The rich world needs to remake the case for climate in such a manner as pleases the poor, cautions Gamal Nkrumah Delayed indefinitely? Is that the conclusion of the Copenhagen Climate Summit? If so, that is indeed a most maddening anti- climax. Most states understand the urgency of the situation. Modest as they sound, the final communiqués emanating from the clumsily contrived 15th Conference of the Parties (COP15) on the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the simultaneously convened Fifth Conference of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol. The COP15 and UNFCCC are acronyms that have arguably become synonymous with inaptitude, tedium and insipidity. This summit should get them off to a start. Sadly Copenhagen was a talking shop with more gusts of grandiose rhetoric than a Norse Althing. The question was who was to be the lawspeaker? United States President Barack Obama tried to smooth matters a little in his own suave diplomatic fashion. He had just accepted the Nobel Peace Prize and was in exuberant mood. "We have come a long way, but we have much further to go" Obama told the world leaders assembled in Copenhagen. Few, however, of the leaders of the emerging nations seemed especially impressed with Obama's comforting words of wisdom. "Each one of us acknowledges that those worst affected by climate change are the least responsible for it. Whatever emerges from our negotiations was addressed as glaring injustice to the countries of Africa, injustice to the least developed countries, and injustice to the small island states whose very survival as viable nations is in jeopardy," Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh summed the disappointment of the underdogs at Copenhagen. It is tempting to dismiss the event as a piece of political theatre. Copenhagen could have taken Kyoto into new heights. Clearly the priorities of the rich, highly industrialised nations of the North are not those of the developing countries of the South. Of course, in contrast to emerging markets, the West has economic clout. The growing economic potential of the emerging markets is beginning to worry Western powers. And, the climate debate is seen as the perfect excuse to put countries like China, India and Brazil in the doghouse. Sighs of relief are certainly not in order. The three aforementioned mega-nations are too capacious to be treated like puppies. It was entirely predictable that Copenhagen would turn out to be a flop. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez summed it up. The wealthy Western nations are "pulling a document from nowhere", he protested against the outcome of the Copenhagen proceedings. His protestations fell on deaf ears. The hardened hearts of the rich at Copenhagen did little to ease the tense atmosphere. Chavez was backed by the representatives of the impoverished and disfranchised. Bolivian President Evo Moralez warned that the proposed agreement at Copenhagen was "smuggled in like countreband ". Are we not on the verge of a new series of errors that will inevitably cost the world dearly in the years to come? Who will the West blame this time if it all goes terribly wrong? China, unquestionably. The West, it seems, has a vested interest in tarnishing China's image. At Copenhagen, China retaliated with arraignments levelled against Western powers. On closer inspection, however, the Copenhagen initiative has an intriguing logic for the developing countries of the South. Part of the strategy of the West has been to demonise China in particular, and to a lesser extent other emerging markets for their rapid economic development which inevitably led to an increase of their gas emissions. And global warming does not take a break just because the world needs a breather. Copenhagen was supposed to have ironed out the difficulties between rich and poor. Unfortunately, it didn't. It couldn't. It may not achieve the desired results, but it indicates how little the developing South have to lose in terms of development progress. The West has turned a blind eye to the intrinsic needs of the South. The attempt of the impoverished nations to shake things up was cruelly rebuffed. The emerging markets, the rising economic powers, stood their ground. They tried to speak on behalf of the poorest of the poor. How could this be happening, they argued. It remains to be seen where Western intransigence will lead. "We are willing to participate in the financing mechanisms if we reach an agreement on a final proposal from this conference," Brazilian President Luiz Lula da Silva told delegates at the Copenhagen climate summit. "It is a matter of life or death for the population of the globe. We should put our heads together and take very serious decisions. Our view is that we are dealing with an issue that threatens the very survival of humanity. That must take precedent, not the issue of trying to benefit while others are going under," thundered the forthright and vociferous South African President Jacob Zuma. No one can predict what will happen next. The battle of wills between the Western powers and an ascendant China backed by a host of developing countries will continue unabated. Their battle at Copenhagen is part of a bigger contest that draws developing countries into a stronger bargaining position vis-à-vis the North at various international forums. Rarely have the prospects for a meaningful deal between the developing countries of the South and the industrially advanced wealthy nations of the North looked so bleak. Copenhagen gave it even more totemic importance. Over all this ill will hangs the shadow of recrimination. If that were not obstacle enough, the unfolding of the tragic consequences of global warming is exacerbated by political quibbles. Perhaps worst of all, the Western powers, without whom no durable deal can be done, flexed their muscles at Copenhagen. They appear to be making a hash of the climate change conference in Copenhagen. The prospects for dilly-dallying and pussy-footing on matters of life and death for billions around the world should not be taken lightly. The first steps were taken in Kyoto when, having exhausted all other possibilities of reaching a compromise, the Americans decided to forsake their moral leadership, scouring the emerging markets for potential dragons to slay. Suddenly after the brightest of starts in Kyoto, matters came to a head in Copenhagen. Obama disappointed his fans. And perhaps that is the biggest danger facing the world in the aftermath of Copenhagen. All this helped spawn a troupe of new and committed environmentalists determined to halt climate change. There are new problems on the horizons, though. Having decided to pick a fight with the West over global warming, the governments of the underdeveloped nations of the South should have pressed on, threatening to foil any Copenhagen resolution that does not serve their interests. "We are running short on time," Obama warned. Copenhagen cannot impinge on China's "right to develop" trumpeted The People's Daily, amid incessant charges that Beijing blocked attempts by the rich countries of the North to set a target of an 80 per cent reduction of carbon emissions by 2050. Beijing is accused of blocking agreement on global reduction in greenhouse emissions, but China isn't the only culprit. To begin with, Obama described Copenhagen as a "meaningful and unprecedented breakthrough". However, Obama appears to have backtracked conceding that there was a "fundamental deadlock in perspectives". By 2020 China's carbon dioxide emissions per unit of GDP will decrease by 40 per cent to 45 per cent from the 2005 level. China is fast changing -- in the right direction. Forest coverage increased by 40 million hectares and non-fossil fuels in primary energy consumption increased to 15 per cent. "There are voluntary actions China will take in light of its national conditions." China is a veto-wielding member of the United Nations Security Council. It has assumed the role of spokesperson for developing countries. "China has taken climate change very seriously in the course of its development." Wen Jiabao assured delegates in Copenhagen. The outcome of the Copenhagen Climate Summit was described as "extremely flawed" by Lumumba Di-Aping, Sudanese ambassador and chairman of the bloc of developing countries in Copenhagen. Even cynical Western leaders had to concede the facts. "The text we have is not perfect," admitted French President Nicolas Sarkozy. And yet a strong moral case remains for China to assume the mantle of leadership in slowing down global warming. But, not at the expense of its own development priorities. "Bearing in mind the fundamental interests of the Chinese people and mankind's long-term development, we have extended unremitting effort and made a positive contribution to the fight against climate change," said Wen Jiabao. "We have improved the taxation system and advanced the pricing reform of resource products with a view to putting in place at an early date a pricing mechanism that is responding to market supply and demand, resource scarcity level and the cost of environmental damage," added Wen Jiabao. What more can China do? Certainly Beijing cannot afford to jeopardise its own development. "By the end of the first half of this year, China's energy consumption per unit of GDP had dropped by 13 per cent from the 2005 level, equivalent to reducing 800 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions," disclosed Wen Jiabao. China is certain to steal the show at the next Climate Change summit in Bonn, Germany.