Kyoto Protocol ratification: with or without the US?

Many observers had anticipated that the Sixth Conference of the Parties (COP- 6) to the FCCC (Framework Convention on Climate Change) would not result in any decision or action of significance. But the complete collapse of the negotiations, which at a late stage of deliberations were heading towards some sort of compromise, came as a surprise to those present in The Hague as well as those who monitored developments from afar. It is unfortunate that almost a decade after the FCCC was carefully crafted and signed by almost all the countries of the world we still have no binding agreement to mitigate the threat of climate change. Meanwhile, scientific evidence gets stronger that the world is going through a major change in its climate system through human interference, and the extent of change is palpably larger than earlier estimates has suggested. Simplistic interpretations of why the talks collapsed are numerous, but the attitude of the US in not accepting the letter and spirit of the targets set in the Kyoto Protocol for reduction in emissions of greenhouse gases is clearly a major cause. Unfortunately, US emissions have grown by 21.8% during the period 1990 to 1998, which would make it difficult for any US Administration to take the measures necessary to meet the Kyoto targets. The US public continues to buy more and more sport utility vehicles mostly driven all over the country with just one passenger being transported. A further period of inaction would only make the task more daunting for the Government of the US. The only answer lies in the ratification of the protocol without the US. If that were to happen, then US public opinion would force the Congress and the executive branch to catch up with the rest of the world. There is need for a coalition of rational interest in Europe and other nations to join hands towards ratification of the protocol without the US. No further delay in this effort would be justified.