'There should be consensus among G-77'
What do you think of the US insistence on voluntary com-
mitments from developing countries?
It is not for us (industrialised countries) to question
I (developing countries) commitments. We have to make
sure that our commitments are respected, and translated
into domestic policies and action. we must not forget
the long-term objective under Article 2 of the convention
which is to have a convergence of emissions. We have
a responsibility - historic and otherwise - to respect
our commitments. For us, commitments from non-Annex I
countries is not important.
What do you mean when you say convergence?
Convergence on equitable targets. If you translate this into
per capita, you find that developed countries have to make
space for the developing, We have to make sure that we take
the right path, so that the other countries do not follow the
Is there consensus within the EU about this position?
There is consensus that convergence is a real issue, to ensure
that there is at least a minimum of domestic policy measures
that are working. On this you will find consensus among
EU countries - not among the other Annex I countries.
There could be a real political statement of the EU on
this, particularly if there is consensus among the G-77
that they want to talk about convergence, We will put this
high on the agenda.
Has not the G-77 already suggested a consensus on this
We proposed it two days ago, but my impression is that G-77
is led by what is said by the technical experts, who are focusing on flexible mechanisms. We have a political paper from
the G-77 which is actually a technical paper, not a political
paper. It is a list of items. But the EU ministers want a
political mandate - something strong.
Why do you think issues relevant to G-77 do not come out
The dialogue between G-77 and EU has always been very difficult, We have waited two days for a dialogue with G-77,
whereas we wanted it two days ago. I think frankly that the
EU is in a position to bridge the gap, and especially to make
sure that there is political dialogue, one which contains issues
issues of real interest to the G-77.
What do you think of Argentina's decision to take on
If some countries want to commit, its positive, but that is an
individual decision - it is up to them. But there should be no
pressure on them to commit.
But would not there be pressure on other developing
countries now that Argentina has accepted?
It is easy to put political and financial pressure on countries
like Argentina and Khazakstan. The question is, pressure
from whom? And what is the interest of these countries
to enter into commitments? Certain commitments
were made by countries, which are not likely to be met.
We have to analyse why not, before thinking about
What do you think of the US resistance to limits on
the amount of reduction they can make using trading
The US has a straight position on caps - they do
not want them. Other countries have an equally straight
position, that domestic action has to come first -
everything else is nonsense. If they don't want a cap,
what do they want to do domestically? Let them
put their progress on the table. So far their progress is