VZCZCXRO3996
PP RUEHAST RUEHDH RUEHHM RUEHLN RUEHMA RUEHPB RUEHPOD RUEHSL RUEHTM
RUEHTRO
DE RUEHRL #0741/01 1701123
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 191123Z JUN 09 ZFR ZFR ZFR
FM AMEMBASSY BERLIN
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 4390
INFO RUEHZN/ENVIRONMENT SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COLLECTIVE PRIORITY

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 BERLIN 000741 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: SENV KGHG PGOV PREL GM
SUBJECT: GERMAN VIEWS IN ADVANCE OF MAJOR ECONOMIES FORUM 
 
BERLIN 00000741  001.2 OF 002 
 
 
 
ZFR ZFR ZFR ZFR\\\\\\CANCEL BERLIN 741\\\\\\\ZFR ZFR ZFR ZFR 
 
PLS CANCEL BERLIN 741. CABLE SENT IN ERROR. WILL RESEND 
UNDER NEW MRN/MCN. 
 
ZFR ZFR ZFR ZFR \\\\\\\CANCEL BERLIN 741\\\\\ZFR ZFR ZFR ZFR 
 
REF: STATE 59852 
 
¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY: Germany,s delegation to the Major 
Economies Forum (MEF) meeting in Mexico is concerned about 
raising the prospect of a 2020-2030 midterm compliance window 
in open session.  The head of delegation also shared his 
dwindling hopes of an agreement in Copenhagen.  German 
interlocutors insist that commitments by developed countries 
are essential to bringing along the developing countries. 
They also take issue with arguments comparing levels of 
effort among Japan, the U.S., and the EU.  Germany considers 
developing countries, clear efforts beyond business as usual 
emissions  a prerequisite for additional financing.  A senior 
staff officer suggested using the G8 as a pulpit from which 
to articulate U.S. commitments to emissions mitigation, 
offering suggestions about a possible formulation.  END 
SUMMARY. 
 
¶2. (SBU) On June 12, EMIN presented ref A points to Peter 
Roesgen, Director for Infrastructure Policy (and top climate 
advisor) in the Federal Chancellery.  On June 17, EMIN also 
presented the points to Environment State Secretary (Deputy 
Minister) Matthias Machnig. 
 
Concerns about raising 2020-2030 window in MEF open session 
 
¶3. (SBU) Machnig expressed several times his concerns about 
raising in the MEF open session the &very, very informal8 
suggestion that he shared with the U.S. delegation about a 
2020-2030 window for phased emissions reductions.  He feared 
that this would collapse the ambition of many states unless 
it rigorously cascaded with realistic, clear, and ambitious 
reductions after 2020.  He said that for this approach to 
have any chance, the proposal would need to be science-based 
and lead to halving global emissions by 2050, with developed 
country long-term goals of 80-90% reductions.  Machnig said 
it was his &gut feeling8 that it would be dangerous to have 
a 2020-2030 argument in Mexico. (Comment: Days before our 
meeting with Machnig, Roesgen observed that Minister 
Gabriel,s suggestion about a staged approach on midterm 
targets might be helpful.  He said that the discussion on 
this continued inside the government, but that it might allow 
a mechanism to keep temperatures below 2 degrees Celsius. End 
Comment.) 
 
Growing doubts about an agreement in Copenhagen 
 
¶4. (SBU) Noting that there would be no agreement at the 
Conference of Parties (COP-15) without the U.S., Machnig 
guessed that given the time remaining, an agreement is 
unlikely.  He indicated that, as a politician, he had never 
seen an important compromise come through in five months, and 
that following the meetings in Italy, that is all the time 
that would be left.  He worried that if the U.S. postpones 
ambitious commitments, German and European industry and 
society would lose incentives for the same. 
 
The more we put on the table, the more we can ask for 
 
¶5. (SBU) In a theme echoed by Roesgen about planned emissions 
reductions by developed countries, Machnig said that &the 
more we put on the table, the more we can ask for8 from 
developing countries.  He insisted that developed countries, 
agreements must be underpinned with measurable, realistic, 
and ambitious reduction numbers, without imposing additional 
burdens on developing countries.  He said that the developing 
countries would wait for the U.S. and Europe. On financing, 
Machnig stressed that developed countries would need to bring 
money to the fund; he added that the U.S., planned emissions 
trading system (ETS) could be a useful revenue source. 
(Comment: He estimated that the community would require at 
least USD 10 billion annually in financing.  End Comment.) 
 
Clarifying criticism of Japanese midterm targets 
 
¶6. (SBU) Machnig sought to clarify his recent criticism about 
the announced Japanese midterm emissions reduction targets. 
He volunteered, &I said this for two reasons: one, because 
it,s true and two, because if I say it about Japan, I don,t 
have to say it about the US.8  He made clear that he wants a 
&close bridge and understanding8 with the U.S. 
 
Pushback on question of comparability of effort 
 
¶7. (SBU) Asked about the question of the comparability of 
effort between the U.S. and the EU (from a 2005 base), he 
noted that the Japanese had suggested the same, with a 15% 
level of effort.  He claimed that if an international 
agreement were concluded, the assumed EU level of effort of 
13% below 2020 would actually be around 24%, far above both 
the U.S. (Waxman-Markey targets) and Japan. 
 
BERLIN 00000741  002.2 OF 002 
 
 
 
ZFR ZFR ZFR ZFR \\\\\\\\CANCEL BERLIN 741\\\\\\\ZFR ZFR ZFR ZFR 
 
PLS CANCEL BERLIN 741. CABLE SENT IN ERROR. WILL RESEND UNDER 
NEW MRN/MCN. 
 
ZFR ZFR ZFR ZFR \\\\\\CANCEL BERLIN 741\\\\\\\\\ZFR ZFR ZFR ZFR 
 
 
 
Expectations of developing countries 
 
¶8. (SBU) Referring to a gap in the MEF building blocks, 
Machnig signaled the importance of strong expectations for 
developing countries, with measurable, reportable, and 
verifiable targets and national action plans that clearly 
indicate how far they will go beyond business-as-usual.  He 
said that neither the German Parliament nor the U.S. Congress 
would approve funding that does not exceed the national 
action plans.  He clarified that although the plans would be 
quantified, they would remain aspirational. 
 
¶9. (SBU) Asked about recent maximalist demands on the U.S. by 
India, Roesgen said &they are aware that 40% is not 
feasible--it's a negotiating position.8  He added, however, 
that China and India are different in both their awareness of 
climate impacts and their independent actions.  He observed, 
&India has a national action plan, but they are in a 
different economic situation. It is tougher for them to get 
going and they are more dependent on foreign assistance.8 
 
Using the G8 as a pulpit 
 
¶10. (SBU) In a separate conversation, Norbert Gorissen, the 
office director responsible for German MEF preparation at the 
Environment Ministry, suggested to Econoff that the G8 
statement should have some formulation recognizing the 
importance of mitigating climate change. He said, 
&identifying numbers would not be necessary--just senior 
level recognition8.  He strongly recommended an expression 
of a commitment to address climate change, noting that it 
would be a timely demonstration of leadership.  He suggested 
that the U.S. clearly reinforce its accomplishments and plans 
for the future.  Gorissen said, &you may think that everyone 
is aware of President Obama,s goals on climate, but they are 
not.8 
 
¶11. (SBU) He recommended also identifying the common ground 
and, above all, avoiding the impression that the US is 
fighting numerical goals.  He said that the US does not need 
to be defensive on numbers--that it was a mistake the US made 
last year.  He concluded, observing that--based on recent 
meetings with NGOs--civil society is counting on the G8 for 
meaningful signals, not the MEF, and that POTUS, involvement 
would create an optimal opportunity.  In a point underscored 
by each of our interlocutors, Gorissen welcomed the 
opportunity for POTUS to chair the MEF, and underscored its 
importance as &one of the last opportunities to get the 
leaders involved in the process8. 
 
Welcoming change in the US approach 
 
¶12. (SBU) Acknowledging the recent meeting between the 
Chancellor and POTUS, Roesgen welcomed the &near u-turn8 on 
U.S. climate policy.  He noted that both sides share an 
appreciation for the importance of adhering to science in 
moving forward on climate negotiations. 
 
German delegation 
 
¶13. (SBU) Roesgen said that he would attend the MEF in 
Mexico, and that scheduling problems would keep Environment 
Minister Gabriel from attending, with Machnig taking the 
delegation lead. (Comment: According to Environment Ministry 
staff, Director General Urban Rid will attend, as will Office 
Director Norbert Gorissen.  However, Climate Negotiator 
Karsten Sach will not attend.  End Comment.) 
Koenig