US Cooling Off to G-8 Summit
BERLIN - The United States appears to be cooling off to some key concerns at the G8 heads of state summit next month.
The United States is evidently not interested in an international consensus on environmental policy against global warming. Nor does it appear keen on new regulations to control financial speculation.
The U.S. government withdrew participation of treasury secretary Henry Paulson at the preparatory summit of finance ministers in Potsdam near Berlin May 18-19.
The official explanation was that Paulson needed to remain in Washington to prepare for the U.S.-China Strategic Economic Dialogue that takes place the following week. But sources in Berlin say the real reason is the German move to tighten controls over hedge funds and other speculative funds.
In place of Paulson, deputy treasury secretary Robert Kimmitt is attending.
German minister for finance and economics Peter Steinbrueck had expressed concern in March that hedge funds could, with their enormous amounts of capital, influence policy decisions or provoke financial instability.
“I’m worried that there are some hedge funds that have leveraged activities, for example, five or six or even seven times (more commitment than they money they have), and that creditors could be damaged whenever such hedge funds gets insolvent. We are talking about a lot of money — and it can affect an economy, or the worldwide financial system.”
Germany is hosting the summit of the heads of government of the eight most industrialised countries (Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, and the U.S.)
The G8 summit is to take place Jun. 6-8 at the German seaside resort Heiligendamm on the Baltic Sea, 300 km northwest of Berlin. Leaders from the five major developing nations — Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa — will also participate.
One of the key points set by the German government in the official agenda is “improving systemic stability and transparency of financial markets.”
German labour minister Franz Muentefering has compared hedge and other speculative funds to locusts ravaging fragile economies and enterprises for short-term gains.
The U.S. government considers financial funds a necessary instrument to channel private investment on an international scale.
Steps to curb climate change are the other major area of differences between the German and the U.S. governments. U.S. representatives have objected to numerous passages of a draft agreement prepared by the German government.
U.S. representatives want to avoid the proposed objective of reduction of all greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 by 50 percent. They also object to making commitments to cutting energy consumption.
U.S. officials object to use of the word “concern” to describe the latest assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). U.S. representatives had made similar objections during the closing meetings of the IPCC before the release this year of the group’s three new assessments. They have already obtained a watering down of the original warnings and conclusions.
Despite this, IPCC scientists said clearly that human-made greenhouse gas emissions are responsible for global warming and resulting climate changes such as droughts, melting of the ice caps at the North Pole and on mountains, rising sea levels, hurricanes, and decimation of biodiversity.
Hans-Joachim Schellnhuber, director of the German Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, told IPS that “the optimal result of the G8 summit would be that the original draft, as formulated by the German government, be approved by unanimity.”
Schellnhuber said some of the objectives established in the original draft are reducing energy consumption by 30 percent by the year 2030, and creation of a worldwide carbon emissions rights market “which would channel investments into sound environmental policies and strategies.”
A third important element in the original draft is the long-term commitment of restricting the global rise of temperatures to two degrees Celsius by 2050 relative to the beginning of the industrial revolution around 1750, Schellnhuber said.
“If the G8 governments do not reach consensus on such issues, then the summit can be seen as a failure,” Schellnhuber said.
Many environmental organisations share Schellnhuber’s views. “The most industrialised countries must think about formulating a final declaration for the summit without taking into consideration the U.S. government’s opinion,” Karsten Smid of Greenpeace Germany told IPS.
“It does not make any sense to accept compromises around a minimum common denominator. Such empty summit rhetoric does not help anybody any more.”
Antje von Broock of the German environmental federation BUND urged the German government to “go alone for an ambitious policy against global warming. If the German government would unilaterally announce that it will reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent by the year 2020, that would be a clear signal for other industrialised and developing countries,” she said.
Copyright © 2007 IPS-Inter Press Service.
Why is all this “human-caused global warming” hysteria still making headlines when:
1) Genetic engineering will eliminate Homo Sapiens long before global warming does.
2) The honey bees are dying off from injesting Monsanto’s GM pollen.
3) Criminals are still in charge of our government and nobody is prosecuting them.
4) Our borders are wide open allowing our nation to be “balkanized” into race-based competing turfs that will lead to race wars and the eventual dissolution of the United States of America into a North American Union.
5) Both major parties are still allowing torture.
6) The Democrats are not going to get us out of Iraq or Afghanistan any quicker than the Republicans.
7) Over thirty percent of ballot boxes that will decide the next election are electronic “black boxes” that will select the next president using propietary code that nobody can examine except the owners of the “intellectual property.”
With so many real emergencies that absolutely require our response right now, why are hypothetical problems of fifty years downstream distracting our attention?
that’s really idiotic. In the first place, global warming is not fifty years off: it’s already happening now. Hurricanes are getting more powerfully devastating, whole communities are being devastated, the polar ice caps are melting much more rapidly than we thought, and as they do, the carbon dioxide they contain will be released, just as when we warm the oceans, carban dioxide will be released. Deforestation is also causing a further slide. We are reaching a tipping point, and if we don’t move fast, right now, 95% of the human race will die off, who knows when, maybe 100 years from now, maybe twenty.
These problems are all interrelated, having to do with corporate capitalism. Get out of the either/or mentality, and do it quick.
And BTW, what’s this xenophobic crap about open borders and race wars? Right there is a complete non-problem, largely invented by the Right.
“Our borders are wide open allowing our nation to be “balkanized” into race-based competing turfs that will lead to race wars and the eventual dissolution of the United States of America into a North American Union.”
What racist, nativist, nonsense!
The US has has been sustaining mass influxes of immigrants since it’s founding. In Pittsburgh or Chicago in the 1920’s you hardly ever heard English through the Italian, Polish, German, Serb-Crotian, Czech, Slovak, Bulgarian, Ukranian, Russian, Irish brogue, Yiddish…etc…etc… In some neighborhoods where I live, older residents can still be heard speaking Italian, or Ukranian or Yiddish even today - and go out to the countryside and you hear the Amish or old-order Mennonites still speaking an old dialect of German after seven generations…
Get over it!
It is remarkable that it took the Al Gore’s documentary “Inconvenient Truth”, the polar bear demise,and the conclusions from the intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change , to alert many to the impending dangers from global warming–which has been obvious to anyone who had made even minor efforts to be informed. The evidence linking carbon pollution to warming is as close to certain as science can be. Its causes, consequences, and mitigation requirements have been documented by the scientific community, many dedicated environmental organizations including The Union of Concerned Scientists, and chronicled in the press for years.
The dangerous manipulation of essential scientific data used by this administration to conceal and derail corrective measures for this threat and other vital environmental reforms has also been apparent. The gullibility of so many who are influanced by them is more alarming than the scientific manipulation itself.
Contrary to their assertions, measures to reduce greenhouse gases could only improve our economy by lessening our trade deficits, and improving our security by reducing our dependance on foreign oil. We could also regain some of our lost world respect that has resulted from our opposition Kyoto while arrogantly contributing disproportionally to carbon pollution. With our involvement, China & India could then be compelled to join the rest of the developed world.
Often overlooked is the fact that the same measures needed to mitigate global warming would be necessary even if it were not an issue. Conservation, alternative energy development, anti- pollution refinements, etc are essential for other vital environmental reforms such as air and water quality, reductions in toxic waste generation, land preservation, etc.
The environmental and social damage from our indifference to (and even denial of) carbon pollution and its effects can only worsen if we allow these destructive policies of this reckless and unlearned president and his financial supporters to continue. Robert Settgast
San Rafael, CA
rhsettgast@hotmail.com
psilver58 May 20th, 2007 4:12 pm
GW is with us now, so responsible people and responsible governments are trying to work to reduce its impact. The ultimate hypocrisy perpetrated by others is that working towards sustainability would damage the economy. In fact, it is an opportunity for entrepreneurs to bring together technologies to help us through the next century or two.
I agree with you regarding most of your other emergencies, although not some of your conclusions. In particular, regarding the open borders, they would be alright if only our laws were being enforced and all the Freedom-to-exploit Trade Agreements were scrapped. We have SECRET (read corporate-written) Freedom-to-exploit trade agreements being rammed through congress at the moment and an Amnesty bill that totally ignores concerns of 70% of the population.
Why is it so hard for people to care about our own planet/home? Insane, completely insane. And the people running our country are educated adults? Pathetic. A bright 15 year old could do better.
It’s good to see that responsible world governments are finally learning to leave the US behind and forge ahead with agreements to limit greenhouse gases.
“The United States is evidently not interested in an international consensus on environmental policy against global warming.”
Well, duh! The US is run by the military - industrial complex. Anyone who doesn’t know this still has their head in the sand. So, when they say the the US isn’t interested, it’s the military - industrial complex that isn’t interested. DUH!!!
The military is the single biggest cause of the destruction of this planet. The United States military, to be precise. Human beings have created a monster that cannot be killed, that cannot be tamed, that can not be unmade. The monster - the military monster - will fight for the life we have given it.
What Steinbeck said about the banks in The Grapes of Wrath is applicable to the military - industrial monster, “The bank [military] is something else than men. It happens that every man in a bank [military] hates what the bank [military] does, and yet the bank [military] does it. The bank [military] is something more then men, I tell you. It’s the monster. Men made it, but they can’t control it.”
Does ANYBODY out there have any ideas on how to stop ALL funding the military misadventures. Not just the current manifestations (Iraq and soon Iran) - but the entire military - industrial monster? We must stop this in order to save the planet!
www.HAARP.net
Such is democracy. It is the will of the majority of US citizens to keep what they have - a standard of living that depends on their 5% of the world’s population consuming 25% of the world’s resources. They don’t want to give this up, and the US administration is well aware of this fact.
Of course, real leadership in the US could sway public opinion, and inspire some of the values that have existed there in the past - but with the super indulgences of recent times, this is unlikely.
I think that the next leader chosen by the corporate elite will probably put more focus on environmental issues — not enough but more. It is a good thing however that the US is increasingly irrelevant and unable to sustain or achieve the global empire our ruling class dreams of. Economic and productive centers have moved to Asia and Europe and the neocons have clearly illustrated the limits of military might. I think this in itself will cause major shifts in the next decade or two that may allow for more focus on the environment crisis.
The fact is INSTABILITY IS GREAT FOR PROFITMAKING THUGS AND PIRATES. The Iraq war has been great for US arms dealers and the contractors tasked with “rebuilding” Iraq. The same is true for climate instability. Increased drought makes water a very valuable product to sell. It means more opportunity to profit from commodities futures. We must face the fact that OUR RULERS HAVE NO INCENTIVE TO AVOID THE DISASTERS WHICH ARE FAST APPROACHING. They are under the misguided belief that their wealth will protect them. Of course it won’t but they don’t believe that. No one will escape unscathed, but as usual, the greatest impact will be felt by those who had the least to do with creating the situation.
Give the Bush administration a break! They are trying to demonstrate to the entire world that capitalist regimes are a threat to the human race, a menace that must be countered, while their more sophisticated counterparts in the other G-8 nations are trying to fool the people into believing in their beneficence and accepting their continued domination of the political-economic systems. I say “hurrah!” for the Bush administration. Heckuva job, Bushie!
Hey, some of us have to find silver linings wherever we can to keep our spirits up.
“With so many real emergencies that absolutely require our response right now, why are hypothetical problems of fifty years downstream distracting our attention?”
Answer: Because all of that shit won’t mean a damn thing if we are not simultaneously responsible stewards of our environment. Wake up you moron!
“I’m worried that there are some hedge funds that have leveraged activities, for example, five or six or even seven times (more commitment than they money they have), and that creditors could be damaged whenever such hedge funds gets insolvent. We are talking about a lot of money — and it can affect an economy, or the worldwide financial system.” -German minister for finance and economics Peter Steinbrueck
Mr. Steinbrueck is not the only finance guru who is worried about hedge funds: Google “hedge fund concerns” and you’ll discover that most governments have major concerns about them.