在美国国内，气候变化和新能源政策的阻力应该来自于石油、汽车产业集团。现在，底特律的汽车业在一片寒风中瑟瑟发抖，不得不向政府低头求助，那么，现在是否可以说石油巨头们是抵制减排的主要力量呢？抑或还有其他利益集团？

Within the US, the resistance to the policies on climate change and new energy is from the giant oil and automobile industry groups. Now, the automobile industry in Detroit is in depression and has to seek help from the government. Then, can we say oil tycoons form the main force of resistance to carbon reduction? Or are there any other interest groups involved?

对于中国劳动密集型产业主导的出口结构来说，来自发达国家的环境壁垒是个很大的挑战。一直以来，在气候谈判上最卖力的欧盟，也正是制定和执行环境标准最为严格的出口对象。对于中国的企业来说，提高产品的附加值，尤其是低能耗、无污染的产品，将是大势所趋。

As China's export structure is mainly formed by labour-intensive industries, the environmental barriers of the developed world mean great challenges for China's exports. Being the most endeavouring party in the negotiation of climate change from now and then, the European Union, who is China's exporting target, is the strictest in drafting and enforcing environmental standards. As a result, the enterprises in China tend to follow the trend of raising the added value for products, especially those require low-energy-consumption and pollution-free.

当奥巴马绿色新政中的新能源政策，展示了其重视多边主义国际趋势的时候，美国积极参加双轨制下的国际谈判，并积极与欧盟、中国在双边层面展开碳外交对话，仿佛一夜之间，美国从众否之地变成了应对气候变化多边机制的领导者。甚至有人提出了G2理论，设想只有中美两国就可以共同治理复杂而缓慢的全球减排温室气体的宏伟计划了。显然，这样的论调过于理想化。因为，正如上文所提，美国的国内政治将不可避免地干预甚至左右着美国政府的国际事务。南希.佩洛西领导的众议院几遍通过了美国的能源和气候法案，参议院也未必能在几场听证会后就立即认可法案，他们仍认为美国国内经济形势比国际承诺应对气候变化要重要的多。美国政府在2009年11前得不到国会授权，那么美国想领导世界应对气候变化的格局就只能是黄粱一梦罢了。反观中国，其国内自上而下的政策实施将为其在双边和多边碳外交中谋取重要的筹码。上半年和美国的双边碳外交，已经促使美国认同了“共同但有区别的原则”，在5月20日公开的《中国应对气候变化的谈判立场》中向发达国家提出必须在公约和议定书框架下运行双轨制的谈判模式、要求发达国家承担40%的减排指标、在资金和技术上建立真正有效的机制等外交攻势，似乎说明，中国才是一个可能在今年的碳外交中最游刃有余的国家。因为中国坚持不承诺减排，但积极推进国内的节能减排（6月5日的国务院节能减排和应对气候变化领导小组会议上甚至预示中国的“十二五规划”将设置中国的碳减排强度）；中国积极参与中欧的CDM合作，同时积极迎合美国的能源和气候合作的橄榄枝；因此，我认为，气候变化的领导权之前可能在欧盟，因为欧盟的承诺最符合科学要求，但当个发达国家的谈判要价和欧盟严重背离的时候，未来应对气候变化的领导权似乎真的已经旁落了。但是，它并没有转向任何一个国家，不是美国，也更不是中国，这一领导权将重归多边机制的国际法框架。因为，当各国在应对气候变化的国际谈判中形成胶着的均势的时候，一国或一地区的领导权就将淡化，而被多边妥协的协同机制取代，而这样的结果恰恰是国际关系最理想的状态。也更能促使各国在全球环境治理的理念下，最大程度的处理国内经济发展和国际环境保护的关系。
评论人是华东政法大学国际法学博士生李威。

When Obama's New Energy Policy of Green New Deal shows its emphasis on international multilateralism,the States actively participates in international negotiations under track plan system and stage biliteral diplomatic dialogue on carbon emissions with EU and China. It seems America has changed from the target of public criticism into a leader of multilateral regimes on dealing climate changes overnight. Moreover,some people bring forward G2 Theory, supposing that the complicated and tardo grand plan on global greenhouse gases emission can be managed by China and America merely. Apparently, this point of view is too idealistic. As aforementioned, America's demestic affairs will inevitably interfere, or even manipulate its international affairs. The House of Representatives directed by Nancy Pelosi approved American Energy and Climate Bill for several times, but whether Senate would certificate the Bill immediately after a few hearings still wait to see, since they think the domestic economic situation is far more important than international commitment on coping climate change. The anticipation that America leads the world to deal with climate change will fall through if it fails to get authorization from the Congress until November,2009. On the contray, China's implemention of top-down policy would bring it a big advantage in bilateral and multilateral carbon diplomacy. The bilateral carbon diplomacy with America in the first half year have conduced to Ameica's identification of "The principle of common but differentiated responsibility". Besides,in the "China's negotiations stance in coping with climate changes" published on 20th May, China proposed to developed countries that they must run track plan negotiation conforming to treaty and protocol, undertake forty percent index of carbon emission ,and establish truly effective mechanism based on fund and technology,etc. These diplomatic offensives seem to indicate China is the most capable country in this year's carbon diplomacy. Since China insists on disclaimer of emission, but actively promote internal energy conservation and emission reduction. State Council's leading group session about energy conservation emission reduction and coping with climate changes on June fifth, indeed indicate China's carbon emission intensity will be set on Twelfth Five-Year Plan. China takes part in Central Europe's CDM cooperation enthusiasticly, meanwhile, cater to the olive branch of America's energy and climate cooperation with a warm heart. Based on all these, I believe the leadership of climate change may lies in EU, because its commitments are in the greatest accordance with scientific requirements. Whereas, when developed country's requirements lapse severely from EU's, future's leadership of coping with climate changes really appears to be transferd. However,it doesn't divert to any countries, not America,not China, the leadership will return to multiple mechanism, the framework of law of nations. For reason that when each country strike a balance in international negotiations about coping with climate changes, the leadership of one country or one region will dilute, replaced by multiple collaboration mechanism, which is an ideal condition of international relationship, and would do better to urge every country to deal with the relations between domestic economic development and international environment protection in their utmost, while preserve the philosophy of global environment treatment.

The commenter is Li Wei, a JD of international law in East China University of Political Science and Law.
This comment was translated by Mingzhu Yao.