As the United Nations holds its Climate Change Convention in Milan, the debate on the long-debated and hotly contested Kyoto Protocol on global warming is heating up again.

The Kyoto Protocol was signed in 1997 and has been ratified by 120 countries. Under the treaty, industrialized countries bound by the treaty are required to take steps to reduce worldwide emissions of greenhouse gases by an average of 5.2 percent below 1990 levels over a 10-year period.

The Kyoto Protocol is designed to work on a system of credits; industrialized countries are given limits on restrictions, and countries are assigned “carbon credits” — based on environmental and economic factors — that can be exchanged with other countries. The United States did not agree to the stipulations of the treaty; the Senate voted 95—0 to reject it.

As the world’s top producer of greenhouse gases, the United States came under harsh criticism from the world community for rejecting the treaty. The criticism was exacerbated by President Bush’s decision in 2001 to abandon efforts to move toward the possible ratification of the pact.

Last week, conflicting reports came from Russia on the future of that country’s ratification of the Kyoto Protocol. Russian President Vladimir Putin announced plans to reject the treaty, then reports emerged stating the Russian government was “moving toward” approval.

Russia’s economic and environmental conditions could result in profit for the nation by selling unused emissions credits to countries with stronger economies. But if the United States isn’t a participating member under the treaty, Russia has fewer options — namely, the European Union — and has a bargaining chip in the matter.

The situation with Russia is another wrench in the works slowing the approval of the treaty, flawed as it is. The United States stands to gain little from ratifying the treaty as it stands now. The credit system is open to abuse, and the goals of reducing greenhouse gases are considered unrealistic by experts.

Reducing global emissions is of the utmost concern, but a treaty must exist that the global community can agree upon — including the United States. As the largest contributor to global pollution, little progress can be made without the participation of the United States.