I wasn't sure whether to laugh or cry when I read President Bush's remarks on climate change to the Global Leadership Council today. Just days ahead of the G8 summit, surrounded by a media storm of leaked reports about the Bush administration's refusal to accept a proposed global goal for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, President Bush announced this morning that the U.S. would launch its own separate round of talks in search of... wait, you'll never guess... that's right - a global emissions goal.

Confused yet? You should be, because the President's proposal, in my humble opinion, is a clever bit of obfuscation and political theatre, designed to trick us into seeing action where there is none.

Why embrace the goal that's already on the table, which would move international climate negotiations to the next level (a new set of mandatory emissions commitments negotiated under the auspices of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change), when you can announce (unilaterally) a new set of talks designed to come up with a similar goal - which just happens to kick the next step of the process (the big C word) that much farther down the road? Why indeed.

Germany's proposal, which has gained broad support from other G8 countries, includes a global climate mitigation goal - preventing the earth's average temperature from rising more than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit). Yet, given a golden opportunity to strengthen relationships with key allies, enhance the image of the United States abroad, and (a small side benefit) take a significant step towards saving the planet by mobilizing the international community to prevent climate change, the Bush administration has instead flung mud in the faces of its friends by refusing to seriously consider Germany's proposal. Then, to add insult to injury, the President announces his own independent initiative to come up with a new goal. I wouldn't want to be hanging out in Chancellor Merkel's office today.

The worst part about all this is that the goal Germany's proposing is not arbitrary. It's a threshold beyond which there is scientific consensus that there is a greater than 50% chance of triggering "dangerous" or "uncontrollable" climate change.

To be fair, the President has come a long way in the past year. The words "climate change" have passed his lips, and I applaud the statement he made today about helping developing countries "leapfrog" into a better energy future.

“We need to harness the power of technology to help nations meet their growing energy needs while protecting the environment and addressing the challenge of global climate change.”

Today's announcement even recognizes a need to work with other nations to solve the global climate challenge.

“The United States will work with other nations to establish a new framework on greenhouse gas emissions for when the Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012.”

All this is great, as far as it goes. But does pre-empting two critical ongoing multilateral process - the G8, and the UNFCCC negotiations to be held in Bali later this year - and replacing them with a unilateral initiative designed to search for a goal that already exists really promote international cooperation on climate action?