Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Indispensability and Indefensibility? The United States in the Climate Treaty Negotiations

Indispensability and Indefensibility? The United States in the Climate Treaty Negotiations Global Governance 5 (1999), 457–482 Indispensability and Indefensibility? The United States in the Climate Treaty Negotiations Shardul Agrawala and Steinar Andresen The United States has a penchant these days for joining international ne- gotiations that spin out of control. We went to Kyoto to talk about cli- mate change and discovered we couldn’t sign the treaty. We went to Ot- tawa to talk about landmines and found our military problems ignored by other states. We may be the “indispensable country,” as Secretary of State Madeleine Albright likes to say. But we often set ourselves up as Alamo holdouts, criticized as the indispensable country with indefensible positions. —Ruth Wedgwood, New York Times, 10 June 1998 he United States is the single most important national actor in the global climate regime for reasons of both historical and practical T significance. Historically, U.S. federal support has played a pivotal role in fostering pioneering research on several aspects of climate change, including the development of general circulation models used to construct scenarios of future climates. Without this support, climate change might not be the global policy concern that it is today. Meanwhile, from a prag- matic perspective, the United States remains the single http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations Brill

Indispensability and Indefensibility? The United States in the Climate Treaty Negotiations

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/indispensability-and-indefensibility-the-united-states-in-the-climate-Eso0AbVuhs

References (10)

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
Copyright © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
1075-2846
eISSN
1942-6720
DOI
10.1163/19426720-00504004
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Global Governance 5 (1999), 457–482 Indispensability and Indefensibility? The United States in the Climate Treaty Negotiations Shardul Agrawala and Steinar Andresen The United States has a penchant these days for joining international ne- gotiations that spin out of control. We went to Kyoto to talk about cli- mate change and discovered we couldn’t sign the treaty. We went to Ot- tawa to talk about landmines and found our military problems ignored by other states. We may be the “indispensable country,” as Secretary of State Madeleine Albright likes to say. But we often set ourselves up as Alamo holdouts, criticized as the indispensable country with indefensible positions. —Ruth Wedgwood, New York Times, 10 June 1998 he United States is the single most important national actor in the global climate regime for reasons of both historical and practical T significance. Historically, U.S. federal support has played a pivotal role in fostering pioneering research on several aspects of climate change, including the development of general circulation models used to construct scenarios of future climates. Without this support, climate change might not be the global policy concern that it is today. Meanwhile, from a prag- matic perspective, the United States remains the single

Journal

Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International OrganizationsBrill

Published: Aug 3, 1999

There are no references for this article.