Search

Begin New Search Topic Climate Change Political Geography United States of America

91. A Vision of the Future: The U.S. Intelligence Report “Global Trends 2040”

Author:
Marcin Andrzej Piotrowski
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Polish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
In April 2021, the U.S. intelligence community published the extensive report “Global Trends 2040: A More Contested World”. It analyses the main demographic, political, and strategic trends that will likely shape the world for the next two decades. The report will be intensively used by the Biden administration in the preparation of the new U.S. National Security Strategy and National Defense Strategy, as well as in new military doctrines. The “Global Trends” document reflects the main tendencies in American strategic thinking, such as the growing “Sinocentrism” and traditional U.S. attachment to transatlantic relations.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Climate Change, Intelligence, and Strategic Planning
Political Geography:
China and United States of America

92. The Impact of Climate Change on U.S. Foreign Policy and the National Interest

Author:
John Harbeson and Keith P. McCormick
Publication Date:
05-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
American Diplomacy
Institution:
American Diplomacy
Abstract:
Editor’s note: In September 2020 the DACOR Bacon House Foundation invited climate experts from government, science, diplomacy, the academy, and media as well as an audience of foreign affairs professionals to examine the current state of knowledge on climate change and its impacts on U.S. foreign policy and the national interest. A summary of the conference proceedings follows.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Climate Change, and Diplomacy
Political Geography:
North America, Global Focus, and United States of America

93. Climate Politics and the Crisis of the Liberal International Order

Author:
Felipe Leal Albuquerque
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Contexto Internacional
Institution:
Institute of International Relations, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro
Abstract:
The election of Donald Trump brought disarray to the climate change regime. The changes in what was up to then a promoter of the liberal international order (LIO) exacerbated existing tensions while creating new ones. This paper investigates how that challenge impacted the behaviours of Brazil, China and the European Union (EU) by comparatively analysing their dissimilar positions with respect to three indicators before and after Trump’s coming into power. These indicators are individual pledges and climate-related policies; approaches to climate finance; and the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities (CBDR-RC). The analysis first shows how the US started eroding the broader LIO and the climate change regime to then delve into the behaviours of the three respective key players concerning climate talks. I sustain that the EU, despite its inner divisions, is already counteracting Washington, whereas China is combining a pro-status quo position based on a rhetorical condemnation of the United States. Brazil, in turn, had a transition towards a climate-sceptic government, shifting from being a cooperative actor to abdicating hosting the COP25.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, Liberal Order, Multilateralism, and International Order
Political Geography:
China, Asia, Brazil, South America, North America, and United States of America

94. Sustainable Infrastructure Offers Opportunities for U.S. – Thai Cooperation

Author:
Courtney Weatherby
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
Courtney Weatherby, Deputy Director and Research Analyst for the Southeast Asia and Energy, Water, & Sustainability programs at the Stimson Center, explains that “Thailand’s forward-looking focus on climate resilience provides ample opportunities for bilateral collaboration with the United States.”
Topic:
Climate Change, International Cooperation, Bilateral Relations, and Infrastructure
Political Geography:
North America, Thailand, Southeast Asia, and United States of America

95. Climate Change: The Greatest National Security Threat to the United States

Author:
Anatol Lieven
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
Climate change presents threats to the United States and the wellbeing of its citizens that dwarf those from Russia, China, or Iran. U.S. government policies and priorities should be reoriented accordingly. The necessary policy changes are these: • U.S. strategy toward China should be crafted and focused with a view to making sure tensions between the two countries do not impede international action against climate change. A zero-sum relationship between the great powers will ensure continued prioritization of manageable military threats over existential climate perils. This is precisely the policy framework that must be superseded. • Spending on efforts to limit climate change and mitigate its effects should take precedence over military spending, especially on new, vast, and nonessential programs such as the upgrading of America’s nuclear forces, which are already much larger than nuclear deterrence requires. • International aid should be increased and redirected toward building resilience against climate change in endangered countries, especially, but not only, in Central America. • The United States should seek opportunities to work with China’s Belt and Road Initiative, BRI, to improve climate resilience in Asian and African countries. • The United States should maintain cooperation and trade with China in the area of renewable energy technology.
Topic:
Climate Change, International Cooperation, National Security, and Renewable Energy
Political Geography:
Global Focus and United States of America

96. Europe in the Age of Uncertainties

Author:
Mikael Barfod
Publication Date:
05-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
American Diplomacy
Institution:
American Diplomacy
Abstract:
Donald Trump has regularly chipped away at multilateralism during his three years in power: climate change, trade wars, immigration, withdrawal from international conflicts, ambiguity about defence alliances, and even suspension of the US budget for the World Health Organization, to mention a few. EU policy, on the other hand, has always supported the UN and the multilateral approach. A traditionally open and liberal EU has a clear self-interest in preserving multilateralism. Could the EU (as I have previously argued[1]) still take the lead in forming effective international alliances to reactivate and possibly even reform multilateral structures? How can Europe take “its destiny into its own hands” as Angela Merkel suggested recently? Well said, but she is retiring in a year and a half. And meanwhile, what has the coronavirus done to Europe’s destiny? Let’s look at today’s main challenges and opportunities.
Topic:
Climate Change, Immigration, Multilateralism, Trade Wars, and Donald Trump
Political Geography:
Europe and United States of America

97. The Point of No Return: The 2020 Election and the Crisis of American Foreign Policy

Author:
Thomas Wright
Publication Date:
10-2020
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Lowy Institute for International Policy
Abstract:
With the international order weakened by COVID-19, economic recession, and receding American leadership, the 2020 presidential election will be even more consequential than that of 2016. There is no reason to believe that President Trump will follow in the tradition of other Republican presidents and pursue a more multilateral and cooperative strategy in his second term. Emboldened and unconstrained, a second Trump administration could spell the end of the alliance system and the postwar liberal international order. A Biden administration would be a reprieve for the US-led international order, and will act on climate change, COVID-19, immigration, and multilateralism, while Biden will need to adjudicate internal debates on China, the Middle East, globalisation, and foreign economic policy.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Climate Change, Globalization, Elections, Economic Policy, Donald Trump, COVID-19, International Order, and Joe Biden
Political Geography:
China, Middle East, and United States of America

98. Managing US-China Rivalry in the Arctic: Small states can be players in great power competition

Author:
Luke Patey
Publication Date:
10-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS)
Abstract:
Many fear that strategic competition between the US and China threatens longstanding regional cooperation and stability in the Arctic. But if they recognise their own political and economic significance and work collectively, the Nordic states and Canada can still play an instrumental role in steering the region’s future away from confrontation. Recommendations: Recognise how US–China strategic competition represents a false binary for policy choices in the Arctic. Understand how economic connectivity provides room for manoeuvre against big power pressure. Encourage participation of non-Arctic states with similar economic and political norms on natural resource and infrastructure development.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Climate Change, Diplomacy, Environment, Oil, Power Politics, Gas, and Economy
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, Arctic, and United States of America

99. U.S. and China Climate Goals: Scenarios for 2030 and Mid-Century

Author:
Asia Society Policy Institute and Climate Analytics
Publication Date:
11-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Asia Society
Abstract:
In September 2020, President Xi Jinping announced new goals for China to reach carbon neutrality before 2060, as well as to strengthen its existing 2030 commitments under the Paris Agreement. With these announcements, China has signaled a move to join the European Union—as well as the United States under a Biden administration—in leading long-term climate action among the big emitters. Our analysis demonstrates that if China’s new long-term goal covers all greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and not just carbon dioxide (CO₂), this could bring the country within reach of the emissions reductions required by mid-century for its actions to be in line with the Paris Agreement’s long-term goal of limiting average global temperature increases to 1.5°C. However, if President Xi’s announcement is only meant to cover CO₂, then China would need to achieve carbon neutrality around 2050 for this to be compatible with the Paris Agreement.1 Either way, China’s short-term actions will also need to be quickly brought into line with its new long-term trajectory. This includes doing more than simply peaking CO₂ emissions before 2030 as President Xi foreshadowed. Instead, our analysis demonstrates that China would need to peak its emissions by 2025 and rapidly reduce these thereafter to be compatible with the Paris Agreement. This also implies a need for significant adjustments to the other quantifiable targets identified in China’s existing Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) under the Paris Agreement and the ramping up of action to achieve these. Reducing coal-fired power generation quickly and phasing it out entirely by 2040 would be an important step toward achieving this early peak and rapid reductions. Under the Trump administration, the United States has reneged on past climate action promises and rolled back existing policies resulting in an increase in emissions compared with the Obama administration. As a result, this report highlights that even under a Biden administration, the United States is likely to miss its previous 2025 target under the Paris Agreement. However, a Biden administration means that the United States now has the potential to reverse the Trump administration’s rollbacks and make a significant contribution to closing the Paris Agreement’s ambition gap in a new 2030 NDC. Indeed, by taking the initiative to reboot U.S. action in line with the Energy and Climate Package touted by President-elect Biden during his campaign, including its goal to reach net-zero emissions by 2050, U.S. emissions could be reduced substantially by 2030.2 For example, our analysis indicates that if the Biden campaign’s policies were to be fully implemented with the support of Congress (see below), and continue to be supported by strong subnational action, they could bridge more than half of the U.S. share of the global ambition gap by 2030 through reducing emissions by up to 38%–54% below 2005 levels (GHGs, including land use, land-use change and forestry)3. This would also reduce estimates for average global temperature increases in 2100 by 0.1°C, on top of the 0.2°C–0.3°C reduction achieved by China’s recent announcement. As this report shows, President-elect Biden’s plan to decarbonize the U.S. electricity system by 2035 would represent by far the biggest contribution to this effort and is in line with the Paris Agreement temperature goal. It would result in savings of ~1,350 MtCO₂ out of a total abatement potential of ~1,810 MtCO₂e [1,630–2,100] in 2030 across his Energy and Climate Package. However, this report also estimates that potentially only half of this potential could still be achieved through Executive Authority in the event of Congress not supporting action, although this estimate carries a large degree of uncertainty. We also outline how additional emissions reductions could come from action in other areas, including freight transport and industry—with the electrification of end-use sectors and green hydrogen important opportunities to achieve this. If the United States and China fully implement these ambitious goals and are able to achieve net-zero GHG emissions around mid-century, it would be a monumental step forward toward bringing the Paris Agreement goals within reach. It would also mean that for the first time more than 60% of the world’s emissions are in countries with a clear pathway to decarbonize their economies. However, achieving the goals will require bold action in all sectors of the economy, with an early coal phaseout being paramount for both countries.
Topic:
Climate Change, Carbon Emissions, Paris Agreement, and Decarbonization
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

100. Climate Diplomacy under a New U.S. Administration

Author:
Thom Woodroofe and Brendan Guy
Publication Date:
04-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Asia Society
Abstract:
The United States is the world’s second-largest greenhouse gas emitter. For that reason, the outcome of the U.S. presidential election in November will have an undeniable impact on the future of the global climate change regime. This is especially the case now that the United Nations’ COP26 Climate Change Conference has been postponed to 2021 as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Indeed, as Asia and the rest of the world consider whether and how to step up their levels of ambition as part of the five-year ratchet mechanism of the Paris Agreement, the United States has the potential to be either a catalytic force for that effort going into 2021 or an even stronger spoiler of the Agreement’s ongoing effectiveness at a crucial juncture. No country will be watching more closely than China. The 2014 U.S.-China Joint Announcement on Climate Change between President Barack Obama and President Xi Jinping proved to be the watershed moment in the lead-up to the Paris Agreement, as the two countries signaled for the first time that they would act in a coordinated manner to combat climate change. Whether the United States and China can recapture that spirit of shared ambition in the future will have ripple effects on the positions of other major emitters as well—especially India, Japan, and Australia, which may not enhance their own levels of ambition without a stronger indication of further action by the United States and China. While President Donald Trump has begun the process of withdrawing the United States from the Paris Agreement and rolled back domestic and international measures to combat climate change, it is clear that if a Democrat is elected president in 2020, they would make combating climate change a defining priority of their administration. Therefore, a clearer understanding of the specific approach that would underpin the climate diplomacy of a new Democratic president can provide greater reassurance to the international community as countries consider their own levels of ambition in the lead-up to COP26 and beyond.
Topic:
Climate Change, Diplomacy, Carbon Emissions, COVID-19, and Joe Biden
Political Geography:
China and United States of America