Vienna 1987

The United States entered the second negotiating session, held in Vienna the following February, with much the same negotiating position. This position was strengthened by congressional threats of trade sanctions against Northern producers of CFCs, and further pressured by legislation calling for unilateral actions should international negotiations fail to reach an agreement.79 The Vienna meeting saw attendance increased to thirty-one (ten Southern as Columbia, Kenya, Malaysia, Nigeria, and Thailand joined the proceedings and Uruguay declined to attend) but little progress on substantive issues.80 The Toronto group solidified its goals around the U.S. position of an immediate CFC production freeze followed by scheduled reductions.81 While the two sides, United States and EU, remained a distance apart, the two breakthroughs at Vienna were the first signs of an EU willingness to discuss reductions they had previously refused and the setting of a firm date to finish the protocol negotiations.82 The deficiency of progress, however, was disconcerting to some delegates and who worried that the process would have to go on without the Europeans.83

The United States, through two rounds of negotiations and in preparation for a third, stayed the course with a negotiating position that called for global cooperation among Northern powers—the EU, Japan, and Russia. Though Tolba mentions that financial aid was discussed for the first time at Vienna, U.S. behavior demonstrated that it was clearly not a major concern of the United States at the time.84 The United States was concerned with the lack of a coherent EU policy and the influence of industry on the other Northern delegations.85 U.S. diplomatic efforts in the spring of 1987

centered on the goal of convincing Northern states of the need to take action.86 The United States, in that it thought about Southern states at all, actually considered them to be strong supporters of CFC regulations. Lee Thomas, the administrator of the EPA, listed Japan and the EU as the least aggressive states regarding CFC regulation, while he listed the Nordic countries and some Southern states as the most aggressive.87

Surefire Negotiation Tactics

Surefire Negotiation Tactics

Shockingly Simple But Powerful Negotiation Strategies Save The Ordinary Joe Thousands Of Dollars Of Foreseen Expenses. Discover How You Too Can Save More, Keep Under Your Budget, And Make More Money With These Simple Negotiation Tactics You Can Apply In Any Business!

Get My Free Ebook

Post a comment