SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
group of seven
'Our Leaders Are Not Leading': Groups Decry Yet Another G7 Climate Failure
"If these embattled leaders want to leave a lasting legacy, they need to heed the will of voters demanding a safe environment and climate," one campaigner asserted.
Jun 14, 2024
As the Group of Seven summit wrapped up Friday in Italy, climate defenders condemned G7 leaders for their continued failure to take meaningful action to combat the worsening planetary emergency.
Taking aim at what critics called the G7 leaders' largely empty pledge to undertake "concrete steps to address the triple crisis of climate change, pollution, and biodiversity loss," 350.org U.S. campaigns manager Candice Fortin lamented that "yet another meeting ends without real commitments to revert the situation rich countries like the U.S. put us in."
"As COP29 approaches and the world deals with worsening climate impacts, we can't afford to waste more time," Fortin said, referring to the United Nations Climate Change Conference scheduled to take place in Baku, the capital of Azerbaijan—a major fossil fuel-producing nation—in November. COP29 is set to be chaired by a former oil executive.
"If the U.S. wants to pride itself on being a 'world leader,' it needs to show how it will pay its climate debt to climate-vulnerable countries that bear the most significant climate impacts without the necessary funds for adaptation," Fortin added.
While G7 governments hailed their recent agreement to phase out existing unabated coal power generation in energy systems during the first half of the 2030s, critics took issue with the policy's timeline and banks' continued financing of fossil fuels.
"Our leaders are not leading. In the hottest 12 consecutive months of recorded human history, our leaders are failing us,''
argued Bronwen Tucker, Oil Change International's public finance lead. "G7 countries are adopting an inadequate coal phaseout date and endorsing increased fossil gas production, sending a terrible signal at a time when countries should be focusing on accelerating the phaseout, not delaying it."
Tucker continued:
G7 leaders can't say they're committed to a livable climate while expanding and bankrolling the fossil fuel industry at home and abroad. At the same time, these rich countries should not be congratulating themselves for delivering $100 billion for climate finance two years too late. Trillions are needed to cover climate damages and the G7's finance was largely provided as loans which only worsens unjust debts.
"The G7 must end the billions of dollars in taxpayer finance still flowing to fossil fuel projects abroad and fund the buildout of affordable renewable energy on fair terms," Tucker asserted. "If their oil and gas expansion plans are allowed to proceed, it will lock in climate chaos and an unlivable future."
Greenpeace International climate politics expert Tracy Carty said in a statement that "if these embattled leaders want to leave a lasting legacy, they need to heed the will of voters demanding a safe environment and climate."
"Taxing the billions of dollars in profits of the fossil fuel industry to fund climate action at home and abroad could be their stake in history and a win for people and planet," Carty continued. "G7 leaders need to seize the moment ahead of the U.N. climate talks in Baku and show they will lead the transition away from fossil fuels and build trust they will significantly increase climate finance support to developing countries."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Scandalous': G7 Nations Spend 62 Times More on Military Than Humanitarian Aid
"More must be invested in eradicating poverty and fostering peace and development, not fueling war and destruction," said one campaigner.
Jun 14, 2024
Despite historic levels of forced displacement due to armed conflict, Group of Seven member countries have increased their military expenditures to record highs while they slash spending on humanitarian aid for people affected by wars that these powerful nations often started or stoked, an analysis published Friday revealed.
According to Birmingham, England-based Islamic Relief Worldwide, military spending by G7 members Canada, France, Italy, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States—which wrapped up Friday in Puglia, Italy—rose to $1.2 trillion last year, the overwhelming bulk of that amount attributable to the U.S.' $886.3 billion Pentagon budget.
"Too many governments are putting far more resources towards acquiring weapons of war than helping those suffering the deadly impacts of conflict."
That's a 7.3% increase over 2022 levels, and 62 times what those countries spent on all humanitarian aid in response to wars and disasters.
"From Gaza to Sudan, Ukraine to Myanmar, we see millions of lives destroyed by war," Islamic Relief head of global advocacy Shahin Ashraf said in a statement. "The humanitarian needs today are greater than ever before, so it's scandalous that many wealthy G7 nations are cutting aid while spending more than ever before on weapons."
It's not just the G7. According to this year's Stockholm International Peace Research Institute annual analysis, global military spending increased 6.8% to a record $2.4 trillion in 2023.
"Too many governments are putting far more resources towards acquiring weapons of war than helping those suffering the deadly impacts of conflict," Ashraf asserted. "More must be invested in eradicating poverty and fostering peace and development, not fueling war and destruction."
Islamic Relief Worldwide said:
While some of the discussions at the G7 summit focus on restricting immigration into rich developed nations, most people displaced by conflict remain in war-torn countries and impoverished neighbouring countries. After more than a year of brutal war, Sudan is now the world's biggest displacement crisis with over 10 million people—about a quarter of the population—now forced from their homes. The vast majority of people fleeing the violence in Sudan remain in the country, with many receiving aid from local communities, youth groups, and mosques.
"As rich nations increasingly shut their borders and cut aid, in places like Sudan it is heartening to see the generosity of some of the world's poorest communities taking displaced people into their homes and sharing their food and water with them," said Ashraf. "But they need more international support, especially from the wealthiest countries."
Another analysis published ahead of the G7 summit by Oxfam International revealed that just 3% of the seven countries' 2023 military expenditures would be enough to "help end world hunger and solve the debt crisis in the Global South."
Keep ReadingShow Less
The Perils and Promise of the Emerging Multipolar World
The world economy is experiencing a deep process of economic convergence, according to which regions that once lagged the West in industrialization are now making up for lost time.
Jun 06, 2024
The World Bank’s release on May 30 of its latest estimates of national output (up to the year 2022) offers an occasion to reflect on the new geopolitics. The new data underscore the shift from a U.S.-led world economy to a multipolar world economy, a reality that U.S. strategists have so far failed to recognize, accept, or admit.
The World Bank figures make clear that the economic dominance of the West is over. In 1994, the G7 countries (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, U.K., U.S.) constituted 45.3% of world output, compared with 18.9% of world output in the BRICS countries (Brazil, China, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Iran, Russia, South Africa, United Arab Emirates). The tables have turned. The BRICS now produce 35.2% of world output, while the G7 countries produce 29.3%.
As of 2022, the largest five economies in descending order are China, the U.S., India, Russia, and Japan. China’s GDP is around 25% larger than the U.S.’ (roughly 30% of the U.S. GDP per person but with 4.2 times the population). Three of the top five countries are in the BRICS, while two are in the G7. In 1994, the largest five were the U.S., Japan, China, Germany, and India, with three in the G7 and two in the BRICS.
Despite the new global economic realities, the U.S. security state still pursues a grand strategy of “primacy,” that is, the aspiration of the U.S. to be the dominant economic, financial, technological, and military power in every region of the world.
As the shares of world output change, so too does global power. The core U.S.-led alliance, which includes the U.S., Canada, U.K., European Union, Japan, Korea, Australia, and New Zealand, was 56% of world output in 1994, but now is only 39.5%. As a result, the U.S. global influence is waning. As a recent vivid example, when the U.S.-led group introduced economic sanctions on Russia in 2022, very few countries outside the core alliance joined. As a result, Russia had little trouble shifting its trade to countries outside the U.S.-led alliance.
The world economy is experiencing a deep process of economic convergence, according to which regions that once lagged the West in industrialization in the 19th and 20th centuries are now making up for lost time. Economic convergence actually began in the 1950s as European imperial rule in Africa and Asia came to an end. It has proceeded in waves, starting first in East Asia, then roughly 20 years later India, and for the coming 20-40 years in Africa.
These and some other regions are growing much faster than the Western economies since they have more “headroom” to boost GDP by rapidly raising education levels, boosting workers’ skills, and installing modern infrastructure, including universal access to electrification and digital platforms. The emerging economies are often able to leapfrog the richer countries with state-of-the-art infrastructure (e.g., fast intercity rail, 5G, modern airports and seaports) while the richer countries remain stuck with aging infrastructure and expensive retrofits. The IMF’s World Economic Outlook projects that the emerging and developing economies will average growth of around 4% per year in the coming five years, while the high-income countries will average less than 2% per year.
It’s not only in skills and infrastructure that convergence is occurring. Many of the emerging economies, including China, Russia, Iran, and others, are advancing rapidly in technological innovations as well, in both civilian and military technologies.
China clearly has a large lead in the manufacturing of cutting-edge technologies needed for the global energy transition, including batteries, electric vehicles, 5G, photovoltaics, wind turbines, fourth generation nuclear power, and others. China’s rapid advances in space technology, biotechnology, nanotechnology, and other technologies is similarly impressive. In response, the U.S. has made the absurd claim that China has an “overcapacity” in these cutting-edge technologies, while the obvious truth is that the U.S. has a significant under-capacity in many sectors. China’s capacity for innovation and low-cost production is underpinned by enormous R&D spending and its vast and growing labor force of scientists and engineers.
Despite the new global economic realities, the U.S. security state still pursues a grand strategy of “primacy,” that is, the aspiration of the U.S. to be the dominant economic, financial, technological, and military power in every region of the world. The U.S. is still trying to maintain primacy in Europe by surrounding Russia in the Black Sea region with NATO forces, yet Russia has resisted this militarily in both Georgia and Ukraine. The U.S. is still trying to maintain primacy in Asia by surrounding China in the South China Sea, a folly that can lead the U.S. into a disastrous war over Taiwan. The U.S. is also losing its standing in the Middle East by resisting the united call of the Arab world for recognition of Palestine as the 194th United Nations member state.
Yet primacy is certainly not possible today, and was hubristic even 30 years ago when U.S. relative power was much greater. Today, the U.S. share of world output stands at 14.8%, compared with 18.5% for China, and the U.S. share of world population is a mere 4.1%, compared with 17.8% for China.
The trend toward broad global economic convergence means that U.S. hegemony will not be replaced by Chinese hegemony. Indeed, China’s share of world output is likely to peak at around 20% during the coming decade and thereafter to decline as China’s population declines. Other parts of the world, notably including India and Africa, are likely to show a large rise in their respective shares of global output, and with that, in their geopolitical weight as well.
We are therefore entering a post-hegemonic, multipolar world. It too is fraught with challenges. It could usher in a new “tragedy of great power politics,” in which several nuclear powers compete—in vain—for hegemony. It could lead to a breakdown of fragile global rules, such as open trade under the World Trade Organization. Or, it could lead to a world in which the great powers exercise mutual tolerance, restraint, and even cooperation, in accord with the U.N. Charter, because they recognize that only such statecraft will keep the world safe in the nuclear age.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular