Diplomacy & Crisis News

Is Beijing building a rival alliance system?

Couvrant près d'un tiers du territoire, la forêt française constitue un fabuleux trésor. Mais il y a loin de l'arbre brut au bois travaillé : faute de politique industrielle concertée, la sylviculture est devenue le deuxième poste du déficit commercial. Plongée au sein d'une filière saccagée, entre (...) / France, Entreprise, Industrie, Mondialisation, Mutation, Matières premières, Forêt, Environnement - 2016/10

After extending the COP26 climate negotiations an extra day, nearly 200 countries meeting in Glasgow, Scotland, adopted on Saturday an outcome document that, according to the UN Secretary-General, “reflects the interests, the contradictions, and the state of political will in the world today”.

Climate action can be the driver for a green and equitable future for all, UN Deputy Secretary-General Amina Mohammed has said at the TED Countdown Summit, urging people everywhere to demand that leaders deliver on their promise to limit global warming. 

Le catch mexicain — ou « lucha libre » — inspire et fascine bien au-delà de son pays d'origine. La popularité de cette « comédie humaine » apparue au début du XXe siècle s'enracine dans la culture, l'histoire et la vie politique mexicaines, dont elle révèle des aspects inattendus. / Amérique latine, (...) / Amérique latine, Mexique, Culture, Exclusion sociale, Histoire, Identité culturelle, Industrie culturelle, Intégration sociale, Médias, Mutation, Politique, Société, Sport, Travail, Amériques - 2016/10

Growing up in 1970s New York, Mindy Howard received no encouragement at home and was ridiculed at school for her dream to become an astronaut, it was a time when only boys were supposed to have such aspirations. 

L'assassinat de Berta Cáceres le 3 mars dernier au Honduras a suscité une vague d'indignation. Ce meurtre s'ajoute à celui de nombreux militants amérindiens et écologistes opposés aux barrages hydroélectriques qui prolifèrent en Amérique centrale. / Amérique latine, Eau, Écologie, Énergie, Amérindiens, (...) / Amérique latine, Eau, Écologie, Énergie, Amérindiens, Mouvement de contestation, Violence, Amérique centrale, Honduras, Environnement - 2016/10

Le Congrès américain est composé de 435 représentants et 100 sénateurs. Si les premiers sont répartis suivant la population de chaque État — ce qui n'empêche pas certaines disparités —, les sénateurs sont toujours au nombre de deux par État. Ainsi, un sénateur californien porte la voix de 19 millions (...) / États-Unis, Démocratie, Élections, Femmes, Minorité nationale - Amérique du Nord

There is no planet B

When Congress makes a mistake in determining important economic policy like setting the tax rate or implementing a new trade policy, the results can be pretty awful. Unexpected inflation might take place, jobs might be lost, and personal savings might crumble. In the most severe cases, these disruptions might result in economic recession, or worse, a more sustained depression. It goes without saying, this can be devastating- on a personal, national, and even global level.

However, in the aftermath of even the most severe of these crises, individual people have proven resilient. We “Keep Calm and Carry On”, as the saying goes. Even when the most sensitive economic policy goes awry, the consequences are usually constrained to economic matters. A mistake in tax policy can certainly cause suffering, but it cannot result in the end of the world.

This principle applies for many of the most important matters in the American political landscape. Immigration, education, healthcare, and of course economic policy are critically important, but our collective resilience allows for politicians to gradually tweak policy to match the nation’s needs and mood. The American political system is designed to process these sorts of changes incrementally at the national level while giving local decision makers the ability to implement policy in a way that suits their constituencies. Put another way- for most things in American political life, policy makers have the opportunity to “muddle through” policy making decisions, honing and (hopefully) improving policy over time.

However, there are some policy matters where tinkering around the edges or “finding the middle ground” simply will not do. Climate change is perhaps the most obvious and most pressing of these. There is a strong scientific consensus, backed by the United Nations IPCC report, that in order to avoid reaching the point where climate change becomes self-reinforcing, the global community must become carbon neutral by the year 2050. This is only twenty-eight years away.

To the extent that the world’s governments and the individuals that they represent ignore these warnings, we are gambling with the fate of the whole of humanity. The idea that we can be protected from the worst consequences of climate change by making only incremental adjustments does not fit with intellectually honest political discourse.

Of course, there is still plenty of room for debate regarding the best course of action to address climate change. It is entirely reasonable to debate if the bulk of the responsibility for addressing climate change falls on nations that have emitted larger total sums of greenhouse gases over time but have already begun to reduce their harmful emissions, or if it lies with nations that are currently the world’s chief greenhouse gas emitters. In either case, it is appropriate to shame Russia and China for failing to attend the COP26 climate conference, and it is reasonable to question the follow-through of leaders like Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi when he pledges that India will be carbon neutral by 2070 despite currently working to expanding coal mining operations.

More than that, it can be wise to weigh the virtues of a carbon tax against those of a cap and trade system in our own country. Local decision makers will know far better than distant bureaucrats if subsidies for solar panels or a heightened focus on local agriculture suits your local community’s needs better.

These questions, however, ask which actions and policies are best suited to address climate change- they are elevated beyond the basic question of whether or not drastic action is necessary in the first place.

This is what separates climate change from the other important issues in American life. A failure to address growing inflation is bad, while a failure to appropriately address climate represents a potentially existential threat. More than that, the action that appears necessary to avert the worst of the harm done by climate change remains fully outside of the Overton Window. Forget actually curbing emissions, the United States gives something to the effect of $14.5 billion in subsidies and tax breaks to oil and gas companies- those subsidies outnumber investments in the renewable sector by 7 to 1.

Democrats and Republicans alike need to make dramatic progress in their willingness to take on climate change if they are serious about the current administration’s stated goal of achieving carbon neutrality by the year 2030. Additionally, American political discourse needs to commit itself to curbing climate change regardless of other important policy making, and regardless of our confidence in the follow through of other nations that are sometimes untrustworthy. Without the United States on board, there is little hope for avoiding the worst consequences of climate change. This is true for the United States even as it is true for Russia, India, and China- however, a failure by any of those nations to fulfill their responsibility does not excuse failure by the United States.

The time is now for us to fully shift the conversation from “do we need to address climate change” or “under what conditions should we make a full commitment to addressing climate change” to “what is the most effective way to address climate change”. Despite this somewhat liberal sounding call to action, this sentiment finds roots on both sides of the aisle. Former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, “the [global warming] debate is over. We know the science. We see the threat, and we know the time for action is now.”

The time for action is now.

—

Peter Scaturro is the Director of Studies at the Foreign Policy Association

Le royaume chérifien est confronté à un climat social difficile. L'opposition peine à défendre les maigres concessions obtenues avec la Constitution de 2011. Dans un contexte de mise au pas des médias, questionner le pouvoir du roi Mohammed VI reste un tabou. / Maroc, Monde arabe, Citoyenneté, Droits (...) / Maroc, Monde arabe, Citoyenneté, Droits humains, Économie, Élections, Entreprise, État, Exclusion sociale, Justice, Mouvement de contestation, Parti politique, Pauvreté, Politique, Religion, Travail, Maghreb, Torture, Répression, Sexualité - 2016/10

Parce qu'ils relèvent du domaine public, l'éducation et la santé suscitent les plus grandes convoitises des entreprises privées. L'assaut d'une logique de profit se déploie avec une vigueur particulière dans l'université. Sous couvert de « marché des idées », la course aux disciplines qui « attirent (...) / États-Unis (affaires intérieures), Éducation, Entreprise, Finance, Recherche - 2001/03

Les investissements français en Chine sont six fois plus importants que les investissements chinois en France. Tandis qu'à Pékin personne ne s'inquiète d'une invasion hexagonale, les convoitises de l'empire du Milieu effarouchent nombre de commentateurs à Paris. Cet afflux de capitaux étrangers (...) / Chine, France, Économie, Entreprise, Finance, Industrie, Multinationales - 2016/10

On ne compte plus les biographies de M. Vladimir Poutine, mais le système politique russe reste mal connu. Sait-on par exemple que le parti du président a organisé des primaires avant les législatives, prévues le 18 septembre ? En imitant ses homologues occidentaux, Russie unie cherche à convaincre (...) / Russie, Démocratie, Élections, Parti politique, Politique, Autoritarisme - 2016/09

What might happen if Abiy Ahmed falls.

/ Asie, Frontières, Chine, Pakistan, Inde - Asie / Asie, Frontières, Chine, Pakistan, Inde - Asie

 

The Economist recently published an article on the overarching power of the European Council, a government body of the European Union that was designed to facilitate the discussion and application of policies throughout the EU. The problem that has always persisted in the European Union is how you can get consensus between so many differing ideas, cultures and interest groups that can be applied fairly and transparently throughout all 27 Member States. Part of the solution has been to reduce the number of voices in the process as not to make it so incredibly cumbersome, but many see this as a move towards systemically reducing democratic values in the process.

My experience studying the framework of the EU at a time when Accession was a major topic of the day was characterised by the expansion of the EU into Central Europe along with the addition of new cultures and former Warsaw Pact nations. These countries accepted entrance into the EU at the cost of what many see as an unfair burden on their agricultural sector and shared economic values. Many of those countries who over the last two generations overthrew the tyranny of fascism and the long slow decline of their societies under the Iron Curtain are naturally weary of outside pressures being put on their societies, and the top down structure of the European Council has the very real power of being able to tread on grassroots movements in Member States.

Countries like the United Kingdom always sat uncomfortably within the EU. This was always the case despite being at the top of its power structure and possessing parts of the UK that were happy to have the support of other regional Governments in the application of policies within the UK and EU. While The Economist article humourously compares the power of the European Council to that of a neo-Monarchic power structure, it was always the case that many English people saw themselves apart from Continental Europe, and were proud of their unique British cultural and democratic institutions and in some fashion had longed mourned their lost Empire. While the irony of the British Government having a Queen Monarch as Head of State would be lost on no one, the British Parliamentary system’s culturally based Constitution, assumed Customary Laws and invisible Constitutional etiquette would be hard to codify outside of British Society, and the grumbles against EU power within the UK was ever-present. One of the major factors that lead to Brexit that is often not spoken on is the feeling that democracy could not survive the whims of those not directly elected representing British citizens in a city with no connection to Britain’s culturally based democratic system. The Queen herself, while having the ability to technically apply Absolute power, culturally is at the sidelines and is well aware that interference in party politics may sour the public to the idea of having a Monarch altogether. This wise balance was not possible with UK representatives in Brussels, and it degraded the idea of Britain being in the EU for generations.

To see what the end result could be from those at the top ignoring grassroots politics and using their power to quell democratic traditions, you only need to look at how Canada’s Federated Government took to announcing policies that would greatly affect specific regions of its own country, in an international forum, and not within the region being affected or even Canada itself. The recent announcement of a cap on energy sales at a time where inflation hit record highs and cost of living is placing many in risk of losing their homes in winter is seen as needlessly aggressive policy. With a closed Parliament and no manner to answer to policy, the British Parliamentary system cannot function when Parliament is closed at a time of major policy development. In addition, ignoring the Customary laws of that traditional system means that people may feel their voices are muted, at a time when life is difficult and leadership is required. As the European Council slowly alienated British voters, no region of the world would tolerate a foreign power limiting their ability to produce an income, afford social programs and have an open voice in their own democracy. To keep a union of states or even a nation united, it should not be able to harm to itself as part of its own democratic system. As history has noted, then it is not really a full democracy.

Les traces que nous laissons sur Internet, les informations de nos smartphones et nos contributions aux réseaux sociaux ravissent les publicitaires et enrichissent les géants de la Silicon Valley. Pourtant, les données personnelles ne sont pas condamnées à ce destin. Leur usage à des fins d'utilité (...) / Capitalisme, Fiscalité, Idées, Information, Internet, Médias, Multinationales, Politique, Service public, Technologie - 2016/09

Pour se faire une place dans le supermarché mondial de l'enseignement supérieur, les établissements rendus « autonomes » par la réforme de 2007 fusionnent. Les exigences scientifiques et pédagogiques fondamentales se heurtent alors à l'expansion d'une bureaucratie libérale. / France, Éducation, (...) / France, Éducation, Mondialisation, Politique, Recherche, Région, Science, Travail, Université - 2016/09

Permettre à ceux qui ignorent une langue de profiter des chefs-d'œuvre qu'elle a produits : une mission à la fois essentielle et impossible. Comment restituer l'œuvre de Shakespeare en français, idiome si éloigné de l'anglais élisabéthain ? Un traducteur expose ici quelques-uns de ses partis pris. / (...) / Royaume-Uni, Culture, Histoire, Idées, Langue, Littérature, Théâtre - 2016/09

Depuis 1947, trois guerres ont opposé l'Inde et le Pakistan sur le Cachemire. La partie administrée par New Delhi vit sous un régime d'exception. Le 8 juillet, Buhrhan Muzaffar Wani, chef d'un groupe séparatiste, a été tué par des militaires indiens. Il était devenu un symbole de la résistance armée (...) / Inde, Pakistan, Art, Conflit, Culture, Géopolitique, Internet, Islam, Médias, Musique, Nationalisme, Politique, Presse, Violence, Conflit du Cachemire 1949-, Répression, Indépendance - 2016/09