At the UN Climate Change Conference in Bali from 3-14 December it could be a stormy affair between the already industrialized nations and the newly industrializing countries (NICs).The backdrop for the big meeting could not have been better selected: the Indonesian island of Bali, a tropical paradise on earth set in the middle of the Indian Ocean with lush hibiscus and panda nut palm trees – it’s not surprising that this place is also known as the “island of the gods”. However Bali is not only an example of our planet’s beauty that is worthy of protection; Bali also stands for the threat posed by climate change, as can be seen by the rampant weather extremes during their monsoon season and the progressive global warming which endangers its coastlines.Of course, the participants at the UN climate conference are aware of this double meaning. In order to save these particular paradises (and the world climate in general), they have jetted to Bali from a total of 192 countries. But the consequences of their kerosene consumption in the CO2 debate is only a fringe concern. The issue that will exclusively decide the success or failure of the summit is whether an effective successor agreement can be found for the Kyoto protocol that expires in 2012.Opening of the Climate Change Conference in BaliWhether an agreement is effective or insufficient is measured basically by the magic number two. Global warming of two degrees Celsius above the pre-industrialized level – according to general expert opinion - is the maximum our planet can tolerate. As the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) emphasizes, greenhouse gas emissions in the year 2050 must be reversed to at least 50% of the 1990 level in order to reach this goal.This objective is ambitious, and several climate researchers fear it is too ambitious. There are indeed quite positive trends: After the change of government in Australia the new Labor government under Premier Kevin Rudd ratified the Kyoto Protocol immedietely. And since the G8 summit in Heiligendamm in June, the resistance of the USA against an effective global climate policy seems no longer carved in stone. Nevertheless: Many European industrialized countries are falling short of their ambitious self-imposed goals for emission reduction. The real problem is with the rapidly developing NICs. An agreement that does not include countries such as India, China and Indonesia, in which an overwhelming thirst for growth and thus cheap energy has developed, is worth nothing more than hot air – in the literal sense. But to get all these countries into the same boat, may prove to be very difficult. Prior to the conference the Chinese government implied that it could only imagine a mandatory upper limit for emission in exchange for being compensated by the rich industrialized nations for its stunted growth . This is reminiscent of Vladimir Putin’s tactics in 2004, when he consented to the Kyoto Protocol only in order to guarantee EU approval for Russia to join the World Trade Organization (WTO). China’s behavior, however, can be accounted for by a certain exigency: For its economic growth, China needs concrete and steel in great quantities – materials that require considerable energy input for their production. Hence the Chinese deputy minister of foreign affairs, Zhang Yesul, emphasized a few weeks ago that the Chinese energy demand “will increase over a long period”. Economic advancement must be sanctioned to the newly industrializing countries.This attitude is not completely incomprehensible. The wealth of the Western industrialized countries is based to a considerable degree on a decade-long exploitation of nature. Holding others accountable for the mistakes that one has allowed one's self to make, undermines one’s credibility to be an example, as the West perceives itself to be. But when the prospering NICs of China, India and Brazil are excluded, as in the Kyoto treaty, will the Bali summit therefore be considered a failure? What would a good solution look like?First of all, a basic rethinking of the global struggle against climate change is imperative. The Kyoto Protocol attaches importance to economic solutions but ignores, for example, the possibilities of technology transfer. Ecologically compatible coal-fired power plants and a massive support for regenerative energy sources in the NICs would not only retard their emission output, but also provide a surge of innovation in the industrialized countries. This alone, though, will not dissuade the Chinese from their belief in fossil fuels; in that land an average of two new 500-megawatt coal-fired power plants per week are being constructed.Yvo de Boer, Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (left) with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon (right)Great expectations are placed on the trade with emission allowances. Every country will receive air pollution certificates based on its population figures. Wealthier countries have the possibility to buy extra certificates from the NICs, thereby subsidizing the implementation of environmentally compatible technologies in these countries. At the same time energy in the industrialized countries would increase in price, which would force these lands to think about more efficient technologies. The snag, however, is that India and China in particular would have many certificates available to them due to their high population figures, but the CO2 emissions there are already so high that scarcely any certificates would be left over for trade.Whether the climate summit meeting will indeed fulfill these great expectations remains to be seen. All participants, however, should be conscious of the fact that they are quasi “doomed to success”. Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the United Nation's Framework Convention on Climate Change, does not tire of stressing that a successor treaty of the Kyoto Protocol ending in 2012 must be written at all costs, since the ratification process in the individual countries demands so much time. Conference participants can contemplate their responsibilities until 14 December – in a location that daily illustrates to them the magnificent aspects of our planet that need to be saved.What do you think about the responsibility of the newly industrializing countries (NICs) to reduce their emission? Are the demands of the wealthy industrialized nations unfair? Or are there no other alternatives? Are the industrialized nations supposed to reduce their emissions one-sided? Write and send us your opinion!To hear more voices about the UN Climate Change Conference in Bali, watch also our Video of the Convention of the Social Democratic Party in Germany!Images: United Nations