Renewable energy and trade policy were the trickiest issues to resolve in Johannesburg, as the presidents and prime ministers of the world concluded negotiations without George W. Bush on an implementation plan for sustainable development. Issues concerning women's reproductive health and human rights were still not settled by late afternoon on Tuesday September 3.

Despite official agreements on dozens of other highly controversial issues, activists representing civil society organizations from around the world have already condemned the results -- charging the political leaders with "irresponsible subservience to corporate-led globalization." Even the presidents and prime ministers, in their political declaration, have acknowledged that there is an "ever-increasing gap between the developed and developing world. If we do nothing," they state, "we risk the entrenchment of a form of global apartheid."

The conference halls are buried under piles of paper describing the grim statistics: 6000 children die every day from communicable diseases due to a lack of clean water. Nearly half of all Africans live on less than $1 per day -- poverty on this continent is worse than it was 10 years ago. The planet's fisheries and forests are being depleted faster than imagined. Climate change has accelerated, not slowed, and even British Prime Minister Tony Blair criticized the U.S. for its failure to join the Kyoto Protocol pledging to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

In Rio in 1992, the first President Bush joined his fellow heads of state at the last minute to finalize a Plan of Action for sustainable development. President Clinton then signed the two treaties finalized there to slow

climate change and the loss of biological diversity. The U.S. Senate has never ratified these treaties, however, and was widely condemned in Johannesburg for its lack of cooperation with the world community. A popular tee-shirt worn by activists reads: "What Can We Do About the United States?"

The official declaration of the presidents and prime ministers also states that the "goals we set ourselves at the Rio Earth Summit have not been met" and to achieve these goals, "we need a democratic system of global governance with enhanced and accountable international and multilateral institutions."

In searching for positive things to say about this summit in Johannesburg, those who followed the negotiations closely can come up with a reasonable list of breakthroughs -- but many of these come under the category of "damage control." For example:

- Agreement was reached on a commitment to increase renewable energy sources relative to fossil fuels, but European proposals for the world to produce 15 percent of its energy from renewable sources by 2010 were not accepted. Ironically, an alliance between the U.S. and oil producing nations defeated calls for more measureable goals, despite tension over the U.S. policy in the Middle East.

- U.S. demands that all environment and development policies ensure "consistency" with the World Trade Organization were finally defeated, when Ethiopia pointed out that post-Cold War progress towards eliminating poverty in the Third World was suddenly reversed in 1994 when the WTO was created.

But the agreements still support the WTO's work program agreed to last year in Doha, Qatar, including its review of the the U.N's multilateral environmental agreements in terms of their impact on commercial trade.

- Governments committed themselves to providing clean water to at least half a billion more people by 2105, and sanitation services to at least 1.2 billion, but this is far from complying with the U.N.'s human rights laws which establish a fundamental human right to water for all.

- A Global Solidarity Fund was established to pay for poverty-reducing projects, but it is entirely voluntary. And the U.S. indicated its help funding water projects would be at the expense of renewable energy projects, but not both. Recipients of this aid would have to comply with the Doha, Qatar work plan on services, de-regulating and privatizing their domestic water systems even before they would be expected to do so under the WTO.

- Corporations will be expected to "operate within a transparent and stable regulatory environment" and the U.N. "should pursue the matter of corporate responsibility," but the U.S. said it would opt out of this process. Hundreds of "partnerships" between governments and corporations were announced to provide water and other public services that are normally expected of the governments themselves.

- Despite intense opposition from the U.S., the final agreements do reiterate the 1992 "Precautionary Principle," which states that when scientific knowledge is lacking, governments should err on the side of caution. But restating agreements of ten years ago hardly could be called "progress" and the U.S. came very close to obliterating these fundamental principles of sustainable development.

In their final declaration, the presidents and prime ministers gave the United Nations General Assembly the responsibility "to institute a follow-up mechanism to facilitate, evaluate and monitor the implementation of the agreements reached in Johannesburg." Calling it the "world's foremost multilateral forum" and "the most universal and representative organization in the world," the leaders of more than 100 nations gave the U.N. the official authority for determining whether or not this Johannesburg Summit may be considered a success.

In the long run, however, it will be obvious to everyone. Scientists recognize that the Earth's climate, biological and ecological systems are interdependent and at risk of a catastrophic systems failure -- and that our human society is likewise dependent and at risk. Poor people are already profoundly aware of the crisis.

As civil society groups stated in their final declaration in Johannesburg, the promotion of "market forces and the WTO as the main economic, social, environmental and cultural arbitrator" is incompatible

with the goals of sustainable development. The next global gathering in their campaign for a "world of equity, justice, democratic participation, and human rights for all, where the values of life, peoples and the planet take precedence over profits" will likely be in Cancun, Mexico, when the next Ministerial Meeting of the World Trade Organization takes place next September.