Yes, I agree this phenomenon is quite interesting. World politics has been gradually moving in this direction, where rich countries and poor countries confront each other, for a couple of years. The Bali Conference on climate matters at the end of 2007 was like this. Discussions on the financial crisis and world financial governance (IMF and World Bank) also pit poor countries against rich countries. Negotiations around the Doha Round for a new world trade treaty also divide the world in this way, as do discussions around the food crisis, energy crisis, etc. To my way of seeing it, when Ghaddafi calls for abolishing the security council in the UN, premature as this may seem, it is also a sign that the question of UN reform, another key question of global politics, will also end up pitting the rich countries against the poor ones (eventually), because, on the one hand China's position on most things can probably win in the General Assembly, while the rest must rely on their position in the security council (or their military power) to get their way.
As you say, Europe and the US are not exactly on the same page. Yet, they have been coordinating much more than in the past. In fact, in some ways it seems that some European countries are trying to backtrack on Kyoto, basically to let the US of the hook. I even wonder if Austrialia joined Kyoto under Rudd with a view to undermining it.
And I also agree that these conferences will not solve the problem. At least now for a while. Too many countries see their "right to grow" as a matter of national security, because in fact it is so. The US even seems to think that Europe is being too generous when it trades carbon credits with China. Unfortunately, this problem, and many other world problems, will only be solved when this kind of competition among states is put to rest.