The $64,000 question does not merely concern the ticklish issue as to whether the Copenhagen Climate Summit will lead to a binding accord, a mere framework or, even worse, a fudge but also as to whether a transatlantic climate partnership can be forged between now and then... and beyond!
Never has the US had a President that was so better understood and respected in Europe. He has proved to be inspirational for Europeans of all ages. And, yet, the fact that he could be hampered by Senate in seeing his long cherished and nurtured climate goals and objectives through could open new divides between the two continents. Divides which I personally believe will be temporary and surmountable.
In contrast to past years, the transatlantic partners now agree on the severity of the climate threat, the urgency of solutions, the necessity of action by all major emitters, the responsibility of developed nations to take the lead, the responsibility developed nations have to assist developing nations and the importance of negotiating new global climate agreements.
Today, I intend to focus on those aspects that give reason for concern without coming up with any unwarranted doom and gloom scenarios.
As the negotiations heat up, new signs of transatlantic friction are visible, with European leaders pressing President Barack Obama and his Congress to do more than even the greenest American politicians are contemplating. For their part, US policy makers are reported to worry that Europe will be weak kneed when it comes to pressing China, India and other emerging economies to take action as well.
These differences need to be overcome without further delay. Unless they are tackled effectively, past experience shows that forging a durable global consensus will prove to be well nigh difficult and perhaps even impossible.
Whether Europe and the United States like it or not, the only global deal developing nations are prepared to consider right now must include commitments from developed nations to immediate emissions mitigation, more financial assistance and to giving developing nations greater control of global climate institutions.
Climate talks are not occurring in a vacuum. Rather, the current round of negotiations builds on 20 years of climate diplomacy and is following a "road map" approved by the international community in December 2007.
In spite of all the global players involved, I am of the opinion that the transatlantic partners have the power to shape a new climate agreement in significant ways.
Apart from reducing their own emissions, especially through strong action before 2020, developed nations must finance the incremental cost for developing nations of both adapting to climate change and abating their growth in emissions.
Developing nations account for approximately half of global emissions today but are projected to contribute 90-97 per cent of the growth in global energy-related CO2 emissions through 2030.
Many of us tend to ignore the fact that many emerging economies, including China, have already adopted serious national climate action plans. But emerging economies will refuse to commit themselves internationally to these plans, let alone make their emissions mitigation plans more ambitious, absent new international commitments by developed nations.
From the information I have, emerging economies simply do not see the more straightforward deal - emissions mitigation by developed nations in exchange for emissions mitigation by emerging economies - as in their national interest.
It is easy to point an accusing finger at these nation states but one must recall that, primarily due to having been led by a President in constant denial on climate issues, the US took more than a decade since the 1997 Kyoto conference to respond to new scientific information and mounting international pressure.
Thus, whether Europe and the United States like it or not, the only global deal developing nations are prepared to consider right now will include the preconditions mentioned above.
A leading think tank that is committed to strengthening transatlantic cooperation recently argued that the good news is that most parties, including the US and Europe, agree on a number of points... and the bad news is that developed and emerging economies disagree on two really big questions: the level of ambition of the medium-term US emissions target and the legal and structural form of actions by emerging economies.
Mr Brincat is a Labour member of Parliament.
Brincat.leo@gmail.com, www.leobrincat.com