Reading the WikiLeaks cables was like watching a vast army advance. Some nations have responded, others choose not to. What is your reaction?

It was like watching a vast army advance. As I read the WikiLeaks cables, the strategy became clear. The US decides what is in its interests, then sets its massed ranks of diplomats around the globe to work.

Demarchés, statements of what the US wants, are delivered in person and pledges of support gathered. Only the strongest resist: a major developing power like Brazil or a rich and secure nation like Norway might bridle, but I saw dozens of cables from tiny nations immediately acceding to US demands.

The US wanted to maximise support for the Copenhagen Accord, the weak compromise that emerged from the wreck of the UN climate change summit last December, because it best matched its unambitious aims for action on climate change. Diplomatic shock and awe ensued, complete with spying, threats and bribes: result, 140 nations have now signed up or say they will, near the top end of the US target of 100-150.

The US dearly wanted to block an Iranian scientist from high office on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. It deployed its diplomatic arsenal: the Iranian was not elected.

The security co-operation of the United Arab Emirates in Afghanistan, Pakistan and elsewhere was judged at risk if the US did not back the UAE bid to host a major new international agency dedicated to renewable energy. The US didn't want the agency founded at all, but decided that UAE help was too valuable to lose. The global mobilisation of diplomats followed: the UAE now has the agency's headquarters, as it wished, and the US has signed up.

Did I really believe diplomacy, seen through the lens of climate change, was any different behind the scenes? No, I have always said it was a haggle. But that doesn't make it much less startling to see it all out in the open, with the times, places and sums of money all declared. The US has perhaps the greatest diplomatic forces on the planet: these leaks show it is remorseless in using them.

Below, I've put some of the reactions to the revelations of the WikiLeaks climate cables. Do let me know what you think of the cables and the reactions in the comments below.

US reaction. With thanks to my colleague Suzanne Goldenberg, currently at the UN climate negotiations in Cancún.

Speaking in Cancún, Todd Stern suggested that countries that wanted climate aid were in no position to criticise. Citing, with approval, a confrontation at the Copenhagen summit in which a Norwegian official berated a counterpart from a developing country, he said, "he just stood up and blasted the person, 'you can't on the one hand ask for and make a legitimately strong case for the need for climate assistance and then on the other hand turn around and accuse us of bribery'." Stern added: "We can eliminate any cause or accusation of bribery by eliminating any money."

Bolivian reaction (Bolivia is a prominent Accord refusenik): With thanks to my colleague John Vidal, also in Cancún.

Bolivia today accused the US of disrespect and resorting to blackmail in the UN climate negotiations after studying the WikiLeaks papers published by the Guardian. Pablo Solon, Bolivian ambassador to the UN in New York, said: "WikiLeaks confirms the pressures and blackmail exerted by the US administration in the talks. They accuse us [in the cables] of being 'political and ideological'. But all we want to do is to hold temperature rise to 1.5C. Is that political or ideological? "What is of concern to us all of us is that this type of diplomacy is exercised in a multi-state [UN] process. One country, because of its economic power, is resorting to blackmail. This is not a negotiating process between countries who respect each other. It's an imposition."

EU reaction. From Connie Hedegaard who is reported by a cable as telling the US that the "Aosis (Alliance of Small Island States) countries 'could be our best allies' [in supporting the Accord] given their need for financing". With thanks to Democracy Now.

"It is a one-sided and selective report [by the US diplomats] of what that conversation was all about," she told a news conference. "What we [the EU] have tried to do is lots of outreach to some of the least developed countries, some of the most vulnerable countries. For many good reasons we want to work very much with them. I went to the Maldives myself in the spring."

NGO perspective. From Friends of the Earth: