Still, so much more work to be done

TOYAKO, Hokkaido--Fittingly, Hotel Windsor Toya, the venue of the three-day Group of Eight summit that wound up here Wednesday, was shrouded in fog for most of the event.

Leaders of the world's most industrialized nations had failed to dissipate clouds on global challenges ranging from climate change to African development by the time they left the luxury hotel atop 625-meter Mount Poromoi overlooking Lake Toyako.

On climate change, the summit made little progress propelling U.N.-led negotiations on a new international pact to succeed the Kyoto Protocol, whose key provisions expire in 2012.

The joint declaration issued Tuesday lacks an explicit agreement among G-8 members on a long-term target of halving greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. That was due to the U.S. position that emerging economic powers such as China and India must sign up as well.

Instead, G-8 leaders called on all signatories to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change to share the "vision" of the goal of achieving at least a 50-percent reduction by 2050.

But developing countries are demanding that industrialized economies demonstrate a stronger commitment, in particular, to set specific midterm targets, rather than an aspirational goal for decades ahead.

"The ball remains in the G-8 court, and countries like India and China are rightly insisting on rich nations to set ambitious targets," Kim Carstensen, WWF's director for global climate initiative, said in a statement.

At Wednesday's Major Economies Meeting on Energy Security and Climate Change, leaders of China, India, Mexico, Brazil and South Africa spurned the G-8's call to endorse the "50 by 50" goal.

Officials and experts said a shift in U.S. policy is unlikely until after the new U.S. administration takes over in January. The two U.S. presidential candidates, Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama, are considered more willing than outgoing President George W. Bush to tackle climate change.

Marthinus van Schalkwyk, South Africa's environment minister, said Wednesday it would be a "very tall order" to hammer out a new climate change pact by the target date of December 2009, given Congressional appointment procedures for senior U.S. policymakers.

"We think it is possible, but it will require a huge commitment, especially from the United States," he told reporters.

On African development, Japan delivered "the voice of Africa," keeping a promise it made at the Fourth Tokyo International Conference on African Development, held in Yokohama in May.

But G-8 leaders failed to offer a convincing response to Africa on how the industrialized world will help the continent overcome poverty, disease and a lack of social and economic infrastructure.

"Put your money where your mouth is" became the buzzword among NGO representatives at Lake Toyako.

Attention focused on how the G-8 would follow up on a 2005 promise at the Gleneagles summit to boost annual official development assistance by $25 billion to achieve U.N. Millennium Development Goals. Only a fraction of that amount has been allocated.

In their joint declaration, G-8 leaders merely reaffirmed their pledge "to fulfill our commitments on ODA."

A new initiative, called the Framework for Action on Global Health, was unfurled to improve health and disease control programs for women with children and train medical workers.

But aside from stating that $60 billion, already promised at the Heiligendamm summit last year, would be "provided over the next few years," no specific outlays for programs were presented, adding to aid organizations' pessimism.

"It is extremely regrettable that no new commitments, or specific disbursement plans for past commitments, were presented at this summit," said Nobuhiko Katayama, national director for World Vision Japan.

G-8 members remained oceans apart over the prickly issue of biofuels.

In a statement, G-8 leaders only agreed to "ensure compatibility of policies for the sustainable production and use of biofuels with food security" and "work to develop science-based benchmarks and indicators for biofuel production and use."

Critics blasted the wording as too vague and weak.

While Germany and Britain contended that the diversion of grains for biofuels is one cause of food shortages, the United States argued that the impact on food prices is minimal.(IHT/Asahi: July 11,2008)