Non-Kyoto compliance and enforcement

This is pretty much an older news item but one that I have been watching with some interest. I made a conscious effort not to comment on it until I could study it more and figure out exactly what it meant. The November 13th proposal during the UN Climate Change Conference in Nairobi by France's Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin to place taxes on imports from nations not complying with the Kyoto Protocol (mentioned here a billion times so far) by 2012 seemed rather interesting.

I suppose the wording and intent of the proposal was what really caught my eye. Early reports stated that the actual proposal would affect nations that refused to sign the Kyoto Protocol. That in itself is a problem as nations such as the United States actually did sign but have yet to ratify the pact and make it part of our national agenda. Or what about Canada, who has signed the Protocol but does not expect to meet it's 2012 goals? Will it also be penalized?

Perhaps supposition of this is moot anyway. De Villepin's plan to have created a more solidified plan of action by spring 2007 relies on WTO trade treaty provisions and obligations as neither the Kyoto Protocol nor the Climate Change Convention currently have the authority to create and enforce trade restrictions. Unilateral trade restrictions will no doubt be challenged by the United States as the current administration has already voiced intent to remove itself from the Protocol and while the US has never really ratified the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties the "State Department has stated in the past that it considers the Vienna Convention to be a codification of customary international law and hence also binding on the US". This allows the US to use Article 18 which states that even though the US was a signatory to the Kyoto Protocol if it (US) “shall have made its intention clear not to become a party to the treaty" it will no longer be bound to adhere to Kyoto restrictions.

So what does this really mean? That even were the UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention no Climate Change) to impose tariffs upon countries not following the Kyoto Protocol to reduce GHG (Green House Gases) that there already exists a rather gaping hole in the ability to enforce such tariffs.

Even inserting trade language into the current Kyoto Protocol to allow for the ability of an international body to impose and collect tariffs would possibly open the entire protocol up to re-examination and could eventually undermine the entire intent of such an important international convention. Some thoughts have been to actually adjust the duties of the UNFCCC and grant them the power to impose and enforce more stringent standards.

While currently a "hot button" issue, due to the widespread acceptance by the scientific community backing human based global warming as well as most industrialized societies actually wanting to accept the responsibility that planning for change brings I cannot imagine why any nation would want the mantle of not supporting stricter international regulations on GHG or other pollutions as an attempt to protect humanity as a whole. It seems to fly in the face of any political parties inherent interest to protect it's citizens.

Resources:
Comments on the Proposed Use of Trade Sanctions Against Non-Kyoto States

Kyoto Protocol Primer

Interactive: What is the Greenhouse Effect?

Cute Polar Bear Cubs in Trouble care of Ms. Marjie

Matt Groening's "NONE LIKE IT HOT" Care of "Futurama"