We cannot assess yet if the talks will produce a deal at all. UN climate chief Yvo de Boer is so optimistic that talks will progress rapidly when some 115 world leaders start arriving in the Danish capital Wednesday and, by the time the talks end Friday, the world will see a new deal. But many others are far less optimistic.

The thorny issues that could block the talks remain the same, and the divide between developed and developing countries is still vast.

The main issue on the table is whether the Copenhagen Summit will be a continuation of the Kyoto Protocol or a new deal altogether. Developing countries would certainly prefer that it be a continuation of the Kyoto Protocol, with deeper quantified emission reduction targets for developed countries for the second commitment period. The Kyoto Protocol’s first commitment period will end in 2012.

Developed countries, especially the United States and the European Union, on the other hand, continue to contend that Kyoto is insufficient because it does not legally oblige fast-developing countries like China, India, Brazil and Indonesia to cut emissions. In this case, they especially target China, currently the world’s second largest greenhouse gas emitter.

Meanwhile, China, the biggest developing country in the world, argues that it still lags behind more than 100 countries in terms of GDP per capita, and therefore, it flatly refuses to be held internationally accountable for its emission reduction plans. China has planned to reduce CO2 emission intensity per unit of GDP by 40 to 45 percent in 2020 from 2005.

We are of the opinion that the Copenhagen talks should produce an agreement that would strengthen what was achieved in Kyoto. After all, the Kyoto Protocol is the only legally binding instrument available so far to force developed countries to actually reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

If the Copenhagen Summit is successful, the United States, as the world’s number one climate offender, should take the lead of other developed countries and show greater commitment to reaching a deal that would strengthen the Kyoto Protocol.

US President Barack Obama, who arrives in Copenhagen on Friday, needs to reassure the world that his presence is to help achieve a better deal for the world. To achieve that, he needs to stand by his commitment he already announced to reduce emissions in his country by 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020. He also needs to give a clearer commitment on how much money the US will provide for long-term financing for poorer nations to cope with the impacts of climate change.

Only through such a commitment, could the United States win support from developing countries. So far, developed countries have devised a US$10 billion “fast-start” fund for poorer countries through 2012, but have eluded questions of how much long-term financing they will commit.

As a friend of Obama, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, who will also be in Copenhagen, needs to play a bigger role as a bridging bridge between developed and developing countries. Indonesia, which has been seen by many as a good boy in the climate arena, is more acceptable for both sides.

Both Obama and Yudhoyono have a big responsibility to shoulder. They need to encourage other world leaders to give better commitments to make the climate talks a success, not a failure.

Failure to reach a deal in Copenhagen would send the wrong message to the people of the world and let the positive hope drift away. More importantly, failure in Copenhagen would put our planet in a more dangerous position. Failure in Copenhagen is definitely not an option.

Popular

Power begins to return after outage in Indonesia's Bali island

Coffee, gold push up inflation to 1.95 percent in April

The fragile promise of pluralism, religious freedom in Southeast Asia