Interesting interview, I suggest you read it in full. Excerpts:
SPIEGEL: Before going to Copenhagen, you formulated clear criteria for success at the summit. You wanted to see concrete reduction targets being established for both 2020 and 2050, which would lead to a global climate treaty within six months. Neither of those things has been achieved. Why don't you be honest and talk about a complete failure?
Röttgen: There is no disguising the fact that the outcome does not meet our criteria for success, and it is miles away from what we consider to be urgently necessary. If you want to call that failure, then I can understand that -- even if I do not entirely share that view.
[...]
SPIEGEL: What caused the conference to collapse?
Röttgen: Emerging economies, led by China, were not willing to commit themselves to CO2 reduction targets as a part of their foreign policy or to join the common political will. With the United States, the problems were domestic in nature. The political conditions are lacking there for the country to be part of a global framework. Both countries are not prepared, for different reasons, to solve the problem on the basis of reciprocal obligations. Both seem to consider national politics to be more important.
[...]
SPIEGEL: At what point in Copenhagen did you realize that things were turning for the worst?
Röttgen: When it became clear that China was not even willing to accept unilateral pledges on the part of the industrialized nations to reduce emissions by at least 80 percent by 2050. That was the absolute low point. The Chinese said that was too little for them. We replied that we industrialized countries could perhaps offer 100 percent, but that would have to be the end -- for mathematical reasons apart from anything else. At that point, it became clear that the Chinese were not concerned with agreeing on CO2 reductions, but rather with preventing them. When US President Barack Obama retreated for a face-to-face meeting with Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao, it suddenly became clear to me: We can forget about our main targets.
[...]
SPIEGEL: By cutting a deal with the emerging economies and giving the EU the cold shoulder, the US has ushered in the end of the era of the classical West.
Röttgen: The US as leader is part of the political concept of the West. But the US hasn't led -- instead it reached a deal with China that there wouldn't be any leadership. In my perception, they have neither turned away from Europe nor really turned toward China strategically. In that sense I see an erosion of their leadership role. Barack Obama and Wen Jiabao have agreed to the lowest common denominator: China doesn't want to lead, and the US cannot lead. The major blockade at the summit grew out of an unfortunate combination of weak leadership on the part of the Americans and Chinese power to impede progress.
SPIEGEL: But isn't Europe the real loser? It was unable to push through any of its objectives.
Röttgen: No, Europe is not the loser because it presented itself as a unified bloc at the summit, with clear goals and a solid strategy. That was one of the few really positive experiences in Copenhagen and vitally important to our role in this new world order. We have shown what Europe's role could be.
SPIEGEL: Perhaps Europe has a role, but Europe has no power.
Röttgen: We cannot solve the climate problem alone because, in this sense, our emissions are too low. Our share of global emissions is only about 14 percent. We could stop emitting CO2 tomorrow and global warming would still be catastrophic. On this issue those who emit the most have the greatest power -- unfortunately.
SPIEGEL: Despite all the superficial conflicts, wasn't there an American-Chinese alliance in Copenhagen? Both countries are economically dependent on one another to a massive extent, a fact that creates common interests.
Röttgen: That perspective only goes part of the way to providing an answer. The Chinese do not want any obligations under international law which involve transparency, because they fear it will set a precedent for other areas of policy.
SPIEGEL: What about the Americans?
Röttgen: In the United States, the country's political and economic elite know that the hour has arrived in which the US, for environmental and economic reasons, needs to follow the path that will lead it to becoming a CO2-neutral society. But this elite is unable to secure majority support for that approach. Too many people are unwilling to follow them because they prefer to have cheap money to consume, and they don't want to limit their CO2 emissions, so that they can continue to do things their way. The elite believe they will lose the majority if they try to explain the energy issue. So I do not believe there is a conscious American-Chinese alliance. It is more a case of two forms of weakness coming together.
SPIEGEL: The Chinese sent deputy ministers to discussions with Obama until he, enraged, went to Wen Jiabao and demanded direct talks. Have we just witnessed the world's new top superpower?
Röttgen: China sees itself in economic terms as an emerging country, but when it comes to CO2 emissions it is a superpower that could almost ruin the two-degree target all by itself. The government in Beijing, of course, takes advantage of the fact that the US and Europe do not have a common position. The Americans should reflect carefully on that when they analyse what happened at the summit.
SPIEGEL: Was the image deceptive that Sudan, a rogue state, had more influence in Copenhagen than Germany?
Röttgen: That is truly wrong. Sudan had no influence, but was used as a mouthpiece for foreign interests -- including China.
[...]
SPIEGEL: But Germany is clearly so insignificant that no one wants to follow the German example on climate issues.
Röttgen: You are also deceiving yourself there. It is German policy to take a leading role in environmental technology. China and the US may oppose binding targets, but both countries are also pursuing a massive expansion of their own environmental technologies and will also buy the best technologies from around the world. Our role is in a sense quite traditional: We want to help satisfy the growing demand for energy in an environmentally friendly way with German technology, engineering skills and equipment. Our capital is green technology and political credibility. And we can exert political and economic influence using those things.
[...]
SPIEGEL: Germany will host a small climate summit in Bonn in June 2010. What do you intend to do better than the Danes?
Röttgen: It won't be possible for us to achieve in half a year what could not be achieved in the past two years and more and what did not succeed in Copenhagen. The fact that the US and China fundamentally reject the current approach is a turning point. It requires that we find the causes, which includes being self-critical. We also need to make changes to our strategy and to find a new approach. We need to talk about the whole format. The EU environment ministers agreed last Tuesday that they would do this in Seville at the end of January.