Category Archives: Politics

Climate Change, Economic, Environment, Government, Politics, Science, Society, United Nations

Delivering a comprehensive global agreement on climate change is urgent…

CLIMATE CHANGE

Intro: Our environment is incontestably heating up and that it is now beyond reasonable doubt that human activities are the cause

The fifth report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is being delivered in stages. The first of those instalments was delivered last autumn, and stated that our environment is incontestably heating up and that it is now beyond reasonable doubt that human activities are the cause. The second tranche was delivered last week, which concluded that global warming is already taking worldwide effect and is threatening everything from crop yields to social cohesion. The third and final part of the IPCC’s report, which is due for publication later this month, seems likely to focus on the stark vision and scale of the challenge ahead.

If global warming is to remain below the 2C threshold – above which changes becomes catastrophic – the wealthy nations of the world, including the sceptical US, will need to halve their carbon emissions by 2030. Indicative, too, will be fast-growing economies, including India and China, making significant reductions to their carbon emission footprints. In the context of the global picture, cuts in emissions will need to go far beyond any existing targets. This is hampered when we consider that many of the commitments already placed on many countries around the world are far from being met and guaranteed.

All of this only adds to concern at the slow progress that has been made so far. In the UK, anxieties over energy security and economic sustainability continue to put pressure on green and renewable goals; indeed, the fourth-phase of the so-called ‘carbon budget’, which is due to run from 2023-2027, is under review by the Treasury. Its aim is to slow the pace of change. It must be stressed that even if the UK were to meet all of its self-imposed obligations, the net-effect in global terms would have little impact beyond the setting of a fine example.

A comprehensive global agreement is urgently needed, and one that includes a resolution of the difficult question of how to share and mitigate the high costs of climate-change between developed countries. In the past, the richest nations polluted heavily: a moral obligation exists, making it incumbent in helping developing nations to invest in new renewable technologies. This is needed if they are to ever have any chance of meeting their renewable obligation targets. The prospects of meaningful advances, though, are slim when we consider that it is now developing countries which are more polluting. Sharing the associated costs of climate change and how it should be done is a politically vexed question.

The last of the serial UN Conventions on Climate Change, in Warsaw at the end of 2013, made no material progress. The crucial meeting, however, at which any new treaty on global warming would need to be signed, is not until the UN reconvenes in Paris in 2015. We can only hope, then, that the IPCC’s blunt appraisal will focus and concentrate minds in how best a more comprehensive agreement can be delivered.

Standard
Afghanistan, Britain, Foreign Affairs, Government, NATO, Politics, United States

Afghanistan must not be allowed to slip back into its old ways…

AFGHANISTAN

Intro: As British troops prepare to exit Afghanistan after more than 12 years of bitter fighting, a bilateral agreement between Afghanistan and the West will be needed to prevent the Taliban becoming a major political force again. That would ensure our sacrifices have not been made in vain

Task Force Helmand, the military campaign to bring stability to the south of Afghanistan, ended this week with US Marines assuming responsibility for the province. Whilst it may be argued that the British mission has not been an overwhelming success, some of what has been done has led to tangible improvements in the lives of ordinary Afghans – particularly in education, health care and security. Some 350,000 Afghans have been trained by western forces in a policy designed to allow them to take full control of their own security.

Related:

The conflict in Afghanistan has lasted more than 12 years – a bitter war that has resulted in the loss of 448 British lives, with thousands more that have suffered serious injury. It will be with a collective sigh of relief that Britain’s military engagement in southern Afghanistan is now finally drawing to a close. Following a two minutes silence for the fallen this week, it was fitting that the presiding padre overseeing the religious ceremony paid tribute to our ‘bravest and best’ that had ‘borne the cost of freedom for others.’

Despite areas of progress that have been made much of the country is still threatened by the Taliban-led insurgency. With this is mind, there will be many who will question just how much has actually been achieved in Helmand province and elsewhere. The amount of treasure plundered, in terms of human sacrifice and the enormous amounts of money expended, has been a high price to pay. The words used in 2006 by John Reid, the then defence secretary, that British troops would be able to complete their mission ‘without a single shot being fired’ have turned out to be complete balderdash when compared now to the actuality of events on the ground over the past 12 years. However, the intensity and ferocity of the fighting, often with ill-equipped and under-manned British troops in a desperate battle for survival, has led the British commander of UK forces, Brigadier James Woodham, to conclude that we ‘have given the Afghans a chance.’

That, no-doubt is the case, but Afghanistan still has a long way to go before it reaches anything approaching long-term stability. This weekend, the country will hold its third presidential elections since western forces overthrew the Taliban led government in 2001. Hamid Karzai, the country’s unpredictable and impulsive president, is ineligible to run, but the outcome of the election could provide an opportunity for Western governments to agree terms with Kabul in maintaining their support for Afghanistan’s fledgling security forces, once all NATO combat operations conclude at the end of this year. Mr Karzai has refused to sign a bilateral security agreement with Washington – the objective of which would be for the US and its allies to remain in a supporting role beyond 2014, as well as providing financial assistance – which, undoubtedly, will be needed if Afghanistan is not to slip back into its old ways. If the Taliban were to re-establish itself as a major political force the country could quickly become a safe haven again for terrorist groups such as al-Qaeda.

Standard
Economic, Europe, Government, History, NATO, Politics, Russia, Society, United States

America has a role in supporting Europe. It isn’t about to turn its back…

AMERICA & EUROPE IN COUNTERING THE THREAT FROM RUSSIA

A European crisis has, once again, brought the ambitions of a second-term American president into the sharp light of day. Mr Obama could never have wished that he would land in Europe with the sole task of rallying some of his country’s oldest allies against the expansionist threats posed by Vladimir Putin of Russia. And yet, this is precisely the situation Barack Obama finds himself in.

Mr Obama arrived in The Hague and described Europe’s idiosyncratic collection of comatose economies as the ‘cornerstone of America’s engagement with the world’. His presence was enough to underline the realities of a new and emerging Cold War message: one to which America remains the ultimate guarantor of European security.

Whatever the intrinsic American wishes are, America cannot abdicate from that role. While history may reflect back the words of Franklin Roosevelt who pledged that America would never send US troops to fight in Europe, or even during Mr Obama’s own reign in office when he pronounced America’s ‘pivot’ and orientation towards Asia, Putin’s provocative stance and actions in Crimea has made such a profound difference to how the US reflects upon Europe. The United States accepts that the threats posed by Russia are serious and interconnected, and is turning away from the Pacific to behave in a way that every president from Truman to Reagan would have recognised.

Predicting what Putin will do next to enhance and strengthen his Russian Federation is difficult to determine. As a former KGB officer, he knows the high value placed on keeping his intentions as mysterious and covert as possible.

Psychology is also at play. The flint-eyed incumbent of the Kremlin strongly believes that Mr Obama is a president motivated far more by what is happening in the Pacific. To Mr Putin’s eye Barack Obama is a leader that is fundamentally uninterested in Europe and viscerally reluctant to use force of any kind. The Russian leader observed how Mr Obama steered clear of intervening in Libya by allowing Britain and France to claim the credit for toppling the Gaddafi regime. America’s role in that campaign was leadership from the back, rather than the front dynamism many would otherwise have expected.

And no-doubt the Kremlin hardliner would have taken special note when Bashar al-Assad made a mockery over Mr Obama’s ‘red lines’ and gassed hundreds of innocent Syrian civilians without paying a military price.

Mr Putin may even have thought this was an American president who could be pushed around. The disarmament treaty with Moscow, signed in 2010, for example, imposed far greater cuts on the US arsenal than was made to the Russian inventory.

Russia has remained committed in driving a wedge between Europe and America. Along with its actions in Ukraine, Russia has demonstrated the compelling necessity of NATO and the Atlantic Alliance. Such miscalculations may even impel Europe to realise the mistakes of continuously running down its defences.

America and Europe seem certain to respond with skill and resolve. Such a partnership can only make the world a safer place.

Standard