Deeds, Not Words

MONTREAL, Dec. 9 - Two weeks of treaty talks on global warming neared an end today with the world's current and projected leaders in emissions of greenhouse gases, the United States and China, still refusing to take any mandatory steps to avoid dangerous climate change.

The Bush administration was sharply criticized by environmental groups for walking out of a round of informal discussions shortly after midnight that were aimed at finding new ways of curbing gases beyond steps taken so far.

The walkout was widely seen here as the capstone of two weeks of American efforts to prevent any fresh initiatives from being discussed.

"This shows just how willing the U.S. administration is to walk away from a healthy planet and its responsibilities to its own people," said Jennifer Morgan of the World Wildlife Fund.

The talks have left the world's major sources of the emissions - the United States, big developing countries, and a bloc led by Europe and Japan - divided over how to proceed under both a 1992 treaty with no binding gas restrictions and the Kyoto Protocol, an addendum that took effect this year.

The Kyoto pact sets binding restrictions on gases, but they apply only to about three dozen industrialized countries. The United States and Australia have rejected it.

In Washington, Adam Ereli, a State Department spokesman, defended the American opposition to binding restrictions on the gases and, instead, a focus on long-term work to develop cleaner technologies.

"If you want to talk about global consciousness, I'd say there's one country that is focused on action, that is focused on dialogue, that is focused on cooperation, and that is focused on helping the developing world, and that's the United States," Mr. Ereli said.

Just imagine what they would have done if they hadn't been focused on dialogue and cooperation! Instead of walking out after two weeks of obstruction, maybe they would have bombed Montreal? Sent the Rendition Team after the Canadian Prime Minister?

Of course, their childishness might have something to do with the fact that Bill Clinton was invited to give a speech, and he said some things that weren't exactly sycophantic, like that we might want to pay attention to global warming.

"I think it's crazy for us to play games with our children's future," Mr. Clinton said. "We know what's happening to the climate, we have a highly predictable set of consequences if we continue to pour greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, and we know we have an alternative that will lead us to greater prosperity."

No wonder the Bush administration had to go home pouting. They wouldn't want the rest of the world thinking that the administration wasn't consistently driven by an irrational need to destroy every aspect of our standing in the world community.