So what about the Europeans? Their position is pretty clear - and starkly opposed to the UNFCCC's desire to avoid talking turkey until next year.
Europe wants dramatic cuts in emissions - and believes the US should cut its greenhouse gases by a third in just 12 years. Any roadmap for future negotiations must be specific about the 'level of ambition' for the future.
Stavros Dimas, European Commissioner for the Environment set out Europe's stall before Bali:
[quote]To guide the negotiations there needs to be a 'shared vision' of what the new agreement is seeking to achieve. For the EU it is clear the objective must be to limit global warming to no more than 2 degrees Centigrade above the pre-industrial temperature.
This goal is fully supported by the IPCC's projections of far more dangerous impacts beyond this level. Keeping within the 2 degrees limit means that global emissions must peak within the next 10 to 15 years and then be cut by at least 50% of 1990 levels by 2050.[/quote]
The EU has a seven step roadmap in mind - but the first two steps are the most important. Unlike the US it wants rich countries to make 'binding and absolute emissions reduction commitments'. 30% below 1990 levels is its opening offer - that would be 35% below where the US is today. Europe is prepared to commit to 20% even if no-one else joins in.
It is also asking developing countries to 'play a key role' - reducing the rate that their emissions are growing, even if emissions are not themselves cut.
At today's press conference, I asked the Commissioner what the EU made of America's preference for non-binding targets. He too is taking lessons from history:
[quote]When the UN framework convention on climate change was negotiated and finally agreed, we set ourselves a medium term target that all developed countries would bring their emissions back to 1990 levels by the year 2000. That was a voluntary agreement that was honoured by some and not by others.
Then during the course of the years leading up to Kyoto, there was an understanding that you would need an agreement that binds everybody into doing the right thing, because otherwise it's probably not going to happen. From experience, we see we need to be serious and have binding agreements.[/quote]
So, as is so often the case, a huge gulf separates the Europeans from America. Who will prevail? The Americans can count on the Saudis, but that will not be enough. Will the Japanese back them? The Indians? Or will they become increasingly isolated as the conferences wears on?