Connect with us

Politics

The politics behind Xi's big green promise for China – The Japan Times

Published

 on


Chinese President Xi Jinping’s vow to snuff out emissions by 2060 completes a diplomatic pirouette that moves China to the heart of the global green agenda, wrong-foots the U.S. and cuddles up to Europe’s climate advocates in one nimble step.

The Chinese leader last month chose the U.N. as the stage for his country’s unexpected pledge to reach peak coal use by 2030 and go carbon neutral three decades later.

The announcement gives China — the world’s biggest polluter and second-largest economy — an opportunity to show environmental leadership at the same time as the United States retreats from the issue under climate change skeptic Donald Trump.

While light on details, the plan is a game-changer if China is good to Xi’s word, and the pledge was welcomed by the European Union, which is already toughening up its own emissions targets.

“It comes at a very good time,” says Wendel Trio, of Climate Action Network Europe, with the European Commission launching its own proposal to deepen its emissions cuts to 55 percent by 2030.

China has become a diplomatic pariah after spats with India over borders, the EU over rights abuses, Australia over security and the U.S. over everything from trade and technology to the origins of the coronavirus.

The 2060 pledge reflects China’s desire to showcase itself as a “responsible international player” after a storm of negative attention, Trio added.

While many remain unconvinced China can meet its carbon ambitions — especially as it goes on a coal spending spree at home and sponsors dirty energy projects abroad — the promise gives China helmsmanship of a big global issue for the first time.

“Xi’s pledge plays into his larger agenda of promoting China as a global standard setter,” says Maria Repnikova, political scientist at Georgia State University.

China also remains tethered to the Paris climate accords, the deepest effort yet to stop calamitous warming of the Earth, despite Trump pulling the U.S. out of the deal.

“China no longer just follows international rule and norms, it creates them. That’s a significant shift, and a big contrast with the isolationist rhetoric of the United States,” Repnikova said.

Xi also has hard domestic calculations at play.

China’s 30-year economic surge from developing nation to superpower status has been nourished by coal — bringing with it some of the world’s most polluted skies — and the country is far from quitting its carbon addiction.

Next year China hosts the delayed U.N. biodiversity summit and Xi will likely seek positive headlines on his environmental position.

While many remain unconvinced China can meet its carbon ambitions — especially as it goes on a coal spending spree at home and sponsors dirty energy projects abroad — the promise gives China helmsmanship of a big global issue for the first time. | AFP-JIJI

Beijing’s five-year economic plan, which also comes into force next year, will be scoured for serious commitments to weaning the country off coal.

Currently, just 15 percent of the country’s energy mix is provided by renewables. Beijing’s 2060 commitment means that will have to ramp up fast.

But if the global direction of travel is away from coal and towards cheap renewables and green tech, China could put itself at the forefront of a new economic order.

That could encourage action by provincial governments made twitchy by the economic blows of the coronavirus pandemic, says Lina Li, climate and foreign policy specialist at the Berlin-based Adelphi consultancy.

Taking coal plants offline, meeting stringent emissions targets and pleasing the population by curbing pollution could also deliver a strategic win to the Chinese Communist Party.

The move will allow Beijing to “tighten its controls over the local governments as well as the Chinese society,” says Fuzuo Wu, an international relations lecturer at the University of Salford.

But whether China’s new climate policy supersedes international angst over human rights issues remains to be seen.

On Wednesday, German Chancellor Angela Merkel accused China of “poor and cruel treatment” of its minorities and raised fears over the running crackdown on dissent in Hong Kong.

European leaders are planning to hold a special summit next month to discuss the continent’s complicated relations with China.

The climate question could also be suddenly reshaped by the outcome of next month’s U.S. election.

China and the US are arm-wrestling for supremacy in trade, tech and defense and experts say the green agenda will become a new battleground — or a potential point of rapprochement.

Another Trump victory would further America’s isolation over the environment. But a win for Joe Biden, champion of a Green New Deal for America, “will change the setting,” Trio adds.

RELATED PHOTOS

Coronavirus banner

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Politics

Paul Davis's political return sparks Conservative Party turmoil – CBC.ca

Published

 on


Former premier Paul Davis has announced his decision to re-enter politics, this time at the federal level — but that move isn’t welcome news to some members of the Conservative Party of Canada, with some local riding executives stepping away from their duties because of it.

On Thursday night, Davis posted on Facebook that he will seek the party’s nomination in the riding of Avalon in a future general election. Early Friday morning, Chris Power, the president of the Avalon Conservative Association, made an announcement of his own: that as Davis didn’t notify party executives first prior to posting, Power was stepping aside from his party duties, at least temporarily.

“I strongly feel that he should have first given notice to CPC nominating committee before any public announcement was made,” Chris Power said in a letter to fellow members of the association board.

In an interview with CBC News, Power said others on the board feel similarly and some executives have resigned, although he said Davis was not required to give a heads-up to the party before making his announcement.

“That’s your people on the ground, and the general consensus [is] that if we’re on the ground, that our opinion should matter, you know, and it didn’t seem like it really did,” Power said Friday.

Chris Power, the president of the Avalon Electoral District Association for the Conservative Party of Canada, is taking a leave of absence from his duties in the wake of Davis’s announcement he will run for candidacy in the riding. (Chris Power)

Power himself has decided on a temporary leave of absence from his role while the nomination process is underway, as Power said he and other executive members support the other candidate, Matthew Chapman, over Davis.

“We just thought at this time that we’d be better served with fresh blood. And we frankly didn’t think experience as a provincial politician was necessarily a positive thing right now,” said Power, who said he will be taking a “very active role” campaigning for Chapman during his leave.

‘Airing their dirty laundry’

Davis departed politics in November 2018, and in his resignation announcement at the time said he had no intention of running federally. But on Friday, Davis said the last six months — with troubles besieging small businesses and large industries, particularly oil and gas, as well as the omnipresent uncertainty — changed his mind.

“Someone needs to step up to the plate. I just can’t sit by any longer,” he told CBC News.

“There’s no plan to fix it. We don’t even hear any empathy or concern being communicated by our MPs in Ottawa.”

Davis said he’s had positive discussions with the local party ranks about running, and was caught off guard by their reaction to his announcement.

“Many of them are supporters of the other candidate. So it’s not unusual … for a candidate to have their own supporters on a district association. It happens provincially, it happens federally, it’s not unique to Avalon,” he said.

“I’m a little bit surprised that they’re airing their dirty laundry publicly, or their views on that, because some of them have been open arms welcoming and encouraged me to be in the process.”

A grassroots revival

Chapman, the other candidate, said he’s open to the competition.

“I wish Paul nothing but the best, and I’ve told him that. I believe that the membership and people of Avalon are going to recognize that I ran when nobody else would,” he said.

Chapman ran in the 2019 general election and lost to Liberal Ken McDonald, who has been the riding’s MP since 2015. In that race Chapman garnered significant support, capturing 31 per cent of the vote, compared with McDonald’s 46 per cent.

Matthew Chapman ran for the Conservative Party of Canada in the 2019 federal election and lost, and is running again for the party’s nomination in the Avalon riding. (Matthew Chapman)

Chapman credited that to grassroots support, as he and a few dedicated volunteers spent the last year rebuilding the Conservative Party’s base in the riding.

“I’ve spoken to all of people who are upset, because they’ve recognized I’ve literally put hundreds of hours of work into rebuilding this,” he said.

“People had the opportunity to run and turned it down, people had the opportunity to get involved and rebuild their association, and they didn’t.”

In the last year, the party’s grassroots in the Avalon have grown, added Power, to an executive board of 25 people with more than 280 party members, but Davis’s announcement and its resulting inner turmoil could prove to be a setback for the party.

“It’s sad because we had a number of initiatives that we were working through as a district that now all has to be put on hold,” said Power.

The call for nominations in the riding is still open, and Davis said the party would give two weeks’ notice before it closes and the candidate election process kicks in.

Read more from CBC Newfoundland and Labrador

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Some facts on British Columbia politics as the province heads to the polls Saturday – News 1130

Published

 on


VANCOUVER — Voters in British Columbia go to the polls on Saturday. Here’s some of what you need to know about B.C. politics:

— The NDP formed a minority government in 2017 with support from the Green party after finishing on election night with two fewer seats than the B.C. Liberals, while the Greens had an election breakthrough, winning three seats and holding the balance of power.

— The last time B.C. had a minority government before that was in 1952 and the NDP’s rise to power in 2017 ended a 16-year span outside government.

— The B.C. Liberals were in power from 2001 to 2017.

— Andrew Wilkinson became leader of the Liberal party in February 2018, replacing Christy Clark.

— John Horgan was acclaimed NDP leader in 2014 and first won a seat in the legislature in 2005.

— Sonia Furstenau took over the job of Green party leader about a week before the election was called, replacing Andrew Weaver.

— This election has 87 seats up for grabs. At dissolution, the NDP and Liberals were tied with 41 seats. The Greens held two seats, there were two Independents and one seat was vacant.

— The Liberal Party of British Columbia is not affiliated with the Liberal Party of Canada and describes itself as “a made-in-B.C. free enterprise coalition.”

— The NDP was in power from 1991 to 2001 with four different party leaders during its time in office.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 23, 2020.

The Canadian Press

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Debate Night: The ‘On Politics’ Breakdown – The New York Times

Published

 on


Good morning, and welcome to our very last debate recap edition of On Politics — for this year, anyway. I’m Lisa Lerer, your host. Stay tuned for Giovanni Russonello’s Poll Watch later today.

Sign up here to get On Politics in your inbox every weekday.

For President Trump, the measure of success in last night’s debate was clear: He needed a big win.

This final matchup of the 2020 election season was his biggest remaining opportunity to substantially change the dynamics of a race that’s been slipping away from him for weeks — if not months.

But instead of getting a debate victory, Mr. Trump fought Joe Biden to a draw, and that’s not what the president needed.

There were some improvements over his previous debate performance: Following the advice of his aides, Mr. Trump focused his attention on attacking Mr. Biden, and restraining his emotional outbursts and frustrations with the moderator.

While many of his arguments were littered with false and unsubstantiated claims, he drove a consistent message against Mr. Biden, casting him as a career politician who’s been ineffectual during his decades in Washington — “all talk and no action.”

And Mr. Trump delivered red meat to his conservative base, alleging that the former vice president used his position to enrich his family — an unsubstantiated argument peddled by Rudy Giuliani and other Trump allies.

But amid all the attacks, Mr. Trump presented no clear vision to a country in the midst of a national crisis, failing to explain how he would use a second term.

Mr. Trump is no longer a political outsider able to blame the Washington establishment for the country’s failings. Yet, he seemed to dismiss the more than 222,000 people killed by the coronavirus pandemic in the United States and the plight of hundreds of children separated from their parents at the southern border.

For his part, Mr. Biden remained unfazed by the assault. He accused the president of trafficking in Russian disinformation and challenged him to release his taxes.

Even with mute buttons and social distancing, the debate ended up being a strikingly normal political event in a very strange election year. Neither man performed in a way that would automatically disqualify him among his supporters or undecided voters.

For some viewers, the debate brought back memories of 2016. Four years ago, Mr. Trump entered the final debate trailing in the polls and needing a big victory. He stuck with a more measured tone, attacked Hillary Clinton as a political insider and had his best performance of that campaign.

Then, Mr. Trump trailed Mrs. Clinton by about six points, according to polling averages. Mr. Biden now leads by around nine points nationally, and he’s made notable inroads into key parts of the president’s coalition.

Much of Mr. Biden’s strength stems from the low marks voters have given the president on the defining issue of the campaign — the coronavirus pandemic. Last night, Mr. Trump still did not have any good answers for how he would manage the spread of virus.

As he has for months, the president tried to downplay the severity of the pandemic, arguing that the virus is easing its grip on the country even as the number of new infections hit the highest point in months. The claim flouts not only current reality but also what most voters expect for the future.

Recent polling by The New York Times and Siena College found that just over half of likely voters believed that the worst of the pandemic was yet to come, compared with 37 percent who said the worst was over.

“Anyone who’s responsible for that many deaths should not remain as president of the United States of America,” Mr. Biden said.

In a particularly unpredictable election season, a Biden win is not a forgone conclusion, as my colleague Adam Nagourney detailed in the paper yesterday. But a draw in the final debate may not be enough to sharply turn the race away from him.

When the debate began, more than 48 million Americans had already voted. For Mr. Trump to win this race, he must energize a “red wave” in the final days of this contest that could overtake the Democrats’ early voting advantage. That either means turning out a sizable number of new voters or persuading a decent slice of Americans to change their opinion and back the president.

Mr. Trump may have gotten his best performance of the campaign last night, but it’s not clear that it will be enough to get him what he needs.


  • Here’s the assessment from our recap article from the front page of the newspaper: “If the tenor of Thursday’s forum was more sedate, the conflict in matters of substance and vision could not have been more dramatic.”

  • Our news analysis notes that Mr. Trump “succeeded at various points in acting like the type of person he claims to disdain: a typical politician in a debate.”

  • The debate moderator, Kristen Welker, managed to restore order to a quadrennial institution that some believed could not be tamed, our media reporter writes.

  • A team of New York Times reporters fact-checked Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden, providing context and explanation for more than three dozen claims.

  • Win, lose or draw — what did the analysts, strategists and other observers think? Here’s a roundup of reaction from across the political spectrum.


Drop us a line!

We want to hear from our readers. Have a question? We’ll try to answer it. Have a comment? We’re all ears. Email us at onpolitics@nytimes.com.


President Trump and the Republican Party are giving up. So argue the Times columnists Ross Douthat and Charles Blow.

“What we’re watching is an incumbent doing everything in his power to run up his own margin of defeat,” says Mr. Douthat.

#notifications
font-family: nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;
min-height: 111px;
margin: 40px auto;
scroll-margin-top: 80px;
width: 600px;
max-width: 100%;
border-top: 1px solid #e2e2e2;
border-bottom: 1px solid #e2e2e2;
padding: 20px 0;

.Hybrid #notifications
max-width: calc(100% – 40px);

#notifications h2
font-size: 1.125rem;
font-weight: 700;
flex-shrink: 0;
margin-bottom: 0.5em;

.styln-signup-wrapper
margin-top: 20px;
max-width: 400px;

@media screen and (min-width: 768px)
#notifications
min-height: 90px;

#notifications .main-notification-container
align-items: center;

.notification-stack
display: flex;

.notification-stack > div:not(:first-child) .styln-signup-wrapper
padding-left: 20px;
margin-left: 20px;
border-left: 1px solid #e2e2e2;

.notification-stack > div .styln-signup-wrapper
display: flex;
position: relative;

.notification-stack > div .styln-signup-wrapper .signup-error
position: absolute;
bottom: 0;
left: 20px;
transform: translateY(100%);

.notification-stack > div:first-child .styln-signup-wrapper .signup-error
position: absolute;
left: 0;

.notification-stack > div
display: flex;

.styln-signup-wrapper
margin-top: 13px;

Keep up with Election 2020

“Trump isn’t even trying to make a case for a second term,” writes Mr. Blow. “He isn’t laying out a vision and a plan.”

So what is he doing? Mr. Douthat contends that “he’s making a closing ‘argument’ that’s indistinguishable from a sales pitch for a TV show or a newsletter — suggesting that even more than four years ago, the president assumes he’ll be in the media business as soon as the election returns come in.”

As Mr. Blow points out, Mr. Trump has been driven in recent weeks to speculate what he might do in the event of a loss. “Could you imagine if I lose?” he said at a recent rally. “My whole life, what am I going to do? I’m going to say I lost to the worst candidate in the history of politics. I’m not going to feel so good. Maybe I’ll have to leave the country. I don’t know.”

For Republicans in the House and Senate, frustration abounds. The president’s erratic messaging during a pandemic and a period of economic instability leaves Republican senators up for re-election in a bind. That’s especially true for Senator Susan Collins of Maine, a Republican whom Mr. Trump seems to be actively campaigning against.

Some Republicans are simply tired of the president and his antics. The Times columnist Gail Collins notes in The Conversation with Bret Stephens that Senator Ben Sasse of Nebraska accused Mr. Trump of “screwing up the coronavirus crisis, cozying up to dictators and white supremacists and drawing the water for a ‘Republican blood bath.’”

That’s “too little, too late, in my view, though it’s always nice to hear what Republicans really think of their favorite president,” Mr. Stephens says.

— Adam Rubenstein


At the start of last night’s debate its moderator, Kristen Welker of NBC News, delivered a polite but firm instruction: The matchup should not be a repeat of the chaos of last month’s debate.

It was a calmer affair and, for the first few segments, a more structured and linear exchange of views.

President Trump, whose interruptions came to define the first debate, was more restrained, seemingly heeding advice that keeping to the rules of the debate would render his message more effective. And while there were no breakthrough moments for Joe Biden, he managed to make more of a case for himself than he did last month, on issues such as the coronavirus and economic support for families and businesses in distress.

On “The Daily,” Alexander Burns, a national political correspondent for The Times, recaps the night’s events.

Click here to listen now.


Thanks for reading. On Politics is your guide to the political news cycle, delivering clarity from the chaos.

On Politics is also available as a newsletter. Sign up here to get it delivered to your inbox.

Is there anything you think we’re missing? Anything you want to see more of? We’d love to hear from you. Email us at onpolitics@nytimes.com.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending