Two days into the climate conference, and the US is out to inflame. Yesterday, US representatives declared that the world will hereafter be divided into two: those who agree with them on climate change, and those who do not. Countries that believe in multilateralism, and countries that opt for US bilateralism and voluntary action. With us, or against us.

Should we be surprised? Not at all. We are all acquainted with US foreign policy these days — multilateralism bad, bilateralism good. At the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD), the US lambasted the multilateral WSSD process and beatified bilateral, voluntary partnerships. As a US senator pointed out, multilateralism is nothing but an obstacle in the way of the world’s superpower. Who needs somebody else to decide what’s fair and foul when you are rich and powerful?

The divide and rule policy goes deeper. Two press briefings held in two days emphasised that several countries had entered into bilateral agreements with the US. In case countries were ratifying the protocol in the hope of shaming the US into taking action some day, chief honcho Harlan Watson announced that the US will not take on cuts even post-Kyoto. (Very presumptuous,

Mr Watson. As one EU delegate said, there will probably be a new government in the US by then!)

Finally, in case the countries were joining the protocol under the mistaken impression that it would work, US delegates were heard telling the media that it remained to be seen if the protocol would ever come into effect, or whether countries would meet their commitments.

Developing countries delegates — beware. It is easy to be taken in with promises of bilateral aid, and make seemingly innocuous commitments in bilateral agreements. There is far too much at stake here. To further their interests, smaller, poorer countries don’t have aid to bribe and trade muscle to threaten countries.

Instead, find a way to make the world’s biggest polluter accountable for its actions. No developing country would have gotten away with the kind of arrogance that the US is displaying — they would have been hit with trade sanctions even before they knew what was happening. Waiting for another government to be elected in the US may seem like a pragmatic strategy, but it does not give the world community a mechanism to make rich countries equally accountable for their actions.