Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
07SEOUL3088
2007-10-12 07:22:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Seoul
Cable title:
SOUTH KOREAN VIEWS ON MAJOR ECONOMIES' MEETING AND
how-toVZCZCXYZ0002 RR RUEHWEB DE RUEHUL #3088/01 2850722 ZNY CCCCC ZZH R 120722Z OCT 07 FM AMEMBASSY SEOUL TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 6954 INFO RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 3252 RUEHBY/AMEMBASSY CANBERRA 8557 RUEHBR/AMEMBASSY BRASILIA 0175 RUEHME/AMEMBASSY MEXICO 0334 RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW 8302 RUEHNE/AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI 0620 RUEHOT/AMEMBASSY OTTAWA 2173 RUEHSA/AMEMBASSY PRETORIA 0171 RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO 3390 RUEHJA/AMEMBASSY JAKARTA 2461 RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 1565 RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 0956 RUEHRL/AMEMBASSY BERLIN 1489 RUEHRO/AMEMBASSY ROME 0809 RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHINGTON DC RUEAEPA/HQ EPA WASHINGTON DC RHEBAAA/DEPT OF ENERGY WASHINGTON DC RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 0477 RHEHAAA/WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON DC RUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS
C O N F I D E N T I A L SEOUL 003088
SIPDIS
SIPDIS
STATE FOR OES/EGC; WHITE HOUSE FOR CEQ
E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/12/2017
TAGS: SENV ENRG TRGY KGHG KSCA KS
SUBJECT: SOUTH KOREAN VIEWS ON MAJOR ECONOMIES' MEETING AND
NEXT STEPS
REF: SECSTATE 140075
Classified By: EMIN ANDREW QUINN, REASONS 1.4 (B) AND (D)
C O N F I D E N T I A L SEOUL 003088
SIPDIS
SIPDIS
STATE FOR OES/EGC; WHITE HOUSE FOR CEQ
E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/12/2017
TAGS: SENV ENRG TRGY KGHG KSCA KS
SUBJECT: SOUTH KOREAN VIEWS ON MAJOR ECONOMIES' MEETING AND
NEXT STEPS
REF: SECSTATE 140075
Classified By: EMIN ANDREW QUINN, REASONS 1.4 (B) AND (D)
1. (C) SUMMARY: A member of the South Korean delegation to
the September 27-28 Major Economies' Meeting (MEM) opined
that a successful outcome for the MEM process depends, in
large part, on 1) limiting the scope and ambition of the
process, and 2) bypassing France's offer to host the second
meeting. He seemed to be looking for ways to help the U.S.
chart a path to success (rather than hoping to clip the wings
of the initiative),and concluded in a sympathetic tone that
the U.S. initiative faces a tough period ahead. End summary.
2. (U) ESTH Chief met October 12 with Kim Chan-woo, Senior
Coordinator for Environmental and Scientific Affairs at the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MOFAT),to obtain
Korean perceptions of the MEM. Kim was part of the Korean
delegation to the MEM, led by Foreign Minister Song Min-soon.
3. (C) Kim observed that the conflicting interests
(particularly between developing and developed countries)
seen in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change (UNFCCC) process were on display in the MEM.
Particularly in view of the MEM's ambitious timetable
(including the target of holding a leaders' meeting in 2008),
Kim asserted, the question arises whether the level of
ambition in the U.S. vision for the MEM process is realistic.
The prospects for achieving a consensus among the disparate
MEM participants depend on holding the level of ambition low
enough to make consensus feasible. For example, he said that
it was not entirely clear to all participants whether the
proposed interim national targets would be completely
voluntary, or whether the U.S. envisioned a process of
comparing, coordinating and massaging those targets. (His
implicit conclusion was that the latter would not fly.) When
ESTH Chief referred to the U.S. concept of "pledge and
review" of voluntary targets, Kim responded that he wasn't
sure that even "pledge and review" was feasible.
4. (C) Kim noted that numerous participants had argued that
some of the subjects broached by the MEM were of strong
interest to countries not represented. He mentioned
specifically adaptation and conservation of tropical forests.
He suggested that leaving those subjects to other processes
might improve the odds of consensus within the MEM.
5. (C) Describing France's offer to host the second meeting
as a major hurdle to progress, Kim asserted that finding a
diplomatic way around that will be key. The first meeting
did not fully lay the groundwork for a successful MEM
process, and the second meeting will be crucial, he contended.
6. (C) One indicator of the mixed response to the U.S.
initiative, Kim indicated, was that according to his
information fewer than 10 of the attending economies had
submitted the requested matrices of actions already under
way. He confirmed that Korea had submitted its matrix.
7. (C) Asked about Korea's response to the President's
proposal for an international technology fund, Kim said that
Korea had not had an opportunity to examine it in depth yet
and looked forward to hearing details.
8. (C) ESTH Chief also asked Kim how to interpret reports
that Korea had taken the position that it should be treated
as a developing country ("equivalent to Bangladesh?") in
terms of climate change commitments. Kim recalled that that
has been a consistent Korean position, including in the terms
it negotiated for accession to the OECD in 1996. That said,
he noted that the Korean press is increasingly focusing on
climate change, and public understanding of the issue is
growing. Most ministries accept that Korea will have to
adopt policies to curb emissions. He implied that the
traditional Korean position will not be the last word as
international efforts evolve.
9. (C) COMMENT: Kim concluded, sympathetically, that the
United States, as initiator and leader of the MEM process,
faces a very tough period ahead. His comments about limiting
the ambition of the project seemed to reflect the views of a
partner struggling to help chart a path toward success rather
than of someone hoping to clip the wings of the initiative.
End comment.
STANTON
SIPDIS
SIPDIS
STATE FOR OES/EGC; WHITE HOUSE FOR CEQ
E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/12/2017
TAGS: SENV ENRG TRGY KGHG KSCA KS
SUBJECT: SOUTH KOREAN VIEWS ON MAJOR ECONOMIES' MEETING AND
NEXT STEPS
REF: SECSTATE 140075
Classified By: EMIN ANDREW QUINN, REASONS 1.4 (B) AND (D)
1. (C) SUMMARY: A member of the South Korean delegation to
the September 27-28 Major Economies' Meeting (MEM) opined
that a successful outcome for the MEM process depends, in
large part, on 1) limiting the scope and ambition of the
process, and 2) bypassing France's offer to host the second
meeting. He seemed to be looking for ways to help the U.S.
chart a path to success (rather than hoping to clip the wings
of the initiative),and concluded in a sympathetic tone that
the U.S. initiative faces a tough period ahead. End summary.
2. (U) ESTH Chief met October 12 with Kim Chan-woo, Senior
Coordinator for Environmental and Scientific Affairs at the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MOFAT),to obtain
Korean perceptions of the MEM. Kim was part of the Korean
delegation to the MEM, led by Foreign Minister Song Min-soon.
3. (C) Kim observed that the conflicting interests
(particularly between developing and developed countries)
seen in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change (UNFCCC) process were on display in the MEM.
Particularly in view of the MEM's ambitious timetable
(including the target of holding a leaders' meeting in 2008),
Kim asserted, the question arises whether the level of
ambition in the U.S. vision for the MEM process is realistic.
The prospects for achieving a consensus among the disparate
MEM participants depend on holding the level of ambition low
enough to make consensus feasible. For example, he said that
it was not entirely clear to all participants whether the
proposed interim national targets would be completely
voluntary, or whether the U.S. envisioned a process of
comparing, coordinating and massaging those targets. (His
implicit conclusion was that the latter would not fly.) When
ESTH Chief referred to the U.S. concept of "pledge and
review" of voluntary targets, Kim responded that he wasn't
sure that even "pledge and review" was feasible.
4. (C) Kim noted that numerous participants had argued that
some of the subjects broached by the MEM were of strong
interest to countries not represented. He mentioned
specifically adaptation and conservation of tropical forests.
He suggested that leaving those subjects to other processes
might improve the odds of consensus within the MEM.
5. (C) Describing France's offer to host the second meeting
as a major hurdle to progress, Kim asserted that finding a
diplomatic way around that will be key. The first meeting
did not fully lay the groundwork for a successful MEM
process, and the second meeting will be crucial, he contended.
6. (C) One indicator of the mixed response to the U.S.
initiative, Kim indicated, was that according to his
information fewer than 10 of the attending economies had
submitted the requested matrices of actions already under
way. He confirmed that Korea had submitted its matrix.
7. (C) Asked about Korea's response to the President's
proposal for an international technology fund, Kim said that
Korea had not had an opportunity to examine it in depth yet
and looked forward to hearing details.
8. (C) ESTH Chief also asked Kim how to interpret reports
that Korea had taken the position that it should be treated
as a developing country ("equivalent to Bangladesh?") in
terms of climate change commitments. Kim recalled that that
has been a consistent Korean position, including in the terms
it negotiated for accession to the OECD in 1996. That said,
he noted that the Korean press is increasingly focusing on
climate change, and public understanding of the issue is
growing. Most ministries accept that Korea will have to
adopt policies to curb emissions. He implied that the
traditional Korean position will not be the last word as
international efforts evolve.
9. (C) COMMENT: Kim concluded, sympathetically, that the
United States, as initiator and leader of the MEM process,
faces a very tough period ahead. His comments about limiting
the ambition of the project seemed to reflect the views of a
partner struggling to help chart a path toward success rather
than of someone hoping to clip the wings of the initiative.
End comment.
STANTON