Human-induced climatic change, caused by steadily escalating emissions of the so-called greenhouse gases is now recognised by politicians and scientists alike as a serious global threat to the Earth.

This year will be crucial in the international politics of climate change and its solutions. December will see a major conference of the parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) to be held in Kyoto, Japan. The meeting will consider significant new agreements to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

Only by agreeing to undertake immediate and ongoing reductions in greenhouse gases can nations of the world meet their own pledge to protect the climate from "dangerous human interference", quickly enough to ensure the world's ecology, food supplies and economies are not damaged irrevocably. This is the objective of the FCCC signed at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992.

The next twelve months will see intensive negotiations in the lead up to the Kyoto meeting. Governments have already agreed to negotiate a new Protocol to the Convention containing specific reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. The issue at stake is the extent and effectiveness of those reductions.

Solutions to the burning of fossil fuels, responsible for nearly half of the greenhouse gas problem, are available now: energy efficiency, solar and other renewable energies. The problem is not technical--it is political.

SHORT POLITICAL CHRONOLOGY

October 1988 : Toronto Conference on the Changing Atmosphere." This was the first major international meeting bringing government and scientists together to discuss action on climate change. At this conference, governments voluntarily pledged to cut CO2 emissions by 20% by the year 2005 (the so-called "Toronto target").

This meeting was also critical in the establishment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change(IPCC), an international grouping of over 300 of the world's best climate scientists charged with peer reviewing and reporting on the latest international science, impacts and responses to climate change.

1990: Release of the IPCC's First Assessment Report. This report said 60 to 80% cuts in CO2 emissions would be needed to stabilise the current level of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere - already 25% higher than they were before industrialisation started the intensive use of fossil fuels.

June 1992: In a hail of self-congratulation, the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) was finalised at the Rio Earth Summit. A total of 165 governments, plus the European Union, are now parties to this Convention. As a first step, industrialised countries agreed to stabilise their CO2 emissions at 1990 levels by the year 2000. However, this agreement was non-binding.

March 1995: The Berlin "Climate Summit." The first Ministerial level full meeting of the Convention, also known as the Conference of the Parties (COP 1), was held. The Berlin meeting agreed that the Convention is too weak to meet its own objective of protecting the climate, particularly as it says nothing about the post-2000 period. Parties agreed the "Berlin Mandate"--to negotiate a Protocol or other legal agreement by the time of the third Conference of Parties (COP3) containing specific "emissions limitations and reductions."

December 1995: The IPCC Second Assessment Report. Involving well over 2000 scientists and experts, the Report concluded that "The balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate" - that is, we are already seeing the first signs of climate change.

July 1996: The Second Conference of Parties (COP2). Held in Geneva, this meeting made little progress on CO2 targets or timetables for a new Protocol. However, the vast majority of Ministers present at the meeting signed onto the "Geneva Declaration" which says:

* the new IPCC science provides the basis for "urgently strengthening action";

* the world faces "significant, often adverse impacts" from climate change;

* legally binding "significant overall reductions" in greenhouse gas emissions should be negotiated by the next Conference of the Parties (COP3).

December 1997: COP3 will take place in Kyoto, Japan.

THE DYNAMICS - POLITICS

There will be three further negotiating sessions before the COP3 summit. The next one is at the end of February 1997. The United States, Japan, Australia and the European Union will be critical players in determining the success or otherwise of the process.

As a major greenhouse emitter, the United States is a key player. Currently it appears to be politically schizophrenic: while President Clinton advocated strong international action during his recent trip to Australia, US diplomats stalled and delayed discussions at the UN talks.

To ensure effective and measurable outcomes, it is essential that Japan, as host, plays a strong leadership role in the lead-up to and at Kyoto. Thus far there have been no signs of such leadership, despite Japan's placement at the cutting edge in emerging world markets in solar and other renewable technology.

The European Union has traditionally been a progressive force in the climate negotiations, but is currently distracted by internal differences. France in particular, and also Spain, appear to be unwilling to support strong targets for CO2 reduction.

Australia's position is currently among the most destructive in the climate negotiations, as it chooses to protect its coal industry over any other domestic or international concern.

An Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) has been formed by 36 nations particularly vulnerable to the impacts of sea level rise and increases in storm severity resulting from human-induced climatic change. In 1994 this group presented a blueprint for a legal Protocol, containing commitments for industrialised nations of a 20% reduction in CO2 emissions by the year 2005 - similar to the "Toronto target" identified in 1988.

THE DYNAMICS - INDUSTRY Not surprisingly the world's rich, influential fossil fuel industry have consistently tried to undermine political action on climate change. Using industrial front groups such as the US "Global Climate Coalition" and the "International Climate Change Partnership", oil, coal and car interests have targeted the credibility of climate science and climate models, and scaremongered about the possible economic and employment impact of reducing CO2 emissions. They have repeatedly tried to deflect attention away from the West's responsibility to clean up after the mess it has created, ignored the cost of "no action", and have moved to suppress the development of clean and climate-friendly alternative solutions.

GREENPEACE