Bush agrees to CO2 cut, with strings attached

Blair had announced his confidence that he could get Bush to agree to sign up to a deal on climate change and I scoffed.

Well, it appears to be a case of "more fool me":

George Bush last night pledged the United States to a "substantial" cut in greenhouse gas as the west's leading industrial nations agreed to negotiate a new climate change deal within the next two years.

After strong lobbying from EU leaders, Mr Bush agreed to "seriously consider" a proposal that would result in a 50% cut in carbon emissions by 2050 but made it clear that US involvement depended on India and China being included in any agreement.

Although this falls short of the Blair's pre-summit goal he is right when he states that this is "a huge step forward".

"The possibility is here for the first time to get a global deal on climate change with substantial cuts in emissions with everyone in the deal - which is the only way we are going to get the deal we need.

"This is a major, major step forward. There's now the recognition that we do need a global deal with everyone in it."

Now, I obviously note that the proposed deal is two years down the line and that Bush will probably be out of office by the time this deal comes into effect, leaving open the possibility that his successor could reject it, just as Bush rejected the Kyoto agreement agreed to by Clinton.

Nevertheless, Blair and the others have managed to move Bush at least on principle, which I never thought would be possible. However, I do note some use of language on Bush's part that suggests that he hasn't moved as far as Blair's statements would lead us to believe.

But yesterday Mr Bush said: "The United States will be actively involved, if not taking the lead, in a post-Kyoto framework, post-Kyoto agreement. I view our role as a bridge between people in Europe and others and India and China. And if you want them at the table, it's important to give them an opportunity to set an international goal. And that's why I laid out the initiative I laid out.

"We're deadly earnest in getting something done; this is serious business. And the fundamental question is how best to send proper signals to create the technologies necessary to deal with this issue."

Bush still appears to be clinging to the notion that through emerging technologies we can basically carry on as before, meaning that our lifestyles won't have to change at all which strikes me as an unrealistic theory.

Nevertheless, one has to give a cautious welcome to the fact that Bush appears to have accepted that there is a problem here, even if he appears to think that the solution can be found in technological advances.

If we can set limits, then it matters not how Bush thinks those limits can be achieved, for his successor will still be bound to meet them, even if the technologies Bush puts such faith in fails.

There were, however, some who saw the promise to "consider" cuts as meaningless:

Environmental groups were more cautious. John Sauven, the director of Greenpeace UK, said: "George Bush's final gift to Blair falls short of what was needed... Bush says the US will 'seriously consider' substantial long-term cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, but that's like saying aid to Africa is a good thing then refusing to actually commit to donating a single dollar."

Friends of the Earth said yesterday's agreement was "weak and lacked substance". It said all G8 countries except the US and Russia made a non-binding pledge to cut climate change-causing gases by at least half by 2050. Oxfam welcomed the progress at the G8 but added: "It is profoundly disappointing that some members, including the world's leading polluter, the US, have failed to sign up to specific targets or even an indicative global stabilisation goal."

I could find a million ways to find holes in what has happened, but the very fact that Bush has moved is significant. Of course, it would be preferable to have specific targets, but I will take the view that even movement towards agreement in the future is still movement. And for Bush to have made that move is something that I never foresaw.

It is also said that Merkel asked Blair to use his close relationship to Bush to broker the deal. So Blair pulled it off and I was wrong. I am, however, delighted to be wrong in this instance.

There is still a long, long way to go, but for a first step, this was as good as I could have hoped for. After all, it is Bush we are dealing with here.

Click title for full article.