This article appeared as an Op-Ed piece in the Toronto Star, Feb 4, 2007
As is so often the case, the Canadian public is far ahead of Canada’s politicians (especially those who “lead” by following public opinion polls). Most Canadians, it seems, want Canada to meet its commitments under the Kyoto Protocol. Well, they have it right. They have it right from the standpoint of combating climate change. They have it right from the standpoint of international law. And they have it right from the standpoint of Canada’s standing in the world.
Little more needs to be said on the climate change issue as such. Yesterday’s UN report makes for a chilling read, the hot topic notwithstanding. As for Canada, judging from the new Environment Minister’s record-breaking use of the word “science” in one interview, our government now accepts the inconvenient truth about global warming. And, however inconvenient, it is no less true that Canada must get serious about its Kyoto targets. Not because these targets would bring us anywhere near solving the climate problem. But because they get us on the unavoidable road to the much larger cuts required in the future. It may well be that Canada cannot reduce its greenhouse gas emissions enough to meet its Kyoto targets. But that is not what the Kyoto Protocol requires of Canada. The Protocol specifically allows countries to supplement efforts at home through reduction credits acquired abroad. One of the Protocol’s most innovative aspects is the “Clean Development Mechanism,” which Canada helped negotiate. It promotes emission reductions where they are more cost-effective and helps bring developing countries on the right climate track. And let us be clear: There is a big difference between buying empty emission rights from Russia and investing in actual emission reductions in developing countries. The bottom-line is: Canada can meet its commitment, by making credible efforts at home and acquiring reduction credits. There simply is no excuse for Canada not to honour its commitment.
That leads to the second point. Plain and simple: Canada has a legally binding obligation to comply with its Kyoto commitments. Honouring treaties is not a trivial matter or a matter of convenience. One of the foundational principles of international law is that “Every treaty in force is binding upon the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith.” International law rests on this principle. Obviously, states do violate international law, for any number of reasons. But when a country fails to make even a good faith effort to meet its commitments, let alone shows actual disregard for them, then we must take notice. Flatly disregarding a treaty commitment is not just a violation that has legal consequences, it undermines the very foundations of international law. That is why we should be concerned about Canada’s recent stance on Kyoto.
Which brings me to my final point. It is a rare spectacle for a country to say to the world: “Well, yes, climate change is important. But, sorry, we won’t be able to meet our commitment. And, by the way, we won’t even try.” Whether deliberately or through lack of experience, Canada’s Kyoto “diplomacy” has done great damage to our international reputation and severely undermined our ability to influence the ongoing negotiations. Indeed, the Kyoto message Canada sent last year was reckless. Given its nonchalance towards Kyoto, how much weight will Canada have when it demands that other countries honour their international commitments (on softwood lumber, for example, or the rights of our citizens abroad)?
Let’s hope that the new Environment Minister will send dramatically different signals at the Paris meeting, and that the Canadian government will follow through by closing our Kyoto (credibility) gap. Canadians are right to insist that Canada live up to its Kyoto commitments. For all the right reasons.