U.S., EU Link on Trade, Split on Climate May 3, 2007Posted by silviamocanu07 in civil society, Government, Public Interest.
The article that I found on BusinessWeek relates to different kinds of organizations, namely state and supre-state: the U.S. and the E.U. Policy coordination between the two economic spaces has long been under negotiation(Link: http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/may2007/gb20070502_918558.htm?chan=globalbiz_europe+index+page_top+stories) . However, some the ideas that are most valued in Europe, do not seem to make the priority list in the U.S., namely taking steps toward the looming issue of climate change.
Despite the fact that both entities are able to agree on the regulatory framework regarding intellectual property and financial services, an agreement is still pending with issues relating to the environment. The U.S. has a long-standing history of not being proactive with regard to environmental issues, as was clearly demonstrated through the fact that the U.S. did not ratify the Kyoto Protocol.
“Mr Barroso said “We agree there is a threat, there is a very serious and global threat. We agree that there is a need to reduce emissions. We agree that we should work together.” But both sides remain split along familiar lines on how quickly developing nations should react, with the EU arguing richer nations need to take the lead before asking poorer states to move and the US refusing to budge until emerging economies like China and India come on board.”
There is a clear bridge between the two approaches to the climate change problem, with the U.S. trying to evade its responsibility, as having the world’s highest emissions levels. Do you agree with the U.S. approach that they will not take action until other significant Asian economies are on board? Do you think that this is merely an excuse to avoid tackling the problem?