AUSTRALIAN VIEWS ON MEF MEETINGS, CHINA, UNFCCC

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 CANBERRA 000603 NOFORN SIPDIS STATE FOR S/SECC STERN, OES/EGC TALLEY. WHITE HOUSE FOR NSC FROMAN E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/02/2019 TAGS: SENV KGHG AS SUBJECT: AUSTRALIAN VIEWS ON MEF MEETINGS, CHINA, UNFCCC NEGOTIATIONS REF: A. CANBERRA 525 ¶B. CANBERRA 583 Classified By: Economic Counselor Edgard Kagan, Reasons 1.4(b)(d) ¶1. (C/NF) Summary: Australian negotiators in the Major Economies Forum (MEF) are impressed with the recent movement toward a joint leaders' statement in the run up to the leaders' meetings in L'Aquila in July. Australia's stalled domestic climate change legislation is seen as having undercut Australia's negotiating position. The GOA is concerned that domestic climate legislation in the U.S., combined with the dynamics of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, will lead towards an international framework where commitments are enforced through trade measures. The growing perception of a common understanding between the U.S. and China is making some other interlocutors less comfortable. Australia is waiting to learn more about Chinese concepts involving technology and assistance on climate change. Climate Change Minister Penny Wong is waiting for a U.S. decision on whether a meeting on text of the statement is necessary in Rome next week, and her travel plans include flexibility to attend If that occurs. End Summary. ¶2. (C/NF) Econ counselor and econoff met with Department of Climate Change (DCC) Deputy Secretary Howard Bamsey and Chief Advisor for International issues Harinder Sidhu for lunch on June 30 to discuss the recently concluded major economies forum meetings and future negotiations. Bamsey and Sidhu made up the GOA team at Cuernavaca as Climate Minister Penny Wong remained in Canberra to try and pass the government's domestic climate change legislation through the Senate (ref A). Progress But Not Perfection -------------- ¶3. (C/NF) Bamsey said he was impressed with how quickly the MEF members, led by the U.S., had been able to agree in principle to a leaders' statement and the degree of work that had been achieved. He singled out Deputy National Security Advisor Froman and Special Envoy Stern in particular as having assembled and led an "excellent team" to get such rapid progress. He also expressed appreciation for the ongoing partnership with the U.S. delegation, saying that Australia particularly values Deputy Envoy Pershing's work to reach a substantive outcome. Bamsey said he was surprised at how far the MEF statement had come, but was concerned that the expectations built up by President Obama's very public commitment to action on climate change will be unfulfilled. The passage of H.R. 2425 on June 26 strengthens the U.S. position in international negotiations, Bamsey said. However, he noted that this also increased already high expectations, expressing concern that the draft MEF leaders' statement may be seen as lacking the specifics to cement forward progress. In Bamsey's view, the "visibly more comfortable" interaction between U.S. and Chinese negotiators in the MEF was making other delegations, including the EU, less certain that they will carry the day on key issues in the UNFCCC. In what Sidhu called the "cynicism-heavy Qthe UNFCCC. In what Sidhu called the "cynicism-heavy environment" of the UNFCCC negotiations, Bamsey still held to the belief that the failure of the government to pass domestic legislation in June (ref B) did have a negative impact on Australia's ability to influence the Copenhagen process. Bamsey said that the passage of domestic legislation, either in Australia or the U.S., demonstrated that international commitments were serious. For a "middle power" like Australia, this gives a bit more credibility to strengthen its hand at the table. ¶4. (C/NF) According to Bamsey, one of the challenges facing a successful MEF outcome will be when other delegations, led by the EU, recognize that the U.S. is seeking a more flexible international framework than they are willing to accept. CANBERRA 00000603 002 OF 002 Bamsey suggested that the Europeans in the MEF had not yet come to grips with the fact that the U.S., in Bamsey's view, is setting the stage for an outcome at Copenhagen that would not result in a "central UN body handing out emissions limits and enforcing them." Such an approach would probably allow a greater chance for success, Bamsey said, but would be seen by many Europeans as flawed because each country would be responsible for monitoring and enforcing its own reductions, rather than a central body. Trade Impacts A Potential Concern -------------- ¶5. (C/NF) Bamsey said that a critical stumbling block between international outcomes and domestic frameworks would be the relationship between addressing climate change and possible impact on trade. In his view, H.R. 2425 signaled the possibility that the U.S. is heading toward a negotiating position that could result in an international framework that imposes costs on those who are not taking action through trade measures. Stressing that any such measures would be poorly received in Australia, Bamsey said possible methods of "border leveling" could be constructed that might not necessarily violate free trade principles between developed and developing nations. Noting the broad political commitment of both major parties to free trade, as well as concern that border mechanisms would inevitably become a vehicle for a resurgence of protectionism, Bamsey said that a system where enforcement took place through trade measures would be "very problematic" for Australia. Bamsey stated that no one was willing to talk truthfully about this yet in the international negotiations, but it would absolutely have to be dealt with or could undermine a successful outcome in Copenhagen. On China, Bamsey commented that he doesn't understand what exactly China needs from developed countries in terms of technology transfer and intellectual property (IP). While Beijing might dream that an agreement will deliver "a huge block of IP on a plate" for China, the PRC had not made clear to Australia what it wants and the GOA was unclear exactly how to proceed in the absence of more concrete demands. Nonetheless, Bamsey said he was among the "hopeless optimists" about China playing a constructive role in the UNFCCC process once Beijing decides its bottom line. He argued that the shift in the U.S. position means that China is much more likely to be blamed for lack of progress -- a position Beijing clearly wants to avoid. ¶6. (C/NF) Bamsey said that GOA plans for L'Aquila were not well developed. While he had been told that he would be attending, and to make someone available to travel with PM Rudd and Minister Wong, there had been little clear discussion between DCC and the PM's office to prepare for the meetings. Bamsey said that his understanding of the idea of having the PM open the Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute (GCCSI) depended less on a U.S. decision to participate than the Italians being able to organize an Qparticipate than the Italians being able to organize an event. Bamsey will travel to Greenland on July 2 to participate in preparatory meetings for the UNFCCC. He said that Minister Wong was waiting to hear whether the U.S. was organizing a meeting before the leaders' meeting to complete difficult negotiations on the text of a statement. He said he believed that Wong's travel in Europe could be altered if necessary to participate. ¶7. (C/NF) Comment: Bamsey is frank in his appreciation of what the MEF has achieved so far but clearly concerned that that the final leaders' text must be seen as a substantive step forward in order to add momentum to the UNFCCC negotiations. The focus on domestic politics in Australia has disrupted the GOA's preparations for L'Aquila, but Bamsey was confident that Australia will support U.S. goals at the meetings. End comment. CLUNE