What's new

How China and India stopped Obama

EjazR

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
5,148
Reaction score
1
How China and India stopped Obama - dnaindia.com

Hong Kong: An extraordinarily energetic effort by US President Barack Obama to get developing economies, including China and India, to commit themselves to carbon dioxide emission cuts was beaten back on Friday by a rare manifestation of Sino-Indian solidarity at the Copenhagen climate change conference.

It wasn't always a pretty picture. At least on one occasion, push literally came to shove, conference delegates and observers told DNA. "Think of it as war minus the shooting," said an American observer.

Somewhat frustrated by the absence of progress even on the final day of the conference, a weary Obama at one stage stormed into a meeting attended by Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Brazil's President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and South African President Jacob Zuma.

"Obama and (Secretary of State) Hillary Clinton turned up uninvited, which had one Chinese protocol officer apoplectic," said the observer. "Upon entering the room, Obama assumed the manner of a schoolmaster dealing with truant schoolboys, telling them that he didn't want them 'negotiating in secret'." It was from that 45-minute meeting that a non-binding political accord emerged, which Obama celebrated as a step forward, but which doesn't really pin down India and China to much more than voluntary pledges.

In fact, there had been much wily truancy afoot on Friday. In what was perceived as a calculated diplomatic insult, Premier Wen did not attend two impromptu meetings that Obama had convened earlier in the day; Wen instead sent three Chinese diplomats. Obama gave voice to his exasperation, saying that it would have been nice to negotiate with someone who actually had political authority.

"That was very unusual," said Julian Wong, an energy policy and technology analyst with Center for American Progress. "I wouldn't have thought this was something the Chinese would pull off, since they're very conscious of the concept of 'giving face'."

The American delegation's exasperation appeared to be directed particularly at Chinese-led efforts all week to resist any attempt to hold developing economies accountable for their pledges of cuts in emission intensity - through an international verification mechanism. In his speech at the conference on Friday, Wen reiterated China's commitment to abiding by its voluntary target for emission cuts, and pledged to "increase transparency... and international cooperation".

Obama wasn't easily persuaded. Speaking right after Wen, he deviated from his prepared text to pointedly criticise China's unwillingness to be transparent about its emission reduction efforts. "I don't know how you can have an international agreement where we're all not sharing information and ensuring we're meeting our commitments," Obama said. "That doesn't make sense."

The latent Sino-US tension manifested itself somewhat more starkly when Chinese officials physically blocked American reporters from entering a room where Obama and Wen were to meet, according to a White House correspondent travelling with the US delegation. An incensed White House press secretary Robert Gibbs was "jostled about a bit in the scrum".

Although Wong sees these as just part of "conference theatrics", he acknowledges that at the heart of the problem is the fact that China's word on its emission commitments isn't trusted. "But then the world doesn't trust the US either."

India's hardball negotiating strategy alongside China too came in for criticism from French President Nicholas Sarkozy. But the steadfast alliance among developing economies won India rare praise from China. According to the Chinese news agency Xinhua, Wen and Singh "agreed to further develop the strategic cooperative partnership" between their two countries.

Climate change activists may claim that India's and China's reluctance to commit themselves to binding emission cuts puts them on the wrong side of history, but the two countries that have seen their bilateral relations strained in recent months are for now celebrating their 'Asian solidarity'.
 
.
Very interesting piece. Thanks EjazR

I really appreciate the Indian and the Chinese working together for the betterment of our respective people. This is a breath of fresh air, from the usual saber rattling we have been seeing for the past few months.

However, what disturbs me is that this Indo-China alliance is at the cost of controlling emissions in our countries. Given that emission control would stifle our nascent industries and we need those industries for development, but doesnt it make sense that we give impetus to develop greener technologies so that we end up with vastly superior technologies to develop our industrial base, not to mention creating a new field (green technologies) for development?

Why are we stalling committing ourselves to emission controls? Why not put in more efforts to develop greener technologies and show the world that we too can do it, but in a better way!
 
.
Just one question How Taxing carbon Going to clean the enviroment Please some one Answer that.

Al gore travles around in the world talking about carbon in a private jet he comes home to 27000 square feet of house which he shares with wife and couple of kids i think while telling us all how to cut down our carbon foot print his energy usage in that house is per month 100 times more then average person uses in a year sorry not buying this bull.
 
.
Just one question How Taxing carbon Going to clean the enviroment Please some one Answer that.

Al gore travles around in the world talking about carbon in a private jet he comes home to 27000 square feet of house which he shares with wife and couple of kids i think while telling us all how to cut down our carbon foot print his energy usage in that house is per month 100 times more then average person uses in a year sorry not buying this bull.

If the developed countries are so concerned about the enviroment why not give the technology away at cost price or have joint effort with all the nations to produce non patented technology.
I think it was the UK govt that asked the malaysians to stop chopping down trees to save the environment to which the malaysian replied that they would have no problem with funding a project to reforest the UK.
 
.
Gubbi, greener and better technologies come at a cost. About almost 80% of greenhouse gases as industrial by-product came from the western nations in the previous century. However, when it comes to the developing nations trying hard to come at par with the developed ones economically, they (developed nations) try to enforce such embargoes on us.

ये तो वही बात हो गयी: पहले उन्होंने जम के चूल्हा जलाया, पर्यावरण का सत्यानाश किया, और अमीर हो गए | जब हम गरीबों क बारी आई, तो बोले या तो गैस खरीदो, या भूखे मरो लेकिन चूल्हा मत जलाओ, धुआं बहोत हो रहा है |

ये कोई मज़ाक है क्या? We are the developing nations in this century, and we were not the ones who put a hole in the ozone! The aerosols and CFCs were heavily used by them despite knowing its damning effects for decades. They just want us to carry the burden of their own sins.

This is why China and India never want to cut their carbon emissions on the standards set by the West.

Greener is better of course, but not at the cost of the development of our respective nations. Besides, the concept of global warming is still highly disputed, as it has been researched and declared by only those who are funded by the developed nations. Al Gore did not get Nobel prize for nothing.

If the US is so concerned about the greenhouse effects and global warming, it should dump its Hummers and make it mandatory for its citizens to drive around in Tata Nanos. Afterall the Americans still account for the greatest (2nd for a year now, after China) amount of greenhouse gases.
 
.
Gubbi, greener and better technologies come at a cost. About almost 80% of greenhouse gases as industrial by-product came from the western nations in the previous century. However, when it comes to the developing nations trying hard to come at par with the developed ones economically, they (developed nations) try to enforce such embargoes on us.

ये तो वही बात हो गयी: पहले उन्होंने जम के चूल्हा जलाया, पर्यावरण का सत्यानाश किया, और अमीर हो गए | जब हम गरीबों क बारी आई, तो बोले या तो गैस खरीदो, या भूखे मरो लेकिन चूल्हा मत जलाओ, धुआं बहोत हो रहा है |

ये कोई मज़ाक है क्या? We are the developing nations in this century, and we were not the ones who put a hole in the ozone! The aerosols and CFCs were heavily used by them despite knowing its damning effects for decades. They just want us to carry the burden of their own sins.

This is why China and India never want to cut their carbon emissions on the standards set by the West.

Greener is better of course, but not at the cost of the development of our respective nations. Besides, the concept of global warming is still highly disputed, as it has been researched and declared by only those who are funded by the developed nations. Al Gore did not get Nobel prize for nothing.

If the US is so concerned about the greenhouse effects and global warming, it should dump its Hummers and make it mandatory for its citizens to drive around in Tata Nanos. Afterall the Americans still account for the greatest (2nd for a year now, after China) amount of greenhouse gases.

Ofcourse there is politics in curbing advancing behemoths like India and China.

But greenhouse effects are for real! Its the common people who suffer from the effects of these emissions! Bangalore was once a pristine garden city and now look at what its become with all those unregulated industries and vehicular emissions!

Though US is one of the largest contributors of greenhouse gases, the effects seen here are small. Unlike India or China, US has a large land mass, most places are sparsely populated, industries are not concentrated in congested places nor are they built in populated areas. Also there are strict regulations regarding the disposal of wastes and other emissions. India or China do not have even half as much in place.

In our quest for 'development' we are disregarding basic rules. One question comes to mind - development at what cost? Should development benefit a country's infrastructure or its people? Investment in greener technologies or regulating wastes generated in industries creates more jobs, better technologies with lesser impact on our immediate environment. That - our immediate environment - is more important for countries like India or China considering our populations and concentration of industries in or around populated centers!

ps: Dr. Strangelove...one of the most interesting characters ever! Peter Sellers is a hoot!
 
.
Cope 15 didnt came up with something really significant but it was soothing to see The Delegates from India and China speaking in voice for a common cause.

JaiRam's comment that this meet had a vital implication in cementing China-India Relations is indeed a welcome move.
 
.
Well Gubbi, my take is a little different from yours on the issue.

I believe that the effects of greenhouse gases hit us all equally.

The immediate effects do take place right there locally, however, the pollution, especially gas borne molecules, do not consider international boundaries.

Take an example:

Pittsburgh during its peak in steel production in the 30s:



And its effects locally:

7c961de2a730d6e123ceb05b11ca22c1.jpg


^^^ It is not midnight, it is 2 PM noon time in 1948 in Pittsburgh - Courtesy, pollutants.

Now take a look at Pittsburgh of 21st century:



Now, where did all that pollution go? It did not stay in Pittsburgh for sure. Such pollutants harm the local area only for a short period, but in the longer term, every cubic inch of our atmosphere has to bear the brunt equally. Australia did not have any such heavy industries, but the ozone layer ruptured right over that country exposing them to harmful radiations. The Aussies surely were not responsible for that. Every single person in this world has been affected equally by the West's irresponsible behavior of the past, be it an African, Indian, Chinese, Russian, Aussie, or American.


My take: When a city like Pittsburgh can get as clean when the nation gets developed, then Bangalore is already way ahead.

Even Delhi was not as polluted, as were London and Pittsburgh once, yet the government took measures and made it illegal for anyone to use Diesel or Petrol run buses for public transportation. Within months it made Delhi much cleaner than before.

The West will not have any problem if we polluted our own country, they would rather be happy to show off their clean cities, but their past is not as clean, and our future is not as dark. Once India has acquired all the technologies to suppress the pollutants, our cities too will get at least as clean as theirs.

In my opinion, the local pollution is a temporary phase, and if the West is really seriously concerned about it, it should provide us with the technologies and equipments to reduce the level of pollution. For free. After all, it is all about humanity.

P.S. I so love his idea of 10 voluptuous women per man, lol dream come true hahaha. My signature is also his quote from that movie ;-)
 
Last edited:
.

Military Forum Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom