VZCZCXRO9246
OO RUEHIK
DE RUEHSM #0036/01 0260605
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 271258Z JAN 10 ZDK CTG NUM SVCS
FM AMEMBASSY STOCKHOLM
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 5068
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING IMMEDIATE 1088
RUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS IMMEDIATE
RHEGGTN/DEPT OF ENERGY WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
INFO RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEHZN/ENVIRONMENT SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COLLECTIVE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 05 STOCKHOLM 000036 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: KGHG SENV PREL PGOV ENRG SW
SUBJECT: Swedish Views on Climate Change Post-Copenhagen 
 
REF:  (A) 09 STOCKHOLM 791; (B) STOCKHOLM 13; (C) 
STOCKHOLM 9; (D)STOCKHOLM 10; (E) 09 STOCKHOLM 800 
 
STOCKHOLM 00000036  001.4 OF 005 
 
 
 
¶1.  (SBU) Summary:  Sweden has been encouraging the BASIC countries 
to inscribe their commitments to the Copenhagen Accord by January 
¶31. Although he is concerned about Chinese back-tracking on 
verification, Sweden's Climate Ambassador welcomes news he heard 
that the BASIC countries agreed to submit their voluntary national 
actions before January 31. Within Sweden, the political blame game 
on COP-15 continues with the Deputy Prime Minister telling 
Parliament that China sabotaged the chance to reach an agreement. In 
another forum, the Prime Minister's Climate Advisor publicly blamed 
a flawed Swedish EU Presidency strategy focused solely on emissions 
reductions as a means to press the U.S. and China. Several Swedish 
observers see promise in the Major Economy Forum (MEF) Technology 
Action Plans, Climate REDI and related efforts, which they view as a 
promising way to bring China on board. All we have talked to see 
value in forums such as the MEF, although they say a final deal 
would have to go through a hopefully reformed UNFCCC process.  The 
Embassy's expansion of the successful U.S.-Sweden alternative energy 
partnership to broader areas of sustainable development will provide 
further opportunities to support U.S. efforts toward technology 
sharing. End Summary 
 
 
 
 
Sweden Encouraging BASIC Countries to Ascribe to the Copenhagen 
Accord 
------ ----- -------- ------- -------- ---- --- ---- 
 
¶2. (SBU) On January 25, Sweden's Climate Change Ambassador Staffan 
Tillander told Post he had heard that at their recent Summit  the 
BASIC countries (Brazil, China, South Africa, India) had agreed to 
inscribe their "voluntary actions" in the Copenhagen Accord.  On 
January 24, Tillander had told Post how Sweden was encouraging the 
BASIC countries to inscribe their actions. Sweden, he said, views 
the Accord as "not perfect, but the best they could get." 
 
Sweden Worried that China May Be Backtracking 
----- ----- ---- ---- ---- ---- --- -------- 
 
¶3.  (SBU) Tillander had said China was interested in associating, 
because it likes the Accord. Swedish officials are concerned, 
however, that Environment Minister Xie recently made some 
"troubling" public comments about the Accord's verification 
provision being "voluntary," raising Swedish concerns that the 
Chinese may be walking back from their commitments on verification. 
 
 
EU and Member States to Inscribe; Internal Mechanism Under Debate 
----- --- ---- ---- --  ---- ---- ---- ---- --- --- ------ 
 
¶4.  (SBU) Tillander said the intention is for the EU to do one 
inscription for the "European Union and its member states," but 
there is internal wrangling over the role of the European Commission 
in monitoring and enforcing the member states' individual 
commitments within the EU target.  Tillander added that he believed 
the UNFCCC process needed to be supplemented by continued MEF and 
other fora. 
 
¶5. (SBU) Post got additional information from Minister of 
Environment Andreas Carlgren's Political Advisor Karin Rappsjo, who 
reported that the COREPER before the Informal Environment Minister's 
January 15-16 meeting in Seville discussed whether member states 
should associate with the Copenhagen, or if association by the EU 
for all was sufficient. She said the parties did not reach a 
decision. She said Luxembourg raised this question at the 
Environment Ministers' meeting, but it wasn't really discussed due 
to "normal EU politics, tensions over competencies, etc." She said 
discussion has centered on the compromise wording mentioned to Post 
by Tillander, with countries wanting to avoid a migration of 
competencies between member states and the Commission.  The UK, she 
claimed, had declared its "red line" was a situation where only the 
EU is listed, because the Commission often takes on more powers when 
competencies are unclear. 
 
¶6.  (SBU) It is unclear what Sweden would inscribe. While some in 
the Swedish media predict Sweden will report individually and 
inscribe a target of 40 percent Rappsjo says Sweden will act with 
the EU and its member states, " and write 20 percent, with 
conditions for 30 percent," but will "of course still do 40 percent" 
in reductions for Sweden.  Rappsjo noted that some countries, e.g. 
Italy, did not want the 30 percent goal even mentioned.  In any 
case, she predicted that the matter would be solved this week "in 
all likelihood." 
 
STOCKHOLM 00000036  002.4 OF 005 
 
 
 
Political Fallout Continues 
-- ------- ----- ---- ----- 
 
¶7. (U) While most of our interlocutors have moved beyond COP-15 to 
focus on next steps, the approaching September 2010 Parliamentary 
elections does increase the political dimension to the government's 
efforts to manage public disappointment over the results from 
Copenhagen. Center Party Leader, Deputy Prime Minister and Ministry 
of Energy and Enterprise Maud Olofsson stepped into the fray on 
January 21 during the Parliament Party Leaders debate that 
officially kicked off the campaign for the elections.  In response 
to Green Party spokesperson Peter Eriksson criticizing the 
Government for the COP-15 results, Olofsson asked whether Eriksson 
"understood what was going on in Copenhagen? China did not want an 
agreement. China did not want the global community to come to a 
decision about ambitious goals, and the country sabotaged the chance 
to reach an agreement." 
 
¶8. (U) The January 26 Stockholm Daily (Svenska Dagbladet) carried an 
Op-Ed written by former Environment Minister Lena Sommestad, who 
said the "climate debacle" was Sweden's fault for having "abandoned 
their alliance with the developing countries" in the climate 
negotiations, and together with Denmark, the two Nordic countries 
miserably failed.  According to Sommestad, the most important lesson 
from Copenhagen is the "insight that climate policy and global 
justice are connected." 
 
¶9.  (U) On January 20, the Swedish Institute of International 
Affairs hosted a climate change event titled "From Hype to Action." 
In front of an audience filled with environmental NGO's, the Prime 
Minister's Advisor on Climate Change Lars-Erik Liljelund (Refs 
A,C,D) got into a debate with the Policy Officer from the Church of 
Sweden, Gunnel Axelsson-Nycander.  Nycander criticized the Swedish 
EU Presidency's performance at Copenhagen, saying Sweden's 
delegation had too many people from the Environment Ministry and not 
enough from the Foreign Ministry able to deal with the foreign 
affairs aspects of climate change. Nycander said Sweden had 
sabotaged its role as a leader on climate change when it abandoned 
its principles to get the U.S. on board.  While rejecting 
accusations that the U.S. was to blame for problems at Copenhagen, 
Liljelund agreed that the Swedish EU Presidency, "handled this in a 
strange way.  It was unclear what we meant in regard to LCA 
(long-term cooperative action) and the Kyoto Protocol."  He said 
that he was not happy with the Swedish EU Presidency's role because 
the requirement for EU consensus forced a low common denominator 
approach.  As a result, he said the strategy was to talk only about 
emissions reductions in order to get the U.S. and China to do more, 
which did not work, so the strategy failed. He concluded that the 
Swedish EU Presidency should have done more with Africa and Asian 
countries, saying it is essential to get the Chinese talking about 
changing their living habits. (Comment: Over nearly 30 years, Sweden 
has reduced carbon emissions while raising living standards; and is 
trying to export its model by working with partners in the U.S., 
China and other countries.  End Comment) 
 
World Wildlife Fund Recommends U.S. Push Sweden to Show Leadership 
---- ----  ---- ----- ------ ----- ----- ---- ----- -- 
 
¶10.  (SBU) In discussing ways to move the Copenhagen Accord forward, 
World Wildlife Fund Director for Climate Change Stefan Henningsson 
advised Post that now would be a useful time for the U.S. to 
encourage Sweden to exercise leadership.  He said Sweden "feels a 
bit bruised," and would be open to "positive pressure from the U.S." 
He explained that during its Swedish Presidency, Sweden was a bit 
checked by its EU duties, and now has a freer hand to act. 
 
¶11. (U) When asked about Sweden's influence in international 
discussions of climate change, Henningsson opined that Sweden could 
be seen as a leader if discussions were among Energy and Enterprise 
Ministers, but the brand name of its Environment Ministry had been 
hurt by the EU Presidency, giving Sweden less of a role on that type 
of stage. 
 
¶12. (U) As to where Sweden could show leadership, Henningsson noted 
that China was already copying Sweden's holistic approach to low 
carbon urban development, which includes Sweden's "Symbiocity" 
project and sustainable urban developments such as Hammarby SeaPort 
and the Royal Seaport (which breaks ground on February 2.) (Comment: 
 Symbiocity was shown at COP-15. It includes computer modeling to 
show how different assumptions or actions by urban planners affect 
carbon emissions. On December 22, Stockholm city officials told Post 
that a Chinese city was copying the Harmmarby sustainable urban 
renewable project on a scale "20 times greater," given the size of 
Chinese cities.  End Comment) 
 
¶13. (U) Henningsson noted that Sweden has long had "regionalization 
 
STOCKHOLM 00000036  003.4 OF 005 
 
 
of power supply" where municipalities have authorities to plan 
energy use and emissions reductions, and that Swedish cities are 
training other cities in the U.S., China, Chile and elsewhere. He 
said the WWF is highlighting the southern Swedish city of Malmo, 
which has a target of zero carbon emissions by 2030 and trying to 
become a hub for entrepreneur's solutions to climate change. 
 
¶14. (U) Henningsson said it would be useful for Sweden to show other 
countries how Sweden achieves one ton of carbon emissions per capita 
while preserving a high quality of life. It would also be useful, he 
said, if China were encouraged to speak out on how it is working to 
do the same thing. He claimed that while the U.S., China and Sweden 
understood the link between emissions reductions and job creation, 
the EU has not gotten this message. 
 
World Wildlife Fund On How Copenhagen Accord Advances Negotiations 
----- ------- ----- -------- --------- -------- ----- 
 
¶15.  (U) Henningsson explained that the WWF was recommending 
countries inscribe their most ambitious commitments in the 
Copenhagen Accord. He believed a useful next step for the UNFCCC 
would be to assess the inscribed ambitions to see if we are in line 
with the 2 degree target. He believed the Accord "could be 
beneficial somehow" and would be an obstacle if countries did not 
associate with it. He noted that if developing countries follow 
through on their commitment in the Copenhagen Accord to report every 
two years, it would be very useful for future UNFCCC discussions on 
long-term cooperative action (LCA), since that "was one of the 
political nuts that needed to be cracked." 
 
WWF On Role of the MEF, Climate REDI, etc. 
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- -- 
¶16.  (U) Henningsson said the Copenhagen Accord was "far, far too 
weak" in term of ambition, noting that the UNFCCC analysis had shown 
that even if countries implemented the top end of their current 
commitments, the global increase in temperature would be 3 and 
one-half at best. So, we will need additional gigatons from the 
Major Economies Forum (MEF) and similar efforts that are not part of 
national commitments, but are on the table now. 
 
¶17.  (U) Henningsson believed that momentum had been lost in 
Copenhagen, but Mexico still offered the opportunity for a legally 
binding agreement. To get that, we need a more innovative 
negotiating mandate going into Mexico. In this light, he noted that 
MEF Technology Action Plans were "very, very ambitious" and could 
bring reductions of 14 million gigatons.  Solar could deliver even 
more.  Technology cooperation is what China and India want from the 
negotiations, which provides a promising route to bring them along. 
 
 
¶18.  (U) Continuing, Henningsson praised Secretary Chu's 
announcement on the "super efficient appliance initiative," as a 
"very, very good approach" because gigatons could be saved quickly. 
He noted that the WWF was building on this approach. 
 
¶19. (U) Henningsson warned that the "the huge frustration in Africa 
(toward the climate change negotiations) should not be 
underestimated."  He said the MEF and its Technology Action Plans do 
not speak to countries outside the major economies.  At this stage 
of their development, the need of many under developed countries is 
not so much for electric cars, as for bio gas and sustainable urban 
development. Data on ending energy poverty through renewable energy 
is therefore a good approach, as is focus on adaptation and 
resistant crops.  He reported that the WWF is working with Swedish 
firm Ericsson on such efforts, including low carbon infrastructure 
through the use of information/communication technology. 
 
¶20.  (U) Henningsson said that to highlight efforts to reduce 
emissions through spreading technology, WWF would be hosting with 
UNEP a business for the environment seminar in October in Mexico. 
Discussions will include what businesses should be encouraged in 
order to reduce emissions, e.g. would there be benefit in 
encouraging a company like IKEA to vastly expand their sales of 
low-cost solar cells in order to reduce the cost of reducing 
emissions.  The seminar will discuss new standards and rules for 
countries to take these types of steps. 
 
WWF On Global Carbon Budget Approach Vs. Offsets 
------ ------ ----- ---- ---- ---- ---- -- 
 
¶21.  (U) Henningsson said both Sweden and the U.S. were interested 
in the global carbon budget approach to consider emissions 
reductions possible through technology deployment not tied 
specifically to actions by a particular country.  While he said it 
would help negotiations if the U.S. were more transparent on how it 
would use offsets in addition to the current U.S. reduction target, 
he criticized Sweden for using CDM's too much. Because Sweden 
 
STOCKHOLM 00000036  004.4 OF 005 
 
 
started reducing emissions back in the 1990's, much of the most 
cost-effective emissions cuts have been made. He said Sweden's 
emission targets are 40 percent from domestic action, 50 percent 
from CDM's.  He believed Sweden's reliance on CDM's had too much 
influence on the EU position, and the WWF opposes it because such 
heavy use of CDM's affects U.S., EU and Japanese targets. 
 
 
¶22.  (U) A global carbon budget approach, Henningsson said, was a 
way around the "deceptive" debate on percentage reductions and 
differences in base-years by the U.S. versus the EU, versus other 
countries. It would be more useful, he argued, to talk about how 
many remaining gigatons the science tells us we have left. 
 
Former Swedish Climate Negotiator and Stockholm Environment 
Institute (SEI) on on Next Steps 
---- ---- --- --- --- --- ---- ---- --- --- --- --- -- 
 
¶23.  (U) Stockholm Environmental Institute (SEI)Senior Research 
Fellow and former climate change negotiator for Sweden, Bo Kjellen 
found Copenhagen a disappointment, although parties knew early on 
that there would be no legally binding agreement.  What was needed, 
Kjellen said, was a political deal precise and ambitious enough not 
to be challenged when it went to a legal agreement, with a clear 
time table, and ideally a mandate for an agreement by the June 
conference in Bonn. The Copenhagen Accord does not meet that, he 
said, because something went wrong as the talks moved from the 
bilateral to multilateral level. The heads-of-state level can only 
deal with one to three well-defined issues, which is far from what 
Copenhagen gave them.  It is a missed opportunity rather than a 
disaster, because there was no sliding back of progress.  The key, 
he said, is to take up adaptation, technology, REDD and other areas 
where there was a lot of progress in the negotiations. 
 
¶24.  (U) This makes the January 31 submissions important, Kjellen 
continued.  The bureaucracy needs to be meeting in February to see 
that the negotiations start again.  We should look at UN working 
procedures in order to avoid the current "confusion" and obtain an 
efficient management of negotiations so that a few countries do not 
block progress. Kjellen noted the value of discussions outside the 
UN forum, such as the MEF and G-20, but said a final decision had to 
be within the UN framework since this is a global problem. 
 
¶25.  (U) Kjellen said he had no doubt that the Obama Administration 
wants a legally binding agreement, but others in the U.S. and in 
China worry about compliance rules. It would be a "dangerous, 
slippery slope," however, to go from a legally binding agreement to 
something less than the commitments in the Kyoto Protocol. He said 
that even though the Article 10 commitments were not precise for all 
countries, China could include its objectives in the Annex to the 
Kyoto Protocol.  Kjellen noted that there was no final date for the 
Kyoto Protocol; 2012 is the date when developed countries 
commitments expire, not an end for the Protocol. 
 
A Stockholm University Perspective:  Copenhagen Accord Quite Strong 
on Financing 
--- - ------ ------ ------ ---- ----- ----- ----- ---- ----- 
 
¶26. (U) Post's discussion with Kjellen included Stockholm University 
Associate Professor, and climate change expert, Marcus Carson, who 
said Secretary Clinton's announcement that the U.S. would help 
mobilize $100 billion a year starting in 2020 was the "strongest 
impression from the U.S. at Copenhagen."  He said the Copenhgen 
Accord is "very clear about financing in the long and short run, and 
quite strong." On financing, "the U.S. did the best that could have 
been expected." 
 
Future of the Kyoto Protocol 
----- --- ---- ---- ---- --- 
 
¶27. (U) Carson said that the best that could be hoped for the Kyoto 
Protocol would be a new document with a different name that had the 
same legal status as the Kyoto Protocol and contained all the Kyoto 
Protocol had in it. "UN lawyers can do anything if given a political 
direction," he claimed. 
 
U.S. and EU Combining Forces Would not Move China and India 
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ---- 
 
¶28.  (SBU) Carson did not believe that the U.S. and EU joining 
forces would affect China or India given the weakness in the UNFCCC 
process. In the Bali Action Plan, he explained, India and China 
accepted that they should do something, but they are  aware of the 
weaknesses in the U.S. and EU positions and inability to force them 
to act in the short run.  He warned that joint U.S. and EU pressure 
for China and India to accept international control over what they 
are doing domestically could backfire. 
 
STOCKHOLM 00000036  005.4 OF 005 
 
 
 
¶29.  (U) Carson saw some convergence among the political conditions 
in both the U.S. and China with officials concerned about energy 
security and job creation finding more common interest with those 
concerned about climate change. He believed that President Obama 
made "incremental progress" in his talks with China's Prime Minister 
in Copenhagen, although there had been no game changer because the 
transparency China agreed to was not well defined. 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
¶30.  (U) While much of the media focus has been on mitigation 
targets, much came out of Copenhagen on technology sharing and 
financing. Sweden is actively trying to export its successful model 
for low carbon development. Swedish observers see promise in efforts 
announced in Copenhagen like the MEF Technology Action Plans and 
Climate REDI. U.S. Embassy Sweden is expanding the successful 
U.S.-Sweden partnership on alternative energy to include greater 
cooperation on low carbon development. 
 
 
 
BARZUN