There is growing evidence that the EU has threatened to boycott the US major economies process on climate change, "unless there is a substantive outcome" from Bali.
Bali is turning into an asymmetrical battle. The EU badly needs everyone to agree a deal, while the US only needs a few countries to object if it decides to derail the negotiations.
But an EU boycott of US-sponsored talks would be a major slap in the face for the Bush administration. It represents one of the few negotiating cards the EU holds at these talks.
The story has been circulating since yesterday evening, when the French environment minister was said to have had an acrimonious meeting with Paula Dobriansky, head of the US delegation.
His line: if the US won't agree to join the other industrialized countries in a 25-40% cut in emissions by 2020, the French won't host the February meeting you want to hold in Paris.
The Bush administration has put enormous stock in its own series of meetings for major economies. The first was held last September and delivered few results. Many other developed countries are suspicious of the whole affair, regarding it as an attempt to take negotiations out of the UN.
The invite for the second meeting went out at the beginning of the talks, as we reported last week. This irritated many European delegations, who thought the timing was designed to wind them up.
Today, we heard that the German government is strongly considering refusing to attend January's talks if the US reject the principle of firm emissions targets. Then came news, confirmed now by two government sources, that the boycott could be EU-wide.
The Americans batted away the suggestion at their press conference, telling the media that the French were looking forward to hosting the meeting. Dobriansky said she'd had an "excellent exchange" with her French counterpart.
Jim Connaughton, Chair on the Council on Environmental Quality, was keen to underline US claims to be ahead of its European counterparts on combating climate change. Europe might be slightly ahead of the US in some areas, he said, but in other areas "there was no question that the US had a much higher of dedication."
"The US will lead and continue to lead," he concluded, "but leadership requires others to fall in line and follow."