Archived at: www.usinfo.state.gov/products/medreac.htm
Thursday, April 5, 2001
'ABANDONED' BY U.S., KYOTO PROTOCOL AN 'AILING PATIENT'
The U.S. withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol last week--which was roundly
censured by media as an act of U.S. unilateralism and "selfishness,"
and an
"abandonment" of the superpower's international responsibilities--continued
to meet with sharp criticism overseas, but the condemnation was not
universal.
Around the globe, commentators voiced their resentment, indignation
and
disappointment toward the president's decision and alleged U.S.
"environmental isolationism," with most agreeing that without the support
of
the U.S., an international accord was, as the conservative national
Australian
held, "probably doomed to failure." That said, a growing number
of observers
contemplated alternatives to the 1997 accord--calling upon the international
community to forge ahead in the combat against global warming--with
or
without the U.S. Many in the liberal press mourned the "death"
of Kyoto and
despaired that, with the stroke of a pen, "the planet's new master"
had "wiped
out ten years of international mobilization on climate change."
Without the
U.S. taking the lead, the Kyoto Protocol was, in the words of a Brazilian
writer,
"nothing more than a piece of paper." Others were not surprised
at the U.S.'
rejecting an agreement that had generated at best, according to a Hong
Kong
daily, "plenty of lip service, but scant progress." Conservative outlets
in
Britain, Canada and Australia, meanwhile, gave Mr. Bush points for
his
"realism" and derided some Kyoto proponents as "prophets of Armageddon"
for triggering an outbreak of "hysteria." Regional highlights
follow:
EUROPE,CANADA: The refrain that the U.S had put its own national
interests
ahead of the rest of the world while demonstrating an "irresponsible
attitude"
and an "unacceptable disregard" of its obligations, was accompanied
by a
clarion call for Europe to "remain committed" to the principles of
Kyoto.
"Europe can take the initiative and urge America to follow," advised
Milan's
centrist, top circulation Corriere della Sera. Meanwhile, in
Athens, writers
charged that by "cynically pursuing its business interests," the White
House
was establishing a dangerous "paradigm," and "effectively consolidating
the
'law of the jungle.'"
ASIA: A sense of betrayal permeated the Asian press. Capturing
the angst of
the region, Seoul's independent Hankyoreh Shinmun viewed the U.S.
"scrapping" of Kyoto as "tantamount to a declaration of...environmental
terrorism against humankind." Writers in India and Pakistan similarly
deplored
the U.S. for turning its back on developing countries, and predicted
that the
"self-centered approach of an industrial giant" would "spell disaster."
MIDEAST/AFRICA: Concurring that the "Kyoto Treaty is as good
as dead,"
writers from Damascus to Pretoria worried that Mr. Bush's "aggressive"
and
"protectionist" decisions on the environment would have wider implications
on
other international matters, notably trade.
LATAM: Alarmed that Mr. Bush's "disastrous decision" had dealt
a "blow" to
international environmental efforts, many echoed an Uruguayan writer's
disappointment that the "richest and most prosperous nation" had "embarked
on its own solitary and hazy course," rather than shoulder what a Santiago
daily deemed to be its "share of responsibility for global warming."
EDITOR: Irene Marr
EDITOR'S NOTE: This survey is based on 80 reports from 43 countries,
March
29-April 5, 2001. Editorial excerpts are grouped by region; editorials
from each
country are listed from the most recent date.
EUROPE
BRITAIN: "Some Big Steps for Mankind"
The independent Financial Times argued (3/31): "Although the president's
position is grounded in his judgment of the U.S. interest, it should
not be
dismissed out of hand.... Still, the arguments of those who support
laissez-faire
do not justify the U.S. stance.... Imperfect as it was, the Kyoto
Protocol
represented an important first step in what promised to be a very long
haul....
The United States...had no hope of meeting the quota agreed in 1997,
even if it
had stayed in the process. But that should not have been an excuse
for
European politicians to take the high moral ground. That gave
the United
States an excuse to move away, and so put the whole project at risk."
"Not the End of the World"
The conservative Daily Telegraph offered (3/30): "George Bush's
decision...has provoked an outbreak of hysteria the world over.
To listen to
the reaction of some politicians and environmentalists, anyone might
think that
the president has pressed the nuclear button. The prophets of
Armageddon
should cool down.... As a general rule, it is a bad thing for
incoming
administrations to rat on international agreements signed by their
predecessors. It was at best extremely tactless of Mr. Bush--and
insulting to
America's fellow-signatories of the protocol--to abandon it so high-handedly.
But the new president must at least be given credit for displaying
a better grasp
of reality than his critics."
"A Dirty Business"
The liberal Guardian opined (3/30): "Instead of leading the community
of
nations, Bush's America seems increasingly intent on confronting it.
Instead
of a shining city on the hill, the world sees a dark smokestack belching
fumes.
>From a nation that began heroically by trumpeting its belief in universal
values...comes a devastatingly different, divisive and nationalistic
jingle: we do
what we want, for ourselves, regardless of consequences for you.
And if you
don't like it, well tough."
FRANCE: "A Stupid And Irresponsible Decision"
Environmental activists Philippe Quirion and Antoine Bonduelle of Friends
of
the Earth, emoted in right-of-center Le Figaro (4/4): "Although
Bush's decision
to align with the oil industry was predictable, it is nevertheless
stupid,
irresponsible and contemptible.... With hindsight, it appears
as if the European
decision not to accept the meager compromises proposed by the Clinton
administration in The Hague was a good one.... The Kyoto agreement
is not
dead... And maybe one day, the United States and its elite will come
out of their
isolation when they realize that they are losing control of the new
emissions
reduction technology."
"Bush's Good And Bad Reasons"
Guillaume Parmentier of IFRI noted in right-of-center Le Figaro (4/4):
"The
regrettable reality today is that the United States is not in a position
to accept
the terms of the Kyoto Protocol. Bush has at least taken responsibility
for his
decision, not like former presidents who hid behind the Senate's position....
The internal tug-of war within the administration could help to straighten
things out in order to avoid universal condemnation, while still not
losing face.
If the Europeans are good at manipulating U.S. domestic interests and
the
administration's internal conflicts, they have a chance of making some
inroads.... Because the U.S. administration may end up asking
for an
improvement of the protocol rather than abandoning it."
"Bush As Polluter"
An editorial in left-of-center Le Monde opined (3/31): "The White
House calls
it 'America's new realism.' This is the administration's idea
that it isn't tied to
agreements previously signed by the U.S. This is not isolationism,
but rather a
brutal form of unilateralism and blatant contempt for any sort of international
cooperation.... Contempt for the international community is made
worse
because of this irresponsible attitude from a nation that claims to
be a moral
example."
GERMANY: "Unilateral Move Jeopardizes Germany As An Industrial Site"
Klemens Kindermann argued in an editorial in Duesseldorf's business
Handelsblatt (4/3): "Despite all criticism of the Europeans,
George W. Bush
made clear that climate protection is impossible without showing consideration
for business. This is a correct message, since it has brought
the international
climate community back to the hard but honest facts.... The EU
should avoid
creating the impression that international climate protection is possible
without
the United States. Less sluggish idealism, fewer conferences
with agreements
that should be valid for decades, but a greater concentration on business
and
deals, this is the right approach."
"Slap In The Face Of The World"
Regional radio station Westdeutscher Rundfunk of Cologne maintained
(3/30):
"The U.S. policy decision [on the Kyoto Protocol] is a slap in the
face of the
world.... The United States is not staying on board, and the
rest of the world
has to make do--and should continue without being discouraged.
If the
alliance among countries willing to act solidifies, even the United
States will
not be able to stay out of this overall trend in the long run."
"A Clear View In Climate Control"
Center-left Sueddeutsche Zeitung of Munich stated (3/30): "It
is possible that
the U.S.' blockade in matters of climate policy will trigger a change
of strategy
that would have been inevitable anyway. What would be gained
if the United
States stayed on board and the next climate conferences brought as
little
progress as the previous ones? And what would be gained if...an
agreement
came into existence, but with enough loopholes to render it ineffective?
Maybe Bush is now providing the necessary remedy."
"Sharp Drop In Climate"
Jochim Stoltenberg opined in right-of-center Berliner Morgenpost (3/30):
"It is
cold in Washington.... Immediately before Schroeder's arrival,
the Bush
administration bid farewell to the global agreement on climate protection
with a
get-tough policy. This seems to be an environmental challenge
to the
Europeans in particular, since they understand themselves as protagonists
of
the global limitation of the emission of pollutants. And it is
a serious affront to
the chancellor who will be the host of the next international climate
conference
in Bonn in July.... This U.S. policy will result in political
tensions in other areas
as well and alarmingly spoil the political atmosphere between the new
and the
old world."
ITALY: "Environment, This Is Why America Is Wrong"
Centrist, top-circulation Corriere della Sera carried an op-ed by Romano
Prodi
(4/5): "If the Kyoto Protocol contains elements that prevent the United
States
from signing it, let's talk about it rather than giving up on an historic
agreement.... After visiting Washington, the EU delegation will
go to Russia,
Japan, China and Iran in the next few weeks.... This is the message
that it will
carry: 'We in the European Union do not see credible solutions to the
climate
problem without the Kyoto Protocol. The European Union, therefore,
remains
committed to respecting that agreement, with or without the United
States.'"
"United States Unmovable On Greenhouse Gasses, Europe Disappointed"
Pro-Democratic Left Party's L'Unita filed (4/4): "The United States
is unmovable
on the Kyoto agreement.... A license to pollute for the rich
nations, a little
money to repay the poor nations. This is the only recipe proposed by
U.S.
industries vis-à-vis Europe's protests over the threat to sink
the Kyoto treaty."
"The Final Insult To The Environment"
Sergio Romano wrote in centrist, top-circulation Corriere della Sera
(3/30):
"After (initial) enthusiasm, the 1997 Kyoto accord has been, de-facto,
hampered by exhausting, useless negotiations over technicalities....
However,
Bush's 'environmental isolationism'...has the virtue of frankness.
While during
the Clinton era they thought they had a friend at the White
House...environmentalists now know that they have a tough rival [there.]
However, America is too varied, democratic and idealistic...to ignore
the world's
judgment.... A new period, then, is beginning for the EU,
which...will finally be
able to carry out its own foreign policy.... In the 'environment
war,' Europe can
take the initiative and urge America to follow."
RUSSIA: "Global Warming Worse Than ABM"
Aleksandr Timofeyev said in reformist Vremya Novostei (3/30):
"Washington's decision seems incredible. Nearly every other film
by
Hollywood is about brave Americans trying to save the world....
But up
against reality, the U.S. messiah wavers. It looks as if the
subject of ecology
can split the U.S.' allies far more effectively than Washington's ABM
plans.
The opponents of global warming must share the blame.... Only
Romania has
ratified the protocol. That makes it easier for the Americans
to claim that the
other signatories don't need the protocol either."
AUSTRIA: "Global Responsibility And Its National Barriers"
Centrist Salzburger Nachrichten's environmental editor Gerhard Schwischei
stressed (4/4): "National interests are prevailing over global
long-term goals,
with the U.S destroying years of work to reach an international consensus.
Without international cooperation, few politicians will be able to
resist
domestic industrial and energy lobby pressure. All the more important
to get
the U.S. back on board, which--with 4% of the global population, is
responsible
for approximately 25% of the climate-damaging greenhouse gases.
Better
undisputed arguments are required to create public pressure and make
the
Americans assume their responsibility."
BELGIUM: "Back To The Past"
Greenpeace Belgium Director Roland Moreau declared in left-of-center
Le Soir
(4/4): "Bush has created a major international crisis, wiping
out ten years of
efforts to solve the most serious environmental threat to our planet.
What
should we do? Kneel down and implore the Texan leader?
Let us rather let the
president and his friends go back to the 19th century's coal.
In the meantime,
responsible countries, including those of the EU, must implement agreements
which will prevent the seas from rising and the storms from increasing....
Let
Bush revert to the past, to nuclear threats, and to energies of the
previous
century.... I now understand my American counterpart when
he says: 'I love
my country, but I hate my government.'"
"George Bush Against The World"
An editorial in left-of-center Le Soir held (3/30): "Bush's decision
to give up
Kyoto is a real
scandal. With the back of his hand, the American president wiped
out ten
years of international mobilization on climate change.... But
George Bush's
United States thinks that it is right and that the rest of the world
is wrong....
The only opinions which seem to matter to the White House are those
of the
oil lobby, of electricity producers, and of major lumber companies....
Today,
the question is not whether the 15 must continue Kyoto without the
United
States.... The real question is: will the Europeans be smart
and courageous
enough to do it?"
CZECH REPUBLIC: "Climate Changes And The United States"
Bedrich Moldan commented in centrist Slovo (4/5): "It is generally
known that
the Kyoto Protocol is not an all powerful remedy, but a first step
in the efforts
to prevent climate changes; it is unquestionably a correct step.
Its approval
would be a tremendous success in global environment protection....
It is
necessary to find new ways of energy saving, to prefer alternative
power
sources, and also to be able to use current sources more effectively.
This
would require big initial investments, but economic calculations prove
that this
investment would pay back in a few years.... Withdrawal of the
U.S. from the
Kyoto Protocol would mean its practical collapse, and the failure of
current
efforts to prevent climate changes, as well. Under any circumstance,
it would
be a backward step with serious negative consequences."
DENMARK: "U.S. Arrogance"
Center-left Politiken opined (3/30): "News that the U.S. appears
ready to
renege on the Kyoto agreement has, in one fell swoop, set back international
efforts to address global warming by more than ten years....
The message is
clear, Bush is more interested in listening to American industry than
he is to
the people of the world. The U.S. position reinforces the impression
that the
Bush administration is not ready to live up to its international responsibilities."
"Wanted: American Leadership"
Center-right Berlingske Tidende judged (3/30): "It is deeply regrettable
that
Bush does not support the Kyoto agreement. It is particularly
disappointing
because it shows that the United States is in the process of running
away from
its international responsibilities."
FINLAND: "Washington Reserves The Exclusive Right To Pollute The Air"
Leading, independent Helsingin Sanomat judged (3/30): "The decision
is
wrong and deplorable on two accounts. It reveals a short-sighted
and
indifferent attitude to a problem the seriousness of which has received
new and
increasingly compelling evidence over the past years. It also
tells about the
world's leading great power's inability to understand how it should
use its
position in the international community in the name of its own interests.
The
most important thing is the signal it sends. Washington declared
in the
clearest of terms that...it does what it wants and the rest of the
world just has to
live with that."
"To Europe...U.S. Decision Looks Irresponsible And Backward"
Independent Aamulehti argued (3/30): "Bush's decision may please
his
American voters.... From the European perspective, however, the
U.S. decision
looks irresponsible and backward. Statements by the new U.S. leadership
about
Kyoto favoring developing countries are...true. But using that
as a justification
is immoral. The world's economic leader can, if it wants, meet
its obligations at
relatively low costs. That is not true for China, not to mention
India."
GREECE: "Bush, The Criminal"
Writing in the Sunday To Vima, editor Vassilis Moulopoulos intoned (4/1):
"By virtue of a signature alone, the planet's new master has removed
CO2 from
the list of gases that produce
the greenhouse effect.... The Bush-Cheney duo has promised the
bosses of
big business that nothing in the 'American way of life' will change
in the next 20
years.... The rulers of the earth are conscientiously leading
the planet and its
people to death.... They are prepared to become rich at all costs,
even if it
means poisoning their own children."
"U.S. Threatens The Planet's Climate"
Independent, influential Kathimerini's lead editorial deemed (3/30):
"The White
House's presumptuous stance [is] truly unacceptable.... The fundamental
problem lies in the message the White House sends.... Cynically
supporting
the interests of specific U.S. industries...is an extremely negative
paradigm for
international behavior. It nullifies any moral and humanitarian
principles the
United States claims to uphold and...incites all states--to the extent
they are
able--to act only on their own self-interest and to behave aggressively
toward
other nations, thus consolidating 'the law of the jungle' on the international
political scene."
HUNGARY: "Environmental Debate...A Turning Point"
Washington correspondent Gabor Miklos filed in top-circulation
Nepszabadsag (4/3): "The U.S. strategy is undergoing changes.
The
environmental debate with Europe is at a turning point. Increased
protection of
the environment would cost a lot for the energy industry. Bush
and Cheney
are on intimate terms with the oil industry."
IRELAND: "Bush Should Be Leading Not Helping To Destroy"
The up-market Sunday Tribune charged (4/2): "It hasn't taken President
long
to pay his debt to the big money interests who supported his election
campaign.... This attitude (abandoning the U.S. commitment to
the Kyoto
Protocol) reveals him to be just as we had feared, one of the most
deeply
cynical and flawed individuals ever to hold power in the United States."
"Betrayal"
The conservative, populist Irish Independent suggested (3/31):
"Mr. Bush has
gone farther than the pessimists feared by repudiating an international
agreement, the Kyoto Treaty. Few will take seriously his
assertion that he will
find other means of combating climate change. His present stance
will be
attributed to breathtaking arrogance or his connections with the energy
industry, or a combination of the two?"
"Bush Back Out"
The moderately conservative Irish Times reflected (3/30): "The
rest of the
world...has reacted with justifiable anger and outrage to the announcement....
A refusal to cooperate on a crucial issue like climate change will
affect other
important negotiations...as well as more conventional foreign policy
matters
where the U.S. needs a favorable outcome to protect its interests."
THE NETHERLANDS: "Bush's Conservatism"
Influential, liberal De Volkskrant's editorial stressed (4/3):
"The news that Bush
wants to pull out of the Kyoto protocol caused international commotion.
And
that is understandable because global warming is a problem the Americans
are
treating in a light-hearted manner even though they are responsible
for a major
part of it because of their high energy consumption.... Nevertheless,
it is too
easy to make Bush out as a caricature simply because of his resistance
to
Kyoto. Do not forget that it was former President Clinton who
was responsible
for the failure of the climate conference in The Hague last year."
"Europe Poisonous About Bush's CO2 Treason"
Influential, liberal De Volkskrant ran this front-page commentary (3/30):
"Now
that the Americans no longer play, Europe has to deal with the question
of
whether it should tear up the Kyoto Treaty or try to prevent a disastrous
warming of the earth without the cooperation of the greatest culprit."
NORWAY: "An Arbitrary USA Shocks The Rest Of The World"
The newspaper-of-record Aftenposten commented (3/31): "A brusque
'no'
from the United States's new president this week to the Kyoto agreement...is
sending political shock waves through large parts of the world....
The
Americans are--in plain words--the world's number one environmental
pig....
But what is most shocking is the attitude where the United States does
not take
into consideration the international effects and expressly declares
that the
United States' own interests are the only ones that count."
"Fortress USA"
Independent Dagbladet averred (3/30): "President George W. Bush
rejects the
Kyoto agreement and the immediate response from the rest of the world
is
astonishment and disappointment, worry and dismay.... With this
statement
and with his decision to build an American missile defense, Bush has
demonstrated a clear hostility towards international cooperation....
This can not
be called anything but cynical, high-handed and arrogant."
PORTUGAL: "The Biggest War"
An opinion piece by university professor Adriano Moreira in center-left
Diário
de Noticias held (4/3): "The current president of the United
States has just
taken one of the least excusable actions as the person responsible
for
exercising the unique power of the only reigning superpower.
It shouldn't be a
surprise that he would pursue national interests, which are the orienting
criteria
of all American political forces.... In order for the United
States not to threaten
[its] credibility...it needs to follow the simple rule that changes
of political
personnel do not cancel international obligations undertaken by the
state. It
was the United States that obligated itself under the Climate Convention
in
1992, and took on an obligation under the Kyoto Protocol. It
did so
recognizing that it was the country most responsible for pollution."
ROMANIA: "A New Storm Between Europeans And Americans"
Madaline Stanescu observed in opposition Romania Libera (3/30):
"Far from
heading toward a consensus, the discussions regarding global warming
may
cause a new storm between Europeans and Americans.... President
Bush's
recent decision to ignore the treaty and to give up gas emission legislation...did
nothing but increase the criticism. The Democratic opposition
reacted
immediately.... The Europeans also reacted vehemently....
Ignoring the risk of
creating waves among the European allies, Bush seems determined to
go on
and make, as he said, 'energy security a foreign policy priority.'"
SLOVENIA: "A Negative Example To The World"
Left-of-center independent Dnevnik noted (3/31): "President Bush's
statement
that he didn't support the protocol was hardly a surprise....
The Senate also
hindered the protocol.... Thus, Bush killed an agreement which
was already
dead in the U.S.... Bush set a negative example to the world.
Why would
Japan, which is in even worse economic shape than the U.S., observe
the
Kyoto limitations?... The manner in which Bush dealt with the
subject...is
frightening. Instead of at least trying to find alternative solutions,
he sent the
world a message which offers no renewal of negotiations in which the
Americans would actively participate."
SPAIN: "Bush, Against The Environment"
Conservative La Razon wrote (3/31): "The new emperor has broken
an
international agreement that his country had joined.... The American
president
is more concerned with the U.S. citizen's standard of living and their
energetic
spending, than with the future of the planet."
"Bad Environment With Bush"
Centrist La Vanguardia observed (3/31): "The Bush Administration
cast a
shadow of pessimism over the future of the Kyoto Protocol....
President Bush's
attitude is worrisome, as it is irresponsible and lacking in solidarity.
The U.S.
produces twenty-five percent of the world's gas emissions. This
is why Bush's
initiative is bad news for all of the world's citizens."
SWEDEN: "Climate Betrayal Threatens Relations With U.S."
On the eve of the Kiruna meeting, the Stockholm conservative morning
Svenska Dagbladet carried an article by Sweden's Minister of Environment
Kjell Larsson and EU Commissioner Margot Wallstrom urging (3/31):
"We
cannot foresee more precisely how serious the future climate change
will be.
But we know that the poorest nations will be hurt the most....
The longer we
take to address the climate problem, the more difficult and the more
expensive
the necessary adjustments will be. Now the Bush administration
has decided
to place itself outside the Kyoto Protocol.... The EU must continue
to act
resolutely and consistently. Ten years of laborious and constructive
work on a
central global issue hangs in the balance."
SWITZERLAND: "Outrage At U.S. Climate Change Policy"
Heidi Blattmann, foreign editor of leading center-right Neue Zürcher
Zeitung,
stressed (3/31): "President Bush's desire to withdraw from the Kyoto
Climate
Protocol has prompted condemnation from all corners of the globe.
But while
his comments may indeed have been arrogant, the fact that the Americans
regard climate change policy as an unnecessary inconvenience is neither
new
nor unexpected.... Those who believed that Washington was ever
doing more
than paying lip service to climate change issues have been fooling
themselves.
At least Bush has now made the U.S. position absolutely clear.
It will be
interesting to see what happens next.... 'Kyoto' may turn
out to be dead, but
climate change policy certainly is not."
EAST ASIA
JAPAN: "Bush Administration's Rejection Kyoto Protocol Indefensible"
The conservative Sankei editorialized (3/30): "The Bush administration
announced that it would reject the Kyoto Protocol, designed to combat
global
warming..... Its fate is totally uncertain without a U.S. endorsement.
Japan and
the EU will have to ask the U.S. to retract its decision."
"American Egoism"
Moderate Tokyo Shimbun observed (3/30): "The U.S. rejection of
the Kyoto
Protocol reflects the egoism of a superpower. As the leader in
mass
production, mass consumption and mass dumping, the U.S. has been less
than
enthusiastic about combating global warming. Japan should join
the EU and
others in asking the U.S. to reflect on its selfishness and retract
its rejection of
the protocol. Without the U.S. endorsement, the accord will be
ineffective."
"U.S. Should Return To Cop 3 Framework"
An editorial in business-oriented Nihon Keizai noted (3/30): "The
Bush
administration's rejection of the Kyoto protocol was abrupt.
Japan should
continue efforts to put the U.S. back in the COP-3 framework.
If necessary,
Environment Minister Kawaguchi should visit the United States to discuss
the
issue with U.S. government officials.... As the only superpower
in the world,
the United States will have to combat global warming."
SOUTH KOREA: "U.S. Scrapping Of Kyoto Protocol Irresponsible"
Moderate Hankook Ilbo editorialized (3/30): "The U.S. decision
to scrap the
Kyoto Protocol is sending shock waves around the world. The U.S.
move
reflected its concerns that this protocol might harm its traditional
industries. If
superpowers were allowed to scrap international treaties so easily,
the treaties
would be reduced to wastepaper. The U.S. virtually sentenced
the Kyoto
Protocol to death. Recently, the Bush administration has made
its allies
uncomfortable by adopting policies that focus on U.S. national interests
only.
We cannot help but view the U.S. withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol
as an
extremely irresponsible and self-centered act."
"Declaration Of War Against Humankind"
Independent Hankyoreh Shinmun implored in an editorial (3/31):
"We urge the
United States to withdraw immediately its rejection of the Kyoto Protocol
because it is tantamount to a declaration of war of environmental terrorism
against humankind."
AUSTRALIA: "We Should Not Abandon Kyoto"
An editorial in the liberal Melbourne Age argued (4/3): "The United
States has
been condemned by other developed countries for its stance....
In forcing
many of his traditional allies to break ranks with him, President George
W. Bush
may have made a costly political mistake. He may also have underestimated
the outrage of millions of environmentally aware American voters....
Most
people understand there can be no trade-off between the economy and
the
environment. It is time political leaders reached a similar understanding."
"Room To Improve On Kyoto Pact"
An editorial in the conservative national Australian noted (4/3):
"It is
disappointing that an international accord on greenhouse reform...is
probably
doomed to failure in the absence of support from the United States....
Yet
those who portray Mr. Bush as the 'Toxic Texan' are following a simplistic
script.... Developing nations, which account for about 40 percent
of...greenhouse emissions were exempted from the reductions.
The United
States and Australia have rightly argued that this was nonsensical....
Despite
this, there is plenty of scope for the United States to lift its game....
For the
sake of future generations and a healthier planet, a new international
strategy...is needed."
"Bush Leaves Us Out In The Cold"
An editorial in the business-oriented Australian Financial Review observed
(3/30): "Many are bemoaning--or hailing--Bush's decision as the
'death' of the
Kyoto Protocol. This is quite wrong. The protocol needs
only ratification by
the EU, Japan and Russia to bring it into force, and Bush's action
may have
brought this closer. EU ratification would turn the transatlantic
trade dispute
on Kyoto into a climate cold war, with Brussels determined to force
the United
States to reduce carbon emissions and Washington fending off EU pressure."
HONG KONG: "Washington's Betrayal"
The independent South China Morning Post argued (3/30): "Few campaign
mistakes can have consequences as far-reaching for the entire planet
as Mr.
Bush's decision to abandon the Kyoto Protocol on global warming....
It shows
how the short-term economic interests of the world's most powerful
nation...can overshadow the prospects of unborn generations across
the
globe.... International outrage over the U.S. move is, however,
slightly
misplaced. Since the Kyoto conference in 1997, only Romania has
ratified the
treaty. There has been plenty of lip-service to it, but scant
progress.
Washington's betrayal must not stop other countries from doing what
is
required of them.... The world must push ahead...without the
United States."
INDONESIA: "The Kyoto Protocol"
The leading independent English-language Jakarta Post observed (4/2):
"It is
well for President Bush and members of his administration to remember
that no
country or nation can afford to live in isolation of the mishaps of
others. It is
true that an economic recession in the United States could seriously
affect
other regions of the world, but the reverse could also be true....
In any case,
now that the die has been cast, let us hope that reason will prevail.
The world
is waiting to see what results the flurry of diplomatic activities
between
European and Japanese leaders, and Washington will bring. As
the only
remaining superpower, the United States must bear the heavy responsibility
of
heeding the welfare of the world at large."
SINGAPORE: "A Crying Shame"
In the view of the pro-government Straits Times (3/31): "At least
where the
environment is concerned, Mr. Bush's conservatism stands exposed as
yet
another species of 'know-nothing' right-wing obtuseness.... Mr.
Bush's
argument that Kyoto is too expensive to implement is misleading.
Cleaner
factories and cars do not come cheap, but there are also economic benefits
derived from developing, producing and exporting the new technology
that
would be required to reduce greenhouse gases. The Bush administration
refuses to see these facts...but it can be forced to if enough Americans
are
energized enough by this disgraceful decision to mobilize on behalf
of a planet
that they, more than any other people, have despoiled."
THAILAND: "Bush Must Provide An Alternative To Kyoto"
The lead editorial of the top-circulation, moderately conservative,
English-
language Bangkok Post judged (4/3): "Mr. Bush 's weak and
self-serving
arguments against the Kyoto Protocol were particularly troubling.
Of all the
objections against this imperfect, highly political paper, Mr. Bush's
were
perhaps the worst.... Mr. Bush is not a lone voice in criticizing
the document.
Hardly anyone, anywhere, was truly satisfied with the Kyoto Protocol....
The
point was that until last week the Kyoto protocol provided a talking
point.
Now, despite a brave face by European ministers, the battle to halt
the buildup
of greenhouse gases has returned to the starting line."
"America Reneges On Its Promise"
Kiatichai Pongpanit commented in sensationalist Khao Sot (4/2):
"Such a
superpower as the United States has dishonorably and irresponsibly
reneged
on its pledge.... The United States has become one of the most
disappointing
nations under the Bush administration."
VIETNAM: "The U.S Must Not Be Neglectful Of Its Responsibilities"
Hoang Lien commented in Communinist Party mouthpiece Nhan dan (3/31):
"For years at world forums, U.S. leaders have spoken about human rights,
criticizing the human rights problems of other countries. But
ironically the
issue of protecting the environment--an obvious human rights issue,
which is
one of how to protect and preserve the clean air for today and tomorrow's
mankind--has just been neglected irresponsibly, even vetoed, by the
United
States."
"It Is Inconsistent"
Kieu Thu wrote in the army daily Quan Doi Nhan Dan (3/30): "The
United
States has been boasting that its administrations always respect international
laws and agreements and treaties
signed by their preceding ones. But given the Bush administration's
recent
announcement to withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol, it is obvious that
the
administration is inconsistent, trying to dodge its responsibility
to the
international community."
SOUTH ASIA
INDIA: "Cool On Kyoto"
An editorial in the centrist Times of India held (4/5): "No nation
is perhaps as
vocally committed to the green agenda (as the United States) but when
it
affects its own interests, all this concern goes out of the window....
It is no
secret that as a Texan Mr. Bush has a considerable stake in the oil
industry....
All this is seen as part of the increasing unilateralism of the U.S.
president....
The international community will have to be prepared to face further
counterproductive unilateralist behavior by Washington based on short-
sighted perspectives."
"Killing Kyoto"
The centrist Statesman asserted (4/4): "By pulling the United
States out...Bush
has effectively scuttled the Kyoto treaty.... One of the outstanding
issues is
the U.S. argument that developing countries should come on board in
any
attempt to cut emissions, which India opposes tooth and nail....
Developing
countries...are the least technologically capable, and will have to
import
expensive foreign technologies if they are to meet emissions norms."
"Sins Of Emission"
An editorial in the nationalist Hindustan Times noted (3/31):
"The first
depressing sign of what it means to have a Republican president in
the United
States is available from Washington's deplorable volte-face on the
Kyoto
protocol on global warming.... The Bush administration's decision
to walk
away from the 1997 compact is noteworthy for more than one reason.
First, it
has to be noted that Bush turned his back on a commitment he made during
the
presidential campaign, even if he made it merely to stump his opponent,
Al
Gore.... Secondly, it was only recently that his Secretary of
State Colin Powell
declared Washington's intention to treat climate change as 'a very
serious
issue.' But all that is history now as the new denizen of the
White House has
shown how limited his vision is."
PAKISTAN: "From Kyoto To Jallozai"
Anwar Ahmad judged in the centrist national News (4/2): "It wasn't
a flaw in
the U.S. electoral system that let President George W. Bush scrape
through to
the White House against the wishes of the voting majority. That,
in fact, is the
way the system is designed--to protect the interests of corporate America....
And, Bush Jr. is already beginning to deliver--having backed out of
the
promise to cut polluting emissions by American electric-power plants
before
pulling the plug on the Kyoto Protocol."
"Reneging On Kyoto"
An editorial in the national, center-right Nation held (3/31):
"Washington's
refusal to ratify the
Kyoto Protocol may set a bad precedent for other countries. There
is already
deep resentment in the European countries [and the impetus] to mount
collective diplomatic pressure on Washington not to backtrack on Kyoto.
Safeguarding its national interest does not entitle the United States
to
jeopardize that of other countries. We have only one planet and
the negative
impact of such reckless environmental policies is bound to hit others.
The self-
centered approach of an industrial giant will spell disaster not just
for smaller
countries but ultimately for it as well."
MIDDLE EAST
JORDAN: "To Those Who Defend The U.S. World Order"
Mazen Saket's op-ed in center-left, influential Arabic Al-Dustour noted
(4/4):
"The United States unilaterally decided to withdraw from the Kyoto
agreement.... This is a clear example of a leadership that forces
us to enter the
WTO, to adopt conditional economic policies, to privatize our national
projects
and institutions, to enter a trade agreement that requires Israeli
raw materials,
and to put our infrastructure and national resources on sale in the
stock market.
This leadership declares its withdrawal from an international
agreement that is
designed to protect the environment, but before that, it prevents the
sale of
bananas in order to punish the European countries, it forces Japan
to cut its
exports to the American market, and it declares economic sanctions
against a
country that refused to abide by its rules and conditions. Is
this not enough
to send a message to all those who promote and defend the U.S. policy?"
SYRIA: "America's Superiority"
Adham al-Tawil opined in government-owned Tishreen (4/1): "Once again,
the
United States stressed that its economic and political interests are
paramount....
When President Bush declared the Kyoto agreement dead, the U.S.
rejection
came as unilateral and decisive. Bush ignored all international
efforts that were
and are being spent to alleviate the problems of international pollution
in order
to serve the interests of big American companies.... The American
rejection is
putting Washington's policy during Bush's term to the test and placing
Europe
on a collision course with the United States, since it is difficult
to achieve an
effective universal environmental policy without the U.S. ratification
of the
Kyoto agreement."
AFRICA
SOUTH AFRICA: "Bush Stance A Threat To World Economy"
Independent, liberal Financial Mail commented (4/5): "A chilly
wind is blowing
out of the United States. And it's not from the fall of New York's
stock markets.
President...Bush's decision to pull out of the Kyoto Protocol...has
raised alarm
bells.... His stance...suggests he will aggressively oppose decisions
that seek
to protect the environment at the expense of corporate America.
The real
concern is whether his decision on Kyoto has wider implications....
There's a
real danger that the world faces a damaging protectionist revival,
since the U.S.
is a lead player in setting international rules on a range of issues,
from global
warming to trade."
"Puppet President"
The liberal, independent Natal Witness commented (4/2): "During
the election
campaign...Bush received astronomical sums from a variety of American
business interests towards his campaign expenses. The extent
to which he is,
therefore, beholden is now becoming apparent.... Now he has outraged
European opinion by announcing that he is not prepared to implement
the
Kyoto Treaty.... The president is not going to do anything which,
he says,
'hurts American workers'--and his own political position. Against
these
imperatives, the well-being of the global ecosystem comes a poor second.
Bush talks about a Kyoto alternative.... It's a smoke screen,
of course, akin to
those spewed out by U.S. factories and power stations."
"Pollution President Protects America's Right To Choke"
Washington correspondent Andrew Gumbel wrote in the liberal, independent
Star (4/2): "Barely two months into his tenure...Bush is
already building a
legacy, and it is not a pretty one. He is becoming the pollution
president, the
greenhouse gasman.... The Kyoto Treaty is as good as dead....
Bush has not
only allowed the Republican Party's right wing to hold greater sway
over the
White House than at any time in living memory, but there seems to be
something almost perverse in the timing and manner of...the new policy
formulations.... Kyoto has been scrapped, but nothing has been
decided about
how, if at all, to negotiate for an alternative."
UGANDA: "Destroying The World"
Government-owned New Vision explained (3/31): "President Bush
has said that
he is pulling the U.S. out of the 1997 Kyoto Treaty.... This
is probably the most
reactionary decision by any American administration in recent history....
Already, the whole world including the United States is feeling the
effects of
global warming.... The Kyoto treaty was probably too little too
late but at least
the world community had come together to try and bring global warming
under
control. Now Bush has taken the world's largest contributor of
greenhouse
gasses out of the treaty. Bush may go down in history, if history
remains, as
the man who destroyed the world."
WESTERN HEMISPHERE
CANADA: "Canada Complicit In Kyoto's Death"
Columnist Susan Riley wrote in the tabloid-style Ottawa Citizen (4/4):
"If the
Kyoto accord on climate change dies--and it is on the critical list
this week
thanks to George W. Bush--it isn't the end of the world. Enlightened
governments will continue to advance measures aimed at reducing greenhouse
gases; smart industries will plan for a future that includes cleaner
technologies
and stricter emissions controls; environmentalists will argue, and
sensible
people will agree that we can't continue to pollute heedlessly....
It is
convenient...to blame Bush for this latest setback, and the U.S. president's
dangerously simplistic world view--a discredited argument pitting the
environment against the economy--is a body blow to Kyoto.
But it would be a
mistake to denounce 'the Americans' in general. While the United
States does
produce 25 percent of greenhouse gases, it has also done much more
than
Canada to clean up its act."
"Bush The Magician"
In the words of Agnes Gruda in centrist La Presse (4/2): "It took
only two
months in power for the president to renege on this promise....
What
happened? A month ago, leaders of the carbon and petroleum industry
besieged Washington. Among others, there was...a company that
donated
$250,000 to the Republicans last summer. There you are.
After just one
meeting, the president decided that he was wrong in believing that
CO2 is a
pollutant. Carbon dioxide was a pollutant but it is no longer....
It's pure magic.
Harry Potter could not have done better. "
"Is This The End Of The Kyoto Pact?"
The leading Globe and Mail considered (3/30): "If Kyoto dies,
about 15 years
of international climate-change negotiations will die with it.
A new deal would
likely set the process back years, and would at best result in an even
weaker
agreement than Kyoto.... From the environmentalists' point of
view, Kyoto
seemed the best bet yet, a concrete chance to make a difference on
a global
scale. But the will, at least in North America, just isn't there yet."
"Shaky Science, Bad Economics Killed Kyoto"
Editorial writer Terence Corcoran commented in the conservative Financial
Post
(3/29): "After five years of relentless hype, a decade of phony
weather scares
and disaster scenarios over the prospect of global warming, the Kyoto
Protocol
to control the world's climate through a UN bureaucracy crashed yesterday.
The wailing will be loud and prolonged, with U.S. President George
Bush
getting the blame.... But...Kyoto is going down for three dominant
reasons:
shaky science, bad economics, and even worse policy.... Bad science
and
worse economics will not, however, stop the momentum of climate-change
policy."
BRAZIL: "Better Than What Was Ordered"
Center-right O Estado de Sao Paulo's columnist Luiz Fernando Verissimo
quipped (4/4): "Bush is doing more than what the interests which
elected him
have asked for.... The chemical industry did not expect such
an immediate
return from the capital it invested in Bush's election.... The
oil industry is also
being shamelessly helped by the sacrifice of the environment and health
issues. Bush's frank statement that he would not sign the Kyoto
Protocol
because saving the planet does not interest the U.S. economically,
must be
applauded wherever people believe that profit trumps all, including
common
sense."
"Mr. Bush Seems Willing To Leave The Table Without Paying The Bill"
Conservative O Globo carried this byliner by Pedro Henrique Cardoso
(son of
President Cardoso, and president of the Brazilian Business Council
for
Sustainable Development) (4/3): "The United States has delivered another
blow
to the hopes for the Kyoto Protocol.... The Brazilian protest
calls attention to
the fact that global warming must be negotiated within a global context.
Brazil
has always supported the principle of common responsibility....
The
accumulation of green house gases is a process with roots in the devastation
of the European and the American forests, but mainly after the industrial
revolution. The 'polluter-payer' principle is based on this historical
responsibility. However, Mr. Bush, with his bad example, seems
to be willing
to leave the table without paying the bill."
"Kyoto Protocol's Funeral" enormous importance that the American economy
has in the prolifer
The lead editorial in center-right O Estado de S. Paulo stated (4/2):
"Without
the United States, the Kyoto Protocol is nothing more than a piece
of paper,
because the other industrialized nations will not develop programs
to reduce
greenhouse emissions if Washington is not willing to do the same....
From the
environmentalists' point of view, Bush's decision is disastrous....
If any doubt
still persisted that U.S. attempts to include environmental clauses
in trade
accords...were nothing more than a subterfuge to protect U.S. industry,
that
doubt has been dissipated by President Bush's decision and his reasoning."
MEXICO: "Bush Against the World"
Mireya Olivas asserted in sensationalist Milenio (3/29): "The
blow the Bush
administration has dealt to the first true international effort to
deal with the
global warming issue is comparable to the blow that Woodrow Wilson
gave to
the United Nations (sic) after the First World War.... The energy
industry
donated millions of dollars to land Bush in the White House, and now
he is
returning the favor. The EU and Japan are horrified by the Republican
decision
to throw out the Kyoto Protocol, because this gesture confirms that
the new
government in the United States doesn't have a drop of interest in
problems
concerning the rest of humanity if they do not directly affect the
U.S. 'national
interest.' Some say they miss Reagan's good judgment and moderation.
And it
is possible they are right."
BOLIVIA: "The Uncomfortable Protocol"
An editorial in La Paz's centrist La Prensa commented (4/1): "The
international
community is offended by Bush's statement, (but, to his comfort, the
United
States is not alone). He has in his favor the list of the
big countries which also
have not ratified the protocol. Paradoxically, this struggle
will not define
anything less than the future of the planet in the next decades, and
for that
very reason, it cannot pass cunningly unnoticed. It is time that
the rich
countries...assume their responsibilities and think not only of their
conveniences. And poor nations should abandon the shameful role
of passive
spectators."
"Bad News For The Environment"
The Catholic-church owned, left-leaning Presencia reflected (4/2): "Given
the
ation of the problem, the adherence of the United States seems essential
to
avoid what in the long run could become a true planetary catastrophe....
The
harm to the environment is not an exclusive problem of the industrialized
countries. Poor countries, too, have several responsibilities
especially in
relation to deforestation and water contamination. But regarding
contamination related to industrialization, it is evident that the
planet's future
will depend to a large extent on the countries that produce more toxic
gases
than on the underdeveloped ones."
CHILE: "Global Warming"
Santiago's leading-circulation, popular, independent La Tercera noted
(3/31):
"An alarming situation exists now with President Bush's decision not
to ratify
the...Kyoto Protocol.... The United States must assume its share
of
responsibility for global warming.... We hope Mr. Bush will reconsider
his
position, because the U.S. economic situation is by no means a justification
to
reject an initiative that would benefit humankind."
GUATEMALA: "Bush Flounders"
Largest circulation Prensa Libre's column by Carolina Vasquez Araya
informed
(3/31): "The constant criticism of Bush's style started from
the moment he
announced his presidential candidacy.... These doubts are being
justified by
the controversial decision of withdrawing the United States from the
Kyoto
Protocol.... Bush's mistake is in his attitude, more than his
rhetoric. After all,
no U.S. president has cared about humanity's destiny, nor has designed
policies according to set goals in order to improve the quality of
life of Anglo-
Saxons, Peruvians or the communities in Guatemala's highlands....
His second
mistake is his lack of vision, because global warming will not only
devastate
northern Europe, but the Argentine plains, and is hitting home, which
in about
four years will mean death and the loss of greater resources."
PERU: "Bush Attacks"
Center-left La Republica held (4/2): "There are few decisions
involving the
future of humanity more unfortunate than the one just taken by the
new U.S.
President George Bush, who has announced...that he will not honor the
agreements of the 'World Climate Summit,' held in Kyoto in December,
1997....
The planet suffers a global heating phenomenon...as a result of daily
emissions
of approximately 20 million tons of toxic gases.... Bush has
voided the Kyoto
commitment.... A worldwide movement is necessary to make Bush
come to
reason and honor the Kyoto Protocol.... The industrialized countries,
led by
the United States, must lead by example."
URUGUAY: "Disappointment"
Top-circulation, leading El Pais noted (4/3): "George Bush has
sent many
critical signals regarding international relations. One of the
most critical ones
has been the decision of not supporting the Kyoto protocol related
to climate
change. There are certain realities that cannot be ignored.
One of them is that
emissions of carbon dioxide do not recognize national boundaries and
develop
complex natural processes that affect all countries.... Whereas
in highly
developed countries (like the UK and Germany) strong efforts are made
to
reduce air pollution, the United States--the richest, most prosperous
nation in
the world and holder of one of the principal scientific and technological
bases--
decides to withdraw from negotiations and embarks on its own, solitary
and
hazy course. Really disappointing."