Copenhagen: Danish text row rumbles on

Diplomats at the Copenhagen summit have attempted to downplay the impact of the leaked draft agreement that emerged yesterday and prompted an angry response from developing nations which accused the rich countries behind the document of orchestrating a "power grab" that would effectively ditch the principles enshrined in the Kyoto Protocol.

The so-called Danish text was leaked to the Guardian newspaper yesterday and was immediately seized upon by developing countries as evidence they are being excluded from the negotiating process.

The Danish delegation refused to comment on the draft document, but reports last night suggested that the countries behind the document did not intend to use it to subvert the UN negotiations and that the text was meant as a fall-back option for next week's talks between world leaders in the event that the UN process failed to deliver a draft document.

Unconfirmed reports also suggested that some developing countries had been consulted during the development of the draft document, although China and India are believed to have rejected the text.

One leading UK diplomat attempted to downplay the significance of the document, telling the Guardian that "it would be natural to have all kinds of different texts circulating at this stage. I would expect a lot of texts doing the rounds."

He added that rich nations remained committed to the idea that they must bear greater responsibility for tackling climate change. "It would not be fair for them to be held to the same standards as developing countries," he said.

His comments were echoed by the UN's chief climate change official, Yvo de Boer, who insisted that the formal UN talks remained the pre-eminent forum for negotiations.

"This was an informal paper ahead of conference given to a number of people for the purpose of consultations," he said. "The only formal texts in the UN process are the ones tabled by the chairs of this Copenhagen conference at the behest of the parties [involved]."

UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon also told reporters in New York that he remained "optimistic" a deal could still be reached next week. "From all corners of the globe we see unprecedented momentum for a deal," he said.

However, many developing countries remain furious about the document, which they believe ditches the central principle of Kyoto that only rich nations must deliver legally binding commitments to cut emissions, while developing countries focus on voluntary actions.

One of the key concerns is that the text proposes that funding to help poor countries cope with climate change will "derive from multiple sources" and be dependent on "the basis of appropriate increases in mitigation and adaptation efforts by developing countries".

The statements have been interpreted by developing countries as an attempt to ensure they receive no money until actions to tackle climate change are already under way, and that much of the distribution of the funding will be managed not by the UN, but by the World Bank.

Diplomats from rich nations have long insisted that developing nations must commit to some clear actions in return for funding, otherwise the transfer of cash to poorer countries is unlikely to achieve the intended outcomes.

But developing nations and NGO groups lined up to condemn the text, arguing that it would effectively concentrate power around those rich nations that enjoy the most influence at the World Bank. They also argued that the proposal that rich nations only sign up to "national economy-wide targets for 2020" could effectively allow them to set their own targets, excluding themselves from the internationally binding targets agreed under Kyoto.

Speaking to the Guardian, Lumumba Di-Aping, the Sudanese chairman of the G77 plus China group of developing countries, condemned the Danish text. " This text destroys both the UN convention on climate change and the Kyoto Protocol," he said. "This is aimed at producing a new treaty, a new legal initiative that throws away the basis of [differing] obligations between the poorest and most wealthy nations in the world."

The text also signalled that a legal agreement would not necessarily have to be signed until the next major UN climate change conference in Mexico in December 2010, six months later than many negotiators, including Gordon Brown, had hoped.

And there was confusion over how emission targets proposed under the text would be shared out, with a briefing document from developing countries suggesting the targets would mean that by 2050 individuals in rich nations would still be allowed to emit almost double those in poorer nations. But the leaked text does not contain any figures for emission targets – those were meant to be added next week at the talks between world leaders – and some observers suggested it could have delivered a more equitable distribution of emission targets than expected.

However, there was also some good news contained within the leaked text. The draft document included a commitment to provide $10bn (£6bn) a year to poor countries between 2012 and 2015, as well as a pledge to ensure all climate funding comes from "new and additional resources that supplement existing international public financial flows… in support of poverty alleviation".

And Di-Aping insisted that developing countries would not repeat the protest from African nations at the recent Barcelona talks and stage a boycott. "We will not walk out of the talks at this late hour, because we will not allow the failure of Copenhagen," he said.