And why the Montreal Protocol was more successful in reaching an agreement than the Kyoto Protocol. More specifically, the conflict between the United States and developing countries will be the main focus of my argument. To clarify this, in 1997 the US Senate refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol under the Byrd-Hagel Resolution, as Lutter stated: "The Clinton administration indicated that it would not submit the Kyoto Protocol Kyoto to Senate ratification until there is “meaningful participation” from major key players. developing countries” (Lutter, 2000). The idea behind this is perhaps the intention to have the same participation of all countries, regardless of their development. However, for developing countries, the scenario is different: most developing countries are just starting to build factories that will boost their economies. Therefore, if developing countries limit their CO2 emissions, it will be difficult for them to benefit, in economic terms, as Lutter explained: "Such forecasts imply that a developing country could face a forty percent chance that he would be worse off if he agreed to a deal. the emissions limit is set equal to projected emissions under BAU policies” (Lutter 200). From these factors, we can briefly conclude that for the United States to participate in the Kyoto Protocol, developing countries must participate in the Kyoto Protocol on the same basis as industrialized countries..