Theos-Talk Archives (September 2001 Message tt00259)

> I looked up your reference (and determined that it IS a valid United
> Nations site). I notice, however, that the column is "ratified or
> acceded", not "ratified", and all the countries mentioned in the column
> are developing countries who, in order to accede to the treaty need to
> do pretty much nothing.
>
> Bart

Bart,

Why would I give a reference to the UN Web site that was not a valid UN
site?

The Oxford Dictionary defines "ratify" and "accede" as follows:

"ratify" - to confirm or accept by formal consent an agreement made in one's
name.
"accede" - to formally subscribe to a treaty or other agreement.

I believe I did say that the countries with the most to do did not ratify
the agreement once the United States changed its mind. They are still
hoping to find a way to include the world's biggest single polluter, the US,
in the agreement. The reason being that greenhouse emissions from the US
are 25 percent of the world's total emissions.

> The United States never ratified the treaty,
> and therefore officially never made any agreement to go back on.

Bart, you must know as well as I do that the real work in these treaty
negiotiations takes many years of getting countries to agree about what it
is they are going to finally ratify or accede. They need to have a common
agreement *before* they can officially sign the treaty. They appeared to
have that common agreement until the Bush administration changed its mind.

But these are side issues. I would like to remind you of the main point
here. You wrote:

> What country is doing far more to PROTECT
> the environment than the U.S.? And if you
> mention the Kyoto treaty, please note that
> the Kyoto treaty is largely:
> The United States unilaterally cuts back on
> pollution, while the other countries can pollute
> as much as they want.

According to the United Nations, the US is the world's single biggest
polluter when it comes to greenhouse gases. The agreement on the table at
Kyoto was that the US would cut its emissions by 7 percent and the other
countries would cut theirs by 5.2 percent by the period 2008-2112. This
does not match your description of the Kyoto treaty.

...Peter