Mantus

We often want our politicians to tell the truth. Yet if they always told the truth they would not be able to do their jobs as politicians. One major example that comes to mind is the Kyoto issue that came up early in Bush's first term and is rearing its head again as we come to the G8 summit.

Kyoto is an agreement that is full of hot air. Most countries that agreed to it are strugling or not even trying to meet their goals. Some countries are finding it extreamelly difficult to create a legal framework around the protocol (from what I read of the Canadian strugle of complying with the protocol). In the end, I feel that the Kyoto protocol was nothing more then a way for world leaders to create political capital. Much like promisses of undelivered aid to developing countries. Some countries, like China would even benefit from Kyoto because developing countries get an easier ride, despite the fact that China is the 2nd largest consumer or resources in the world. Infact the same China which was so proud of signing the Kyoto deal is plaining on building multiple coal power plants to deal with it's ever increasing energy demands.

Now I understand that even talk of global enviromental issues is a huge step forward in averting a major catastrope for our species. Thus the Kyoto protocol was certainly not useless. It put the issue of preserving the enviroment on the table. Which is an important first step, a political step.

So we are faced with a choice. Ratify the treaty like everyone else even though we would actually do prety much nothing yet look good politically. Or tell the truth and tell the world that the agreement is unrealistic and simply wont work for our economy.

Bush chose option B. As a result many people, including myself, saw him as a pawn for the major energy corporations. Yet whether he is a pawn or not, he told the truth and payed for it.

Thoughts?