Without a doubt, it's a "green" movement
Posted by aogSaturday, 20 November 2010 at 11:13 TrackBack Ping URL

German economist and IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer says —

Basically it’s a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization. The climate summit in Cancun at the end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War. Why? Because we have 11,000 gigatons of carbon in the coal reserves in the soil under our feet - and we must emit only 400 gigatons in the atmosphere if we want to keep the 2-degree target. 11 000 to 400 - there is no getting around the fact that most of the fossil reserves must remain in the soil.

[…]

First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.

Gosh, who could have expected this? That by “green” they meant control of the economic environment, and the biological one would be dropped as irrelevant?

Comments — Formatting by Textile
AVeryRoughRoadAhead Wednesday, 01 December 2010 at 07:35

China preparing for collapse of N. Korea regime, cables say | John Garnaut BEIJING, with Sanghee Liu | Dec 1, 2010 | The Sydney Morning Herald

A SERIES of leaked US diplomatic cables is prompting the world to confront the dilemma of which country or army should stabilise North Korea and secure its nuclear facilities in the event of regime collapse.

Beijing sees the isolated nation as a buffer against the US military presence in the region and has declined to engage the US in contingency discussions, Chinese and American analysts have said.

In February, South Korea’s then-vice foreign minister, Chun Yong-woo, relayed to US diplomats that China “would be comfortable with a reunified Korea controlled by Seoul and anchored to the US in a ‘benign alliance’”, citing conversations with two senior Chinese officials, according to secret US State Department cables obtained by WikiLeaks. […]

The cables also reveal senior South Korean officials commenting that the North’s economic and political situation is dire. They cited intelligence reports of a bomb scare on a Kim Jong-il train, unrest in the country’s north, and the secret defection of high-ranking officials to the South.

Mr Chun, now national security adviser to [South Korean President Lee Myung-bak], was reported to have said the regime would collapse when Mr Kim dies.

Zhu Feng, a professor of international relations at Peking University, said the regime would not last long and China would inevitably support South Korean-led reunification, partly because it had no choice. […]

”I don’t think China has any real intention of falling into a new Cold War; it’s totally against China’s interests. You can say Beijing foreign policy is not so smart sometimes but it will not always be stupid.” […]

The WikiLeaks cables also revealed a Chinese diplomat slamming North Korea’s nuclear activities as a ”threat to the whole world’s security” and a senior Russian diplomat deriding North Korea’s ballistic missile test as ”a piece of junk that miraculously flew”* and a South Korean minister slamming China’s top North Korea negotiator as an old-school communist not up to the job.

*Which, if I’m not mistaken, was this blog’s take on it at the time.

Apparently nobody is seriously considering that Kim Jong-il’s son Jong-un will be able to hold it together; also:

North Korean leader Kim Jong Il’s eldest son is against his family holding power in the reclusive communist nation for another generation.

“Personally I oppose the hereditary succession for three generations,” Kim Jong Nam told Japan’s TV Asahi…

Post a comment