2008/7/13 22：46
The 34th Toyoko G8 Summit Meeting in 2008 分類なし
To begin with, Summit Meeting was launched in 1975 at Rambouillet, France in order to deal with the "Oil Shock."
So at that time, it is only natural that Summit Meeting was a place of confliction of national interests. In the first Summit, amount of oil import quota was negotiated among developed countries.
But the U.S., as a leader of the western world, rejected to compromise, and European countries were pre-negotiated and agreed on their quote. As the result, Japan drew a blank.
But soon later, summit meetings changed its nature in that western countries confirm their solidarity in order to face up to the communism.
Soon later again, expecially since the collapse of the Soviet, summit meetings changed to the place where leaders of developed countries enjoy their friendship and taking a ceremonial photograph, for your ref.>"The 33th Heiligendamm Summit over"
But this year, summit meeting changes its charactor where confrontation of national interests.
When it comes to reasons why the G8 SUMMIT 2008 in Toyako, Hokkaido changes its nature, there are some reasons, for your ref.>"Tough tasks on G8's agenda" & "Puzzle awaits G8 delegates" & "The G8 summit, A world of troubles to tackle"
First, paticipants confronted in the crude oil prices surging issue, for your ref.>"G8 SUMMIT 2008, Leaders call for more fuel to cool global inflation"
Indeed, not only crude oil but all commodity prices are surging recently.
Some accuse of speculative money for oil prices surging. It is likely that they are correct at least partly.
But we should note remind that speculative money doesn't reverse fundamental trend of market but only exaggerate that in most cases. There is a solid and continuous rise of demands mainly due to emerging economies such as China and India.
It means that it is very likely that global oil demands will only increase, and so do oil prices even if economies of China and India slow down.
When the Summit Meeting was launched in 1975, the Oil Shock was ignited by the 4th Middle East War so it was a supply side shock.
But current shock is a demand-side shock and oil suppliers are making their almost maximam efforts to produce crude oil.
In the long run, there could be some solutions such as sand-oil and oil shale. But there is no magic wand that will be able to settle current energy issue promptly.
Second issue is global warming -- in other words, emission control of greenhouse gases. On the contrary to ostensible beautiful rhetoric o "save the planet," there is also a severe conflict of national interests behind that.
For example, the "Kyoto Protocol" requires ratified developed countries to reduce CO2 emotion from reference year of 1990. Why 1990?
Here, we should remind that 1990 is the year the Soviet Union collapsed.
Just after that, ex. communism East Europe countries declined their economies and CO2 emissions. In addition, it is relatively easy to reduce CO2 emission via replacing obsolete and dirty industrial facilities and equipments in East Europe.
So it is in their regional interests to select 1990 as a reference year of the Kyoto Protocol.
Here, we should also remind that the EU insisted on joining the Kyoto Protocol as the status of each and every European country but as a whole Europe.
On the contrary, Japan was forced to accept terribly unfavorable conditions likened to "squeezing a dry towel more."
Indeed, some calls the Kyoto Protocol "a second Unequal Treaties" that the Edo Shogunate was forced to conclude with the western Great Powers in the later 19th century.
Indeed, it is impossible for Japan to reduce its CO2 emission by 6% from the reference year of 1990. To compensate that, there is no way but acquire emission credits via trading or CDM for Japan.
Off course, introducing of renewable energies and nuclear energy is progressing. Indeed, Japan is making efforts to introduce that, for your ref.>"Power utilities under pressure to clean up their act" & "Nature stifling wind power in Japan"
In addition, introducing newly developed nuclear generation is also progressing, for your ref.>"G8 SUMMIT 2008, Nuke plant makers cast eye abroad"
Utilization of bio-fuel, ethanol, is also wide spreading. But it ignites another issue -- food shortage.
Third, food crisis is one of the major agendas o the 31st Summit Meeting, for your ref.>'The era of food shortage, or even "crisis"'
More annoyingly, above mentioned three issues are closely and complicatedly related each other.
The more staples are used to produce bio fuel to reduce CO2 emission, the more prices of foods rise. Higher prices of energy resources are effective to suppress energy consumption and CO2 emission.
And every and each country wants to emit CO2 as much as possible to promote economic growth.
Especially, emerging countries are reluctant to shoulder responsibility because they think "it is not ours but developed countries' responsibility who have already released huge amount of CO2 until now."
Developed countries are also concern about "CO2 leakage" of hollowing of domestic industry -- firms move to developing countries where they can emit CO2 without restriction.
When it comes to green technology, Japan is in a favorable postion, for your ref.>"Seed of next business -- earn profit via environment"
But Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda failed to show his initiative to lead argument and adjust egos of participants.
Rather than such kind of long term goal, it seems that participants are much interested in short sighted economic woe, for your rer.>"Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae, The muddle-through approach" & "Global markets, Bearish battalions" & "Still under declining phase" & "Hedge funds, The secrets of succession"
In short, the G8 failed to agree on the concrete and numerical target of emission reduction in the mid term scheme after the Kyoto Protocal, for your ref.>"G8 offers halving of emissions by 2050" & "A modest step forward" & "G8 couldn't push emitters to set targets"
Perhaps, G8 summit meeting has already been losing its decision making power as the result of emerging economies, for your ref.>"Too much for the G8 alone"
Indeed, French President Nicolas Sarkozy has an idea to expand current G8 to G13. But other leaders are not so enthusiastic.
Indeed, it is rational concern that too many participants will make summit meetings change to "Le congres danse beaucoup, mais il ne marche pas."
Even among 8 participants, it is really difficult ot negotiate and adjust national interests, for your ref.>"The G8 summit in Hokkaido. They came, they jawed, they failed to conquer"
The more participants, the more it will be tough to reach agreement.
Anyway, there is no doubt that recent circumstances and the G8 Summit Meeting are forcing us to reconsider about mass-production and mass-consumption economy and society, for your ref.>"Real cost of bottled water" & "The price of ramen"
For your ref.>Al Gore & the green inquisition
>Are 24-hour shops a waste of energy?
>Cliches won't rescue Earth
>Australia's pollution problem
>Failure to address climate change like spitting in the wind
>Eco-friendly packaging, Losing their bottle
>Facing a rise in sea level
>Knowing your 'carbon footprint'
>Should Asia brace for more mega storms?
>Misuse of the inaction argument
So at that time, it is only natural that Summit Meeting was a place of confliction of national interests. In the first Summit, amount of oil import quota was negotiated among developed countries.
But the U.S., as a leader of the western world, rejected to compromise, and European countries were pre-negotiated and agreed on their quote. As the result, Japan drew a blank.
But soon later, summit meetings changed its nature in that western countries confirm their solidarity in order to face up to the communism.
Soon later again, expecially since the collapse of the Soviet, summit meetings changed to the place where leaders of developed countries enjoy their friendship and taking a ceremonial photograph, for your ref.>"The 33th Heiligendamm Summit over"
But this year, summit meeting changes its charactor where confrontation of national interests.
When it comes to reasons why the G8 SUMMIT 2008 in Toyako, Hokkaido changes its nature, there are some reasons, for your ref.>"Tough tasks on G8's agenda" & "Puzzle awaits G8 delegates" & "The G8 summit, A world of troubles to tackle"
First, paticipants confronted in the crude oil prices surging issue, for your ref.>"G8 SUMMIT 2008, Leaders call for more fuel to cool global inflation"
Indeed, not only crude oil but all commodity prices are surging recently.
Some accuse of speculative money for oil prices surging. It is likely that they are correct at least partly.
But we should note remind that speculative money doesn't reverse fundamental trend of market but only exaggerate that in most cases. There is a solid and continuous rise of demands mainly due to emerging economies such as China and India.
It means that it is very likely that global oil demands will only increase, and so do oil prices even if economies of China and India slow down.
When the Summit Meeting was launched in 1975, the Oil Shock was ignited by the 4th Middle East War so it was a supply side shock.
But current shock is a demand-side shock and oil suppliers are making their almost maximam efforts to produce crude oil.
In the long run, there could be some solutions such as sand-oil and oil shale. But there is no magic wand that will be able to settle current energy issue promptly.
Second issue is global warming -- in other words, emission control of greenhouse gases. On the contrary to ostensible beautiful rhetoric o "save the planet," there is also a severe conflict of national interests behind that.
For example, the "Kyoto Protocol" requires ratified developed countries to reduce CO2 emotion from reference year of 1990. Why 1990?
Here, we should remind that 1990 is the year the Soviet Union collapsed.
Just after that, ex. communism East Europe countries declined their economies and CO2 emissions. In addition, it is relatively easy to reduce CO2 emission via replacing obsolete and dirty industrial facilities and equipments in East Europe.
So it is in their regional interests to select 1990 as a reference year of the Kyoto Protocol.
Here, we should also remind that the EU insisted on joining the Kyoto Protocol as the status of each and every European country but as a whole Europe.
On the contrary, Japan was forced to accept terribly unfavorable conditions likened to "squeezing a dry towel more."
Indeed, some calls the Kyoto Protocol "a second Unequal Treaties" that the Edo Shogunate was forced to conclude with the western Great Powers in the later 19th century.
Indeed, it is impossible for Japan to reduce its CO2 emission by 6% from the reference year of 1990. To compensate that, there is no way but acquire emission credits via trading or CDM for Japan.
Off course, introducing of renewable energies and nuclear energy is progressing. Indeed, Japan is making efforts to introduce that, for your ref.>"Power utilities under pressure to clean up their act" & "Nature stifling wind power in Japan"
In addition, introducing newly developed nuclear generation is also progressing, for your ref.>"G8 SUMMIT 2008, Nuke plant makers cast eye abroad"
Utilization of bio-fuel, ethanol, is also wide spreading. But it ignites another issue -- food shortage.
Third, food crisis is one of the major agendas o the 31st Summit Meeting, for your ref.>'The era of food shortage, or even "crisis"'
More annoyingly, above mentioned three issues are closely and complicatedly related each other.
The more staples are used to produce bio fuel to reduce CO2 emission, the more prices of foods rise. Higher prices of energy resources are effective to suppress energy consumption and CO2 emission.
And every and each country wants to emit CO2 as much as possible to promote economic growth.
Especially, emerging countries are reluctant to shoulder responsibility because they think "it is not ours but developed countries' responsibility who have already released huge amount of CO2 until now."
Developed countries are also concern about "CO2 leakage" of hollowing of domestic industry -- firms move to developing countries where they can emit CO2 without restriction.
When it comes to green technology, Japan is in a favorable postion, for your ref.>"Seed of next business -- earn profit via environment"
But Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda failed to show his initiative to lead argument and adjust egos of participants.
Rather than such kind of long term goal, it seems that participants are much interested in short sighted economic woe, for your rer.>"Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae, The muddle-through approach" & "Global markets, Bearish battalions" & "Still under declining phase" & "Hedge funds, The secrets of succession"
In short, the G8 failed to agree on the concrete and numerical target of emission reduction in the mid term scheme after the Kyoto Protocal, for your ref.>"G8 offers halving of emissions by 2050" & "A modest step forward" & "G8 couldn't push emitters to set targets"
Perhaps, G8 summit meeting has already been losing its decision making power as the result of emerging economies, for your ref.>"Too much for the G8 alone"
Indeed, French President Nicolas Sarkozy has an idea to expand current G8 to G13. But other leaders are not so enthusiastic.
Indeed, it is rational concern that too many participants will make summit meetings change to "Le congres danse beaucoup, mais il ne marche pas."
Even among 8 participants, it is really difficult ot negotiate and adjust national interests, for your ref.>"The G8 summit in Hokkaido. They came, they jawed, they failed to conquer"
The more participants, the more it will be tough to reach agreement.
Anyway, there is no doubt that recent circumstances and the G8 Summit Meeting are forcing us to reconsider about mass-production and mass-consumption economy and society, for your ref.>"Real cost of bottled water" & "The price of ramen"
For your ref.>Al Gore & the green inquisition
>Are 24-hour shops a waste of energy?
>Cliches won't rescue Earth
>Australia's pollution problem
>Failure to address climate change like spitting in the wind
>Eco-friendly packaging, Losing their bottle
>Facing a rise in sea level
>Knowing your 'carbon footprint'
>Should Asia brace for more mega storms?
>Misuse of the inaction argument
