First of all, the circle of commitment must be the lamest name global leaders could have ever come up with.
Who do they think they are, King Arthur's Round Table?
Secondly, it's destroyed any goodwill that may have accrued in the successful establishment of the largest global summit of leaders that the world has ever seen.
In 24 hours the news has changed from hope and possibility, to the same old bickering that we hear every time the topic of climate change appears across the globe.
Politicians will remain politicians - plotting in secret and working towards self-interest.
And for what?
The Danish Text is certainly the dumbest idea that could have appeared.
Who would agree to it?
It is alleged to place more power to rich nations and place added restrictions on developing nations. The Kyoto Protocol and UN involvement in negotiations are abandoned; agreements which developing nations believe treat them fairly.
Control of climate change finance is handed to the World Bank, with money to poorer countries tied to specific climate action. Poor countries are allowed 1.5 tonnes of carbon per person by 2050, while rich countries are allegedly allowed twice as much.
Hence the arrogance of the rich world surfaces again.
But if we are to successfully reach an accord (which I think is what Copenhagen is trying to do- although I can't be sure) then the rich world has to start understanding the situations of others.
It's easy for us, in our position, to sit back and grumble about how developing nations, with their excessive greenhouse emissions and unending production lines, are going to ruin the world. The West retains pole position, but we can safely sit back and point and say it is not us but China, India and Brazil that are really destroying the planet.
Looking at the data, at this point, it's not an unreasonable assumption.
But look closely. The rich world is basically saying that we, having gotten to a level of economic growth where we can provide for all our citizens, technologically, militarily, financially, we can now turn around and say that no, nobody else is allowed to do this, because it's wrong.
It's like mercilessly crash tackling your way into the big leagues, and then turning around and saying that we need tackle restrictions. It's like gathering all the knowledge in the world and then keeping it for oneself.
The developing world follows the rich world.
China and India aspire to be America and the U.K; they want success and prosperity for their countries. They're still followers.
For the developed world to stand on a pedestal and prevent them from growing is unjustified.
If we're so fond of being leaders, of telling everyone else what to do, then let us lead. Let us show the developing world how to grow and develop sustainably. We can't just tell them to do it.
If we haven't figured it out, why should we expect them to?
Here's an idea - since we use Chinese and Indian labour for making our clothes, televisions, cars, diamonds (the list goes on) why don't we use their labour for creating cheap solar panels?
We're the big businessmen, the innovators. Surely we can show them how it's done?
In China, there is a city called Dezhou or "the solar city," with half of the families in its 5.6 million populace using solar water heaters. It has pledged to become a low carbon city. That's Sydney, plus 1 million.
Now that's called leadership.