A good 'framing' article by Friedman that's worth getting (restricted access).
Some quotes:
...................
Therefore, green is not just the new red, white and blue — the next great American national security project — it should also be the color, focus and cement of the Atlantic alliance in the 21st century.
...................
Margaret Beckett, just delivered a speech declaring that climate change “is not just an environmental problem. It is a defense problem. It is a problem for those who deal with economics and development, conflict prevention, agriculture, finance, housing, transport, innovation, trade and health.”
...................
However, for what I call “geo-greenism” — thinking about green in strategic terms — to become the new core of the alliance, European greens will have to become more “geo” and the U.S. government more “green.”
...................
“The Green Party has been extremely important for German society,” he said, helping to transform the post-Nazi society into a more liberal domain. But an antinuclear stance has been at the core of the party, and now that the German mainstream has embraced a green agenda, the Greens need to rethink nuclear energy. “The Green Party should redefine itself,” added Mr. Hogrefe. “In some fields they are very modern party. ... But concerning nuclear energy and ecology they are stubborn, not open enough to see what is happening around the globe.”
...................
One reason President Bush has failed to become the leader of the West is because he has failed to lead on green, which has become so important to all our allies.
...................
Ehmacer's thoughts on green as a central geopolitical issue that extends well beyond just climate change concerns?
Ehmacer's thoughts on green as a central geopolitical issue that extends well beyond just climate change concerns?
It already is for most governments other than ours and the America. Her line that Europeans need to be more global is just her being insulting. It's the US, and now Canada, sadly, that have refused to sign on to international agreements (or pulled out of them, in our case). Green is one of two geo-political forces of our time. Islamic issues being the other.
__________________
"Courage, my friends; 'tis not too late to build a better world."
-Tommy Douglas
-----------------------
"Never confuse the faith with the supposedly faithful."
courtesy of S*P
----------------------- http://www.wondercafe.ca
It already is for most governments other than ours and the America. Her line that Europeans need to be more global is just her being insulting. It's the US, and now Canada, sadly, that have refused to sign on to international agreements (or pulled out of them, in our case). Green is one of two geo-political forces of our time. Islamic issues being the other.
From a personal point of view, any accords, particularly those concerning greenhouse gases, that do not include China and India are pretty much worthless. Don't get me wrong, I think we, as Canadians, need to do things to clean up the environment and get away from dependency on oil. But, while we can diminish our contribution to things like greenhouse gases, China and India are going to add a heck of a lot more as their economies get geared up. (They represent about 40% of the total world population.)
It already is for most governments other than ours and the America. Her line that Europeans need to be more global is just her being insulting. It's the US, and now Canada, sadly, that have refused to sign on to international agreements (or pulled out of them, in our case). Green is one of two geo-political forces of our time. Islamic issues being the other.
That's still sort of seeing it through just the environmental lens, but the full article gets into it more. One of Friedman's ongoing issues is talking about getting the U.S. off foreign oil to free up its foreign policy (regardless of enviro impacts) and stop feeding money to the oil dictators, which connects to your second geopolitical force -- they can be seen as intertwined.
On the Euro-green side, the full article mentions nuclear (Germany, specifically) and genetically modified crops which are two specific issues on which the movement is more about moralising than helping the environment. I think those are valid points. And again, moving beyond the environment, they demonstrate that if this is a broad geo-political issue and not just a highly politicised environmental issue, it isn't just the U.S. approach that needs changing even if, relatively, it needs changing the most.
That's still sort of seeing it through just the environmental lens, but the full article gets into it more. One of Friedman's ongoing issues is talking about getting the U.S. off foreign oil to free up its foreign policy (regardless of enviro impacts) and stop feeding money to the oil dictators, which connects to your second geopolitical force -- they can be seen as intertwined.
How is it that we have been stating here, publicly, that this is the correct approach to true US security and basically been given the "you don't know what you are talking about" line from supporters of the current US administration... But now Friedman comes out and says it and everyone says... "oh yeah, that's right".
For the record...
Quote:
Originally Posted by da_jonesy
#2 Manhattan Project to develop petroleum replacement
Immediately I would start a “Manhattan” like project to develop an alternative to petroleum based technology. Hydrogen, Ethanol, whatever… On the same scale the Manhattan project was during the forties. Take the best and brightest minds, provide relatively unlimited resources and militarize the project.
The goal is to remove the US from the influence of the need for foreign energy sources. In the end, if the middle east wants to implode… let them.
Being the dominant economy in the world and having developed a petroleum alternative would only solidify the US domination of the world economy for the next century.
The point is... Friedman is entirely correct in stating that the key to US security is to eliminate its dependency on foreign oil. I would take it one step further and state that the key to US preeminence on the global stage would be to develop the replacement technology for oil... I fear for lack of real leadership, that this will not happen any time soon.
How is it that we have been stating here, publicly, that this is the correct approach to true US security and basically been given the "you don't know what you are talking about" line from supporters of the current US administration... But now Friedman comes out and says it and everyone says... "oh yeah, that's right".
I'm not sure who the "supporters of the current US administration" are but I'm just pointing out the article's discussion. I don't think Friedman's approach, from what I've read of it, is completely right; regardless of what you may assume. Thus I said it was a "framing" piece.
To me, it isn't just a matter of blowing money on a hope that something will be invented; long-term research into things like fusion is part of it. There is also some basic efficiency work and using technologies that are available now. Furthermore, I don't see the foreign policy implications as a panacea. Biofuels, if taken beyond a certain level, will make things very difficult and, of course, connect back into international GMO approaches. The oil dictators can also continue even if U.S. and EU consumption is declining.
To me, it isn't just a matter of blowing money on a hope that something will be invented; long-term research into things like fusion is part of it.
It isn't a matter of blowing money on a hope that something would be invented... There are known alternatives, what is required is a massive investment on making it happen.
I read the column in full this morning (hard copy), and the alternate energy movement is kind of under the radar at the moment. Worries abound in some circles (including Friedman's) that the Chinese will overtake the U.S. as far as "green" technologies, and they're probably right. Don't expect any changes during George's watch. He's too tied to his West Texas wildcatter days. While he gives lip service to oil addiction, them's just words.
Meanwhile, the American public seems to be getting the hint, and smaller cars are very popular. There's months-long waits for hybrids. Personally, I make every effort to walk or take a bus.
__________________
Apple stores visited: Soho, Garden City, Pasadena, San Francisco, 5th Avenue, Honolulu
Linear Mode
