised.

In reporting on Bush's speech, the New York Times speculated that the White House was trying to burnish the president's legacy on climate change before he leaves office. But legacies cannot be won by phony solutions dressed up with earnest rhetoric; they must be earned through bold leadership and genuine breakthroughs. Next week, the G8 leaders have the chance, and the obligation, to hold Mr Bush to that standard.