The Danish government has shown by being a part of this draft treaty that they are deternined to get a treaty out of this conference. along with the not so sacrosanct British and U.s governments, but the Danes are on the bull's eye now, being the host country for the conference.

Even if this means last minute arm twisting by the big powers to make sure they get their way. The Danes want a treaty because this is what would make the summit a success for them, it would be a boost to the government and show their standing on the international stage: posit ulterior motives, personal agendas and have a stake in the conference, when the only reason they were told to host it is because they are thought to be 'neutral'(complete farce).

If there is no treaty in the end it is because Denmark's international credibility is hit. By being clandestine/secretive about their informal draft and then leaking it to the public the Danish government has spoiled a lot of things.

Why was the 'informal' draft leaked early on? Why was it covered up if the Danes saw no harm in writing an informal draft?

By doing this they have just ensured that their credibility is hit. Denmark is usually considered to be a neutral nation, someone you turn to when you want someone to mediate international agreements, or ceasefire and peace treaties, this will no longer be the case if they are seen to have their own agenda in negotiations such as these.

The hosts should not be endorsing or signing up to any treaty at this point as negotiations have barely begun. They can hardly claim that the treaty was made at Copenhagen if they have not even had a chance to negotiate at Copenhagen! we are only a few days in and this draft was supposedly made over a week ago, it seems a little early to be thinking about the final draft rather they should still be negotiating - and negotiating more than just the numbers which this draft leaves to the leaders to decide.

The whole point of the conference is to give people from a large number of nations; a voice, if the plan is to stick to a preemptive draft and trump everyone-else, forcing everyone to sign this, then there shouldn't be a conference. Leaders should flat out say 'might is right' and boss/dictate every other country around.

Having a stake is one thing, but imposing a viewpoint on other people while claiming to be 'open to discussion' is hypocrisy.

It is right that draft texts should be circulated early, this gives all sides an idea of what the other side wants in the final form of the treaty. The Danes have a stake in this as much as anyone else so should be taking a side on draft treaties.

Even if such an act is dismissed as being only part of the preparation for the conference. It is unfair and biased that developing countries were not included in the writing of the draft. It is an indicator of how the voice of developing countries will be talked over at the conference.

Bullying Tactic:

The sudden revelation of a secret text prepared only for leaders of developing countries, could be construed as being a strictly bullying tactic to exclude the main negotiators(developing countries) from the conference.

The leaking of the draft could be a deliberate psychological means of bullying developing nations preemptive to the conference. A medium of insuring that the developing countries come to the conference with a subservient listener-mindset.

We are near the end of a very long negotiating process, The Danish government throwing their hat in the ring, now. However, they did it 'before' the conference which is what makes their actions devious.

counter to NO point:

Agreed and that is precisely why the Danes shouldn't have made the draft.

Of course Denmark has her own agenda and she revealed it at the 'right' time, rather than popping her views up during the conference , Denmark left no surprises and was completely transparent. It would be hypocritical if the Danes pretended to be neutral/unbiased

The Danish government as the host should be exploring all possibilities rather than closing possibilities off. This draft text tries to reduce down the scope of ideas rather than keeping everything open. Moreover as host the danes should be bringing the sides together to explore everyone's views, if they are seen as having an agenda this is discouraged.

Since they are only listening to and writing treaties/drafts around one side, they are obviously taking that one side: this is bias: plain and simple.

Maybe they should find out what the 'other' side wants as well.

why invite developing countries to a conference when you're just going to ignore them and play the might-is-right/great-American-Bully-card?

All this means is that the Danes are finding out what one side, in this case the developed countries, want out of the conference. This is precicely what they should be doing, if they do not know what both sides want as their end point they cant work out the road ahead to bring both, or all sides together.

Preperation does not usualy take up the wording of a final treaty.

It in unfair that they only prepared a draft for developed countries , if they wanted everyone to prepare for the conference; developing countries should also have been involved and not left out in 'preparation'.

The draft is already out of date and was never intended to be a final treaty. It is simply part of negotiations, it happened before the conference started so it is not trying to bypass anyone, it is simply preperation for the conference.

THE TOP DOWN APPROACH

The Danish are using the top-down approach rather than the bottom-up approach. Some of the points in the draft are very good and they only outline what is expected of developing countries from developed countries. This may not sit well with Brazil, Russia,India and China, who should and do not appreciate being patronized but smaller countries need to be told what to do.

Why was it leaked? Who leaked it?

Is this a conspiracy of propagating propounding disinformation to sabotage the conference? Who/what-ever is responsible for the revelation of the danish text, should be scrutinized and interrogated.

Since the act is fairly suspicious and borders on (sabotage)wrecking the conference.