UNCLASSIFIED · i r R_L 5 f ·Grist for Reb ttal to Compass Letter of 22 January 199J ELEASED D FT l 28 98 NOT FULLY CLEARED NOT FOR PUBLIC USE The letter makes the following five explicit points which are addressed in turn Point One the precedent set at Kyoto exempting a nu nber ofgrowing economies like China Mexico and Indonesia from the restrictions of the reaty will restrict our future negotiating strategies Rebuttal Developing countries are not exempt from commitments under the Convention or under the Kyoto Protocol Their commitments are differ nt from those of industrialized Annex I countries in recognition of the wide disparities between them both in their contributions to worldwide greenhouse emissions and in their financial and technological abilities to respond to the problem While the Protocol in its current form does not contain emissions limitation commitments for developing countries it advances the-commitments of all parties to the 1_992 Framework Convention on Climate Change to develop national programs to combat global warming and to report on their efforts Developing countries will also be engaged through emissions reduction projects under the Clean Development Mechanism However recognizing that ghg emissions from deveioping countries are growing d will overt e those of the developed world in another generation or so the United States has led the · charge internationally to ensure that developing countries participate meaningfully in the climate change process More than any other nation the United States has stressed that climate change is a global problem that can·only be solved by global action and has made clear th it without more meaningful participation from developing countries we will not be in a position to ratify the protocol Point Two The Kyoto Protocol will make the climate change problem worse by sanctioning continued burning of rain forests and by forcing relocation of energy-intensive industries from the United States · Rebuttal Contrary to the letter's assertion the Protocol actually creates incentives to stem the burning ofrain forests and to ensure that energy-intensive U S industries do not relocate overseas The protocol's Clean Development Mechanism will encourage afforestation and reforestation projects as well as investments in clean technology and allow these efforts to partially fulfill the emission reduction commitments of industrialized countries Thus industrialized Annex I countries will see advantages to working with developing countries in these and other areas as a means of achieving cost-effective reductions Through such projects developing countries will be able to obtain the financial resources technology and know-how to promote their own sustainable development UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE REVIEW AUTHORITY DAVID W COX DATE CASE ID 20 FEB 2008 200600952 - UNCLASSIFIED IN FUL UNCLASSIFIED The Protocol ' s ·other flexibility provisions including joint implementation projects and emissions trading among industrialized countries will enable those countries to meet their emissions reduction commitments wherever reductions can be achieved most cost-effectively As the letter correctly notes the United States has among the strictest air quality rules in the world -- rules that already exist under he Clean Air Act and its amendments -- but these rules have not forced our energy-intensive industries to reloc - te overseas In fact emissions trading for • sulfur dioxide under the Clean Air Act has reduced costs·to a fr ction of the early estimates of both industry and government There is substantial anecdotal evidence from our large cities that environmental regulation did not drive industry to other cities or countries Further several academic studies find that in general environmental regulations seem to have little effect on a firm's decision to relocate This literature suggests that in aggregate increasing energy costs due to some options for climate change action would not significantly effect U S competitiveness Point Three delaying consideration of the verification protocols of the treaty violated the dictum-trust but verify Rebuttal The Kyoto Protocol contains detailed reporting requirements with respect to the emissions reduction commitments of industrialized countries At present under the Convention each industrialized country is required to provide an annual inventory of its greenhouse gas emissions In addition at regular intervals about every three years each such country is also required submit a national communication11 detailing all of the actions it is taldng to implement its treaty commitments These national communications are made publicly available to all Parties and an in-depth review team consisting of experts nominated by Parties and international organizations with appropriate expertise meets with a broad range of officials and citizens in each capital to consider the information provided Reports of the review teams are also provided to the host country and to each Party th y are synthesized by the Convention's secretariat and considered at length by all · · Parties in the course of their regular meetings to The Kyoto Protocol goes beyond even these existing requirements in the information it requires each industri'alized Party to submit regard ng the actions it will take to implement its emissions -reduction commitments All of the industrialized countries share a strong interest in seeing to it that each such country meets the commitments to which it has agreed Moreover there will be strong domestic pressure in the United States and throughout Annex I countries to ensure adequate verification Point Four Even if the United States never ratifies the Kyoto treaty the growing power of international bureaucracies intent on expanding their role will limit the legitimate exercise of UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED US sovereign decisior making in the world Rebuttal How the United States will now have to address the growing power of international bureaucracies intent on expanding their power is not at all clear As globalization increases and as nations find that they must work together to solve problems that no nation can solve by itself it is natural that nations will establish institutions with the expertise needed by those nations t9 achieve the objectives that nations themselves have set The United States contributes one fourth of the budget under the Framework Convention on Climate change and consequently has considerable influence within the Convention and vis-a- vis its Secretariat In all of its actions under the Convention the Secretariat looks to the Parties for guidance and must answer to the Parties with respect to its activities If the United States ratifies the Kyoto Protocol it will have similar influence under that instrument It is difficult to see how the Convention's secretariat which numbers less than 100 staff both professional and administrative in total can exert diplomatic or legal powers to Itmit the legitimate exercise of U S sovereign decision making in the world Looked at another way the United States has positioned itself to use international mechanisms to address a globarproblem which cannot be resolved by one country alone Point Five The Kyoto Treaty sic also threatens to limit the exercise ofAmerican military power bJy exempting only US military exercises that are multilateral and humanitarian Rebuttal The Kyoto Protocol achieves the objectives identified by the Department of Defense where international agreement was neces_sary to protect U S military operations see attached Fact Sheet Moreover emissions of greenhouse gases by the U S military amount to less than one-half of one percent of total U S greenhouse gas emissions Even if these were to increase modestly because of unilateral military actions it is simply untrue that such an increase would make such actions politically or diplomatically more difficult We have ample room within the emissions reductions commitments agreed in Kyoto to accommodate U S military emissions including any-that might result from unilateral military actions General Note Tue science of climate change and its implications for our national security has progressed significantly since most of the signers were in office In late 1995 the IPCC indicated ' that there is a discernible human influence on the climate system For the first rime we have a clear scientific indication that human emissions of greenhouse gases are affecting the climate system and we have ample indications from the IPCC and others about the potential impacts of climate change Moreover dealing ·with climate change is different from dealing w ith other environmental problems because of the significant lag time between emissions of ghgs and radiative forcing of temperature change and consequently impacts such as sea-level rise UNCLASSIFIED