Climate Action (Page 7)

Over the past few years, some Western commentators have proclaimed the “decline of China.” They argue China’s economy is failing, its youth are alienated and unemployed, it abuses human rights and represses its people, and its demographic decline means that China will never rise to surpass Western power.

The subtext of this focus on China’s problems is that Western domination of the world will continue, proving the superiority of the West’s political and economic ideologies.

These eulogies for China are premature, at best.

Economists in the West don’t fully understand Western economies, let alone China’s, and Western states have numerous fundamental problems of their own.

Drumbeat of negativity

China is experiencing economic headwinds as it transitions to a new model of economic development. It is also contending with Western economic and technological sabotage.

How well China manages these forces remains to be seen.

An objective analysis of China’s economy is required, but the constant drumbeat of negativity emerging from the West makes that difficult. Some of it is a concerted propaganda campaign, financed by the United States, to undermine America’s biggest competitor. But the trend also reflects the Western world’s racial and political anxieties and its profound insecurities about its own failures and decline.

For hundreds of years, the West has used imperialism and violence to construct an international system that ensures its prosperity and prioritizes its interests. Keeping the Global South subservient to a Eurocentric world order has been critical to this strategy.

Israel’s attack on Gaza, killing tens of thousands of Palestinians – along with the associated American and British bombings of Yemen, Iraq and Syria – are contemporary manifestations of this phenomenon.

China’s rise is the first time in modern history that a non-European state beyond Western control is economically eclipsing the West. The “yellow peril” is back, and the West will now need to compromise and negotiate with a powerful, non-Western entity.

It cannot simply impose its will on the Global South, though the American campaign against China is an effort to re-establish this status quo.

To the West, this was not how it was supposed to be.

China forged its own path

According to American political scientist Francis Fukuyama, the end of the Cold War was the “end of history,” meaning that liberal democratic capitalism is the final and best form of government for all nations.

This political and economic system, embodied by the West (especially the United States), was supposedly the only path to success. The West was held up as pinnacle of achievement that the entire world should emulate.

China disproved this narrative by achieving extraordinary economic and technological developments with unprecedented speed, and it did so by following its own path. It is a major player in the world economy, but has refused to become a Western vassal state.

At the same time, the Western world has failed in many measurable and obvious ways, particularly since the 2008 financial crisis. Europe is facing economic stagnation, demographic decline and increasingly toxic politics.

Western youth are alienated and pessimistic. The West’s failure to destroy Russia’s economy with sanctions after its invasion of Ukraine is evidence of decreasing Western economic power. Its absolute moral failure in Gaza is tragically apparent.

American decline

But the most spectacular and consequential example of Western decline is the United States. On paper, the US economy is performing moderately well. In practice, under-employment and economic inequality are posing major problems.

Many Americans are angry, disillusioned and polarized. American politics are dysfunctional and blatantly corrupted by money. Even the highest judiciary has been accused of corruption.

In the next presidential election, Americans may well re-elect Donald Trump, someone who epitomizes this corruption.

The US government also continues to stir up violence and instability around the world rather than dealing with its own enormous domestic problems.

China’s achievements

Over the past 20 years, China’s transformation has been astonishing. Its modern cities feature marvels of architecture, well-constructed infrastructure, phenomenal public spaces and are clean and safe, in contrast to the crumbling infrastructure and dangerous streets of some American cities.

By purchasing-power parity, China’s GDP is currently 25% bigger than that of the US; the International Monetary Fund estimates it will be 40% larger by 2028.

China is responsible for 35% of the world’s manufacturing compared with 12% for the US. China’s economies of scale and technological advancements mean that renewable energy may become affordable to billions of people all over the world, offering viable climate action.

If China really does fail – something those Western commentators perpetually claim is imminent – it would have serious consequences for the rest of the world.

Western hostility toward China reflects the grudging realization that the West may not be the pinnacle of achievement after all. Rather than possibly learning from China’s successes, Westerners have chosen resentment borne of a sense of frustrated superiority.

The modern world is a pluralist global system. Different states will follow different paths to development and experiment with different forms of government. The West does not have all – or maybe any – solutions to the many problems the world is currently facing.

China is pursuing its own economic and social goals. These may not accord with Western models, and China may stumble as it follows its own path.

But cheering on those stumbles won’t make for a more peaceful or cooperative world, nor will it compensate for Western failures.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue Reading

As the COP28 climate conference wrapped up in the United Arab Emirates last week, international observers were focused on the outcome of the talks, with good reason. The fate of humanity hangs in the balance.

But just off stage, regional analysts were absorbed in a related issue that will hinder efforts to implement any plan to save the planet. Call it the geopolitics of climate action, and Syria was exhibit A.

With Syrian President Bashar Al Assad absent from the proceedings, Prime Minister Hussein Arnous was tasked to lead the delegation in Dubai. Syrian officials underscored their primary focus was on securing funding for climate adaptation in the war-torn country, a concern other conflict-ridden states share.

While it’s imperative to address Syria’s environmental challenges, it’s crucial to consider them in the wider context. Channeling climate funds to a regime that has exacerbated old environmental woes while creating new ones will undermine efforts to hold those responsible to account. Worse, it creates an opportunity for climate funds to be misused.

The regime’s extensively documented corruption and manipulation of aid and development funding pose a significant risk to mitigation efforts. Any climate funding allocated to Syria must come with assurances that the money won’t be redirected.

For more than 12 agonizing years, the Syrian conflict has inflicted brutal violence, economic turmoil, and widespread suffering. Concurrently, recent years have brought a surge in extreme weather events in Syria – scorching temperatures, devastating wildfires, relentless droughts, and ceaseless sandstorms.

These escalating calamities, both in frequency and ferocity, have heightened Syria’s vulnerability to the impacts of climate change. Ranked 146 out of 181 countries on the Notre Dame Global Adaptation Initiative index, Syria stands among the countries most severely affected by the climate crisis. This ranking underscores Syria’s acute vulnerability and limited resilience against the impacts of severe weather.

However, these dire circumstances must not eclipse the accountability of the Syrian regime in reaching this critical juncture. For decades, the regime’s policies directly aggravated a range of environmental challenges, including water scarcity, soil degradation, and air pollution.

The situation was further deteriorated following the peaceful uprising in 2011. A November 2023 report by former International Criminal Court judge Howard Morrison echoed these concerns, placing blame on the Assad regime for Syria’s extensive environmental devastation.

For instance, relentless bombing campaigns and the regime’s repeated use of chemical weapons have added to the ecological destruction. Today, cities remain buried under hazardous rubble that poses significant environmental and health risks.

Morrison’s report, which was released in the run-up to COP28, also underscores Assad’s targeting of the oil industry. Intentional strikes have created large oil fires and spills that ravaged cultivated land and triggered health crises, notably increased respiratory issues among affected populations.

The report also delineates how Assad’s war tactics have decimated clean drinking water supplies and polluted groundwater sources. The ravages of war have also rapidly diminished Syria’s forests, increasing flooding risks and contributing to a steep decline in biodiversity.

Extending climate financing to the Syrian regime would not only undermine efforts to hold Assad accountable but also risk yielding minimal impact.

Syria is not alone in this climate contradiction. Other countries in dire need of climate adaptation and mitigation funding – Sudan, for instance – are also embroiled in war. Indeed, climate-related challenges, like water shortages and soil degradation, are often contributing factors to conflict.

Still, Syria’s funding track record is particularly egregious. The regime has been accused of selectively directing aid to loyalist areas, manipulating exchange rates for aid transfers, and compromising procurement procedures.

Furthermore, the regime’s constraints on the operational freedom of international agencies impede independent needs assessment and monitoring, leaving these bodies heavily reliant on data provided by regime-affiliated entities. 

Even if funders could look beyond past transgressions, structural corruption within Syrian state institutions will complicate climate financing. Entrenched corruption not only undermines the effectiveness of climate financing but also detracts from essential reforms needed to address Syria’s governance challenges.

The heightened focus on conflict and climate at this year’s COP summit, while sorely needed, will only yield results if the entities receiving support are properly vetted. Climate-related financing, like any funding directed to regime-held areas, must include assurances that mitigate corruption risks and ensure climate action without exacerbating Syria’s existing problems.

Given the technical and political challenges of coordinating with the Syrian regime, climate funding to Syria should target societal and civil society structures at the local level. These entities possess the skills and genuine interest in improving conditions in their areas.

Engaging directly with the Syrian regime, on the other hand, should be avoided whenever possible. A blank check from the international community would enable Assad to exploit yet another critical cause to secure his own political survival. 

We’ve already seen what Assad can do with the slightest opening of support. But this time, the repercussions of engagement have planetary consequences.

Dr Haid Haid is a Syrian columnist and a consulting associate fellow of Chatham House’s Middle East and North Africa program. X: @HaidHaid22

Republished with the kind permission of Syndication Bureau, which holds copyright.

Continue Reading