VZCZCXRO2479
RR RUEHAG RUEHAST RUEHDF RUEHHM RUEHIK RUEHKW RUEHLN RUEHLZ RUEHMA
RUEHPB RUEHPOD RUEHROV RUEHSR RUEHTM RUEHTRO
DE RUEHBS #0449/01 0861532
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 271532Z MAR 09
FM USEU BRUSSELS
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC
INFO RUEHZN/ENVIRONMENT SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COLLECTIVE
RUCNMUC/EU CANDIDATE STATES COLLECTIVE
RUCNMEU/EU INTEREST COLLECTIVE
RUCNMEM/EU MEMBER STATES COLLECTIVE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 BRUSSELS 000449 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ECON EIND ENRG EUN EWWT KGHG SENV TPHY TRGY
TSPL 
SUBJECT: EU COMMISSION PLEASED BY MAJOR ECONOMIES FORUM 
INITIATIVE 
 
REF: BRUSSELS 390 
 
¶1. (SBU) Representatives from the cabinets of EU Commission 
President Barroso and Environment Commissioner Dimas and from 
DG Environment expressed their pleasure at the initiative 
shown by President Obama to continue the Major Economies 
Process in the form of the Major Economies Forum on Energy 
and Climate.  In what was a telling meeting, it is becoming 
apparent that President Barroso's office is moving into the 
lead in the climate conversation in the Commission en route 
to Copenhagen, as Matthew Baldwin, a member of Barroso's 
Cabinet, led the discussion.  (Note: In a separate 
conversation, a DG Environment official expressed that 
Matthew Baldwin and President Barroso are taking charge of 
the climate portfolio.  End note.)  Also, while no definite 
names were put forward as the Leader's representative, it 
seems likely that Joao Vale de Almeida, Head of Cabinet for 
President Barroso, will take the position, a departure from 
last year when Jos Delbeke, then Acting Director General for 
DG Environment, represented the Commission. 
 
¶2. (SBU) Baldwin was accompanied by Laurence Graff, of Dimas' 
Cabinet, and Artur Runge-Metzger, DG Environment's Head of 
the International Climate Negotiations Unit.  Baldwin 
provided several insights into his view of the MEF, including 
thoughts on timing, agenda, and attendance.  Overall, he 
likes the process and explained that though the EU was 
skeptical when it started last year, it worked; now he would 
like to make the MEF more operational and intimate.  He said 
that May will be a very difficult month for the Commission, 
with several summits taking place.  He asked that we provide 
even "undefinitive" dates for May and June as soon as 
possible, noting that May 21-22 is completely out for de 
Almeida. 
 
¶3.  (SBU) Echoing earlier statements by the Commission, 
Baldwin listed three focal points for the agenda: (1) 
mitigation commitments from both developed and developing 
countries, (2) financial architecture and governance (not 
discussing numbers at this point), and (3) green technology 
transfer to developing countries.  He noted that forestry is 
very important and should be included in the discussions on 
commitments and financial architecture.  He appreciated the 
inclusion of Denmark, and noted that Sweden will want to be a 
part from the start, though he understood why they were not 
at the moment.  He intimated that the EU Presidency 
delegation may well include a (non-speaking) representative 
from Stockholm.  (Note: Sweden will represent the EU as the 
Presidency country during the Leaders' meeting in July, 
though will not have officially attended any of the 
preparatory meetings under the current format.  End note.) 
 
¶4. (SBU) Overall, Baldwin had several ideas and thoughts, 
though nothing definite, for the MEF.  He argued that the MEF 
needs an outcome more specific then the G-8 or the MEM.  He 
said that coming to a significant understanding among the MEF 
countries on climate in three meetings is very optimistic, 
but hinted that there could be some "code" in the language of 
the statement that hints to the key pieces of a deal.  The 
problem, he claimed, is the tendency of major emerging 
economies to hide behind the negotiating process.  He 
recommended one way to facilitate agreement on key concepts 
could be to parallel the G-8 sherpa process with a series of 
thought papers before each MEF meeting on the key issues to 
be considered. 
 
¶5. (SBU) Baldwin and Runge-Metzger also commented on the 
UNFCCC process and their thoughts for Bonn and for the year. 
The EU will want to avoid discussion about financing figures 
absent clarity on mitigation targets, both from developed and 
developing countries.  They did not dwell on their 
perspectives of the current U.S. target, instead saying that 
they want to avoid the situation where everyone is looking 
expectantly at the U.S.  Focusing on developing countries, 
Runge-Metzger said he would like to see more commitment, and 
that the terms "comparability" and "common but 
differentiated" will come into play frequently to balance 
"measurable, reportable, and verifiable."  This, they argued, 
could lead to "trenches" being dug by various delegations, 
and Baldwin said that we need to use Leaders' meetings such 
as the MEF to break through these trenches. 
 
¶6. (SBU) Comment: The process in the EU continues to move 
forward, but at a much slower pace than originally perceived 
in light of the Commission's Communication on the path to 
Copenhagen.  The EU Heads of State and Government recently 
displayed their unwillingness at this stage to make strong 
 
BRUSSELS 00000449  002 OF 002 
 
 
commitments on finance (reftel).  All three indicated that it 
will be difficult and time consuming to develop a common 
position, and they are eager to hear our thoughts on this 
issue, perhaps opening the door to U.S. leadership.  They 
expressed a willingness to cooperate closely with the U.S. 
and are looking forward to the MEF, which they believe 
provides a strong opportunity to move the debate forward. 
End comment. 
 
MURRAY 
.