• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Live From Copenhagen: A Matter of Sovereignty

    The Heritage Foundation’s Steven Groves and Ben Lieberman are live at the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference reporting from a conservative perspective. Follow their reports on The Foundry and at the Copenhagen Consequences Web site.

    Climate change negotiations here in Copenhagen have apparently hit a speed bump because the United States and China are in a dispute over a sovereignty issue. But it is China, ironically, that is raising a fuss about intrusions within its borders.

    This impasse is ironic since it is the United States that should be most jealous of guarding its sovereignty in the face of what could be a major intrusion by the international community on U.S. energy policy.

    China, it seems, is unwilling to allow any foreign country or international organization to monitor its compliance with its treaty obligations—specifically its obligation to reduce its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. That unwillingness is apparently a non-starter for the United States. Massachusetts House member Edward Markey—a lead Democrat voice on climate change—understands that China’s lack of transparency is problematic:

    “If China or any other country wants to be a full partner in global climate efforts, that country must commit to transparency and review of their emissions-cutting regime. … Without that commitment, other governments and industries, including those in America, will be hesitant to engage with those countries when they try to partner on global warming.”

    The United States must jealously guard its sovereignty, but unlike China the U.S. has a tradition of transparency, a free press, and a separation of government powers. All of those factors would permit the U.S. to demonstrate compliance with any climate treaty—however misguided that treaty may be—without the intrusion of a new international climate bureaucracy into U.S. domestic policy.

    In the end, China—the world’s top GHG emitter—may be allowed off the hook when it comes to international verification of its treaty obligations, while the U.S. would be required to submit to intrusive international inspection.

    Such a result would be not only ironic, but disastrous.

    Posted in Energy [slideshow_deploy]

    9 Responses to Live From Copenhagen: A Matter of Sovereignty

    1. J.C. Hughes, Texas says:

      GO CHINA! When it comes to national sovereignty, they obviously get it. No irresponsible self-destructive PC there.

    2. Ozzy6900, CT says:

      "…In the end, China—the world’s top GHG emitter—may be allowed off the hook when it comes to international verification of its treaty obligations, while the U.S. would be required to submit to intrusive international inspection…."

      Now do you see why I say this whole thing is one of the stupidest things I have ever heard of? Couple the above with the whole "buy credit" thing and what have you left? A great way to fleece money from one Economy to another, legally!

    3. RLV Phila.Pa. says:

      The United States must keep its sovereignty.We can't have these European nations coming hear and running our country.It will turn the USA into a Bannana Republic bring chaos and destuction to our way of life.Global Warming is Political Hog Wash,its a Money maker for the elite chosen few.There has always been climate change,even before mankind has been on this earth,we can't even predict local weather let alone worry about glbal warming.From the normal cycle of weather patterns,I think in a couple of thousand years if mankind is still on this earth we may experience another Ice Age.

    4. John B. San Diego says:

      I accept no regulation or mandate from the United Nations, climate change is a phenomenon that has gone on eons before we enjoyed the presence of IPCC and will continue for eons after IPCC. Cap & Trade will do nothing to lower emissions and will be a source of Derivative like Trading that will add manipulation and corruption on the trading index at Wall Street in my opinion.

      “POWERGRAB,” the trip we are on ends at Brussels by way of a short stop at,”Lost US Sovereignty” we be arriving in Brussels ladies and gentlemen ahead of schedule we hope you’ve enjoyed your trip!

    5. Ron Kilmartin, Pleas says:

      For over a decade some 30,000 scientists and engineers have gone on record that warming is not due to AGW; the models are incorrect since they cannot accurately reproduce history. However, the liberal media and the US Congress and Obama are entranced by Gore and his pals; it does not matter as long as General Electric and BP and Gore and George Moros and whoever else get their share out of cap and trade and new "science" contracts.

      Climategate has shown that the whole warming proposition is founded in mid air. What a crime against humanity.

    6. Pingback: PA Pundits - International

    7. Pingback: Live at Copenhagen: Try Again In 2010 – The Final Slogan From Copenhagen? | Conservative Principles Now

    8. markjuliansmith,Canb says:

      How many times must we hear the word which condemns humanity so certainly to destruction ‘Sovereignty’?

      Sovereignty the right without accountability to any entity, divine or otherwise, for the heinous crimes perpetrated by an elite against fellow humanity and nature itself.

      What boundaries can we define for the air we breathe, the oceans we fish, the land we plough and the ideas which shape our destinies? How can we restrict in anyway the passage of effects from one so called human sovereign habitat to another? We cannot – for the lines in the sands do not create immutable voids. We know this to be true yet we persist in sovereignties acceptance even though we have enough destruction of humanity and nature to prove its worthlessness as a tool for a better future.

      There are no boundaries, no walls, and no impediments of any sort which can restrict the effects of the action of one human being upon another or upon the environment within which we humans have the good fortune to exist.

      The notion that somehow we are capable of preserving ourselves by being separate from the common cause of humanity to promote our own selfish advantage is an approach we must now cast aside.

      The idea that enabling my independence first at the expense of others is a rational means of sharing scarce resources of our planet and assuring common security is clearly disproven.

      It is only by seeking to enable the independence of others first that we will be able to realise a common human need for providing for our families and the successful future of the planet earth.

    9. Pete, U.K. says:

      This treaty is ploy to set the foundations for a world government. Carbon trading is a big money spinner. Why can we not have a debate on global warming? Many scientists believe it is a fraud. Bring on the carbon taxes!

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.