US embassy cable - 05VIENNA1151

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 VIENNA 001151 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
STATE FOR OES/GC AND EUR/AGS 
STATE ALSO PLEASE PASS TO EPA/OIA - ALMEIDA 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: SENV, ENRG, EIND, ECON, PGOV, AU 
SUBJECT: AUSTRIA FAVORS LESS STRINGENT POST-KYOTO TARGETS 
 
REFS: A) 04 VIENNA 1106; B) 04 VIENNA 804 
 
 
SUMMARY 
------- 
1.  (SBU) At the March 22-23 European Council meeting, 
Austria initiated a remarkable about-face, arguing for lower 
emission reduction targets after 2012.  In the run-up to the 
summit, Austria pressed for setting no emission reductions 
goals at all.  There is an open discussion within the GoA 
between the "economic wing" - centered in the Ministry of 
Economics - and the "environmental wing" - led by the 
Ministry of Agriculture and Environment.  Praising the USG's 
ability to juggle multi- and bilateral issues, Chancellor 
Schuessel said the EU should gauge its economic and 
environmental positions vis-a-vis "big players," such as the 
U.S. and China.  The primary factor behind Austria's "change 
of mind" is its inability to achieve current emission 
reduction goals.  End summary. 
 
AUSTRIA'S CLIMATE CHANGE REDUCTION GOALS OUT OF REACH 
--------------------------------------------- -------- 
2.  (SBU) When Austria signed the Kyoto Protocol in 1997, it 
promised to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 13% by 2012 
(using a 1990 base), far above the EU average of 8%. By the 
end of 2004, however, emissions were 17% more than in 1990. 
The self-proclaimed aim now appears well out of reach.  A 
tug-of-war has emerged between the "economic" and the 
"environmental" wings of the GOA.  Minister of Economy 
Martin Bartenstein and industry lobby groups have argued 
that too strict restrictions on emissions would hamper 
economic growth and cost jobs.  They were successful in 
watering down the Austrian allocation plan for the EU's 
emissions trading scheme (refs A and B). 
 
GOA POLICY SHIFT: NO NEW POST-KYOTO GOALS, PLEASE 
--------------------------------------------- ---- 
3.  (SBU) Rhetorically, the GOA continues to brandish its 
image as an environmental trendsetter in the EU.  However, 
recent GoA actions signal a definite change of policy.  At 
the Foreign Ministers' meeting prior to the European 
Council, Austria's Ursula Plassnik was the only foreign 
minister to vote against setting post-Kyoto reduction goals, 
according to an internal protocol leaked to the Austrian 
press.  The EU environmental ministers had unanimously 
recommended reducing greenhouse gas emissions in industrial 
states 15-30% by 2020 and 60-80% by 2050. 
 
4. (U) According to press reports, the GOA opposed any post- 
Kyoto greenhouse gas reduction goals at the European Council 
meeting, but could not find enough allies. Germany, however, 
apparently successfully lobbied to delete any reference to 
2050 goals from the Presidency Conclusions.  Thus, the 
compromise was to retain the 2020 reduction goals, and to 
waive the long-term aims. 
 
CHANCELLOR AGAINST MORE TARGETS 
------------------------------- 
5.  (U) Minister Bartenstein claimed that setting specific 
goals was "premature" because "climate sinners such as the 
U.S. and China" could regard this as "a self-obligation" by 
the EU.  He added that implementation of current climate 
protection measures would lower growth by 0.6% per annum. 
Chancellor Wolfgang Schuessel cautioned that the EU should 
undertake a study on the impact of the implementation of the 
current Kyoto goals on economic growth and job creation, 
before setting further binding targets.  Schuessel praised 
the U.S. for successfully balancing bilateral and 
multilateral trade interests.  The EU, Schuessel opined, 
could learn from the U.S.  EU Member States should not gauge 
their economic and environmental records towards each other, 
but instead towards "big players" like the U.S. and China. 
 
MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT DEFENDS AMBITIOUS TARGETS 
--------------------------------------------- ---- 
6.  (U) The Environmental Ministry, which has the lead on 
international climate protection issues, continues to 
support tougher reduction goals.  Minister Josef Proell 
publicly defended the environmental ministers' approach to 
set goals until 2050, but he downplayed any difference with 
the Council's final decision.  He countered Bartenstein's 
statement by citing the Economics Ministry's own "Energy 
Report" from 2003.  This report, according to Proell, claims 
climate protection measures would fuel economic growth by 1% 
and create 85,000 new jobs in the environmental technology 
sector. 
 
MFA: GOA REALIZES GOALS ARE TOO AMBITIOUS 
----------------------------------------- 
7. (SBU) Aloisia Woergetter, in the MFA's Environmental 
Affairs Section told post the MFA coordinated the somewhat 
competing positions of the two other ministries on this 
issue in international forums.  She said the GOA realized 
that the EU was now too ambitious with greenhouse gas 
reduction goals.  She underlined that the GoA adopted a new 
policy after careful consideration.  She complained the 
Environmental Ministry was delaying a draft paper outlining 
the changed Austrian position. 
 
8. (SBU) Woergetter insisted, however, on the overall 
benefits of the Kyoto Process and the necessity to devise a 
follow-up scenario.  The upcoming results of a Commission 
cost-benefit analysis would confirm the positive impact on 
the economy and the job market, she said.  Woergetter added 
that the GOA and the EU have "registered" and "understood" 
the U.S. position on climate change and the serious U.S. 
efforts to reduce domestic greenhouse gases. 
COMMENT 
------- 
9.  (SBU) Austria's new position on climate change is indeed 
a remarkable shift.  Austria realizes that the ever-stricter 
emission reduction goals will have consequences for economic 
growth.  Austria, if it continues on this path, may become a 
U.S. "ally" on climate change.  Nevertheless, climate change 
is only one environmental issue.   There remains widespread 
support throughout Austrian society for a continued ban on 
nuclear power and strong resistance to genetically modified 
organisms. 
 
BROWN#