According to a New York Times report from Cancun, "The United States and China have significantly narrowed their differences on the verification of reductions in greenhouse gas emissions … providing hope that a United Nations conference here on climate change can achieve some modest success."
Over at the Guardian by way of contrast, Japan's negotiator says that there is "0 chance" that his country will move off its position against extending the Kyoto protocol beyond 2012, notwithstanding intense diplomatic pressure to do just that.
Still, according to Akira Yamada, ambassador for civil society in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, this does not necessarily spell failure at Cancun: "We need to find a form of words that is unsatisfactory for all but which is not unacceptable. We have to find some concrete wording, or new paragraphs. I admit [Japan] is making a big problem."
In the old days, with only two days left to go in Cancun, this would have been seen as a golden opportunity for Canadian diplomats. Under successive governments and successive ministers, our foreign service's rallying cry was "to make a difference." Often – too often in my experience – that amounted to providing the right word, or the right punctuation point, at the right time – with little regard to Canada's national interests.
No longer.
These days, Canada is boldly and unapologetically pursuing its national interests. Which is what mature, confident countries do in the real world. Even if it means not winning a temporary seat on the Security Council.
These days, as Shawn McCarthy reports in The Globe and Mail, Canada is directly challenging China at Cancun over its demand that it should bear less onerous commitments than developed countries. Back in Ottawa, the Prime Minister directly challenges the opposition parties to defend the asymmetrical Kyoto agreement as the best means of tackling climate change, and is met with silence on this point in Question Period.
Ironically, China – the world's leading carbon emitter – now champions the much maligned "intensity targets" that once were at the heart of Canada's position. While this may be good enough for some, it's unlikely to sway the U.S. Senate, which must ratify any legally binding successor treaty to Kyoto.
If there was ever any doubt, the jockeying in Cancun exposes the reality that the climate change file is about global economic and political power in today's world, not just about the long-term fate of the planet. Faced with an ascendant China, Japan decided to draw a line in the sand in Cancun. It, not Canada, is leading the charge against extending the Kyoto protocol.
For its part, China has not been shy at upping the pressure on Japan – its much weakened Asian rival – most markedly by cutting off its access to strategic minerals. And, a few months ago, Japan had to beat an embarrassing retreat and unconditionally free a Chinese fishing boat captain seized in disputed waters. One gets the sense, however, that on the climate change file the very nationalistic Japanese will hang tough. And that they are quietly being encouraged by the Americans who, as Hillary Clinton remarked in a WikiLeaks cable, are in no position to talk tough with their banker.