By Peter Baker and Helen Dewar
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, December 12, 1997; Page A01

With a far-reaching global warming treaty now in hand, President Clinton and his administration turned their attention yesterday to the daunting task of selling the agreement on Capitol Hill.

The White House said it will not even submit the treaty for ratification in the Senate -- where at this point it would meet with almost certain defeat -- until it can persuade key developing nations such as China and India to limit their production of greenhouse gases, much as the United States and other wealthy nations would under the pact.

Instead, the administration opened what will be at least a year-long domestic campaign to promote the unprecedented agreement before sending it to Congress, probably in 1999. White House officials argued that the deal reached in Kyoto, Japan, would not require cuts in U.S. emissions as drastic as may have first appeared necessary. And Clinton took aim at critics with a mocking attack on their fears that the treaty will spell economic doom.

"I see already the papers are full of people saying, `The sky is falling, the sky is falling, it's a terrible thing,' " Clinton said during a fund-raising trip in Miami. But he added that the economy remains in robust health despite past environmental initiatives. "So don't believe the skeptics. Give us a chance to make the case."

Without the accord, warned Clinton, standing on ISC Causeway Island, higher temperatures would melt icecaps and "huge lowland areas in the United States, including big portions of South Florida . . . could be completely flooded."

The Kyoto accord would commit the world's industrial nations to the first binding limits on the heat-trapping gases that scientists believe threaten catastrophic changes in the planet's climate. Under its terms, the United States would have to reduce its emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and certain other pollutants by 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2012, which would likely force dramatic changes in how consumers and industry use energy.

The European Union agreed to an 8 percent cut and Japan to 6 percent, but developing nations would not have to meet any set targets, even though China is expected to overtake the United States as the world's largest producer of greenhouse gases by 2015.

The breakthrough in Kyoto surprised many negotiators, who were highly pessimistic before the 10-day conference began, but it was greeted with an immediate and caustic chorus of criticism back in Washington. Congressional Republicans raced each other to declare their opposition, and industry leaders complained it would cost jobs.

Vice President Gore, whose one-day appearance in Kyoto helped overcome deep divisions among negotiators, led the defense yesterday by pledging to continue working to involve developing nations.

"Let's be clear, as we said from the very beginning, we will not submit this agreement for ratification until key developing nations participate in this effort," Gore told reporters during a pep rally for the pact attended by Cabinet secretaries and other top officials. "This is a global problem that will require a global solution."

Senate Republicans assailed the strategy, with Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) saying a treaty should not be withheld "for cynical, political reasons."

"The president directed his negotiators to sign this treaty," Lott said. "The president should have the strength of his convictions to submit this treaty as soon as possible for the scrutiny of the United States Senate."

Even supporters of emissions limits agreed the treaty is unpassable in its current form. Sen. John H. Chafee (R-R.I.), chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, said "possibilities for Senate approval of a treaty appear slim at the moment."

Clinton has had a tough time pushing treaties through the Senate, where a two-thirds vote is required for ratification -- and in many cases, they were pacts first brokered by Republican George Bush. An all-out effort was required this year to overcome conservative resistance to a Bush-approved treaty banning chemical weapons.

Recognizing this, the White House is planning a multi-pronged strategy. Without waiting for ratification, Clinton will include in his budget and State of the Union address next month specific proposals for $5 billion in tax incentives and research spending intended to promote energy efficiency and find other ways of curbing emissions even before binding limits take effect.

The United States will then sign the treaty at some point after March 15 to lock in other industrial nations to their commitments, officials said. Over the next year, diplomats will work to sign up key developing countries as well, culminating with a meeting in November in Buenos Aires. If that succeeds, a treaty could then be submitted to the Senate in 1999, after mid-term congressional elections but just as the presidential campaign gets underway for Gore.

While Clinton initially proposed only to stabilize emissions at 1990 levels, aides yesterday insisted that the 7 percent cut actually is little different from that goal because of the way the progress will be calculated.

White House economics adviser Gene Sperling said the agreement will allow countries to count growing forests, which absorb carbon dioxide, in determining their reduction efforts. In addition, the higher emissions levels recorded in 1995 will be used as the baseline for three of the six gases covered. As a result, he said, the pact's U.S. target would translate to an equivalent of no more than a 3 percent cut when compared to the original Clinton goal.

"Make no mistake, we stuck by the president's principles and we prevailed," said Gore. The agreement "asks us to do what we promised, not promise what we cannot do."

Unpersuaded, industry leaders said it would require radical restrictions on growth because emissions already are projected to grow by 30 percent by 2010. "There is no technological silver bullet that will get us to that goal," said Jerry Jasinowski, president of the National Association of Manufacturers.

In foreign capitals, reaction was generally positive. European leaders who had sought a 15 percent cut said they were disappointed by the pact but believed they achieved a meaningful plan. "We pushed the United States and Japan as far as we could, and we are sorry we could not take them further," said Ritt Bjerregaard, the European Union environmental commissioner, according to the Associated Press.

But like Clinton, Japanese Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto faces a tough fight at home over the treaty. While the required cut is "heavy," Hashimoto told reporters yesterday, "we will do our utmost to realize it."