Three federal court judges just rescued your gas stove and other gas-fired appliances from the nanny state.
Yesterday, in a unanimous opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that the nation’s first ban on natural gas, put in place by the City of Berkeley in 2019, violates federal law. The three judges found that the city’s ordinance was preempted by the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, which prohibits the implementation of regulations that favor one type of fuel over another.
The first report I saw on the court’s ruling was here on Substack by my friend, Ed Ireland. There’s no doubt that the decision is a huge win for consumers, businesses, and energy security. Indeed, the ruling in California Restaurant Association vs. City of Berkeley, has ramifications that go beyond California and the Ninth Circuit. It should invalidate the dozens of gas bans that have been enacted across the country over the past four years. It may also mean that plans by federal authorities, including the Consumer Product Safety Commission, to ban, or restrict, the use of gas stoves, gas furnaces, and other gas-fired appliances, are kaput.
About 47 million American homes have gas stoves and lots of chefs, and consumers, including Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm, like cooking with gas. The Department of Energy’s own numbers show that heating homes with gas is far cheaper than heating with electricity. Despite these facts, a group of lavishly funded activist groups have been pushing electrify everything mandates that would prohibit the use of gas in homes and businesses and require consumers to rely almost exclusively (including energy for electric vehicles) on our already-shaky electric grid. The electrify everything claque got a boost in January after Richard Trumka Jr., who sits on the Consumer Product Safety Commission, told a Bloomberg reporter that gas stoves are a hazard and that “any option is on the table,” including, presumably, a ban.
Trumka’s comments sparked a storm of criticism. Within hours, the White House issued a statement saying that President Joe Biden doesn’t support a ban on gas stoves.
What has since been dubbed the “gas stove culture war” was ignited in July 2019, when Berkeley became the first municipality in the country to ban the use of gas. Since then, as I explained in January, (See: “The Billionaires Behind The Gas Bans”), several NGOs, including Climate Imperative, the Sierra Club, and Rocky Mountain Institute, as well as Rewiring America, have spent untold (and undisclosed) millions of dollars campaigning and lobbying at the local and national levels to ban the direct use of natural gas in homes and businesses. And thanks to remarkably friendly (and largely unquestioning) coverage from legacy media outlets, they’ve had undeniable success.
The Sierra Club, which operates on an annual budget of about $180 million, says 74 communities in California have “adopted gas-free buildings commitments or electrification building codes.” But that number doesn’t include the most recent ban. On April 13, the Irvine City Council, again according to the Sierra Club, adopted measures mandating that all new buildings be all-electric “on or after July 1, 2023. That puts the number of California communities that have banned gas at 75. The group isn’t just pushing for restrictions in its home state. Last August, it asked the Environmental Protection Agency to ban natural gas appliances at the federal level.
In September, the California Air Resources Board voted to ban the sale of all gas-fired space heaters and water-heating appliances in the state by 2030. New York City and Seattle have banned the use of gas in new construction. Massachusetts is also rolling out a measure that will allow up to 10 communities to ban gas.
As I reported last month (See: “California Screamin’”), the Bay Area Air Quality Management District recently approved regulations that will ban the use of residential and commercial natural gas-fired water heaters and furnaces. The regulation, which only applies to new appliances, prohibits residents in the Bay Area from buying or installing gas water heaters starting in 2027. Also last month, Boston Mayor Michelle Wu, said she is working on a “climate friendly” building code that will hamper or––in the words of the Boston Globe, “discourage”––the use of hydrocarbons in new buildings in Boston.
Following the proliferation of gas bans requires following the money. The Sierra Club has been a prime beneficiary of former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg’s Bloomberg Philanthropies, which has pledged $500 million to the Beyond Carbon project. In 2019, the pledge was considered the largest ever “philanthropic donation to combat climate change.” The Sierra Club is now getting about $30 million per year from Bloomberg.
For several years, the Rocky Mountain Institute, a group that took in $115 million in 2022, has been ginning up bogus studies that claim gas stoves are a threat to human health. And like the Sierra Club, it is getting big money from super-rich donors. In 2020, the Bezos Earth Fund gave RMI $10 million. RMI said the cash from the group, which, of course, came from Amazon founder and multi-billionaire Jeff Bezos, would help fund its “work with a coalition of partners in key states. The project will focus on making all U.S. buildings carbon-free by 2040 by advocating for all-electric new construction.”
In January, numerous national news stories were published after RMI issued a paper claiming that 12.7 percent of childhood asthmas are due to gas stoves. One of the authors of that paper, Talor Gruenwald, works at RMI. Gruenwald is also a research associate at Rewiring America, a San Francisco-based outfit that calls itself the “leading electrification nonprofit, focused on electrifying our homes, businesses, and communities.” Rewiring America is funded entirely by dark money. It doesn’t publish its budget or file a Form 990. Instead, it is a sponsored project of the Windward Fund, a 501c3 non-profit that does not disclose its donors. Nor does the Windward Fund reveal how much it is giving to Rewiring America.
The January RMI paper didn’t stand up to even modest scrutiny. The definitive analysis of indoor air pollution and gas stoves was published in 2013 in Lancet Respiratory Medicine. It studied half a million schoolchildren in 47 countries over a multi-year period and relied on questionnaires that were filled out by the mothers of the children. It concluded, “We detected no evidence of an association between the use of gas as a cooking fuel and either asthma symptoms or asthma diagnosis.”
Furthermore, just a day or two after the RMI paper came out, the group walked back its claim about asthma, with one RMI official telling the Washington Examiner that the study “does not assume or estimate a causal relationship” between childhood asthma and natural gas stoves.
April 18, 2023
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Deception, Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Science and Pseudo-Science | Human rights, United States |
Leave a comment
The Washington Post tells us that President Macron’s China jaunt has created an European ‘uproar’. So it seems. Though on the face of it, his geo-strategic recommendation that Europe should keep equidistant from both the U.S. behemoth and the China colossus, is scarcely so very radical. Yet, whatever Macron’s underlying motivations, his comments seem to have touched raw nerves. He is accused of something approaching ‘betrayal’. The betrayal of America curiously – rather than a betrayal of ordinary Europeans.
Perhaps the irritation reflects our habitual love of comfort, normalcy, and a desire to ‘not rock the boat’. This normalcy bias keeps people frozen in a state of status quo, as if some inner voice intrudes to say: ‘things will be somehow ok. This will pass, and things will again be as they were. “Everything must change, for everything to remain the same”, in the famous quotation pronounced by Tancredi, Prince Fabrizio Salina’s beloved nephew in The Leopard.
On the other hand, Malcom Kyeyune, writing from Sweden, detects a more profound shift under way – an agony writhing within European Atlanticism:
“The war fever that swept Europe in the summer of 2022 made discussion impossible. Ritual denunciations of “Putinists” and even supposed Russian spies became commonplace on social media, and chest-thumping about the immense power of the West and NATO became obligatory. Again, there was a huge pressure not to notice things:
“The only acceptable position was maximalist: Suggesting that a peace deal would likely involve coming to some sort of compromise marked you out as a “Putin loyalist” and “Russian agent.”
“But once again, the fever is starting to break. Few still post about Ukraine on social media; people by and large prefer to pretend it isn’t happening. The chest-thumping has gone away, replaced with a sullen, bitter silence. People aren’t quite ready to admit that the sanctions were a failure and that the West overplayed its hand, but many know these things are true, and that the economic and political consequences of these failures are only really beginning to be felt.”
Is Macron picking up on these ‘vibes’? That is to say, the self-deception, by which we feel the illogicality of going about our daily lives with ‘darkening clouds’ looming ever closer, yet never questioning why Europe is being de-industrialised; why its industry is relocating to the U.S. or China; or why Europeans have to import Liquid Natural Gas at three or four times its going price.
Are Europeans then beginning to notice things again? Are they asking ‘how come’ the economic paradigm has been so drastically eclipsed, or ‘how come’ the fall into mad fervour for incipient wars with China and Russia?
Macron’s equidistant prescription is entirely aspirational. He gives it no substance; he gives no explanation of how strategic autonomy would be achieved, nor does he address the issue of ‘the empty stable’. There is no point in shutting the stable door now after the autonomy horse’ has long fled; It ‘fled’ with the war fever of 2022. We are therefore, where we are. Can the autonomy horse still be led home? That seems improbable.
So much of the ‘uproar’ no doubt reflects the warding-off of uncomfortable admissions, as things begin to be noticed again. Macron at least has opened the issue (however sensitive it may be); He is an outlier for the moment, but is not alone.
EU Council chief, Michel, in an interview, said: “Some European leaders wouldn’t say things the same way that Emmanuel Macron did”, adding: “I think quite a few really think like Macron.” And SPD chair in the Bundestag, Rolf Mützenich, said “Macron is right” and “we must be careful not to become party to a major conflict between the U.S. and China.”
There are multiple revolutions afoot everywhere across the globe. And Macron asks where does the EU fit in, which is fine. But he doesn’t give the answer. To be fair, though, at this point, maybe there isn’t one, for now.
Equidistant from the U.S.? Does Macron mean equidistant from specifically the Neo-con strategy of maintaining U.S. global hegemony through aggressive projections of military and sanctions power? If so, this needs to be made explicit.
For America, too, is undergoing a quiet revolution, and the Macron prescription could need nuancing in the case that the Ukraine war marks the final collapse of the Neo-cons’ short-lived ‘American Century’. There has been a noticeable tone of desperation to western MSM reportage this past week. Ever since the Intelligence leaks, it’s been doom, gloom and panic. The leaks have made uncomfortable truths unmissable (even to those who preferred not to notice) – that the vast ‘optics’ construct that is the Ukraine project is slowly coming undone.
The ‘Saving Ukraine for Democracy’ project was supposed to underwrite the legitimacy of the U.S.-led World Order. In reality, Ukraine has become the “harbinger of terminal crisis”, Kyeyune suggests.
The political path likely to be followed in America however, is far from straight-forward. It is possible though that today’s ‘Other Project’, the ‘western class war’ inversion ‘project’ may similarly collapse in the crisis (in this case) of U.S. societal schism. The Woke ‘project’ is an unlikely one – a strange neo-Marxist construct, in which an ‘oppressed class’ actually is composed of élite affirmative-action intellectuals (who lay claim to the mantle of being redeemed oppressors), whilst Americans, working in industry and in the low-paid service industry, are conversely denigrated as racist supremacist, anti-diversity, white oppressors.
China, too, is undergoing transformation: It is preparing for the war which the American ‘uniparty’ China hawks increasingly clamour. Meanwhile, its ‘political warfare’ strategy is to use geo-political mediation, underpinned by a powerful economy, as the non-intrusive means by which to pursue the Chinese operational art. This project already has re-shaped the Middle East –and its geo-strategic appeal is spanning the globe.
President Putin’s slow, long-term practice of political warfare (as opposed to China’s operational ‘art’) is clearly conceived with an understanding that the slowly-building disillusionment in the West with woke-liberalism – requires time in the chrysalis. In the Russian perspective, this Sun Tzu approach (overcoming the western paradigm, without militarily fighting it) calls for the ‘economy of military application’ within an all-of-system, holistic political ‘war’.
Russia’s is perhaps then, the more complex and more revolutionary: Embracing reform and efficiencies in all areas (cultural, economic, and political) of Russian society too.
China disavows the explicit aim to force a change of behaviour on the West, but for Russia its security is contingent on the U.S. fundamentally changing its military posture in Europe and Asia. This objective requires both patience and employing all complementary means at Russia’s command, (i.e. effectively ‘weaponising’ non-military tools such as financial ‘warfare’ and energy) to overcome the enemy – yet staying at some threshold, just short of all-out war.
The West, by contrast, conceptually separates the military from the political means, which perhaps explains why western analysts misconceive Russian ‘switching’ between military procedures to diplomatic or financial pressures as reflecting some deficiency or stumble in the Russian military machine. It is not. Sometimes the violins play; other times the cellos. And sometimes it is the moment for the big bass drums to sound; It is up to the conductor.
Julian Macfarlane has commented that Russia has started a veritable ‘revolution’, with China now joining in. To make his point, Macfarlane adapts Thomas Jefferson’s “we hold these truths to be self-evident …” speech and glosses it to say “… that all States are equally entitled to sovereignty, undivided security and full respect”. He contextualises this in terms of a Jefferson focus on the tyranny of the British Crown, whereas Putin formulates his multi-polar order doctrine, as versus U.S. hegemonic ‘Rules’ tyranny.
Xi Jinping says it straight: “All countries, irrespective of size, strength and wealth, are equal. The right of the people to independently chose their development paths should be respected, interference in the affairs of other countries opposed – and international fairness and justice maintained. Only the wearer of the shoes knows if they fit or not”.
It is a doctrine winning support across the globe. The EU would be unwise to discount its appeal.
So, back to Macron and the equidistant concept for European Union ‘strategic autonomy’: It is hard to see what space might comprise a median ground between homogenous, ‘Rules Hegemony’ and the Sino-Russian declaration of heterogenic ‘National Rights’. It will have to be one or the other (with perhaps a little ‘betweenness’ just possible, should the U.S. drop its “with us; or against us” dogma).
Equally, Macron warns the EU against the extra-territorial reach of the U.S. dollar (and therefore of sanctions and Third Country sanctions).
Yet, the EU cannot escape the U.S. dollar. The Euro is its’ derivative.
Europe has little autonomous defence manufacturing infrastructure. NATO is the political, as well as the military, framework in which the EU operates. How does it escape from a NATO framework that is so closely meshed in with the EU political one?
The EU is deeply divided on its future path: Macron wants more strategic autonomy for Europe (and Charles Michel says this is supported by not a few member-states), whereas Poland, the Baltic States and certain others want more America and more NATO and a continuing war to destroy Russia. Poland has proved to be a vociferous critic of Western Europe’s perceived softness toward the Kremlin.
Indeed, the war in Ukraine has ushered in a kind of geopolitical shift in Europe, Ishaan Tharoor writes, moving “NATO’s centre of gravity” – as Chels Michta, a U.S. military intelligence officer, recently put it – away from its traditional anchors in France and Germany, and eastward to countries such as Poland, its Baltic neighbours and other former Soviet Republics. In Central and Eastern Europe, wrote Le Monde columnist Sylvie Kauffmann, “the weight of history is stronger … than in the West, the traumas are fresher and the return of tragedy is felt more keenly”.
The EU is deeply divided on structure as well: Warsaw, nervous about a general election due this autumn, is encouraging anti-German paranoia. Its propaganda suggests that Polish opposition politicians are secret agents in a German plot to take control of the EU, and to force degenerate western permissiveness on heterosexual Catholic Poland – a ‘bastion of western Christian civilisation’ – unlike Brussels, which is viewed as a as a “Germanised” conspiracy to overrule the right of independent nations to make their own laws.
Jarosaw Kaczyski, leader of the PiS party, plays with an alternative future for Europe. This would be a Europe des patries, almost on de Gaulle’s model: an alliance of fully sovereign nation states, within NATO but independent of Brussels, which would include post-Brexit Britain, rather than just the EU’s present members. (No EU Third ‘Empire’ there).
In a major speech, the Polish Prime Minister has emphasised that now is the moment to shake up the status quo further West and dissuade those in Brussels who would “create a super-state government by a narrow elite. In Europe nothing can safeguard the nations, their culture, their social, economic, political and military security better than nation states”, Morawiecki said. “Other systems are illusory or utopian”.
Elections are due this autumn in Poland, and polls suggest that the outcome will be close.
It seems that Macron has opened a veritable can of worms. Possibly, this was his intent; or maybe he just didn’t care – his objective being primarily domestic: i.e. to shape a new image in the context of a changing, and turbulent, French electoral landscape.
But in any event, the EU is caught in the midst of a maelstrom of geopolitical change at a moment when it faces the possibility of a banking crisis, high inflation and economic contraction. Simple survival may become more pressing than addressing Macron’s speculative musings about the EU becoming a Third Force.
April 17, 2023
Posted by aletho |
Economics, Militarism, Russophobia | China, European Union, France, NATO, Poland, Russia, United States |
Leave a comment
Thousands protested in downtown Prague on Sunday, arguing that the Czech government is devoting too many resources to helping Ukraine fight Russia rather than tackling the energy crisis and high inflation at home. Many are calling on Prime Minister Petr Fiala to resign.
The ‘Czechia Against Poverty’ rally was spearheaded by the opposition party Law, Respect, Expertise (PRO 2022). Protesters gathered at Wenceslas Square, condemning what one called “the lying government” and carrying banners that said “No to war” and “Get out of NATO.”
Addressing the crowd, Jaroslav Foldyna, an MP from the Freedom and Direct Democracy party, said that “the government needs to go before it destroys the country.”
A protester named Renata Urbanova told AFP that the government is “full of warmongers” who “are making us suffer economically.”
A group of people with Ukrainian flags rallied in support of Kiev in the center of the capital at around the same time. Members of opposing camps shouted at each other, but were ultimately separated by police.
A similar anti-government demonstration was held last month. More than a dozen people were arrested and scuffles with police broke out at that event.
The monthly cost of living has increased for most Czechs and up to 70% of households were forced to resort to austerity measures, according to a survey released by pollster Median in January.
At the same time, Prague has supplied heavy weapons to Ukraine, including 89 tanks, and has backed economic sanctions imposed on Russia by the EU. More than 460,000 Ukrainian refugees arrived in the Czech Republic after February 2022, and around 300,000 of them are still in the country, according to Euronews.
Last year, the Czech parliament adopted a law aimed at providing assistance to refugees, which was recently extended until April 2024.
April 17, 2023
Posted by aletho |
Economics, Militarism, Russophobia, Solidarity and Activism | Czech Republic, European Union, NATO |
Leave a comment
By Ahmed Adel | April 17, 2023
Although Euroscepticism has existed since the inception of the European Union, the UK’s departure from the bloc in 2020, the only sovereign country to have left, demonstrated to other member states that it is possible to leave. Many member states are frustrated by forced immigration quotas, scandals such as Qatargate, and a lack of strategic depth by the bloc as it prioritises the interests of the US instead of Europe. Seemingly, it appears that Italy, Greece, Poland, and France are the most Eurosceptic countries.
This lack of strategic depth led to the decline of European economies because sanctions against Russia have been self-sabotaging. When paired with the aforementioned scandals and migration issues, as well as the loss of legislative control, it is understandable why Eurosceptism persists across the bloc.
According to OddsChecker, an online bookie comparison site, Italy was ranked as the country which is most likely to leave the EU,” specifically with odds of 3/1 or 33 percent. It is recalled that in the September 2022 election, the former president of the European Central Bank (ECB), Mario Draghi, was ousted from power by the right-wing populist Brothers of Italy party. In the same manner, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni had previously condemned the hostility by Brussels against the UK’s decision to leave the EU, describing its actions as an effort to “humiliate the British people who have freely chosen Brexit.”
The next likely country after Italy is Greece, with odds of 6/1 or 16.67 percent. Although Eurosceptism has always been prominent in Greece, it especially accelerated during the sovereign debt crisis, with discussions of a possible “Grexit” entering the mainstream.
Eurosceptic party SYRIZA lost power to the liberal-conservative New Democracy party in 2019, but Greeks are returning to the polls this May. Although it is expected the ruling party will maintain power, the gap between the two parties has now narrowed from ten to five percent over the past year as Greeks are angered by having to pay the most expensive energy bills in Europe and in their majority are against weapon transfers to the Ukrainian military.
Poland comes in third place, with odds of 7/1 or 14.3 percent. President Andrzej Duda, of the ring-wing Law and Justice (PiS) party, has been continuously criticised for limiting freedom of expression and LGBTQ+ rights. However, since Poland positioned itself as a regional player in the context of the war in Ukraine, much of the criticism from Brussels has alleviated.
None-the-less, although Brussels might have quietened its criticisms of Poland, there is still a high degree of eurosceptism within Polish society, something which will grow as the negative effects of the war in Ukraine are crippling the country, resulting in war weariness.
War weariness has set in so much so that Poland, and neighbouring Hungary, took unilateral action to ban grain and other food imports from Ukraine. This is to protect their local agricultural sector, something which still received the wrath of the EU.
“In this context, it is important to underline that trade policy is of EU exclusive competence and, therefore, unilateral actions are not acceptable. In such challenging times, it is crucial to coordinate and align all decisions within the EU,” said a spokesperson of the European Commission.
Poland’s ruling nationalist PiS party are seeking re-election in the 2023 parliamentary election, and people in rural areas, where support for PiS is usually high, are angered about large quantities of Ukrainian grain, which is cheaper than that produced in the European Union, staying in Central Europe due to logistical problems, thus making prices and sales for local farmer’s plummet.
Meanwhile, the fourth most likely country to leave the EU is France, with a 12.5% chance. French President Emmanuel Macron, another liberal like his Greek counterpart Kyriakos Mitsotakis, has been facing endless largescale protests against pension reform. Protestors have sworn to not stop until Macron backtracks on his plans.
At the same time, the French President was branded a “madman” and accused of insisting on a “political coup de force” by Boris Vallaud, leader of the PS deputies in the National Assembly.
When speaking about Macron, Vallaud told LCI and Le Figaro : “When you discredit social dialogue, when you step on the social partners (…), when you do not respect the parliamentary institution, when you brutalise it (…), when in the street you have people demonstrating by the hundreds of thousands, by the millions, yes, it is a democratic coup because you are diminishing democracy.”
What makes eurosceptism all the more interesting is that it spans across different political ideologies, with only liberals in support of the failed European project. In the case of France, it is mostly comprised by anti-Macron elements, whilst in Greece it is represented mostly by SYRIZA, a radical Left party. This is contrasted by Italy and Poland, where right-wing politics prevails.
With Brussels failing to deal with migration issues in Italy, Greeks having a general tendency to be Russophile, Poland being lambasted for not implementing liberal policies, and the French having a desire to be an independent country in the vision of Charles de Gaulle, Eurosceptism is not only a persistent issue, but one that will continue to deepen.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.
April 17, 2023
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Economics | European Union, France, Italy, Poland |
Leave a comment
Quartz published a concise report earlier this month about the Democratic Republic of the Congo’s (DRC) audit of a Chinese mining deal from the early aughts and attempts to renegotiate its terms more in Kinshasa’s favor. President Tshisekedi claims that his predecessor Kabila agreed to a massively lopsided arrangement, which he claims Beijing hasn’t even perfectly honored. Accordingly, he wants it to pay more taxes as well as invest more in the DRC’s infrastructure like was initially agreed.
This is a major move for several reasons, the first being that the lion’s share of the world’s cobalt reserves (70%) that are indispensable for the green revolution and modern-day technological devices is located in the DRC, almost all of which (80%) is exported to China according to Quartz’s report. Second, China’s positive reputation across Africa is largely based on the perception that it’s a reliable infrastructure investment partner, but the DRC’s latest claims challenge that notion.
The third and fourth reasons why everyone should pay attention to this concern the potential outcome of their planned negotiations. If they successfully agree to new terms, then this could inspire copycat efforts– including those on false pretexts – for pressuring China into revising the terms of other deals elsewhere. Should they fail to agree to new terms, however, then Kinshasa could potentially demand that Beijing sell back its earlier purchased shares in the DRC’s state-run mining firm.
The final reason why all of this is so important is because either outcome could set a precedent that complicates China’s Belt & Road Initiative (BRI) deals across the Global South that have already been under intense scrutiny since the US declared its trade war against the People’s Republic in 2018. While it’s true that some of the unsavory reports and related investigations into those deals were baseless provocations by the US’ intelligence services, others nevertheless have some substance to them.
This means that they should each be approached on a case-by-case basis exactly as the DRC-Chinese one presently is since it’s inaccurate to paint the scrutiny into every deal with the same brush by either dismissing it all as a foreign intelligence provocation or assuming that every criticism is valid. The outcome of this latest audit and attempted renegotiation might set a standard across the Global South in terms of reshaping perceptions about China for better or for worse depending on the ultimate result.
On the one hand, agreeing to renegotiate the deal’s terms would show flexibility on China’s part and thus counteract the weaponized narrative that it’s laid a series of so-called “debt traps” for its partners through BRI. That said, the cumulative effect of potentially setting into motion a series of seemingly never-ending renegotiations on other deals elsewhere could reduce the profitability of its BRI projects, prolong the time that it takes to recoup its investments, and thus imperil this model in the long run.
On the other hand, however, refusing to renegotiate the deal’s terms would feed into the aforesaid weaponized narrative and risk setting the precedent for Kinshasa to demand that Beijing sell back its earlier purchased shares. Instead of setting into motion a series of seemingly never-ending renegotiations on other deals elsewhere, this could catalyze the process whereby BRI states – irrespective of US influence – consider reappropriating Chinese assets just like the DRC might do.
Both outcomes could have outsized consequences for BRI, but the first-mentioned related to successfully renegotiating the DRC-Chinese deal is preferred when all the risks are considered since it would counteract weaponized narratives while also keeping the BRI model alive for the time being. The second scenario could quickly deal immense strategic damage to Chinese interests, especially if US intelligence weaponizes that process, hence why all efforts should be made to avoid it.
It remains to be seen what will happen, but there’s no question that the DRC’s audit and attempted renegotiation of its mining deal with China is a major move that could have far-reaching economic-strategic reverberations in the New Cold War, particularly with respect to its African front. Observers should closely monitor this process for that reason and remain especially alert for any signs of foreign forces like the US’ intelligence agencies and/or media attempting to influence the outcome.
April 17, 2023
Posted by aletho |
Economics | Africa, China |
Leave a comment
More than a year after the United States and its allies imposed numerous economic sanctions against Russia over the escalation of the conflict in Ukraine, US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen has stated the obvious: the sanctions may threaten the hegemony of the US dollar, the world’s reserve currency.
“There is a risk when we use financial sanctions that are linked to the role of the dollar that over time it could undermine the hegemony of the dollar,” she said during an interview with a US media outlet.
Yellen, however, claimed that the US dollar is “used as a global currency for reasons that are not easy for other countries to find an alternative with the same properties.”
She went on to boast that, other than the United States, there is no other country in the world that has the basic “institutional infrastructure that would enable its currency to serve the world” like the US dollar, and that sanctions are still an “extremely important tool.”
When asked during the interview whether Russian assets in the US, which were frozen in the wake of the launch of Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine in February 2022, might be appropriated to be used for Ukrainian reconstruction, Yellen claimed that Moscow “should pay for the damages” it has allegedly inflicted upon Ukraine.
She admitted, though, that there are “legal constraints on what we can do with frozen Russian assets, and we’re discussing with our partners what might lie in the future.”
April 16, 2023
Posted by aletho |
Economics | United States |
Leave a comment
Regional countries expect China to play a more active role: expert
China released an 11-point paper to fully elaborate its position on the Afghan issue and express firm support for the reconstruction of the war-torn country on Wednesday – the same day as Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Qin Gang started a two-day visit to Uzbekistan where he will also attend the fourth Foreign Ministers’ Meeting among the Neighboring Countries of Afghanistan in Samarkand.
Analysts noted that China is taking concrete measures to push further coordination on the Afghan issue and together with regional countries to help with Afghanistan’s reconstruction and revitalization.
The paper, titled “China’s Position on the Afghan Issue,” lists China’s adherence to the “Three respects” and “Three nevers,” as the first point. These are respect for Afghanistan’s independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity, to respect the independent choices made by the Afghan people, and to respect the religious beliefs and national customs of Afghanistan. China never interferes in Afghanistan’s internal affairs, never seeks selfish interests in Afghanistan and never pursues so-called sphere of influence.
Afghanistan is in a crucial period of moving from turbulence to stabilization. To fully outline China’s policy and propositions in a systematic way and build consensus and synergy among countries in the region and elsewhere on stabilizing and helping Afghanistan, the foreign ministry released China’s Position on the Afghan Issue, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin said at a press conference on Wednesday.
Wang noted that the fourth Foreign Ministers’ Meeting among the Neighboring Countries of Afghanistan will be held in Samarkand on Thursday and China is willing to work with neighboring countries to help Afghan to walk on the path for stable development and to realize regional peace and prosperity.
State Councilor and Foreign Minister Qin will attend the fourth Foreign Ministers’ Meeting among the Neighboring Countries of Afghanistan in Samarkand, Uzbekistan and visit Uzbekistan from Wednesday to Thursday, according to information from the Foreign Ministry.
Observers said that the paper on the Afghan issue came on the heels of a 12-point positon paper on Ukraine crisis which was released in February, also highlighting China’s consistent stance in seeking and making peaceful solutions for heated geopolitical issues.
Qin will meet with the President of Uzbekistan Shavkat Mirziyoyev and hold talks with Acting Foreign Minister Bakhtiyor Saidov. They will exchange views on bilateral relations, high-level exchanges between the two sides and international and regional issues of shared interest, according to Foreign Ministry.
Qin’s visit will further deepen mutually beneficial cooperation and bilateral relations with Uzbekistan and Central Asian countries to inject stability in the region amid global spillover effects of the Ukraine crisis, analysts said.
The Wednesday paper which collectively and thoroughly elaborates China’s stance on the Afghan issue will help coordinate neighboring countries’ stance and push a different way from the West and the US in solving conflicts within Afghanistan through political dialogue, Zhu Yongbiao, director of the Center for Afghanistan Studies at Lanzhou University, told the Global Times on Wednesday.
The international community, especially regional countries, expect China to play a more active role on the Afghan issue given its selfless assistance to Afghanistan people, Zhu noted.
The third Foreign Ministers’ Meeting among the Neighboring Countries of Afghanistan was held in Tunxi, East China’s Anhui Province in 2022 and foreign ministers or high-level representatives from China, Iran, Pakistan, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan drafted a joint statement and an initiative in pooling resources and coordinating to increase their support for Afghanistan, analysts said.
The paper released on Wednesday showcases China’s efforts in promoting mechanism of the foreign ministers of Afghanistan neighboring countries a step forward to bring more light to Afghanistan reconstruction, Hu Shisheng, director of the Institute for South Asian Studies at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations, told the Global Times.
Hu noted that currently, Afghanistan is facing new historical changes – after the withdrawal of the US and Western troops, the country has seen no proxy wars and more autonomy.
However, the situation is fragile and can be reversed at any time. And the sanctions imposed by the US and the West are squashing Afghanistan’s chances of future development. While China and regional countries are working to help Afghanistan regain the capability to revitalize itself, the US and Western countries should also take their due responsibility, said Hu.
The Wednesday paper urged the US to live up to its commitments and responsibilities to Afghanistan and noted that “by seizing Afghanistan’s overseas assets and imposing unilateral sanctions, the US, which created the Afghan issue in the first place, is the biggest external factor that hinders substantive improvement in the humanitarian situation in Afghanistan.”
Zhu noted that more efforts from the international community are required given the current problems in Afghanistan, including the Afghan Taliban interim government’s ban on women’s access to education, domestic and regional measures on countering terrorism and Afghanistan’s fight against narcotics.
All these topics will be discussed on Thursday during State Councilor and Foreign Minister Qin and other foreign ministers’ meeting from neighboring countries, said Zhu, noting that a stable Afghanistan not only fits the interests of Afghanistan people but will also contribute to regional stability, creating favorable conditions for countries in the region to seek better development.
April 16, 2023
Posted by aletho |
Economics | Afghanistan, China, United States |
Leave a comment
Ideological green policies are tearing Germany’s economy apart
In an interview, Prof. Kurt Lauk, former economic council head and automobile manager, warns half of Germans “will no longer be able to afford a car.” Socially explosive…”a disgrace”.
He also warns of a rapid demolition of Germany’s economic backbone: the automotive industry.
“It is a disgrace what is sitting in the chair of Ludwig Erhard or Graf Lambsdorff. The hostility to technology coming from the Ministry of Economics is unbearable. Everywhere where we are or were world market leaders, we have gone about abolishing it,” Lauk said in an interview . It is the “worst thing that could happen” for German industry.
“For several years now, we have been working hard to destroy this competitive advantage of German industry or to hand it over to other nations. We now have ‘economic heads’ sitting in the Ministry of Economics who have no other professional qualifications,” Lauk added.
Lauk says Germany’s technological advantages are now in jeopardy because the backbone of Germany’s economy and driver of innovation is the country’s automotive industry. “This is where most of the jobs are.”
150 years of technological experience “thrown away”
“The technological advantage of German carmakers through 150 years of experience with the combustion engine, transmissions etc. is being recklessly abandoned, Lauk said. “We are throwing away our competitive advantage and adopting the ‘Chinese drive’. Because 80 per cent of the battery drives come from China. That means China has driven us up against the wall in a strategic situation. And with our naivety, we didn’t realize what was happening.”
Unaffordable for the bottom 50%
Lauk warns that because of e-cars being considerably more expensive than conventional combustion engine vehicles: “The bottom fifty percent of the income pyramid will no longer be able to find a vehicle for less than 40,000 euros.” and thus this group will see significantly restricted mobility.
Tinder dry social powder keg of the haves and have nots
“Today you can get a cheap, suitable vehicle for 15,000, 18,000 or 20,000 euros. That will no longer be the case. We are running into a huge social conflict with this idiotic, singular policy to drive with electric batteries.”
April 15, 2023
Posted by aletho |
Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | Germany |
Leave a comment
Buy How is This a Thing Mugs here: https://teespring.com/stores/computing-forever-store
Support my work on Subscribe Star: https://www.subscribestar.com/dave-cullen
Support my work via crypto: https://computingforever.com/donate/
Follow me on Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/hybM74uIHJKg/
Source video: Living in This Pod Will Cost You $1,000 a Month: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXB5ivW6PbE
A 3D animated short film about not too distant but a dystopian future. It speculates on the potential consequences of the infamous Great Reset, medical tyranny, woke culture, and green agenda. Everything, that World Economic Forum (WEF) is planning for us. If you’d like to buy me a beer, here is my PayPal address: oleg@3depix.com
Spoiler: you will get to see an animated Klaus Schwab.
My Rumble channel: https://rumble.com/c/c-750647
If you’d like to support my work, you can become my Patron at https://patreon.com/3depix
All Rights Reserved 3D Epix 2023 ©
April 13, 2023
Posted by aletho |
Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Video | California, United States |
Leave a comment
While we were being distracted by the ongoing Russia/Ukraine war – and Washington’s increasing involvement in the war – tremendous developments in the Middle East have all but ended decades of US meddling in the region. Peace is breaking out in the Middle East and Washington is not at all happy about it!
Take, for example, the recent mending of relations between Saudi Arabia and formerly bitter adversaries Iran and Syria. A China-brokered deal between the Saudis and Iran has them re-establishing full diplomatic relations, with the foreign ministers of both countries meeting in Beijing last week. It is the highest level meeting between the two countries in seven years.
Additionally, Riyadh is expected to invite Syria back into the Arab League and Syrian president Assad may attend the next Arab League summit. Syria was suspended from the Arab League 12 years ago when then-US allies in the Middle East signed on to Washington’s “Assad must go” policy that wreaked havoc across the region.
And the nearly decade-long war in Yemen, which has devastated that population, appears to finally be ending, as Saudi Arabia is expected to announce an end to its US-backed war on that country. Troops from the United Arab Emirates are leaving Yemen and a Saudi delegation is arriving to negotiate a peace deal.
To normal people the idea of peace breaking out in the Middle East is a wonderful thing. But Washington is anything but normal. President Biden dispatched his CIA Director, William Burns, to Saudi Arabia in a surprise visit last week. According to press reports, Burns was sent to express Washington’s surprise and frustration over the peace deals going through. Biden’s foreign policy team “has felt blindsided” by Saudi Arabia’s sudden move to get along with its neighbors.
Washington is angry that Saudi Arabia will start trading with Syria and Iran because those two countries are still under “crippling” US sanctions. One by one, as these countries begin ignoring US-demanded sanctions, the entirety of US foreign policy is being exposed as a paper tiger – just bluster and threats.
Middle East developments have revealed a dirty secret about US foreign policy. Washington has for a long time used a “divide and conquer” strategy to keep countries in the Middle East – and elsewhere – at each other’s throats. Sanctions, covert operations, and color revolutions have all been used to make sure that these countries do not get along with each other and that DC controls who runs the show.
As unlikely as it may seem to some, China has moved into the region with a different policy. China seeks business partners, not to manipulate the internal politics of the Middle East. They may be ruthless in their own way, but it is suddenly clear that the countries of this region are tired of US meddling and are looking for new partners.
We non-interventionists are often attacked as “isolationists,” but as I have always said, it is the neocons and interventionists in Washington who are really isolating us from the rest of the world. Nowhere is that more evident these days in the Middle East. It didn’t have to be this way, but if this is the end of US meddling in Middle East affairs then ultimately it is a good thing for the American people… and for peace.
April 11, 2023
Posted by aletho |
Economics, Timeless or most popular | China, Middle East, United States |
Leave a comment
Many in the Alt-Media Community (AMC) dismissed the importance of French President Macron and European Commissioner Von Der Leyen’s trip to China, implying that President Xi wasted his precious time meeting with them over several days all for nothing. In truth, their trip actually served a pragmatic purpose in that it allowed each party to speak candidly about their concerns at this pivotal moment in the global systemic transition, hence why all sides made the time to meet with one another in Beijing.
While it’s true that the two European representatives wishfully hoped that they’d sway their Chinese counterpart around to seeing the NATO-Russian proxy war in Ukraine the same way that they do, that wasn’t the primary reason why everyone took the time out of their busy schedules last week. What really brought them all together in Beijing was the impending inflection point that’s quickly approaching in that aforementioned conflict.
Kiev’s upcoming counteroffensive will be a make-or-break moment. On the one hand, it could wildly succeed in pushing Russia back to its pre-2014 borders, in which scenario China could then feel compelled to arm Moscow as a last resort in order to preemptively avert the possibility of it losing. That would in turn prompt the US to pressure the EU into sanctioning the People’s Republic, thus spiking the chances that they’ll swiftly decouple, which would harm both of their interests while advancing the US’.
On the other hand, however, Kiev’s counteroffensive might not ultimately achieve all that much as evidenced by the Washington Post’s report a month back about how poorly its troops are faring. In that scenario, Russia could either flip the momentum to make a major breakthrough across the Line of Contact and beyond or seriously encourage Kiev to agree to a ceasefire. The last-mentioned possibility would certainly be supported by China and most likely France now too.
Considering the grand strategic stakes connected to the outcome of Kiev’s upcoming counteroffensive, which will probably lead either to a Chinese-EU decoupling per the first scenario or China and France jointly mediating a ceasefire per the second, it made sense why they’d all meet ahead of time. The real drivers of events are the US, its Polish-led Central European partners (which includes the Baltic States), and their proxies in Kiev, whose success or lack thereof will shape the future of Chinese-EU ties.
It doesn’t have to be this way, of course, but the fact of the matter is that the EU is unlikely to be able to effectively resist the US’ sanctions pressure in the event that China feels compelled into arming Russia as a last resort as was earlier explained. They know how painful it would be for their already struggling economies, especially since this dramatic scenario could push them over the edge into a full-fledged recession, but that’s precisely why two of their top representatives wanted to speak to President Xi.
He wanted to speak to them too in order to clarify that China hasn’t yet armed Russia but perhaps also explain why it might feel compelled to do so in the hypothetical sense without directly confirming this contingency plan due to how sensitive it is. Simply put, the EU wanted to know what would have to happen for China to cross Brussels’ “red line” by arming Russia, while China wanted to know whether the EU would be willing to cross Beijing’s “red line” in that scenario by sanctioning it in response.
Both sides also wanted to explore just how far the other would go if they felt compelled by circumstances or pressured by the US respectively, ergo another reason why they all felt it important enough to take the time out of their busy schedules to meet over the past few days. If the whole purpose was just for the European representatives to spew propaganda to President Xi aimed at swaying him to their side in the NATO-Russian proxy war, then the trip wouldn’t have taken place.
The AMC’s top influencers were therefore far off the mark in assessing the purpose of last week’s visit, which failed to account for the pragmatic reason why all three parties prioritized meeting at this specific time. It was important for them to speak candidly about how they’ll react to the two most likely forthcoming scenarios to emerge from Kiev’s upcoming counteroffensive, which will result in them either decoupling under US pressure or working together to broker a ceasefire.
In the interim between their meeting and whichever of those two trajectories their ties are pushed along, all sides at least had something tangible to show with respect to the statements released by Macron and Von Der Leyen after their respective meetings with President Xi. Russia’s TASS drew attention to three highlights from the former concerning their support for a UN-enshrined multipolar world order, peace in Ukraine based on international law, and overlap on many other issues.
While cynics might claim that these statements have more symbolism to them than substance, they’re at least something that all parties can build upon in the scenario that China doesn’t feel compelled to arm Russia as a last resort or the EU largely resists the US’ pressure to sanction it if that happens. In any case, President Xi wouldn’t waste his valuable time staging a multi-day photo-op just for the sake of releasing several perfunctory statements so it should be taken for granted that China’s intent is sincere.
This insight further discredits the AMC’s over-simplistic conclusion that the whole trip was a gigantic waste of everyone’s time and failed to achieve anything worth the three parties’ while. It might not result in avoiding the worst-case sequence of events that was earlier described regarding their accelerated decoupling under US pressure, but the intent was to candidly discuss the future of their ties in that context in an attempt to mitigate the mutually disadvantageous consequences if that unfolds.
April 8, 2023
Posted by aletho |
Economics | China, European Union, France, Ukraine, United States |
Leave a comment
French President Emmanuel Macron has wrapped up a three-day visit to China, accompanied partly by European Commission Chief Ursula von der Leyen, who went home a day earlier.
The dual visit came at a time when EU nations, worried about a growing Sino-Russian partnership, are looking for ways to strengthen their own diplomatic engagement with Beijing.
Von der Leyen’s presence on the trip was widely seen as a “check” on Macron, there to ensure he complied with “European unity” on the matter of the EU’s relationship with China. Before the visit, she gave a hawkish address warning China against supporting Russia in the Ukraine conflict and slamming Beijing for becoming “more repressive at home and more assertive abroad.”
While she urged the bloc to reduce “dependencies” on China, she also opposed full “decoupling” of economies, as called for by the US. Enduring trade relations were made abundantly clear by the fact that Macron was accompanied by a 50-strong delegation of business leaders who came to Beijing to sign deals.
It is unusual that Macron, an advocate of the EU’s so-called “strategic autonomy” in negotiating with other actors on the world stage, and von der Leyen, an ardent atlanticist who is reportedly in the wings to be the next NATO secretary general, were both in China together.
Despite their somewhat conflicting agendas, their visit was a net positive for Beijing and a net negative for US attempts to force the EU to fully take its side in its own geopolitical crusade against Beijing. The US looks upon all attempts by the EU to engage with China with disdain, and does its best to undermine it where possible.
Likewise, when it comes to the Ukraine conflict, China’s effort to open talks by presenting its 12-step peace plan was immediately dismissed by Washington, with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken accusing Beijing of providing “diplomatic cover” for what he called Russia’s attempts to “freeze the war.” However, Xi Jinping’s recent visit to Moscow has apparently shown EU leaders, who would prefer the war to end rather than drag on indefinitely, the potential consequences of “losing China” – and now Macron is urging Xi to mediate a return to the negotiating table by “bringing Russia to its senses.”
In other words, many EU leaders, bar the overzealous and fanatical ones in states such as Lithuania, now realize that they must pursue a diplomatic effort to “keep China on board,” which in turn illustrates the tactical shrewdness of Xi Jinping in preserving his partnership with Moscow without explicitly endorsing the Ukraine conflict. This has given China geopolitical leverage.
It should also be noted that China has never sought to oppose Europe, but its principal objective has been to try and keep Europe out of the American camp at all costs. The EU, after all, collectively represents the largest export market China has in the developed world and is therefore critical to China’s growth and development.
Of course, on the other hand, the US has long been pushing very aggressively to undermine China’s prospects in the EU. It has been waging a public opinion war against Beijing, using its own state-sponsored think-tanks, and pushing issues such as human rights to create negative sentiment and to block engagement, such as on the Comprehensive Agreement on Investment (CAI), which was proposed back in 2013 and is still pending ratification a decade later. Similarly, the US uses bilateral and unilateral diplomacy to undermine China’s relationships with specific European countries in a bid to wreck its attempts to engage with the bloc as a whole.
For example, the US explicitly supported Lithuania in undermining the ‘One China’ principle by opening a “Taiwan representative office.” It also forced the Netherlands to agree to new export controls on sending advanced lithography machines (used for making computer chips) to China. Similarly, because the EU could never agree to a comprehensive ban of Huawei’s application in 5G networks in 2020, the US simply resorted to bilaterally approaching countries one by one, making them agree to the ban until those states that were not on board, such as Germany, were effectively isolated and could not drive the EU agenda.
Ultimately, the EU is a bloc which can only operate by consensus between all of its member states, but if the US can undermine that consensus, it can throw a spanner in the works and break the entire machine. This is why it is so difficult for Europe to truly create an “autonomous” foreign policy capable of serving coherent “European interests.” This means when nations such as France and Germany declare their desire for engagement with China, they of course have influence, but the overall effect is never truly consistent. The bloc is being subjected to a constant tug of war in its foreign policy direction, which ultimately shows that Europe remains more of a passenger, rather than a player, in the world of US-China competition.
However, despite the traditional dominance of the US over Europe, Beijing is by no means out of the game, because as much as the US can play divide and conquer against EU countries, so can China – and the outcome of the visit demonstrates that very well. Having given von der Leyen and her message of “unity” a noticeably cooler reception, the Chinese hosted a cordial tea ceremony for Macron, after signing a joint communique that spoke at length about improving trade, economic and cultural ties, but made barely any mention of the main political sticking point between China and the EU – Beijing’s good relations with Moscow and Xi’s refusal to condemn Russian President Vladimir Putin over the Ukraine crisis.
For China, this is a clear win. For France, this is a win in terms of enduring business and economic relations with China, but a loss in that all of Macron’s attempt to change Xi’s mind on Putin and Ukraine were comprehensively stonewalled.
For von der Leyen, whose mission in Beijing was purely political, it was a complete failure. Not only did her message fall on deaf ears, the wooing of France continued unabated under her nose. But perhaps most importantly, the result of this visit dealt a blow to US agenda, showing that positive relations between China and the EU are worth working towards and Washington’s attempts to drive wedges between them are, so far, futile.
April 8, 2023
Posted by aletho |
Economics | China, European Union, France |
Leave a comment
Aletho News 