By ZHOU JIN | chinadaily.com.cn | Updated: 2023-04-11 00:02
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin speaks at a press conference in Beijing, China, April 10, 2023. [Photo/fmprc.gov.cn]
China is not the source of "debt traps" for African countries, but a partner that helps those nations get out of poverty traps, Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said on Monday.
Wang made the remark when commenting on recent criticism from United States Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and World Bank President David Malpass, who both accused China of being a barrier to African countries' debt relief.
The spokesman rejected the accusations as groundless, saying that they are a "narrative trap" fabricated by Western politicians in an attempt to disrupt cooperation between China and developing countries.
These "tricks" have been seen through by developing countries and the international community, he said at a regular news conference.
China attaches high importance to and actively helps African countries deal with debt issues, and has also made the biggest contributions to the Group of 20 Debt Service Suspension Initiative, Wang said.
He cited a report released this week by Johns Hopkins University that said China had fulfilled its role "fairly well" as a responsible G20 stakeholder.
According to the available data, Chinese creditors accounted for 30 percent of all claims and contributed 63 percent of debt service suspensions in the countries that participated in the initiative, the report said.
Nigeria's Vice-President Yemi Osinbajo said last month that the preoccupation of Western governments and media with the so-called "China debt trap" might be an overreaction, and added that most African countries are rightly unapologetic about their close ties with China.
Africa needs the loans and infrastructure that China provides and the country shows up where and when the West will not, or is reluctant to, he said.
Wang said China has been committed to providing support for the economic and social growth of developing countries, including African nations, and has carried out investment and financing cooperation with those countries on the basis of equality and mutual benefit.
World Bank data shows that three-quarters of external debt in African countries is held by multilateral financial institutions and commercial creditors. The debt held by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund accounts for nearly 70 percent of the total amount held by multilateral financial institutions, according to Wang.
Noting that the US is the biggest shareholder in the World Bank and the IMF, Wang urged Washington to step up efforts to promote greater participation of multilateral financial institutions and commercial creditors in handling Africa's debt issues.
In another development, Wang on Monday expressed firm opposition to a visit by India's Home Minister Amit Shah to Zangnan in the south of China's Tibet autonomous region.
The visit violated China's territorial sovereignty, and is not conducive to the peace and tranquillity of the border region, Wang said.
http://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/20230 ... b9528.html
********
US uses Taiwan as pawn for war on China
While the U.S.-NATO war against Russia in Ukraine continues unabated, the U.S. is preparing at breakneck speed for war with China, using Taiwan as the excuse. Taiwan, like Ukraine, is a pawn. The military and economic threats on both China and Russia are a desperate bid to quash the emergence of a multipolar world.In the following article, which originally appeared in Workers World, Sara Flounders, a contributing editor to the newspaper and a member of our advisory group, unmasks and dissects the US plans for war against China, notably with Taiwan as a pretext.
Sara notes that, “Taiwan, like Ukraine, is a pawn. The military and economic threats on both China and Russia are a desperate bid to quash the emergence of a multipolar world.” She proceeds to outline how, “US imperialist hegemony is being challenged from every side,” citing de-dollarization, the strength of China’s economy, its position in international trade, and the Belt and Road Initiative.
“China,” she notes, “and a growing number of countries are in an increasingly stronger position to resist the U.S.’s unequal demands. Countries with three-quarters of the world’s population refused to go along with sanctions on Russia. Will they be willing to accept US sanctions on China?”
Sara explains that, “Taiwan’s trade with China is far bigger than its trade with the US. Mainland China and Hong Kong accounted for 42% of Taiwan’s exports last year, while the US had only a 15% share, according to official Taiwan data. For Taiwan’s imports, mainland China and Hong Kong again ranked first with a 22% share. The US only had a 10% share, ranking behind Japan, Europe and Southeast Asia. South Korea and Japan have greater trade levels with China than with the US.” For US imperialism, the problem is how to make countries and regions in the Asia-Pacific act against their own economic interests.
Explaining the US military moves in some detail, Sara writes that the US is frantically seeking to stop China’s economic rise by militarily encircling it, aiming to create an Asian version of NATO. In its drive to find an excuse for war, the US is reversing the One China policy to which it has committed over the last 50 years.
Her article ends with the militant call: We must mobilize! US hands off China!
U.S. imperialist hegemony is being challenged from every side. De-dollarization among major economies of the Global South is a component of trade agreements among the powerful emerging economies of China, Russia, Iran, Brazil, India, Malaysia and South Africa. Even Saudi Arabia, a reactionary bulwark of U.S. domination in West Asia, is willing to seek new agreements with Iran and is interested in trading their oil in Chinese yuan renminbi, rather than be wholly dependent on U.S. dollars.
Even more threatening to U.S. capitalists is that China is developing trade relations with the 40 countries sanctioned by Washington, and they are doing this by barter and direct currency exchanges. This works around the almighty dollar, the international reserve currency that has dominated global trade and capital flows for 100 years.
These are not the first efforts to find a replacement to U.S. dollar domination. There is no crime that U.S. imperialism wouldn’t commit to preserve the U.S. dollar. Both oil rich Iraq, which proposed a currency based on the dinar in 1990 and Libya, which attempted an African currency in 2010 found they had fabulous resources but no protection from U.S. bombs. Their efforts at sovereignty led to their brutal destruction by U.S. imperialism.
The aspiration to break free of U.S. corporate control is today being challenged by many more countries. China is a more formidable opponent.China is surpassing the U.S. in gross domestic product and the development of its economy. China is the top trading partner to more than 120 countries and the largest external trading partner of the European Union.
The ability of China to provide trillions of dollars in development funds through the Belt and Road Initiative means that developing countries can now have more favorable trade relations without the International Monetary Fund and World Bank’s onerous conditions. This option is a threat to every U.S. bank and U.S.-controlled financial institution.
China and a growing number of countries are in an increasingly stronger position to resist the U.S.’s unequal demands. Countries with three-quarters of the world’s population refused to go along with sanctions on Russia. Will they be willing to accept U.S. sanctions on China?
All of this poses a threat to the hegemony of the U.S., the center of world imperialism. The capitalist system is relentlessly driven to expand or die — and now it is shrinking. For multibillionaires and corporate CEOs, this is a life-or-death crisis.
Provoking conflict to retain hegemony.
U.S. strategy is to sabotage Taiwan and its trade with China, by creating conflicts and imposing sanctions. These desperate efforts to reverse Washington’s declining global position will disrupt the global economy.
Presently Taiwan’s trade with China is far bigger than its trade with the U.S. Mainland China and Hong Kong accounted for 42% of Taiwan’s exports last year, while the U.S. had only a 15% share, according to official Taiwan data.
For Taiwan’s imports, mainland China and Hong Kong again ranked first with a 22% share. The U.S. only had a 10% share, ranking behind Japan, Europe and Southeast Asia. South Korea and Japan have greater trade levels with China than with the U.S. (cnbc.com)
The problem U.S. imperialists face is how to reverse this — how to force countries in the Asia Pacific to act against their own economic interests.
The U.S.-NATO war in Ukraine was a strategy to impose sanctions on Russia and to break the EU’s trade with Russia. In 2020 the EU was Russia’s first trading partner; 36.5% of Russia’s imports came from the EU, and 37.9% of its exports went to the EU. The EU was the largest investor in Russia. Russian trade with the EU has since been reduced to 5.8%. (tinyurl.com/55fh6j6f)
The U.S.-NATO war in Ukraine has failed to destabilize and collapse Russia, as the U.S. had hoped. But the war devastated the economy of Ukraine and disrupted the EU, which went along with the sanctions demanded by the U.S. The economies of Europe have suffered greatly. Inflation, recession and supply-chain chaos due to sanctions have harshly cut into the EU’s own markets and increased European dependence on the U.S.
U.S. threats and escalating demands to sanction China will severely damage the economies of Taiwan, Japan, South Korea and the Philippines.
To force high-tech companies to decouple from the People’s Republic of China, U.S. imperialism needs a political-military crisis with China. Every U.S. plan for sanctions on China starts with a manufactured crisis over Taiwan.
The U.S. is frantically seeking to stop China’s economic rise by militarily encircling it. Utilizing Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Australia and the Philippines, U.S. strategy is to create an Asian version of NATO, a military alliance to disrupt economic cooperation in Asia. This is a terrible danger to the people of Taiwan and the People’s Republic of China. Throughout the entire region, peoples face a U.S.-created crisis that can destroy their lives and futures and ruin their economies.
Poor and working people in the U.S. will be forced to pay for this war, as they pay for every war with steadily deteriorating conditions.
China is one!
In the drive to find an excuse for war, the U.S. government is reversing a position Washington had agreed to and signed more than 50 years ago with China.
China has spent decades developing its economic relations with Taiwan; trade between the island and mainland China has grown, along with political and cultural relations. To counter this effort at peaceful reunification, the Pentagon is turning Taiwan into a porcupine, bristling with billions of dollars in military equipment. Another $10 billion in military aid was just promised.
Washington is openly violating three different signed agreements — joint communiques it made with China in 1972, 1979 and 1982 — affirming that China is one country and Taiwan is a province of China. Such commitments are the political foundation for China’s diplomatic relationship with the U.S. and with every country.
China has not threatened Taiwan. China has only asserted what is recognized by the U.S. and 181 other countries, as well as the United Nations and all international bodies: Taiwan is part of China. Taiwan’s own constitution affirms that Taiwan is a province of China. It is the U.S. that has broken its promises not to interrupt China’s efforts to reunify the island peacefully.
Instead of adherence to the One-China Policy, dangerous mobilization is taking place on military and political levels. The recent manufactured crisis over a Chinese hot air balloon followed by Congressional hearings grilling the CEO of TikTok represent new levels in psychological war propaganda, designed to convince the U.S. population that China is an enemy and a threat.
Democrats and Republicans try to outdo each other condemning China. Taiwan was referred to as “the beating heart to our Indo-Pacific strategy” by Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Menendez, a Democrat. (foreign.senate.gov)
Military preparations against China include U.S. pressure for Japan to double its military budget and become the third largest military in the world, in violation of the Japanese constitution.
A new agreement, announced Feb. 2, granted the U.S. military access to nine bases in the Philippines to counter China. Foreign bases are in direct violation of the Philippine constitution. In 1992 a massive peoples’ movement forced the U.S. to close its bases in the Philippines.
More ominously, in early February four-star Air Force Gen. Michael Minihan, head of the Pentagon’s Air Mobility Command, in a “leaked memo” predicted war with China over Taiwan in two years. Gen. Minihan oversees 107,000 airmen and 1,100 cargo, tanker and transport planes. The memo includes training, drills and preparations for war in 2025 and specific orders: “Defeat China” and “Be prepared for deployment at a moment’s notice.” (tinyurl.com/2a7ctjae)
Another threat was the largest-ever launch from a U.S. base of huge C-17 transport aircrafts Jan. 5, as training for a naval blockade of China. This is the opening round of a massive missile-and-air assault on mainland China — the Pentagon’s Air-Sea Battle strategy.
The U.S. Pacific Fleet consists of approximately 200 ships and submarines, nearly 1,200 aircraft and more than 130,000 sailors and civilian workers. The U.S. regularly sends naval patrols and destroyers through the 180-km-wide Taiwan Strait (about 112 miles).
China condemned these arrogant displays of U.S. military power as reckless, provocative and meant to apply pressure.
Taiwan’s ‘president’ visits U.S.
Inflated media coverage greeted the visit to New York City of Tsai Ing-wen, the so-called “president” of Taiwan. (“President” is in quotes because Taiwan is recognized as an island province of China and not as an independent country by the U.N. and 181 countries.)
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning objected to this Taiwanese delegation visit and the receptions held in Tsai Ing-wen’s honor, as a violation of the One-China Policy: “China firmly opposes any form of official interaction between the U.S. and Taiwan.” Mao Ning said the U.S. was “conducting dangerous activities that undermine the political foundation of bilateral ties.” (abcnews.go.com)
Xu Xueyuan, charge d’affaires at the Chinese embassy in Washington, said China does not accept the U.S. claims that Tsai’s trip is merely a “transit,” saying “the so-called ‘transit’ is merely a disguise to her true intention of seeking breakthrough and advocating Taiwan independence” and accuses the U.S. of allowing Tsai to “make a splash” and of arranging her meeting with House Speaker Kevin McCarthy. (nbcnews.com)
While in New York City, Tsai Ing-wen was treated to a banquet and “Global Leadership” award from the Hudson Institute, an influential, right-wing think tank funded in part by Taiwan. The Brookings Institution, the Center for American Progress, the Center for a New American Security, the Center for Strategic and International Studies and the Hudson Institute actively promote expanded arms sales and trade agreements with Taiwan and anti-China propaganda. These five prominent think tanks receive substantial funding from Taiwan.
The visit reinforces Tsai Ing-wen’s standing, at a time when she is in a seriously weakened political position. She was forced to resign as head of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party of Taiwan, after her party suffered a major setback in local elections in November, which was the DPP’s worst performance since its founding in 1986. The election debacle confirms that the DPP’s aggressive stand on independence is losing support in Taiwan.
Tsai Ing-wen’s visit to Guatemala and Belize, two of only 13 remaining countries that recognize Taiwan, was overshadowed by the Honduran Foreign Ministry’s announcement that its government now recognized “only one China in the world” and that Beijing “is the only legitimate government that represents all of China.”
The statement added that “Taiwan is an inalienable part of Chinese territory, and as of today the Honduran government has informed Taiwan of the severance of diplomatic relations, pledging not to have any official relationship or contact with Taiwan.” (pbs.org) Honduras is the ninth diplomatic ally Taiwan has lost since the pro-independence Tsai first took office in May 2016.
China has held a consistent, well-understood position on its sovereignty and territorial integrity that is recognized internationally in all world bodies. China has repeatedly asserted its right to resolve this unfinished national reunification. China’s long-held position is that cooperation, trade and development can overcome differences; it is the only way forward.
The preparation of U.S. imperialism for a possible war with China — surrounding it with military bases and nuclear weapons and military vessels — is a highly dangerous provocation. U.S. wars are for corporate profit.
We must mobilize! U.S. hands off China!
https://socialistchina.org/2023/04/10/u ... -on-china/
The sudden arrival of a cold war with China
AS SOMEONE who lived through the first cold war against the Soviet Union and its allies, and who was in some important respects politically shaped by it — including in terms of my decades-long opposition to nuclear weapons — I recognise all too well the depressing signs of a new cold war against China, being fomented by the US, Britain and a handful of other countries.In the following article, which we are pleased to reprint from the Morning Star, Ken Livingstone, former Mayor of London (2000-2008), denounces the new cold war that has been instigated against China, in which Britain has once again followed behind the United States.
Outlining some of the hostile measures taken by the UK against China, Ken notes how recent ex-Prime Minister Liz Truss had been set to formally declare China to be an enemy of Britain while current Prime Minister Rishi Sunak describes the country as a “challenge to the world order.”
In contrast, Ken writes: “The rise of China is one of the greatest events in world history in my lifetime. When I was born, life expectancy in China was under 40. Around 90 per cent of the population was illiterate. The country had been torn apart by a century of foreign aggression, invasion, warlordism and civil wars. Millions died every year from floods and famine.
“What a contrast to today’s China, which is on the cusp of overtaking the US as the world’s greatest economy – a change unseen in over a century. China’s life expectancy has already overtaken that of the US… This economic transformation is one that all decent people should welcome.”
Ken compares the present policies towards China with the “golden era” declared by Prime Minister David Cameron and Chancellor George Osborne as recently as 2015 and adds that when he was elected Mayor in 2000, “I was determined that London would develop positive relations with China.” He adds:
“We opened offices for London in Beijing and Shanghai, encouraged Stock Exchange listings, brought the annual celebration of Chinese New Year to Trafalgar Square, and expanded co-operation in a whole range of sectors, such as fashion, design and the creative industries.”
Whilst such positive policies were broadly supported by successive Labour leaders: “Sadly, they now find little or no echo from Keir Starmer and his shadow foreign secretary David Lammy. Their political horizons seem confined to attempting to outdo the Tories as to who can be the most bellicose cold warrior.”
This establishment consensus is leading us into dangerous waters, such as the Aukus nuclear submarine deal with Australia and the United States. Britain is vastly increasing military spending at a time when, “an increasing number of people aren’t being forced to choose between heating and eating because they can’t afford either.”
Ken concludes: “Progressives in the labour movement need to… build the broadest possible alliance to reverse the slide to disaster.”
Here in Britain, we’ve seen:
● A thriving relationship with Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei scuppered at US insistence, leaving 5G infrastructure to be ripped out of our networks, increasing costs to the Treasury and leaving us in the broadband slow lane.
● A ban on the massively popular TikTok app on government devices.
● Attacks and threats to close Confucius Institutes, which play an invaluable role in lessening our educational deficit in the teaching of Chinese language and culture.
● Sanctions and refusal of investment from Chinese companies on dubious national security grounds, costing us jobs, markets and technical upskilling.
● A ban on the Chinese ambassador setting foot in the Palace of Westminster, instigated by a vociferous gang of right-wingers like Iain Duncan Smith.
Not surprisingly, all this, along with the attempts to blame China for the Covid pandemic from Donald Trump and his allies internationally, has led to an upsurge in racist attacks on members of Chinese and Asian communities.
Last year’s Conservative Party leadership contest became an unedifying race to the bottom, to which Rishi Sunak was dragged by Liz Truss. Had she not been ignominiously booted out of office in record time, Truss was set to formally declare China as an enemy of our country. For now, Sunak claims that China “is a country with fundamentally different values to ours and it represents a challenge to the world order.”
The rise of China is one of the greatest events in world history in my lifetime. When I was born, life expectancy in China was under 40. Around 90 per cent of the population was illiterate. The country had been torn apart by a century of foreign aggression, invasion, warlordism and civil wars. Millions died every year from floods and famine.
What a contrast to today’s China, which is on the cusp of overtaking the US as the world’s greatest economy – a change unseen in over a century. China’s life expectancy has already overtaken that of the US.
Going on World Bank figures, China has lifted some 800 million people out of poverty.
This economic transformation is one that all decent people should welcome.
The present new cold war against China stands in stark contrast to the situation just a few years ago. With the 2015 state visit of President Xi Jinping, PM David Cameron and his chancellor George Osborne declared that our relations had entered a “golden era.” Today, to even remotely echo their words is regarded as practically treasonous.
Twenty years ago, when I was elected London mayor in 2000, I was determined that London would develop positive relations with China. Whether as the world’s leading financial centre or as home to Europe’s largest Chinese community, this was a necessary and natural course of action for me.
Visiting China, it was clear that our counterparts there were equally invested in a thriving and mutually beneficial relationship. Of course, my policies were slated in the Tory press, but we pressed on.
We opened offices for London in Beijing and Shanghai, encouraged Stock Exchange listings, brought the annual celebration of Chinese New Year to Trafalgar Square, and expanded co-operation in a whole range of sectors, such as fashion, design and the creative industries.
The Daily Mail may not have liked it, but we were supported from the boardrooms of the City to the restaurants of Chinatown, and it brought benefits to every Londoner.
These are the policies that are needed today. Policies for peace and prosperity. Policies that were broadly supported by the most diverse range of Labour leaders, from Tony Blair through Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband to Jeremy Corbyn.
Sadly, they now find little or no echo from Keir Starmer and his shadow foreign secretary David Lammy. Their political horizons seem confined to attempting to outdo the Tories as to who can be the most bellicose cold warrior.
It is this new establishment political consensus that is leading to reckless adventures like the Aukus deal we have joined with Australia and the US.
This agreement, which will see Australia equipped with nuclear-powered submarines, will cost billions, flouts the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and heightens the danger of a catastrophic war with China, a nuclear power.
All this at a time when we face a cost-of-living crisis where an increasing number of people aren’t being forced to choose between heating and eating because they can’t afford either.
Where nurses and primary school teachers are among key workers increasingly reliant on food banks, which in turn are finding it increasingly difficult to meet the ever-growing demands placed on them.
Yet the government is committed to a massive increase in military spending levels that are already amongst the highest in the world.
And it is simply an obscene farce that, in this situation of huge economic difficulties, we should turn our backs on the huge opportunities offered by the Chinese market, in favour of squandering immense sums on nuclear arms, as part of stoking a potential conflict that would kill millions, would be utterly unnecessary, and which we couldn’t possibly win.
A cold war with China is against the interests of the British people, as is a new nuclear arms proliferation.
Progressives in the labour movement need to stand against them — and build the broadest possible alliance to reverse the slide to disaster.
https://socialistchina.org/2023/04/12/t ... ith-china/
***********
Dragon back terraces, China (Source: McKay Savage, Wikimedia commons)
How China can prevent climate catastrophe? Moving humanity toward global ecological civilization
By David Schwartzman (Posted Apr 11, 2023)
Climate catastrophe? Aren’t we already witnessing climate catastrophe? As the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report tells us, there is still a chance to keep warming at no more than the 1.5°C target, but tipping points to climate catastrophes much worse than we are witnessing now will kick in if this target is breached. According to Kevin Anderson, a climate scientist at Manchester University, this IPCC report is too optimistic and neglects the interests of most of humanity living in the global South. Anderson estimates there is a 50 percent chance of meeting the 1.5°C target if global carbon dioxide emissions are reduced to zero by 2040.1
It is now crystal clear that ongoing wars, in particular the Ukraine war, create huge obstacles to the global cooperation necessary for any chance of meeting the 1.5°C warming target. Please take note of the Science editorial of April 1, 2022, “To solve climate, first achieve peace,” which recognized this obstacle and called for the imperative cooperation of the United States and China to reach the goal of climate security.2 Following the lead of China’s peace plan, we should support the call for an immediate ceasefire in the Ukraine war, and for all parties involved to negotiate.3 China is now being recognized as the leading peace force in the world with the recent success in bringing about better relations between long-term enemies Iran and Saudi Arabia, a reduction in tensions to the dismay of the United States and Israel, and likewise a potential basis for more effective struggle against these two repressive regimes by their own citizens. Since conventional oil has the lowest greenhouse gas footprint of the fossil fuels (with coal and natural gas having the highest footprint, to be phased out first), we should recognize the potential of oil-producing countries such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Venezuela of extracting the minimum amount of conventional oil necessary as an energy source to rapidly build renewable energy technologies especially in the Global South, while phasing out global fossil fuels as quickly as possible, and at the same time earning revenues from such production for improving the quality of life of their own people.4
It is precisely in the Middle East that China can take an historic lead in promoting a renewable energy transition and confront the increasing climate threat. China is the world leader in green capital, actually creating renewable energy supplies, but this green capital is still coupled in the Chinese economy with powerful sectors dedicated to continued implementation and imports of fossil fuels, as well as an ambitious plan to build hundreds of new nuclear fission reactors.5 Can China emerge to fulfill its claim that its goal is a new ecological civilization, that is, become the global leader opening a global ecosocialist path?6 This contingency will likely only be realized with class struggle led by China’s working class and allies. How can China become the global leader for climate security? One example is the termination of China’s plan to build hundreds of nuclear reactors, the rapid phaseout of coal, and the accelerated creation of renewable energy supplies. In a new Belt and Road Initiative, China could build solar power in the Arabian and Saharan Deserts to supply electricity to the whole region and Africa, indeed the whole world, while powering direct air capture of carbon dioxide (DAC) and permanent burial of carbon as carbonates in the crust of Oman. DAC with permanent burial in the crust as carbonates is a carbon removal technology that will be imperative, along with restoring natural ecosystems and replacing industrial agriculture with agroecologies, given that the atmospheric carbon dioxide level must be brought down to below 350 parts per million and kept there as the ocean re-equilibrates with the atmosphere.7
Of course, unless global fossil fuel consumption is ended soon, at the same time as there is a significant buildup of renewable energy supplies, the 1.5°C warming target will be exceeded. Therefore, the enemy of humanity, militarized fossil capital and its political instruments, must be defeated by a transnational movement led by the working class and its allies, in particular Indigenous communities. Promoting a global Green New Deal (GND) with a progressively increased ecosocialist character is a viable strategy to defeat militarized fossil capital, and in its initial stages should capture truly green capital as an ally.8 But green capital is a problematic ally, since it is also a driver of extractivism with its negative impacts. Therefore, transnational class struggle must also confront green capital with the goal of minimizing these impacts, with full respect for the rights of the peoples impacted, notably Indigenous communities around the world and peoples in the Global South. There are already solutions available that can sharply reduce the negative impacts of extractive mining, particularly as renewable energy infrastructure replaces fossil fuels.9 The defeat of militarized fossil capital and an ecosocialist path forward will very likely require the emergence of a global subject with sufficient power to prevail.10 Likewise, the emergence of China as the global leader of struggle for climate security can inspire the transnational working class and its allies to champion a global GND to make this goal possible.
We should recognize China’s enormous achievement of lifting hundreds of millions out of poverty in just a few decades, bringing the Chinese people’s life expectancy to a global rank in 2020 of 45, with the United States ranking 51st, Cuba 49th.11 Hence, there is a strong basis for hoping that China, with its Communist Party in leadership, can lead an ecosocialist path forward for humanity in the next few decades, which is critical for any chance at meeting the 1.5°C warming target. The fate of 8 billion people on our planet literally rests in the hands of China’s workers, farmers, scientists, and engineers.
Notes
1. Kevin Anderson, “IPCC’s Conservative Nature Masks True Scale of Action Needed to Avert Catastrophic Climate Change,” The Conversation, March 24, 2023.
2. H. Holden Thorp, “To Solve Climate, First Achieve Peace,” SCIENCE 376, no. 6588 (March 31, 2022).
3. Patrick Wintour, “Chinese Peace Plan for Ukraine Greeted Cautiously by the West,” Guardian, February 18, 2023; “China’s Position on the Political Settlement of the Ukraine Crisis,” Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China, February 24, 2023.
4. David Schwartzman and Quincy Saul, “The Path to Climate Justice Passes Through Caracas,” Counterpunch, March 11, 2019.
5. “Beijing ‘Doubling Down on Fossil Fuels’; China’s CO2 Emissions Increase; Coal Production Growth,” Carbon Brief, March 17, 2022; Nick Ferris, “Weekly Data: China’s Nuclear Pipeline as Big as the Rest of the World’s Combined,” Energy Monitor, December 20, 2021.
6. David Schwartzman, “China and the Prospects for a Global Ecological Civilization,” Climate & Capitalism, September 17, 2019.
7. Douglas Fox, “Rare Mantle Rocks in Oman Could Sequester Massive Amounts of CO2,” Scientific American, July 1, 2021; Peter Schwartzman and David Schwartzman, “Can the 1.5 ℃ Warming Target Be Met in a Global Transition to 100% Renewable Energy?” AIMS Energy 9, no. 6 (2021): 1170–91.
“Surface Area in the Sahara Desert Required to Power the World with Solar Energy Only – World of Engineering,” China Solar Thermal Alliance, December 8, 2022. The China Solar Thermal Alliance is an ongoing initiative to build concentrated solar power in deserts. Note that the computed 23,398 terawatt-hour = 2.7 terawatt-year is about the annual global electricity consumption level, while the present primary global primary energy consumption level is 19 terawatt-year, which would require about 11 percent of the Sahara Desert. This could be reduced by siting concentrated solar power on other deserts including the Arabian Desert, along with oceanic wind farms and photovoltaics on roofs and floating platforms. Global energy needs will very likely require even more than 19 terawatts for climate adaptation and mitigation, see footnote 9.
8. David Schwartzman, The Global Solar Commons, the Future that Is Still Possible: A Guide for 21st Century Activists (Galesburg, Illinois: Solar Utopia.org Press, 2021).
9. Peter Schwartzman and David Schwartzman, The Earth Is Not for Sale: A Path Out of Fossil Capitalism to the Other World That is Still Possible (Singapore: World Scientific, 2019); David Schwartzman, “A Critique of Degrowth,” Climate & Capitalism, January 5, 2022.
10. David Schwartzman and Salvatore Engel-Di Mauro, “Prefiguration and the Emergence of the Global Subject,” Science & Society 86, no. 4 (2022): 564–83; Robert Latham, “Organizing Anticapitalist Internationalism in Contemporary and Historical Perspective,” Rethinking Marxism 34, no. 4 (2022): 449–68.
11. See footnote 6. World Bank Group Wikipedia, list of countries by life expectancy. The latest data for life expectancies will likely show even higher values for China and Cuba than the United States given the COVID deaths/population ratios of the three countries with the United States/China rate = 47.66, United States/Cuba = 4.13. “Mortality Analyses,” Johns Hopkins University & Medicine, accessed March 30, 2023.
https://mronline.org/2023/04/11/how-chi ... ilization/