"We almost had it, we were close but there is no deal," said British Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott as he left a last-ditch effort among European Union countries to agree on a deal with the United States that would salvage the Kyoto Protocol climate-change negotiations. The U.S. proposal had major sticking points for the 15-member EU. Disagreement remained on emissions reductions that developed countries could claim through offshore-market mechanisms and the degree to which countries could receive emissions credits for forests that soak up carbon.
For many EU countries, the U.S. proposal simply wasn't palatable, and they preferred no deal to a meaningless one. Yet the collapse left many wondering why some deal wasn't achieved. Climate negotiators have always seemed able to work through difficulties before. Even in 1997, when critics predicted that there would never be a binding cap on global carbon emissions, negotiators agreed at the eleventh hour on the Kyoto Protocol.
There is no question that the complexity of the issues played a role: The Hague talks were perhaps the most technical negotiations ever attempted at the multilateral level. The complexity was not something new to these negotiators. Leadership was critical, however.