The State Department web site below is a permanent electronic archive of information released prior to January 20, 2001.  Please see www.state.gov for material released since President George W. Bush took office on that date.  This site is not updated so external links may no longer function.  Contact us with any questions about finding information. NOTE: External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views contained therein.

Melinda Kimble, Assistant Secretary of State, Ambassador Mark Hambley, Special Negotiator for Climate Change, and Dirk Forrister, Chairman of the White House Task Force on Climate Change U.S. Delegation to the UNFCCC Conference of the Parties-4 Press Briefing Buenos Aires, Argentina, November 9, 1998 (Link to Spanish version.)

OPENING STATEMENT BY MS. KIMBLE: Thank you, Susan. Well, thank you too for coming to our press briefing tonight. I think this is the beginning of the last leg of the race we've been running here in Buenos Aires. It's certainly a very important beginning today, and I think we saw some evident progress in SBSTA where we reached a number of decisions this afternoon that were very important, including one on how we are going to approach land use changes and forestry, and also a decision on how we are going to treat gases that are relevant to global warming but also have relevance for the Montreal Protocol. And, in addition, we reached another major decision on research and observation. And I might ask my colleagues Mark Hambley and Dirk Forrister if they have anything to add. Mark?

AMB. HAMBLEY: Thank you very much, Melinda. That's the good news and some of the other news concerns those items where we have not as yet been able to reach closure. And those include such issues as the flexibility mechanisms; as you know the mechanisms topic is being handled by a Contact Group which meets again this evening at 8:00 p.m. We understand that there is a new proposal which will probably be presented at that time on behalf of the G77 and China, and we will have to take that under advisement after we see that, but we are hopeful that we will gradually move that towards closure over the next few days.

In addition there is the question of technology transfer. Indeed that's an issue of very great importance to the developing countries, as well as to ourselves. That's an issue where we have gone back and forth over the past couple of days -- some days very optimistically and other days a little pessimistically -- that we'll be able to reach a decision which would allow us to move forward with a decision which will be useful, and practical and realistic. But I think the last word I had is that is moving along quite well now. We are not really sure whether we will have that decision taken by November 10th, the deadline imposed by the two Co-Chairs to wrap up the decisions, or whether or not that may indeed pass on to the Ministers for their consideration.

In addition there are two other issues of importance which also will have to have additional guidance. One is on the adequacy of commitments under the Convention -- this is what they call Article 4.2 (a) and (b). This unfortunately more or less came to non-decision over the weekend and that is now being considered by the two Co-Chairs to decide how that will be handled, and that will probably go to the Ministers for their consideration. The other issue which is a topic of a Contact Group at the moment is on the impacts on climate change of the economic impacts and the climatic impacts -- that also is an issue which has produced quite a difference of view between Annex I countries on the one hand and some non-Annex I countries on the other. That is also an issue which we will have to see where we get on that, and whether that also will go to the Ministers for review.

So we are talking now as we move towards the Ministerial which begins in two days time of several issues which may indeed be sent to them for their consideration, but it is still too early I think to decide what's actually going to be put on their plate. But I can just assure that all delegations here are earnestly working very hard so that our Ministers can come and enjoy a little bit of the tango -- it's one of the nicer aspects of Buenos Aires rather than having to complete our work. Thank you.

MR. FORRISTER: I won't add a lot except to say that we are also pleased that the reinforcements arrived for our Delegation, and Under Secretary Eizenstat is working in another room right now in a high level roundtable on flexibility mechanisms. And we are also very, very pleased to have Under Secretary Frank Loy, the new Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs, who is with us as well, as well as a few other senior administration officials who will be helping out in the numerous set of side meetings, so we have more folks with us this time.

MS. KIMBLE: So, we're ready for your questions.

JAPANESE NEWSPAPER/YOMIURI SHIMBUN: In the SBI mechanism talking, we have seen some stalemate, a deadlock, in the progress of the argument mainly because China, India and Saudi Arabia insisted that they need more time to discuss each element step-by-step. But at the end of last week, we saw some differences among the non-Annex I nations. Honduras and other Latin American countries started to say that the CDM mechanism discussions should start first to implement that mechanism in an urgent manner. And today, as you pointed out, G77 and China countries is going to present their own proposal in this mechanism contact group. Do you think that these differences amongst the non-Annex I nations are now contributing to make more flexible the position of non-Annex I nations in the overall discussions, and even that it would stimulate their discussion about the so-called voluntary commitment issue?

AMB. HAMBLEY: I think one of the features of the discussions thus far which has impressed us, the Delegation of the United States, has been the manner in which several countries from our non-Annex I parties have introduced proposals actually on the table, proposals which indeed merit considerable advice by all of us. And I think that it's something which we consider being a great contribution to this process. I think although indeed some of these proposals look as if they are creating differences among the G77 and China, I think they are perhaps more reflective of the increased interest among this very large group of countries -- some 135 countries after all are members of the G77 and China -- I think that the fact that they are going to be presenting us with another proposal; I hope this proposal will be a useful one. But in any case I think that the fact that so many different groups of countries -- the African group, various Latin American countries, Mexico and others -- have submitted proposals on the table, something which is good. I think it does speak not to an atmosphere of flexibility, but I think an atmosphere in terms of cooperation. I would hope that cooperation will translate into further progress as we move forward throughout this week.

GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT CHANGE REPORT: I was wondering if you could outline the agreement that was reached on land use and forestry and the views of the U.S. Delegation on that agreement.

MS. KIMBLE: Yes, I think that's a very interesting agreement. First of all, we agreed to decisions taken in Bonn on the carbon stock approach to 3.3 in the Protocol. We agreed to a workshop in the United States focusing on Article 3.4 that will be held sometime in the spring. We have put out a request for submission, submissions from governments on policy and procedural issues. These are issues that the special report will not address. And the submissions will be compiled by SBSTA and available for SBSTA 10. We've agreed to make recommendations that the first COP after the IPCC's special report is issued to the COP/MOP on Article 3.3 definitions, rules, modalities and guidelines necessary to add additional activities under Article 3.4. And we've also agreed to make recommendations that the first COP "practicable" after the special report, to adopt guidelines for the COP/MOP for inventory information needed in connection with these articles. This is a pretty comprehensive decision. It puts the work on two tracks -- the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change scientific track and the policy track in the SBSTA -- and we think this is clearly illustrative of the kind of progress we can make when we get good information fed into the process, and we allow enough time for delegates to understand all the issues that are at stake.

DAILY ENVIRONMENT REPORT: Can you likewise talk about the decision on the gases that have global warming potential and are ozone depleters?

MS. KIMBLE: The big decision on the gases is an information gathering exercise, and a reference point that makes very clear that the HFC's which have impact in the Montreal Protocol, but are actually controlled by this Convention, are going to be managed from this Convention. And so that's basically the sum total of that. This was a very good and innovative decision, I think. And I'd like to point out that it was a decision coordinated out of the JUSCANZ Group, led by Switzerland, so it also shows the power of good coordination within Annex I in a group like JUSCANZ.

ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER: Can you tell us what factors would have to change before the President would sign the Kyoto Protocol?

MR. FORRISTER: We've for a long time said that we intended to sign the Protocol before the signing deadline, but we've made no judgments at this stage as to specifically when between now and March 15th, I guess it is, when the signing deadline will take place. And I have no news to report to you tonight.

[end of document]

Back to the Climate Change page. Back to the Principal Officials' Remarks, Testimonies, and Briefings Home Page. Return to the DOSFAN Home Page. Return to the Secretary's Home Page. This is an official U.S. Government source for information on the WWW. Inclusion of non-U.S. Government links does not imply endorsement of contents.