Isolated, again

Some nongovernmental organizations, however, view the partnerships as a cop-out. They insist that such initiatives, while valuable, should not replace binding agreements between governments with concrete timetables and targets.

But James Connaughton, chairman of the White House Council of Environmental Quality, insists partnerships are the way to achieve meaningful results.

"What countries need, they will negotiate with us and other organizations," he said. "They can decide how the money should be spent -- not have it decided for them at an international forum ... We are committed, but we want to avoid defining terms and timetables that have no relation to a real plan of action."

Connaughton strongly defended President Bush, saying he was engaged at the highest level in various negotiations preceding this summit. "The multidisciplinary high-level implementation team has been brought to this conference and that should be recognized," he added.

He also played down the differences between the U.S. and other countries gathered in Johannesburg. "We think this summit gives an opportunity to work together on 98 percent of common goals and to get on with action points," Connaughton said. "The criticism [of Bush] surrounds isolated issues that catch attention because they are controversial. If there is a frustration, it's that the consensus of action is not getting the attention it deserves."

His words, however, were not enough to appease critics. The U.S. youth caucus today became the latest group to add its opposition to American policy.

In a statement, the caucus said the refusal of the U.S. to consider binding agreements on renewable energy did not reflect the views of the majority of Americans. It said U.S. students were "outraged" at the administration's position on climate issues as well as its flat rejection of a proposal to redirect subsidies from so-called dirty energy to clean energy.

Kucinich also stressed that most Americans are concerned about the impact of the country's energy policies and practices around the world. "There are many Americans who understand our responsibility," he said. His sentiments are being echoed in summit halls where the message from Americans seems to be: Don't judge our country by our government.

One plenary debate on energy evoked a rebellious response from a U.S. delegate representing the views of local government: "The consensus [at the summit] is that our national leadership just doesn't seem to get it," the delegate said, to much applause. "But please, don't judge American people or local authorities by that."

Organizers have tried to downplay talk around the role of the U.S. at this summit. Nitin Desai, the summit's secretary general, said at the start that the U.S. had participated in every part of the process and at very senior levels.

Nkosazana Zuma, South Africa's foreign affairs minister, went further. She said political will was not only indicated by the physical presence of heads of state, but by whether the state itself participates constructively and will continue to do so. "What is critical is the participation of all states but also a critical mass of leaders," she said. "We are confident that even though Bush is not here, it will be just as successful."

That of course remains to be seen; the summit still has a week to run and the heads of state only convene on Monday. Secretary of State Colin Powell is also expected to arrive in Johannesburg next week. But the big question, and not only on the issue of energy, is whether all this talk will produce more heat than light.

The agenda is so broad here -- from saving family farms to conserving mountain goats, from encouraging business ethics to protecting migratory birds -- that it invites every man and his hobbyhorse to jump aboard. And they have done so with gusto through marches, fliers, demonstrations, exhibitions, press conferences, debates and informal networking in the queues.

For all the frenetic activity, however, some firm decisions must be made. If the U.S. gets its way and no binding agreements are made, many delegates here will consider the conference a failure.

"The people in this [Bush] administration might not want to talk about timetables, but the truth is we must talk about them," Kucinich said. "When scientists can show that over time global warming can, in fact, impact on the increase in world temperature, then we better be talking about timetables. We are not a society whose leaders want to turn back the tide."

Perhaps one positive result can be drawn from the fray: If President Bush is so anxious to avoid binding agreements, he must believe in the authority of this summit. That thought might encourage delegates as they pore over the final text to be presented to their leaders next week.

• View blog reactions