'IF YOU ARE NOT WILLING TO LEAD, THEN GET OUT OF THE WAY!"

“If you are not willing to lead, then get out of the way.” This sentiment was shouted at the U.S. by a repetitive at the recent Bali Conference on climate change. This will be the refrain of the world unless we, as a nation, make a determined effort to get our proverbial international act together with respect to climate change specifically and foreign policy in general. The deal signed at the Bali Conference does not require specific climate reduction targets by anyone, thanks to the U.S. Oh, but it does create an agenda for future discussions and negotiations. Some say that at least this keeps the dialogue going and, yes, that is a positive step.

Despite the E.U.’s desire to develop mandatory reductions of greenhouse gases, the U.S., backed by Japan and several other nations prevented stringent actions from being taken. The U.S. argued that numbers should not be assigned until after further negotiations which will not be complete until 2009. So now we will have two more years of discussion and then, maybe, we will sign off on numbers which will still have to go through the treaty process in the U.S. Does everyone think that the GOP will just say, “Sure, let’s put restrictions on big business?” After all, the major reason that the U.S. and China have balked at signing off on limits is because they say it will hurt economic growth. Will it hurt economic growth any less in two years? When India and the E.U. tried to include language that would require monitoring of technology transfer to underdeveloped countries, the U.S. decided it wanted further talks on the issue. While this position was reversed due to massive pressure, the damage to the image of the U.S. had been done.

Thanks to President Bush, the U.S. has bought itself more time to try to figure out how to avoid more regulations that would hamstring multi-billion dollar corporations. A key question is what kind of time do we really have? Will Nature wait for the U.S. and China to get on board with most of the rest of the world? The recent auto emissions standards signed by President Bush are a joke. By 2020 autos are required to get 35mpg. We are not that far from that now and most imports have already reached that goal. The bill also requires more use of ethanol which is basically produced and under the control of oil companies. Who wins? Not the environment and not the consumer. With the tax increase knocked out of the bill to force large corporations to pay for changes, who do you think will be footing the costs to clean up the emissions? Keep in mind that the 35mpg is not required until 2020, what happens to the emissions in the meantime?

With all of these delays it is important to note the condition of the environment is not improving. According to scientists, Artic ice melt reached a new high in 2007 with an area the size of Alaska gone. Sea ice loss up to 2006 was something like an average of 68,000 square miles. The loss of sea ice from 2006 to 2007 was ten times that amount or around 663,000 square miles. It is speculated that the Artic Sea could be ice free in the summer of 2013. The sea temperature has risen an unprecedented 5 degrees Celsius. If this happened in a year’s time, what makes the U.S. think that we have years to decide on a course of action to cope with the issues of climate change?

THE DECLINE OF THE AMERICAN EMPIRE

President Bush will probably become known in history as the American leader who began the decline of the American Empire. Pax Americana is at an end! The single most important cause for this decline is his total lack of leadership in addressing the issue of global climate change.

While clear arguments could be made regarding his lack of leadership in such areas as international diplomacy and his failure to address domestic social and economic issues, those failures pale in comparison to his undaunting refusal to take the leadership role in tackling the tough issues of climate change. Despite the debacle in Iraq; despite escalating personal bankruptcies; despite the growing have and have not gap; despite his failure to meet the needs of millions that have suffered through domestic environmental catastrophes, it is climate change that will be his lasting legacy. No issue affects more people on a worldwide scale than the looming alteration of our home world.

At the Bali conference on climate change the United States said that they are not ready to adopt mandatory limits on greenhouse gases and that we will come with our own plan sometime in 2008. That plan, according to most observers, will be voluntary. The European Union has already committed to mandatory reductions by 2020. Despite the dire warnings of ocean expansion, droughts, floods, increased spread of diseases and general environmental mayhem, Bush is still looking for nonbinding ways to reduce emissions. If that would work, why haven’t all of the major polluting industries already adopted nonbinding reductions? As the Bush Administration waffles, the U.S. is losing what remaining credibility is might have had as a world leader.

Of all of the nations in the world, the United States is the one nation that can afford to make reductions. Our lack of leadership will be the nail in the Pax Americana global empire. With international disdain for our foreign policies, even OPEC nations are talking about eliminating the dollar as the basis for oil pricing. As highlighted in my book, RAPING LOUISIANA: A DIARY OF DECEIT, we are seen as the international buffoon with respect to our ability to even care for our own disasters. The negative ripple effect of our sub-prime housing crisis on international banking adds even more skepticism regarding our ability to lead the world in anything.

And now our true colors begin to show and it is not the green of the environment, rather it is the green of money. At the Bali conference the U.S. and the E.U. are pushing to remove economic trade barriers so we can sell our environmental technology to third world and emerging nations. According to the OECD, this market is worth several hundred BILLION dollars each year. While one might argue that this technology should indeed be more readily available, we once again come off as looking for the bottom line in terms of money rather than the bottom line of the environment. If the U.S. had in place mandatory use of alternative technologies in all federally financed or insured projects, such a move would be credible. Since this is not the case, we come across as just seeking more ways to fatten the pockets of large corporations. While in my mind the jury is still out in terms of ethanol, it is interesting that this push to reduce tariffs does not include this technology, much to the consternation of Brazil. Is it possible that we see Brazil as too competitive for American ethanol production efforts?
Depending on the extent of the lessons that Mother Nature chooses to palace before us, Americans will see the decline in the power and status of our nation. Like barbarian hordes that knocked at the doors of the unsuspecting Romans, we, too have a blind eye regarding our status among the world community. While we will probably blame George W. Bush, we all share in that blame as we let our nation sink like the lost continent of Atlantis.