Obama mayn't keep word
22 Dec 2009, 0544 hrs IST,ET Bureau

NEW DELHI: US President Barack Obama may have returned home from Copenhagen with a host of pledges, but he can deliver on his promise only with the cap-and-trade legislation introduced in the Senate. The Bill has been developed by Senators Lindsey Graham, John F Kerry and Joseph Lieberman. Without such a Bill, it will be difficult to deliver the promised emission cuts and impossible to produce the promised funding of $100 billion annually in ‘mitigation and adaptation’ assistance to developing countries by 2020.

At Copenhagen, Mr Obama managed what some are labelling a diplomatic win by getting India, China and others on board. He got them to dilute the Kyoto Protocol and express willingness to submit to a verification system. “I think he has achieved two valuable points. He didn’t enter into any binding commitments. He managed to get important developing countries, in a de facto sense, jettison the Kyoto Protocol,” said strategic expert Brahma Chellaney. The promise of a fund and the US offer of a 17% cut in emissions from 2005 levels may not be cutting ice internationally, with climate watchers calling both the fund and emission target too little.

But political critics in the US are already accusing Mr Obama of promising too much. Senate minority whip Jon Kyl in a US television programme stated that not even a majority of the Senate’s Democrats would stand behind the pledge to provide a fund to help developing countries deal with the climate change effects. Similarly Senator Graham said on CNN that his fellow legislators find the Copenhagen deal “ineffective”.

The US House of Representatives passed legislation in June seeking a 17% reduction in emissions by 2020. But the Senate is yet to take up the Bill. Most Republicans and also a section of the Democrats oppose the legislation on the grounds that it would hurt the US economy which is coming out of the recession. They also argue that developing countries like China should also agree to emission cuts before the US takes on any cuts. The opposition is strongest from the energy-intensive heartland states.

Those familiar with domestic politics point out that Mr Obama’s ratings have been steadily falling and that he has spent political goodwill on his healthcare legislation. “He has expended a lot of political capital. The question is how soon after such an effort can he mount a similar momentum in the Senate. This would be affecting heartland state which have coal-based energy. It is going to take time,” said Robinder Sachdev of USINPAC and Imagindia Institute.

In fact, even conservative estimates say that it will take time for the legislation to be even introduced in the Senate. As of now, the Copenhagen accord is being seen as just the beginning. And US legislators might want to see developing countries take on legally binding emission cuts and agree to a verification process. Before Copenhagen, nine US senators sent a letter to Mr Obama warning that an unfavourable climate policy could hurt US companies and workers. Any accord should require “all major economies to adopt ambitious, measurable and verifiable actions”, the letter signed by the senators said.