Long ago, I adopted the principle that, in politics, you should never assume malice, conspiracy or purpose when incompetence can provide a better explanation. Let the record show it has served me well.
Yet Pogge makes a compelling case that Paul Martin may have thrown the Kyoto fight:
Oh, look. Kyoto’s dead and the way is clearer than ever to “harmonize” our environmental standards with the U.S. Could Dithers have done it any better if he was trying?
I’m still not convinced that conspiracy’s the answer here. Sure, he had means and opportunity, but what motive could a coal baron possibly have for sabotaging Kyoto?
Or look at it another way. The three-step process Pogge outlines — 1) temporizing and overpromising, 2) half-assed delivery and 3) capitulation (full or partial) and recrimination — has more or less been Prime Minister Martin’s approach to domestic government to date, on issues ranging from child care to the democratic deficit to the gun registry.
