Virtual ghost
Complex paradigm
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2008
- Messages
- 22,152
The Indian elite is hardly alone in opportunistically raising the old banner of anti-colonialism against Western critics. Last year, while announcing his illegal annexation of four Ukrainian provinces, Russian President Vladimir Putin denounced at length the West’s historical depredations in India, China, and other parts of Asia and Africa, and cast Russia as the leader of a global anti-colonial alliance against a “racist” and “neo-colonial” West.
Make no mistake: Moral condemnation of Western powers has not been so widespread since the mid-20th century, when the “darker nations,” as W.E.B Du Bois called them, fought for national self-determination. And, though amplified by self-serving demagogues, it is again shaping mass perceptions and straining geopolitical relations across the globe.
That last headline about Armenians fleeing Nagorona-Karabakh is a bit of good news. I'm sure the Armenians in question are not to happy, but frankly, that region was going to be a bone of contention for as long as it tried to self govern right in the middle of Azerbaijan. They've fought wars over it before, and I am sure they would again.
However, if everyone leaves, it will quiet down and after a few decades, should more or less be forgotten (kind of, I know ethnic tensions in that area like to seethe for long times).
So it's for the best in the long run. And lets face it, 120K people is about 2 weeks of illegal immigration at the US border, so it's not like a huge number of people relocating in those terms.
Well, I hardly consider myself an expert on this region. I suppose the Armenians could have stayed put under Azerbaijani rule, but they seem to have chosen not to. I think their choice to leave minimizes the chance for outright war. Also, I don't see how them staying would make any difference as to how Armenia and Azerbaijan get along. I simply presume they will never really get along. I think moving on is a refreshing change of approach in this case. The usual would be to scrap and squabble and try and draw other regions into the conflict.I am sorry but this is basically nonsense even if we skip the humanitarian part of the story. In other words this presumes that Armenia doesn't have other enclaves in the Azerbaijan.
Hmm, wasn't sure exactly how this CBAM would work (that article doesn't bother to cover that aspect) but I see it's just another name for an import tax. Import taxes/tariffs are almost always inflationary, so the end result likely won't be too popular with most citizens (i.e. voters).
I find many people love to express concern about the environment when pollsters come a calling. Not so much when they get the bill.
It's doable, but it is definitely going to cost everyone. The tariff would not be needed in the first place if low cost goods were not being imported from areas with lax environmental laws in to begin with.Questionable, since the internal market of the EU is big enough that it can/could sustain itself for the most part. Doing this in a country with 20 million is surely a bad idea. However when it is done with 450 million and new ones are coming this could be different story. In other words you can't do green transition if someone can just dump cheap products based on energy from coal. However if you don't do the transition you are messing up the environment and you need to import plenty of energy (if you have the cards that EU has). What in current geopolitical circumstance could be a problem since Russia has to be out of the picture. So this is more like a ambitious project than the crazy one. But that is impossible to understand if you don't distance yourself form traditional understanding of economics.
It's doable, but it is definitely going to cost everyone. The tariff would not be needed in the first place if low cost goods were not being imported from areas with lax environmental laws in to begin with.
Maybe China will straighten up and fly right, but I doubt it. Take steel for example. Now I don't know the state of the EU steel industry, but I suspect all those plants with 70's era technology cannot just be unshuttered to replace cheap Chinese steel, even if China does squat on the carbon front. So the EU will keep importing Chinese steel, add tariffs, pass those costs on to consumers, and the planet will be little better off for it. Although the government will now have another flow of revenue to spend. Will they sensibly reduce emissions with that cash? Unlikely. More likely they will start issuing carbon rebates when unhappy voters start clamoring for new governments that will reduce the cost of living.
But I'm a cynic, so we'll see. We'll have to revisit this subject 3-5 years down the road to see how the old CBAM tariff is doing, and if carbon emissions are down any (or increasing at a slower rate even).
Also, look for the trend towards right wing governments to continue (although this will just be another log on that fire).