Quite true, Peter, but the fact that you have countries like the U.S. and China talking about the need to address climate change in one of the most important MEA forums is likely to emphasize the exigency even more of confronting the spectre of global warming, and my guess is that the public is going to say "if it's salutary to address it indirectly, in fora such as the Ozone Convention, then why not directly in the UNFCCC/Kyoto Framework?" While the U.S. and China may be seeking to downplay the need to confront climate in these fora by working in others, my guess is that this strategy will prove too clever by half. (And, you know, I heard tell that there's something called "epistemic communities" and they work across regimes in many cases :-))
I think the glass on this one is at least three-quarters full, and how often do we get to say that! wil Dr. Wil Burns Senior Fellow, International Environmental Law Santa Clara University School of Law 500 El Camino Real, Loyola 101 Santa Clara, CA 95053 USA Phone: 408.551.3000 x6139 Mobile: 650.281.9126 Fax: 408.554.2745 [EMAIL PROTECTED] SSRN Author Page: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=240348 International Environmental Law Blog: http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/intlenvironment/ _____ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of phaas Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 5:07 PM To: GEP-ED Subject: ozone/climate change lets not prematurely celebrate the ozone achievements. While a great advance, surely, for ozone protection, the linkage politics to clmiate change were strongly presented in the NYT and various press releases by delegates, indicating that this will be used as a reason to justify further delay on dealing with climate change. Peter M. Haas Professor Department of Political Science 216 Thompson Hall University of Massachusetts Amherst, Massachusetts 01003 USA ph 1 413 545 6174 fax 1 413 545 3349