MEDIA REACTION: CLIMATE CHANGE, AFGHANISTAN, NORTH KOREA

UNCLAS BEIJING 003264 DEPARTMENT FOR INR/R/MR, EAP/CM, EAP/PA, EAP/PD, C HQ PACOM FOR PUBLIC DIPLOMACY ADVISOR (J007) SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PREL ECON KMDR OPRC CH SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: CLIMATE CHANGE, AFGHANISTAN, NORTH KOREA -------------- Editorial Quotes -------------- ¶1. CLIMATE CHANGE a. "The world sets its eyes on Copenhagen" The official Communist Party People's Daily (Renmin Ribao)(12/07)(pg 13): "Many people describe the Copenhagen Conference as the last chance to save the globe. For Bangkok and cities in the neighboring area, climate change has become a matter of survival. In India, local people's concern over protecting the tropical rain forests in fact matters to their survival and employment. An Indian professor said that people have to make actions at once, giving a broad consideration of environmental protection, even if personal interests would be sacrificed. Wang Gengchen, a researcher at the Institute of Atmospheric Physics at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, stressed that climate change negotiations go far beyond climate science. Developing countries' rights need not to be ignored and developed countries should help developing countries by providing more funds and technologies." b. "The U.S. factor spells doom for the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference" The official Communist Youth League China Youth Daily (Zhongguo Qingnianbao)(12/07)(pg 5): "Quite a few climate experts argue that China and the United States' commitments to climate change targets are not enough to make up the difference between developed and developing countries. Because the United States still has not made any progress in combating climate change, expectations for the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen should not be high. The U.S. commitment to emissions reduction is indispensable for reaching a new global climate change treaty. However, the U.S.'s announced goal of emissions reduction is far removed from its role as the world's super power. What's even more worrying is that such a disappointing goal may not be passed by the U.S. Congress. Regarding the mid-term election, senators opposing the bill will unlikely compromise. At the same time, the carbon tariff bill in the process of gaining approval from the U.S. Congress is in fact trade protection measures in the name of environmental protection. The impasse has yet to be broken. Therefore prospects for the Copenhagen Conference are dim." ¶2. AFGHANISTAN "To increase troops in Afghanistan, the U.S. seeks Wakhan corridor" The official Communist Party international news publication Global Times (Huanqiu Shibao)(12/07)(pg 8): "Experts believe that logistic supplies are crucial for increasing troops in Afghanistan. Regarding the important geographical locations of China and Russia, it will be critical to see whether the two countries can stay outside the U.S. plan for increasing troops in Afghanistan. Chinese military expert Peng Guangqian said that it is hard to deliver transport supplies to U.S. troops in Afghanistan through the Wakhan Corridor since China-NATO military cooperation is still at an initial phase. It is even more "impossible" that China would send combat troops to Afghanistan. The U.S. will have to stop its efforts to try to pull China down into the water." ¶3. NORTH KOREA "What's the harm if the U.S. takes one step back on the North Korea nuclear issue?" The official Communist Party international news publication Global Times (Huanqiu Shibao)(12/07)(pg 14): "The U.S. is unwilling to leave the world with the impression that it started to have talks with North Korea due to pressure from North Korea. In fact, only when the U.S., as the big country, takes the lead and makes adjustments (to its strategy) will a turning point on the nuclear issue arrive. If the U.S. can compromise first, a process of mutual trust could be established. In fact these compromises can be undone if North Korea refuses to compromise after the U.S.'s compromise. Obviously in that way North Korea will receive a more severe punishment, of which it can't bear the consequence. Even if North Korea completely gives up its nuclear programs, capacity to possess nuclear technology can't now be taken away. At this point, the U.S. long-term strategy should be to compromise first. In fact, in history, although the U.S. has not benefited much from compromising, the truth is that the U.S. did not make real compromises at all. The U.S. policy for the future should be based on solving issues instead of just being conciliatory. North Korea, at the same time, should also take the initiative to make active reactions." HUNTSMAN