Going green for security's sake

The more than 10,000 delegates currently meeting at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Poznan have a difficult task ahead of them: Outlining the successor to the Kyoto Protocol to be agreed upon in 2009.

At the crux of the matter is the transatlantic split between the United States, which did not sign the original agreement on cutting greenhouse gas emissions, and the EU, which sees itself as the world's green vanguard.

The stereotypical understanding of the divide posits that while the EU has faith in the power of regulation to combat climate change, the US does not want to be tied down by international agreements and instead focuses on technological solutions to the challenges of pollution.

That distinction may be less relevant now however with interventionist Nicholas Sarkozy, Democrat Barack Obama and whoever the new group of European Commissioners, due to be appointed in 2009, turn out to be. In Washington, there is talk of a renewed focus on climate issues.

In Brussels, there are plans for a merged position of energy and climate change commissioner after the June European elections. Similarly, the old US-EU dispute may give way to a new hybrid debate in which environmental concerns are merged with the transatlantic challenge of European energy security.

Since Russia's 2006 cutting off natural gas supplies to Ukraine affected the energy imports of EU members states, the issue of Europe's over-dependence on oil and gas supplies controlled by the Kremlin has gained traction in discussions over continental security.

While NATO has yet to delve into strategic energy security issues, there has for years been bipartisan support in Washington for the development of alternative energy routes to Caspian oil and gas producers.

The EU Commission has sent delegations to Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan to build partnerships for the sake of energy diversification.

The projects that would achieve this goal, such as the Trans-Caspian pipeline or the Nabucco route from Turkey to Austria, are of paramount importance for Europe's energy priorities and transatlantic security.

But, to achieve long-term energy security, the US and the EU must invest in non-fossil-fuel-based solutions.

Capping emissions and building new pipelines will be the name of the game for a long time, but for the sake of security, transatlantic co-operation must begin to realise power generation on a mass scale from wind, solar and nuclear sources, not to mention develop carbon sequestration and green transportation technologies.

Security based understanding

A security-based understanding is vital, whatever oil prices may be at the moment.

The less dependent NATO countries are on polluting fossil fuels, the less beholden they will be to a resurgent Russia, an impetuous Iran or a cantankerous Venezuela – all of which are now banding together to form a global natural gas cartel.

When viewed through a national security lens, issues of energy and climate change may make the important step from wishful thinking to implementation of concrete objectives.

In the midst of a global financial crisis, using state funds to encourage the growth of capacity-starved domestic nuclear industries may not be such as bad idea.

If European delegates working on a new Kyoto want the US to come on board, they should frame green regulations as long-term security measures, perhaps coupling them with commitments to increase intra-NATO spending on developing green military technologies.

US delegates would do well to consider emission caps as incentives to promote growth in new industries and provide a bridge to innovative solutions we may not have even thought of yet.

The transatlantic climate chasm is beginning to be filled in by energy security imperatives. This should only be viewed as a win-win development on both sides of the pond.

Alexandros Petersen researches energy security issues as southeast Europe policy scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars and is an adjunct fellow with the Russia and Eurasia Programme at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).