chart (please click here to see my diagram; sorry, I couldn’t get it to upload)

1) My diagram shows how the United States negotiated a climate treaty by gathering information from other countries.  Low-carbon models redirects billions of dollars.  The Beijing talks failed to bring about a global deal.  The United States has always been one of the world’s biggest polluter and climate enemy.  The Copenhagen accord could have solved many of the United States problems.  So, the United States needed to get as many countries as possible to go along with the accord.  Money was offered to countries for their support.  There were also other bonuses offered.  Threats were also made to remove some support that countries were already receiving.  The United States used threats to get countries to back the adopting of the Copenhagen accord.  Of course, trust was a big issue.  It wasn’t known if countries would keep their word on what they were promising.  It wasn’t certain that the countries going along with the Copenhagen accord would keep their word to cut emissions.  It also wasn’t certain that the United States would up-hold their promise of the financial and the other aid it promised to these countries for their support.  Also, it couldn’t be guaranteed that the necessary greenhouse gas cuts would be maintained on a global level to avoid dangerous warming.

2) For the purpose of sustainability, governments must do as much as they can to make the public aware of the changes that must be made to protect the earth and its inhabitants.  This must be done on a global scale.  The United States getting involved in this matter on the scale that it has is just what the United States does.  Needing all the countries’ involvement in climate change diplomacy is necessary as each person’s part of the world effects each other person’s part of the world.  I guess the only way to get this done would be to help out financially in the undertaking of projects.  Maybe educating other countries on redirecting their own funds for these corrections would be a possibility but some countries just may not even have the funds to redirect.  Making threats to get things done just doesn’t seem right.  Offering incentives for a countries’ positive actions for climate change diplomacy would be an idea that might keep that country on the right track.  I think it was good that the State Department cables were made public.  The citizens of the United States need to be aware of the actions of the people they put in charge in order to see if change needs to be made.