A derogative remark cost her the job: Briefly after Samantha Power – in an explicitly off-the-record comment – had called Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton “a monster”, she had to resign as Senator Barack Obama’s senior foreign policy advisor, a position she had held since his early days in the U.S. Senate. Ms. Power’s quick assertion that she was frequently on record praising Mrs. Clinton’s leadership, intellect, even her humor and warmth, could save her just as little as the backing of party VIPs like former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski who held that “an expression of regret for using an inappropriate description (…) should have sufficed”. Ms. Power’s comment was seen as potentially too harmful to Mr. Obama’s self-induced clean campaign to keep her in place. DW WORLD
Nach Nairobi: Wie weiter in der internationalen Klimapolitik?
Europa ist auf der Suche nach einem klimapolitischen Kompass für die nächsten Jahre.
The Climate Changes: Europe Learns to Lead
At their summit last week, the twenty-seven member countries of the European Union agreed on an impressive package of climate policy targets. The union committed to an overall goal of a 20 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020. Bio-fuels in transport must then account for at least 10 percent, and no less than one fifth of EU energy will have to be generated from renewable sources such as wind, solar, biomass and hydro power. The agreement was quickly praised as “groundbreaking” and “bold” by UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, “the most ambitious package ever agreed by any commission or any group of countries on energy security and climate protection” by EU Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso, and as constituting a “new quality of climate policy” and the basis for a “third technological revolution” by German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Politicians’ eulogizing of their own efforts is nothing new in politics, not even in the EU which has not exactly been crowned with success in recent years. Still, for a number of reasons the accord might indeed stand as a remarkable milestone in European diplomatic history.
The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly? Europe, the United States, and China at the World Climate Conference
The picture drawn by the media of the main protagonists at the UN conference on climate change in Bali was reminiscent of Sergio Leone’s famous spaghetti western. In one corner of the stand-off, a tenacious and uppity Europe, convinced that she will succeed. Then there was America, with her presumptuous plan to either get her own say or obstruct everyone else’s. And finally, China. Recently declared the world’s number one greenhouse gas emitter, she insisted on her right to pollute even more in the future. It was a boring picture, one we have seen all too often in the past. Until the very last day, the Bali summit was only the newest episode in a showdown habitually played out at yearly climate conferences: The European Union tries to provide leadership but cannot do it on its own, while the United States and China remain stuck in their regular gridlock ritual, both unwilling to take responsibility for their share of the problem. This year’s climate conference, however, took a dramatic turn: the script was changed so that, at least this season, the perennial tragedy ended on a positive note. FACET Commentary No. 6
The Failures of American and European Climate Policy: International Norms, Domestic Politics, and Unachievable Commitments
Climate change has been one of the most contentious issues in the transatlantic relationship. The persistent divide escalated when President Bush abandoned the Kyoto Protocol in early 2001. Since then, the EU has emerged as the most fervent leader of this UN-sponsored treaty while the United States has remained the only major developed country, aside from Australia, to oppose it. Why is that? In light of their many similarities, the sources of the rift between Americans and Europeans are puzzling. With The Failures of American and European Climate Policy, Loren Cass provides the most extensive and well-researched comparative study of United States and European Union atmospheric protection to date. In addition to the EU itself, he focuses on Germany and the United Kingdom, its two most- outspoken members on this issue. The book is precisely and eloquently written. It is a valuable contribution to existing literature on the domestic adoption (or rejection) of international norms. Above all, the book is destined to become essential reading for students of these four political actors, all of which will remain crucial for confronting this century’s most pressing global challenge.
BOOK REVIEW, GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICS, November 2007, Vol. 7, No. 4, Pages 149-151