Author: wpc_editor

Sheikh Mohamed says the UAE will continue to honour its commitments and looks forward to hosting the world at Cop28.

President Sheikh Mohamed has pledged $50 billion to address climate change across the world after taking part in a meeting hosted by US President Joe Biden.

Sheikh Mohamed said the UAE had invested more than $50bn in renewable energy projects across 40 countries, and it plans to double that over the next decade.

He joined heads of state from 17 economies accounting for 80 per cent of global GDP, population and greenhouse gas emissions at an online meeting on Friday.

“I was pleased to participate in the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate hosted by President Biden and to emphasise the ongoing importance of peace, unity and meaningful collaboration as enablers of sustainable social and economic development,” Sheikh Mohamed wrote on Twitter.

“The UAE continues to honour its commitments on climate action and is on track to submit its revised NDC.”

NDC, Nationally Determined Contribution, is an action plan to cut emissions and adapt to climate change effects.

“We look forward to hosting the world at Cop 28 and accelerating progress on climate action through an inclusive, practical and integrated approach,” Sheikh Mohamed said.

Mariam Al Mheiri, Minister of Climate Change and Environment, said the $50bn investment highlighted the country’s commitment to addressing environmental concerns around the world.

“The UAE has joined the ranks of countries at the forefront of the fight against climate change,” said Ms Al Mheiri, who also serves as Minister of State for Food Security.

“We have issued environmental protection laws and strategies and rolled out relevant initiatives. We have also adopted a proactive approach to promoting clean energy solutions as the sustainable, alternative energy sources of tomorrow.”

The Emirates will host the 28th UN global climate talks in 2023.

Addressing leaders, Sheikh Mohamed acknowledged that climate change must be addressed by co-operation.

He said the UAE has long held the view that climate action is an opportunity to achieve new pathways for economic and social development, with a focus on practical solutions that can benefit all countries.

The UAE is stepping up its efforts to address climate change and speed up the global energy transition.

At the third virtual gathering of the Major Economies Forum under his presidency, Mr Biden urged countries to take collective action on climate, energy security and food security.

He also invited leaders to co-operate and ease these immediate effects by supporting initiatives that accelerate the clean energy transition and reduce the vulnerability of the food system to climate and supply-chain disruptions.

“His Highness Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed’s address to global leaders at MEF highlighted the need for unity, peace, stability and collaboration as key enablers for sustainable economic and social development, particularly as the world tackles global economic challenges, energy and food security, as well as resource scarcity,” Dr Sultan Al Jaber, Minister of Industry and Advanced Technology and special envoy for climate change, said after the meeting.

“His Highness’s statement highlighted the UAE’s long-standing history of and ongoing commitment to climate action, driven by the principles established by our Founding Father Sheikh Zayed.

“For more than 15 years, the UAE has demonstrated a proven track record in progressive climate action and multilateral co-operation, as well as playing a leading role in investing in renewable energy both domestically and internationally which have led to the UAE’s selection as the host country of Cop28 in 2023.”

The UAE was the first country in the region to sign and ratify the Paris Agreement and the first in the region to commit to an economywide reduction in emissions and announce a net zero by 2050 initiative.

The Emirates has also invested in renewable and clean energy, both domestically and internationally.

It is also the first in the region to use peaceful nuclear energy and is home to three of the largest and lowest-cost solar plants in the world.

Read the article on the website The National

https://www.thenationalnews.com/uae/government/2022/06/17/president-sheikh-mohamed-participates-in-climate-change-meeting-hosted-by-joe-biden/

In devastating testimony to a US Congressional hearing this month, a Syrian man known only as “the gravedigger” described the atrocities he witnessed when he was forced to work at a mass grave in Syria from 2011 to 2018.

His evidence — of trucks arriving twice a week with up to 600 bodies of the victims of torture, shelling and slaughter, and at least 40 bodies of civilians who had been executed in prison — is the final blow to those in the US who want to rehabilitate Bashar Assad, and to hopes of supplying gas to Lebanon through Syria.

Lebanon will plunge into darkness after the summer. The deal under which Iraq has supplied the country with a million tons of fuel oil over the past year expires soon, and Baghdad does not want to renew it. In the Lebanese parliament, despite the relative success of protest candidates at the election in May, the established elite will block any attempt to enact the reforms required by the IMF to trigger a desperately needed financial bailout.

The election delivered a fragmented parliament that cannot reach a consensus on anything. Though the protest groups are supposed to work as a bloc, they are divided on several issues, primarily Hezbollah’s weapons — which some want to tackle as a priority, while others see it as a regional issue and prefer to tackle the challenges that affect the day-to-day life of the average citizen. This division was shown in the vote for parliamentary Speaker, which resulted in Nabih Berri’s retention of the role.

The Lebanese elite had pinned their hopes on a deal signed last September for Egyptian natural gas to flow to Lebanon via the 20-year-old Arab Gas Pipeline through Jordan and Syria, but that would require the US to ease or lift sanctions imposed on the Assad regime in Syria under the Caesar Act — and the testimony of “the gravedigger” has buried those hopes.

In addition, the composition of the US Congress will probably change after the November mid-term elections, making it less likely that the “frozen conflict” policy — which indirectly includes a certain level of rehabilitation of Assad — will work. Advocates of this policy in Washington hoped that neutering the Caesar Act with so many exceptions as to make it devoid of content would be a shortcut to stabilizing Syria by accepting Assad as he is, but the new evidence against the Assad regime makes that impossible.

Meanwhile Jordan, which had been lobbying the US government to accept Assad, has changed its position after pro-Iran Assad forces were caught smuggling drugs into the country. As for the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces, the Assad regime has been displacing and persecuting the Kurds for decades and will not give them the autonomy they want, and negotiations with Damascus have been fruitless. The SDF has asked the regime to protect the northeast and use its air defenses against an imminent military incursion by Turkey, but the regime does not want to confront Turkish forces — so the entire premise of agreement between the regime and the SDF falls apart. Therefore, the only remaining viable US policy is to maintainsanctions on the Assad regime and hope that “maximum pressure” will one day bring it down.

None of this is of any comfort to a Lebanese elite that is to a large extent linked to the Assad regime. The political class that has been resourceful in blackmailing the international community to keep itself afloat is running out of options. Hezbollah had hoped that gas via Syria would generate enough electricity to appease popular discontent, but the US is now more likely to enforce the Caesar Act than to weaken it.

Another possible lifeline is the extraction of gas from disputed fields in the Mediterranean, but that is a long shot. Viable extraction takes years, so even if the maritime border dispute with Israel is resolved, it is not a solution to Lebanon’s immediate problems.

Lebanon’s political elite are trying by all means to avoid the true reforms that would expose them. They are holding on to the status quo and banking on stop-gap solutions to prevent a total crash — for example, pricing goods and services in US dollars to extract as much hard currency as possible from the Lebanese expatriates who will come to visit their families this summer.

None of these crooked tricks will save Lebanon. It is important that the international community stands firm against the country’s political establishment, as accommodating them means the disintegration of the country. They might have a space to float during the summer, but a reckoning is coming in September and the US and the rest of the world should be ready to increase the pressure then.

In the end, either Lebanon’s corrupt political elite will crack, or the country will.

• Dr. Dania Koleilat Khatib is a specialist in US-Arab relations with a focus on lobbying. She is co-founder of the Research Center for Cooperation and Peace Building, a Lebanese NGO focused on Track II.

Read the article on the website of Arab News

https://www.arabnews.com/node/2105611

In a pair of related cases in which the decisions were announced June 13, the US Supreme Court upheld the challenge by Biden administration lawyers to three lower court rulings that entitled non-citizens to request a bail hearing while waiting for their objections to deportation to be resolved.

Because of these reactionary rulings, thousands of immigrants who pose no danger and no risk of flight, and who are asserting credible legal claims to remain in the United States, will remain jailed under medieval conditions as their cases wind through the backlogged and indifferent immigration courts.

In a third case decided on June 8, Border Patrol agents, perhaps the most thuggish of all federal law enforcement officers, were granted broad immunity from constitutionally based lawsuits for excessive force, brought by US citizens.

Antonio Arteaga-Martinez was arrested in 2018 after six years in the United States, while awaiting the birth of his first child, because he entered without documents. An asylum official found credible Arteaga-Martinez’s claim that he would face persecution and torture if deported to Mexico. Arteaga-Martinez sought to be reunited with his family while his petition for a “withholding of removal” order worked its way through the immigration courts, followed by the inevitable appeals.

Writing for eight of the nine justices, the leading “liberal,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor, reversed the lower court ruling requiring the federal government to provide a bail hearing within six months, at which an immigration judge could consider traditional criteria for releasing someone in exchange for the posting of a cash bond, such as danger to the public or risk of flight.

Sotomayor, indifferent to the devastating impact that indefinite imprisonment for immigration violations has on working families, based her decision on a pedantic, result-driven reading of the governing statute, which, she  added, could be changed. Sotomayor left open the option that Arteaga-Martinez could present a constitutional challenge on remand to the lower court.

Stephen Breyer dissented, writing that a 2001 case, Zadvydas v. Davis, resolved the issue, preventing the government from detaining immigrants indefinitely. If deportation was not likely in the “reasonably foreseeable future,” immigrants must be released absent some good reason to detain them, Breyer wrote. Arch-reactionary Clarence Thomas agreed that Zadvydas was controlling, but instead urged that the earlier decision be overruled.

The second case, Garland v. Aleman Gonzalez, involved two class actions filed on behalf of non-citizens jailed for more than six months. Both lower courts issued class-wide injunctions ordering bail hearings on the grounds that due process rights were being violated.

Reactionary Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority, did not just rule that the lower courts were wrong, but that the detainees had no right to bring the lawsuit in the first place. He wrote that federal law “generally prohibits lower courts from entering injunctions that order federal officials to take or to refrain from taking actions to enforce, implement, or otherwise carry out specified statutory provisions.”

Despite her simultaneous ruling against the statutory right to bail hearings, Sotomayor dissented, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Breyer, on the grounds that Alito’s ruling made it impossible for people to band together in challenging government misconduct that could not be challenged individually. She wrote that the ruling will “leave many vulnerable noncitizens unable to protect their rights.”

These reactionary rulings occurred against the background of a surge in arrests along the Mexican border. US Customs and Border Protection announced there were 239,416 arrests in May alone, a pace of nearly three million detentions annually. The mass arrests are fueled in large part by the Biden administration’s failure to terminate the unconstitutional Title 42 summary exclusion policy, instituted by the Trump administration, which effectively abolishes the right to asylum on the southern border of the United States.

In the previous week’s case, Egbert v. Boule, Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the right-wing majority, ruled against Robert Boule, a US citizen who runs the “Smuggler’s Inn,” a bed-and-breakfast that abuts the Canadian border.

Boule was a paid government informant who found himself at odds with Erik Egbert, a local Border Patrol agent. While arguing over a Turkish guest legally in the United States, Egbert threw Boule against a car and then slammed him to the ground. When Boule filed a formal complaint, Egbert used his government connections to retaliate by triggering a tax audit.

Boule filed a federal lawsuit under the well-known 1971 precedent Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents, which authorizes claims for money damages against federal officials based on constitutional violations. Right-wing justices have been attacking and restricting Bivens for decades. Although Thomas declined to straight-out overrule Bivens, his opinion reduced its scope to the approximate size of a postage stamp.

While the facts may seem somewhat trivial, the decision has far-reaching legal consequences.

Thomas referred at length to Alito’s 2020 decision in Hernández v. Meza, a sickening case where the Supreme Court “declined to create a damages remedy for an excessive-force claim against a Border Patrol agent who shot and killed a 15-year-old Mexican national across the border in Mexico.”

Although Bivens was decided two years after Chief Justice Earl Warren retired, it stands as one of the landmark decisions from the relatively brief period in the last century when the Supreme Court was popularly perceived as an institution that protected democratic rights. Thomas, speaking for the reactionary majority, wrote not only that Bivens would likely be decided differently today, but that “we are now long past the heady days in which this Court assumed common-law powers to create causes of action.”

Finally, Thomas wrote, “In Hernández, we declined to authorize a Bivens remedy, in part, because the Executive Branch already had investigated alleged misconduct by the defendant Border Patrol agent… Boule nonetheless contends that the Border Patrol’s grievance process is inadequate because he is not entitled to participate and has no right to judicial review of an adverse determination. But we have never held that a Bivens alternative must afford rights to participation or appeal… Thus here, as in Hernández, we have no warrant to doubt that the consideration of Boule’s grievance against Agent Egbert secured adequate deterrence and afforded Boule an alternative remedy.”

In other words, because a law enforcement agency rubber-stamps the actions of its employees, without “rights to participation or appeal,” there is no need for a lawsuit.

Read the article on the website World Socialist Website

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2022/06/18/auqu-j18.html

The Big Question is a regular feature in which Project Syndicate commentators concisely address a timely topic.

Tumbling equity markets and greater regulatory and public scrutiny are subjecting previously fast-growing green investments to what may be their toughest stress test yet. As fears of recession increase, many believe that an industry based on the promise of making money while doing good may be facing a reckoning.

In this Big Question, we ask Bertrand Badré, Karen Karniol-Tambour, Daniel Litvin, and Eva Zabey to assess the future of environmental, social, and governance investing.

Read the entire article in Project Syndicate.

The Time is Ripe to Reset U.S.-Saudi Relations.

Article by Richard Haass

Originally published at Project Syndicate

June 14, 2022

Several recurring debates animate foreign policy. The most basic is how much foreign policy to have, or how to strike the right balance between addressing domestic issues and problems abroad – in extreme form a debate between isolationism and internationalism. Then there are debates over tools (diplomacy versus sanctions or military force) and means (unilateralism versus multilateralism). In some countries, there are also debates over how foreign policy should be made and carried out; in the United States, for example, this debate involves the role and powers of Congress versus those of the president and the executive branch.

The two countries also collaborated against the Soviet Union during the Cold War, most notably in Afghanistan. Such common interests more often than not offset persistent differences over the Saudi government’s poor human rights record and the Kingdom’s hostility toward Israel.

President Joe Biden’s administration came into office a year and a half ago determined to alter this pattern and treat Saudi Arabia as a “pariah.” The US had concluded that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (widely known as MBS), the country’s de facto ruler and heir apparent to the throne, ordered the 2018 murder in Istanbul of Jamal Khashoggi, a prominent journalist and Saudi dissident who was a US permanent resident.

The Biden administration was also deeply opposed to Saudi participation in Yemen’s civil war, a conflict responsible for enormous human suffering. With oil prices low and supplies plentiful (in no small part because of much-expanded US output), and Biden determined to reduce the US footprint in the Middle East and focus on Asia, values appeared to take precedence over economic and security interests for the first time since US-Saudi relations developed in the 1940s.

Now, however, the Biden administration is reportedly considering a change of course, with Biden planning to visit the Kingdom and meet with MBS this summer. It is not difficult to figure out why. Energy prices have skyrocketed, owing to high demand associated with the post-pandemic economic recovery and the sanctions now in place against Russia, Iran, and Venezuela, all of which limit supply.

Higher energy prices are fueling inflation, which has emerged as the greatest economic and political challenge facing the Biden administration. Suddenly, Saudi Arabia, the rare oil producer with the ability to increase output relatively quickly, is a much-needed partner again.

Other factors are at work as well. Several Arab countries in recent years, including the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, have made peace with Israel. Bringing Saudi Arabia, host to the holiest sites in the Muslim world, into the peace camp would have great symbolic and political value. Also paving the way to a presidential visit is Saudi Arabia’s embrace of a cease-fire in Yemen.

What could ultimately prove to be the most important reason, though, is Iran. The US and Saudi Arabia find themselves sharing mounting concern over Iran’s nuclear and missile programs, as well as its support for violent groups in Yemen, Syria, and Lebanon. It is a classic case of the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Close cooperation between the Kingdom and the US will be essential if, as seems increasingly likely, diplomatic efforts to restore the 2015 nuclear pact with Iran fail – or fail to prevent Iran from achieving nuclear breakout with little or no notice.

Despite these new considerations, the Biden administration is treading carefully, as it is sure to be attacked for changing its stance. The good news is that there is no reason for the US to abandon its commitment to human rights. The Saudis need US support to stand up to Iran, and as a result can be pushed to improve their treatment of government critics, women, and religious minorities. The result will not be perfect, but the emergence of a more open society is achievable.

There is a larger lesson here. A successful foreign policy for a global power such as the US cannot choose values over interests. A pure, values-centered approach to Saudi Arabia – or toward China, Russia, Iran, or North Korea, for that matter – is unsustainable. The principal measure of a foreign policy is that it prioritizes the country’s security over its preferences. Realism must prevail over idealism. History suggests the ability of a country, even one as powerful as the US, to bring about political reform in other countries is limited.

But this does not mean that the US should ignore democracy and human rights. Foreign policy must reflect the country’s values if it is to enjoy public support and lead over time toward a more democratic world, which is more likely to be peaceful and prosperous and open to cooperation. It is always a matter of degree and of balance. What the Biden administration is contemplating in Saudi Arabia appears to be righting the balance.

Read the article on the site of Council on Foreign Relations.

The Ukraine war could lead to breakthroughs in nuclear power and natural gas, with Washington’s help.

Anesthésiés depuis des années par des taux d’intérêt négatifs, nous allons redécouvrir que la dette a un coût et des limites. Et que l’argent ne tombe pas du ciel.

Depuis deux ans, c’est la question à laquelle aucun responsable politique n’accepte réellement de répondre, mais qui les taraude tous, au fond : après les plans d’urgence, après les centaines de milliards d’euros déversés pour amortir les chocs de la pandémie hier, de la guerre en Ukraine aujourd’hui, que se passera-t-il lorsque l’argent cessera de tomber du ciel ? Lorsque, dans nos pays occidentaux trop longtemps anesthésiés par des taux d’intérêt négatifs, nous finirons par redécouvrir que la dette a un coût et des limites ?

Dans le cas français, l’interrogation est tout sauf rhétorique : voilà quarante ans, ou presque, que nous sommes dans l’illusion de l’argent magique, en vivant au-dessus de nos moyens et en creusant consciencieusement nos déficits. Et puisque les montants en jeu, stratosphériques, empêchent souvent de se représenter la menace qui se profile, en voici une traduction concrète : en dépit des discours récurrents sur la nécessité de diminuer le train de vie de l’Etat, de renouer avec une trajectoire financière “durable”, notre dette publique s’est alourdie de 1660 milliards d’euros au cours des trois derniers quinquennats, soit près de 100 000 euros par travailleur actif…

On peut, comme Jean-Luc Mélenchon et son orchestre, continuer à jouer sur le pont du Titanic. On peut aussi se dire, en voyant les taux d’intérêt européens repartir à la hausse, que la fête est bien finie et que nous n’avons plus beaucoup de temps pour éviter la catastrophe.

Voilà un peu plus d’un an, dans les colonnes de L’Express, l’ancien président de la Banque centrale suisse, Philipp Hildebrand, avait prédit l’inévitable retour à une politique monétaire plus orthodoxe. “Ce sera un rendez-vous historique, essentiel, qui nécessitera un vrai courage politique”, prévenait-il, en formulant cette mise en garde : les Etats qui auront utilisé les monceaux d’argent injectés à mauvais escient et n’auront pas profité de cette parenthèse inédite pour engager les transformations structurelles qui s’imposent “vont au-devant de grosses difficultés et seront inévitablement rattrapés par la soutenabilité de leur dette”. Ce moment crucial, presque existentiel pour notre pays, c’est maintenant.

Lire l’article sur le site de L’Express

https://lexpansion.lexpress.fr/actualite-economique/finances-publiques-la-dette-a-de-nouveau-un-cout-et-le-reveil-va-etre-brutal_2175187.html

The global financial system finds itself in a very different situation from a few years ago when interest rates were at multi-year lows and stock prices were at all-time high highs, said Bertrand Badré, CEO of BlueOrange Capital.

Speaking at the Ministerial high-level policy dialogue at the ECA’s Conference of African Ministers of Finance, Planning & Economic Development in Dakar, he said, “In 2015 we all believed that financing the SDGs would be relatively straightforward in the era of multilateralism and globalisation, but things have not happened like we thought they would happen.”

In the context of Covid-19, Russia’s war on Ukraine and creeping isolationist policies across the world, investors are looking at “nearshoring” – investing closer to home rather than looking at risker regions like Africa.

This could have profound impacts on Africa, a continent that requires billions of dollars each year to finance its development objectives.

To counter negative market conditions, Africa must “step up and participate” aggressively in the global financial system to attract finance.

One way to do this, Badré said, is for Africa to position itself as a key destination for environment, social and governance (ESG) funds.

Investors are still keen to finance the space, allocating significant portions of their portfolios to development-led investments.

Mohamed Maait, Egypt’s Minister of Finance, said that he would not go to the international markets in the current environment, fearing that any issues will most likely be undersubscribed.

This is in stark contrast to 2020 when Maait went to the market to raise $3bn but returned with $5bn due to high levels of investor interest.

“At the time, I was even being offered as much as $24bn at a very reasonable cost so I decided to increase our demands,” he said.

Maait says that African countries “must diversify” capital-raising strategies if they want to invest in critical sectors, pay off steadily ballooning debt and deal with rising commodity prices.

The minister suggested green bonds and loans from commercial banks as ways to do this.

Rindra Hasimbelo Rabarinirinarison, Madagascar’s finance minister, echoed the Egyptian minister’s sentiments, saying that “alternative and innovative sources of funding must be found”.

One key area is to encourage the diaspora to send funds back to Madagascar, she said.

The country will also look at increasing the tax base and raising funds through green and blue bonds to tackle the lack of fiscal space and dearth of opportunities to plug gaps on the international market.

Serge Ekué, President of the West African Development Bank, said that the IMF’s special drawing rights (SDRs) have not been deployed to their full potential in Africa.

Africa has received a fraction of the SDRs, despite being one of the poorest regions in the world, reinforcing the need for the continent’s finance ministers to push Bretton Woods institutions for increased funding at more favourable terms.

Read the article on the website of African Business

https://african.business/2022/06/economy/raising-capital-in-a-tough-global-environment/

La demande officielle d’adhésion de la Finlande et de la Suède à l’Otan était, pour Moscou, la ligne rouge à ne pas franchir. Comment cette démarche est finalement vécue du côté Russe ? Décryptage de Michel Foucher, géographe, ancien diplomate en Lettonie et spécialiste des frontières géopolitiques. Auteur de « Ukraine-Russie. La carte mentale du duel », collection Tracts chez Gallimard, mai 2022. Invité de la mi-journée de RFI, il répond aux questions de Jean-Baptiste Marot. Il estime que la France ne peut plus être une puissance médiatrice et doit choisir son camp.

Ecouter son intervention sur le site de RFI.

L’ex-chef économiste du FMI était à Paris le 10 juin à l’Amundi World Investment Forum. Inflation, ‘policy mix’: il décrypte les enjeux du moment pour L’Agefi.

WASHINGTON (NASA PR) — France is the latest country to sign the Artemis Accords, affirming its commitment to sustainable space exploration that follows a common set of principles promoting beneficial use of space for all of humanity.

Philippe Baptiste, president of the Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales (CNES) – the French space agency – signed the document during an event hosted by the Ambassador of France to the United States, Philippe Étienne. The signing took place prior to a CNES 60th anniversary celebration.

“We are so pleased to welcome France as the newest member of the Artemis Accords family,” said NASA Administrator Bill Nelson. “France is one of the United States’ oldest allies and our partnership in space exploration dates back more than half a century. That partnership is strengthened by France’s commitment to ensuring the peaceful and responsible exploration of outer space for generations to come.”

France is the 20th country to sign the Artemis Accords and the fifth European Union country to do so. The Artemis Accords establish a common vision through a practical set of principles to guide space exploration cooperation among nations participating in NASA’s 21st century lunar exploration plans.

“The fact that France is joining the Artemis Accords marks a new step forward for our partnership in space with the United States, which is already of prime importance for both nations, notably in Mars exploration and Earth-observation programmes,” said Baptiste. “For our scientific community and industry, this new framework will enable us to meet new challenges and continue to be a leading world space power.”

NASA, in coordination with the U.S. Department of State, announced the establishment of the Artemis Accords in 2020. The Artemis Accords reinforce and provide for important operational implementation of key obligations in the 1967 Outer Space Treaty. They also reinforce the commitment by the United States and signatory nations to the Registration Convention, the Rescue and Return Agreement, as well as best practices and norms of responsible behavior that NASA and its partners have supported, including the public release of scientific data.

Additional countries will sign the Artemis Accords in the months and years ahead, as the United States continues to work with international partners to establish a safe, peaceful, and prosperous future in space. Working with both new and existing partners will add new energy and capabilities to ensure the entire world can benefit from our journey of exploration and discovery.

Read more on the website of Parabolic Arc

France Signs Artemis Accords as French Space Agency Marks Milestone

Emirati delegation sets out plans at global talks to drive sustainability for decades to come

The UAE vowed to “convert pledges and promises” into greater sustainability and economic growth during a global conference aimed at addressing the pressing challenges of climate change.

An Emirati delegation is participating in the meeting and set out the case for progressive action to protect the planet at the Bonn Climate Change Conference in Germany.

The 10-day summit, which is being held under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, will help to shape the agenda for environmental strategy before the 27th Conference of the Parties — known as Cop27 — in Egypt in November.

Climate change is the defining challenge of our era, and it is progressing exponentially. We need solidarity to move faster to flatten the climate curve and avert worst-case scenarios
Mariam Al Mheiri, Minister of Climate Change and the Environment
The UAE is stepping up efforts to hit its target to reach net zero emissions by 2050 through a wide-ranging green strategy focused on a shift to renewable energy and a focus on new technology, which will help slash carbon emission levels.

The country’s commitment to protecting the environment is in line with its hosting of Cop28 in 2023.

Mariam Al Mheiri, Minister of Climate Change and the Environment, and Dr Sultan Al Jaber, special envoy for climate change and Minister of Industry and Advanced Technology commented on the UAE’s participation in the meeting.

Dr Al Jaber said the UAE’s environmental vision will promote green policies while ensuring the economy continues to thrive.

“The UAE is keen to advance progressive climate action at this important gathering leading up to Cop27,” he said.

“In our approach to the Cop process, we aim to convert pledges and promises into practical outcomes that will deliver sustainable and inclusive economic growth.

“The UAE is driving a net-zero-by-2050 strategic initiative as it is a low-carbon, high-growth economic model that will guide our sustainable development for the next 50 years. Making the right decisions and investments now will create diversified economic growth that fosters future-critical industries, knowledge and jobs.”

Dr Al Jaber said the UAE was working closely with Egypt — before both countries host the next two Cop sessions — to help combat climate change, “close the emissions reduction gap” and make important steps towards goals set out at the 2015 Paris climate accord, which focused on cutting emissions to tackle global warming.

Climate change ‘defining challenge of our era’
Ms Al Mheiri said the UAE was eager to collaborate with the international community to bolster sustainability.

“The UAE is committed to driving inclusive, robust and effective collective climate action worldwide. In our quest to achieve net zero by mid-century, we are adopting a science-based approach to determine the impact of our sustainability measures on the carbon footprint,” she said.

“We are developing the National Strategy for Net Zero 2050 to inform our next steps, and have launched the National Dialogue for Climate Ambition that aims to engage all sectors in our decarbonisation drive.

“At the Bonn Climate Change Conference, we are joining the call to mobilise action and raise ambition to ensure a successful Cop27.

“Climate change is the defining challenge of our era, and it is progressing exponentially. We need solidarity to move faster to flatten the climate curve and avert worst-case scenarios.

“The UAE is keen to share expertise, identify overlapping objectives and explore areas of collaboration with like-minded nations that prioritise a development approach that is good for people and the planet. Together, we can build climate resilience capacities, boost green investments and step up meaningful climate efforts.”

The UAE was the first country in the region to sign and ratify the Paris Agreement in line with its ambitions to slash emissions.

Last week, President Sheikh Mohamed planted a ghaf tree to mark World Environment Day during a tour of a Dubai agricultural research centre dedicated to boosting sustainability and food security across the region and beyond.

Sheikh Mohamed praised staff for their vital contribution to agriculture development, which is set to be a significant sector in the UAE for years to come.

He said the centre embodied the country’s vision to promote sustainable development through innovation and scientific research.

Sheikh Mohamed said the centre helped to find answers to pressing challenges posed by the climate and to protect precious water resources.

Read the article on the website The National
https://www.thenationalnews.com/international/

Cette envolée des cours est due notamment à l’impossibilité de transporter les céréales produites sur le sol ukrainien. Même si la France exporte plus de blé qu’elle n’en importe, elle subit aussi les fluctuations des marchés mondiaux.

IFRC Intl. Federation:Twitter

Read the original article on the EnergyMix website.

Dans une tribune au « Monde », Josep Borrell, le haut représentant de l’Union européenne pour les affaires étrangères, souligne que les Vingt-Sept doivent dépenser plus pour leur sécurité et le faire ensemble. La volonté politique a fait défaut jusqu’ici.

La guerre de la Russie contre l’Ukraine a obligé l’Union européenne à relever des défis stratégiques connus de longue date. Notre tâche la plus immédiate consiste à mettre fin à la dépendance de l’Europe à l’égard des importations énergétiques russes, et ce processus est désormais en cours, avec en particulier un embargo pétrolier progressif qui concernera 90 % des importations russes à la fin de l’année.

Plus largement, l’Europe doit aussi développer une politique de sécurité et de défense efficace, ainsi que les capacités nécessaires pour la mettre en œuvre. Cette ambition n’est pas nouvelle, mais elle bénéficie d’un nouvel élan. La guerre déclenchée par la Russie montre clairement que nous devons franchir une étape vers une plus grande mise en commun des investissements en matière de défense. C’était la principale conclusion de la discussion sur la défense lors du Conseil européen qui s’est tenu cette semaine.

Tous les problèmes politiques diffèrent les uns des autres. Parfois, un défi semble si nouveau et dépourvu de précédent qu’il ne peut être relevé qu’après avoir procédé à l’évaluation du paysage modifié. Parfois, les solutions sont connues, mais ce sont les ressources pour les mettre en œuvre qui font défaut. Le débat sur la sécurité et la défense européennes relève d’une troisième catégorie : le diagnostic et les solutions sont clairs, mais c’est la volonté politique qui a fait défaut jusqu’ici.

Nous savons depuis des années – voire des décennies – que les gouvernements européens ne consacrent pas assez d’argent à leur défense, et qu’ils le font de manière trop fragmentée. Il en résulte que nous ne disposons pas des capacités militaires nécessaires pour garantir notre propre sécurité ou pour être un partenaire efficace au sein de l’OTAN. Nous devons dépenser davantage, et nous devons le faire ensemble.

Achats nationaux privilégiés

Au fil des années, de nombreux dirigeants politiques, institutions, ministres de la défense, groupes de réflexion et autres acteurs européens ont rendu publics des rapports et des propositions appelant à augmenter et à améliorer nos dépenses de défense. Ces exhortations ont reflété un consensus massif parmi les experts de la question.

Lire la tribune dans son intégralité sur le site du Monde.

Par Renaud Girard

CHRONIQUE – Il est important de rappeler au peuple russe que non, la partie occidentale de l’Europe n’est pas en guerre avec la Russie, et qu’elle ne souhaite pas l’être.

Au centième jour de la guerre déclenchée contre les Ukrainiens par la Russie, on y entend un langage sensiblement différent qu’à son début. Sur les plateaux télévisés, qui rivalisent tous de nationalisme et de soutien à l’armée, les informations sur l’«opération militaire spéciale» cèdent le pas aux envolées contre l’Occident, accusé de vouloir détruire la Russie. Le 24 février 2022, le régime russe, très sûr de lui, proclamait, à la face du monde, son nouveau rôle d’éradicateur du nazisme, lequel se serait réimplanté en Ukraine. Aujourd’hui, dans un mouvement paranoïaque, il se présente comme la victime d’une guerre que l’Occident lui ferait subrepticement.

Par le procédé rhétorique de l’inversion accusatoire, on ne rappelle pas que c’est le Kremlin qui a commencé cette guerre contre l’Ukraine, mais on sous-entend que c’est l’Occident qui est responsable des hostilités, afin d’affaiblir la Russie.

Lire l’article dans son intégralité sur le site du Figaro.

The innovation and freedom required for prosperity are threatened by unaccountable supranational organizations, expanding state bureaucracies and misguided public policies.

Over the past three years, one of businesses’ main concerns has become securing supply chains for raw materials and semifinished products. But another factor that has grown just as troublesome, or maybe even worse, is the lack of good workers.

Inflation is now the topic on everyone’s mind. Prices are rocketing. People are rightfully concerned. Officials attempt to calm the public by claiming that this situation will be overcome because it is mainly due to the interruption in supply chains caused by Covid-19, and now by the war in Ukraine. U.S. President Joe Biden even went as far as to call it Vladimir Putin’s inflation. The European Central Bank and its president constantly denied a medium- to longer-term problem and were consequently always wrong in their forecasts. These are either cynical lies or proof of incompetence.

On the contrary, this inflation is structural. It is caused by demand exceeding the supply of goods and services. Consumers, including governments, have money in abundance.

Central banks’ irresponsible money printing to cover government overspending and waste has created a situation in which the amount of money circulating throughout the economy disproportionally exceeds the goods and services on offer.

This phenomenon is exacerbated by the growing number of people in nearly all economies engaging in supervisory and administrative jobs – mainly public services – instead of productive private sector positions. The flood of laws, rules and regulations issued on national and supranational levels has become a self-fueling engine, sucking up more and more resources.

Driven by irresponsible deficit policies, the public and administrative sectors are growing. In turn, the bureaucratic complications feed such sectors as tax advisory, compliance, legal services and standardization boards, but also supranational bodies such as the 38-nation Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

We see that next to inflation and supply-chain disruptions, a severe shortage of workers in productive jobs is one of the economy’s biggest problems.

Talent badly needed in business is absorbed into these new professions, made necessary by expanding government. These roles then feed complications that create more layers of unproductive positions in public administration and business advisory.

At the same time, we see that next to inflation and supply-chain disruptions, a severe shortage of workers in productive jobs is one of the economy’s biggest problems.

We are becoming increasingly authoritarian and hiding behind democratically unaccountable supranational organizations. The unstoppable regulatory process gives authorities increasing power and opportunities to make arbitrary decisions. Any perceived threat, from terrorism to Covid-19 to climate change, is welcomed as a pretext to tighten the screws on freedom. It is certainly necessary to fight terrorism, support sustainability and take measures against pandemics, but all of those goals can be achieved without placing disproportionate limits on freedom and constructing convoluted bureaucracies.

Through excessive administration, legislation and regulation, restrictions on freedom, government overspending and irresponsible monetary policies, we are committing suicide as a free and prosperous society. This suicide is assisted by a collusion of governments, supranational organizations, rent-seeking cronies and ideas such as the “great reset” promulgated by the World Economic Forum.

When we will have finally succeeded in killing a prosperous economy, politicians, media and nongovernmental organizations will blame the failure on markets, not the state. The proposed solution will then be more government intervention and “full equality.” Such solutions are already being implemented. When the trend is complete, the bureaucratic dream of 19th- and 20th-century communists will have come true.

In this state-dominated economy, we will have to forget about prosperity and freedom. A bureaucratic nomenklatura will impose an equality of mediocrity. Sustainability will become an illusion as innovation is held back.

The old Soviet model is making a comeback. It is surprising that people have forgotten so quickly and do not realize what is happening. They just need to look to North Korea to see how the model works.

Read the original article on GIS report.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced on Friday that he was sure Turkey’s objection to Finland and Sweden joining NATO will be solved during this month’s summit. To waive its objection, Turkey will not only ask for concessions from Stockholm and Helsinki, but also from the US regarding another planned incursion into the northeast of Syria. However, Turkey can use its leverage on this issue in a better way.

To start with, NATO is perceived by Russians in general and not only the Putin camp as the enemy of Russia. While during the Cold War the world was divided between NATO and the Warsaw Pact countries, the collapse of the Soviet Union prompted the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact. But NATO kept on expanding. Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly stated that he will not allow NATO at his doorstep, which is why the 2008 candidatures of Ukraine and Georgia rang alarm bells in Russia.

The entire Ukraine war was waged because Moscow could not allow its neighbor to join an enemy camp; at least that was the declared reason for the war. But Russia’s belligerent behavior created a backlash. Sweden and Finland, countries that had opted to remain neutral after the Cold War, now want to join NATO to make sure they are not the target of any possible Russian aggression in the future.

This is where Turkey fits in. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been very skillful in benefiting from opportunities whenever they arise. Today, Turkey objects to the entry of these two countries to the alliance due to their alleged support of the PKK and their restrictions on the sale of weapons to Ankara. In addition, Turkey is negotiating a concession from the US regarding an incursion into Syria to push the YPG group away from the Turkish border. However, such an incursion would not really make Turkey safer. Only a comprehensive solution in Syria that involves the return of refugees can provide Ankara with the security it needs. Before its previous incursions, Turkey had clinched a deal either with the Russians or the US. Today, Turkey is seeking a deal with the US, but it should be talking to Russia.

Finland and Sweden’s entry into NATO will only render Putin more nervous and hence more aggressive. It will increase the pressure on him for sure, but not in a way that will push him to make concessions on Ukraine and end the war. On the contrary, he will become more defiant. The entry of these two countries would allow him to reinforce his populist narrative that NATO is trying to destroy Russia.

Here, Turkey can use its objection in a positive way and use its leverage to end the war in Syria. Turkey can instead propose a nonaggression treaty between Russia and Finland and Sweden. Such a treaty could offer guarantees to all parties. While it would offer a face-saving exit for Putin, it would probably not go down so well with the Swedes or the Finns. Russia had agreed, together with the US and the UK, to safeguard Ukraine in exchange for Kyiv giving up its nuclear arsenal in the 1994 Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances — and they can see how that ultimately worked out.

The Finns have already had an especially bad experience with Moscow. In 1932, Finland and the Soviet Union signed a nonaggression treaty, only for it to be unilaterally revoked by the latter in 1939, when Joseph Stalin ordered an invasion. Hence, any new treaty should have a clause under which, if Russia breaks the terms, then Finland and Sweden’s entry to NATO becomes automatic.

The signature of all NATO countries would be required to make sure that, in the case of Finland or Sweden being attacked, no member country could object to their entry to the alliance and the triggering of the Article 5 principle of collective defense.

Instead of asking the US for a concession regarding an incursion into Syria, Ankara could ask Russia to remove Assad.

Dr. Dania Koleilat Khatib

Meanwhile, instead of asking the US for a concession regarding an incursion into Syria, Turkey could ask Russia to remove Bashar Assad and replace him with a military council representing the different factions in Syria. The council could then conduct the political transition as stated in UN Security Council Resolution 2254.

Assad has not been a very loyal client to Russia. Moscow’s disengagement with Syria since the Ukraine invasion has quickly been filled by the Iranians, with Assad’s blessing. A military council could guarantee Russia’s interests as a minimum. The Kremlin could even effectively have a seat on the council by nominating some of the generals it trusts.

The military council could also provide guarantees to Turkey, as it would have some sort of jurisdiction over the Kurdish faction. Today, the YPG operates on its own, with little supervision from the US, which keeps Ankara on its guard.

This is a golden opportunity to end the war in Syria and reach a detente with Russia, which could pave the way to the end of the war in Ukraine. This would be much better than raising the stakes and prolonging the confrontation, which is in nobody’s interest.

Read the original article on Arab News.

It is a question that will hang over a summit meeting of EU leaders starting Monday, and one made more urgent by Ukraine’s demand for fast-track accession talks to join the bloc, which may not be decided before another meeting in late June

BY STEVEN ERLANGER

PUBLISHED: May 31, 2022

Downtown Skopje, the capital of North Macedonia, on Feb. 27, 2020. North Macedonia and Albania are the farthest along as full-fledged candidates for European Union membership. (Loulou d’Aki/The New York Times)

BRUSSELS — With Ukraine defending European values and security against a blatant Russian invasion, what obligation does the European Union and NATO have toward Ukraine?

The moral answer may be obvious, as European and American governments vow support for Kyiv and are pouring money and arms into Ukraine. But the practical answers are complicated, as ever, and are dividing Europe.

Defying expectations, the EU has provided significant military aid to Ukraine and inflicted enormous sanctions on Russia, acting with speed and authority. But now it is confronting a more difficult problem: how to bind vulnerable countries such as Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia to Europe in a way that helps them and does not create a further security risk down the road.

Read the article on the site of Forbes India.

Announcement comes as militarisation of space is increasing

The UAE has been chosen to lead a UN committee working to promote peaceful use of space.

The country will lead the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, with Omran Sharaf, the Emirati engineer who led its successful Mars mission, serving as the committee’s director for 2022 and next year.

The committee has been in operation since 1959 and is one of the largest at the UN. It has 100 member states and plays an important role in peaceful uses of space, encouraging international co-operation and recommending laws and policies that support space exploration.

President Sheikh Mohamed said he was proud of Mr Sharaf and congratulated him on being elected.

“The UAE continues to make notable contributions to the space sector and we wish Omran every success in his new role,” he said.

Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid, Vice President and Ruler of Dubai, also expressed his pride over the UAE’s achievement and said it was an honour to have Mr Sharaf appointed.

“I am proud of the UAE’s victory as chairman of the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space,” he said.

“I am proud of the son of the Emirates, Omran, who has honourably held this high international role.

“The youth of the Emirates have brought us to space, are leading global files and are running international institutions.”

News of the UAE’s election comes as some countries seek to use space for military purposes.

The use of weaponry and military technology in space has caused concern among experts over the years, as countries such as Russia, India and China perform anti-satellite missile tests. Some nations have launched an increasing number of spy satellites.

Sarah Al Amiri, Minister of State for Public Education and Future Technology and chairwoman of the UAE Space Agency, said: “It’s a great honour for the Emirates to take the chair of Copuos, particularly as we founded our space programme on international partnerships and collaboration and continue to place these partnerships at the core of our space sector development.”

Mr Sharaf previously represented the UAE on the outer space committee and on the International Committee on Global Navigation Satellite Systems.

He said this was a “tremendous chance” to serve the global space sector.

“As both a young nation and a relatively new entrant to the space sector, we have benefited from the amazing work of the pioneers who have gone before us,” he said.

“Alongside that heritage, we have also found scope to innovate and challenge what have become accepted norms and we look forward to bringing a spirit of open dialogue and co-operation but also seeking to define solutions and new ways of looking at some of the emerging challenges and opportunities facing our sector and, indeed, humanity.”

The committee is behind one of the most notable space treaties, the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, which has been signed by more than 105 countries so far, including the UAE.

The treaty outlines peaceful uses of space, including low-Earth orbit, the Moon and other space bodies.

However, experts have been voicing concerns for the past few years about some countries using space for the “wrong reasons”.

During the Global Aerospace Summit in Abu Dhabi last week, Maj Michel Friedling, head of the French Space Command, said space was no longer peaceful and immune from politics and war.

“The Outer Space Treaty of 1967 has allowed for the case of peaceful coexistence. And bridges were made between East and West during these decades,” said Mr Friedling.

“But space is and will remain a key factor of economic strategy and military advantage for those who master space and those who know how to use space services.

“So, tensions on Earth will reflect in space and it’s already the case.”

The militarisation includes using weapons in space, carrying out cyber attacks on satellites, using technology that jams communications and possessing a large fleet of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance satellites.

Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in late February, a number of cyber attacks have been carried out on satellites operating over the country, often disconnecting its internet and communication services and cutting off the Ukrainian people from the wider world.

Elon Musk made his Starlink satellites available to Ukraine but warned that they could become targets.

Anti-satellite missile, or ASAT, tests use military technology to destroy spacecraft. They are a concern because they create high levels of debris that could endanger astronauts and satellites.

They are also considered a threat because such missile technology could be used in an armed conflict.

In November, Russia carried out an ASAT test in which it destroyed one of its satellites, creating thousands of pieces of space debris.

India ordered an ASAT test in 2019 in an operation called the Mission Shakti, resulting in high levels of space debris.

China destroyed one of its satellites in 2007 and the US followed a year later with a similar operation.

But the US government recently committed to ending ASAT tests and has called for a global agreement to urge other nations to follow its lead.

Read the original article on The National.

© ABIDJAN.NET PAR DR
LE PREMIER MINISTRE A CLOS MERCREDI 25 MAI 2022 À PARIS LES JOURNÉES AFRICAINES DE L’UNESCO.

ENTRETIEN. L’Afrique est déjà dans les starting-blocks pour la COP27 prévue en Égypte. Directrice exécutive de la Fondation Mo Ibrahim, Nathalie Delapalme explique comment.

L’Afrique est décidée à prendre à bras-le-corps la question du climat et veut clairement se faire entendre. La preuve : à six mois de la COP27, qui se tiendra en Égypte, la Fondation Mo Ibrahim (MIF) a organisé à Londres, et en ligne, un forum sur le climat. Intitulé « En route vers la COP27 : faire valoir l’Afrique dans le débat sur le climat », le Forum, qui a duré du 25 au 27 mai, a exploré les défis et les les opportunités uniques que la crise climatique engendre sur le continent. Les discussions se sont appuyées sur Forum 2022 – Faits et chiffres, document de la Fondation publié avant l’événement. Nathalie Delapalme, directrice exécutive de la Fondation Mo Ibrahim, s’est confiée au Point Afrique sur la manière dont le continent entend s’y prendre pour mettre en exergue ses spécificités et les faire prendre en compte.

Le Point Afrique : Comment s’est imposé le sujet du climat et de la COP27 pour la Fondation Mo Ibrahim ? Quels sont les principaux enseignements que vous tirez du document de recherche publié par la Fondation, à savoir Forum Facts & Figures 2022.

Nathalie Delapalme : La Fondation Mo Ibrahim se concentre sur les défis majeurs du continent, dont la crise climatique qui l’impacte durement. Ce forum et les discussions qu’il a engendrées se sont réalisés dans le cadre du débat global sur le climat où l’absence de décisions adéquates démultiplie cet impact négatif avec des risques majeurs induits en termes de développement et d’instabilité. C’est pourquoi il nous est apparu important, six mois avant la COP27 qui se tiendra à Charm el-Cheikh en Égypte, de mettre en exergue la spécificité de l’Afrique au sein de ce débat global. Trois points essentiels ont été retenus, qui structurent le rapport et les discussions pour ce Forum.

– Le premier concerne la vulnérabilité particulière du continent avec l’apparition d’un cercle vicieux crise climatique, fragilité de développement, qui engendre instabilités et tensions accrues.

– Le deuxième point concerne la protection du climat et l’accès pour tous à l’énergie afin que les décisions prises pour sauver le climat ne mettent pas en péril le développement de millions d’individus.

– Et le troisième point porte sur la richesse du continent en termes de ressources naturelles et minières susceptibles d’en faire un acteur de premier rang dans le développement d’une économie bas carbone sous réserve de certaines conditions. Cela explique pourquoi nous avons choisi ce thème et que nous le traitons maintenant.

Six mois avant la COP27 en Égypte, l’Afrique peut-elle défendre une position commune et ses spécificités pour peser dans le débat mondial sur le changement climatique ?

C’est absolument essentiel. Ce rapport et ce forum, mais aussi les discussions et les travaux qui vont se poursuivre jusqu’à la COP27, ont pour objectif d’étayer le dossier défendu par le continent. C’est aussi la volonté politique exprimée avec force par le président en exercice de l’Union africaine, Macky Sall, président du Sénégal, lors de l’entretien qu’il a eu, pendant le forum, avec Mo Ibrahim, président de la Fondation éponyme.

À la question de savoir quels sont les attentes et les objectifs pour la COP27, Macky Sall a répondu qu’il souhaitait avoir un vrai débat sur la transition énergétique, un débat qui permette d’avoir une transition juste et équitable, et de faire en sorte que l’Afrique puisse utiliser son propre gaz au bénéfice d’abord de sa population. Il a également insisté sur la nécessité de mettre en œuvre les accords de Paris sur le principe du pollueur-payeur et d’alimenter le Fonds d’adaptation climat afin que les États africains puissent accélérer la mise en œuvre des énergies renouvelables. J’ajoute un point sur la désertification. Ce sujet a été largement abordé lors de la COP15 (contre la désertification) qui vient de se terminer à Abidjan, parce que conjuguer l’impact désastreux après deux ans de Covid, et maintenant celui de la crise ukrainienne, nous amène au bord d’une famine extrêmement grave.

Face à la montée des crises, réformer le capitalisme apparaît plus que jamais nécessaire. Reste à trouver le monde d’emploi pour une économie durable et responsable. La clef réside dans la lutte contre les inégalités. Par Bertrand Badré et Yann Coatanlem (*)

Depuis 20 ans, la fréquence et l’intensité des crises mondiales augmentent, ce qui est un mauvais présage pour l’avenir de l’économie. Selon la Banque mondiale, du fait de la pandémie de COVID-19, la politique de réduction de la pauvreté n’a jamais été autant menacée depuis un quart de siècle. Les inégalités se creusent à l’intérieur des pays et entre eux, ainsi que dans de nombreux secteurs clés, de l’éducation à la santé.

Etant donné l’ampleur de ces problèmes, une politique de réduction des inégalités ne doit pas se focaliser exclusivement sur les revenus et les patrimoines. La situation exige une approche holistique avec un horizon à long terme. Sinon, les futurs gouvernements auront la tentation de procéder à des améliorations à court terme aux retombées politiques immédiates (comme l’augmentation du pouvoir d’achat des ménages), plutôt que d’investir dans le bien-être à long terme. Il faut quantifier les compromis nécessaires, de telle sorte que les dirigeants politiques puissent expliquer aux électeurs que sacrifier un peu de bien-être aujourd’hui permettra de vivre bien mieux demain.

Il faut aussi faire attention à la manière de mesurer les inégalités

Est-il juste de demander aux pays en développement de réduire leurs émissions de gaz à effet de serre au même rythme que les pays avancés, alors que la contribution de ces derniers a été beaucoup plus importante que la leur dans le passé ?

Pour les dirigeants politiques, le défi consiste à adopter une stratégie qui soit à la fois internationale et locale, adaptée à un environnement donné. Sinon, les mesures destinées à corriger un type d’inégalités pourraient en générer de nouvelles. Nous pouvons combattre le réchauffement climatique en subventionnant les installations de panneaux solaires, mais il faut alors se préparer aux protestations de ceux qui ont diminué leur empreinte carbone avant l’introduction de ces subventions.

La défense de l’équité dans toutes ses dimensions exige une perspective élargie des inégalités. C’est une conséquence fréquente des dynamiques à somme nulle, de la recherche de rente, des “impôts privés”, du parasitisme, de la corruption, de la discrimination, etc. Les formes les plus saillantes d’inégalité changent au cours du temps, elles évoluent souvent en fonction du contexte juridique. À la fin de la Seconde Guerre mondiale, on considérait le travail comme un droit fondamental, alors que pendant la pandémie, l’accès à Internet à haut débit et à faible coût est devenu une priorité absolue.

La nature toujours changeante de ces questions exige d’élargir le concept de bien-être social, afin que les décisions politiques ne finissent pas par perpétuer les avantages des initiés. Ce concept doit également devenir plus flexible, de manière à faire face à des défis tels que le changement climatique ou la flambée du prix de l’énergie. Il faut aussi développer de nouveaux outils (par exemple le revenu de base universel) pour aider les personnes défavorisées ou marginalisées à surmonter des obstacles structurels de longue date et à prendre des risques calculés en matière de création d’entreprise (ce qui profite en fin de compte à l’ensemble de la société).

Le concept de rendement social doit guider les décisions politiques

En matière d’éducation par exemple, le développement du capital humain dès la petite enfance offre le meilleur retour sur investissement à long terme. Mais la politique sociale ne passe pas nécessairement par les pouvoirs publics. On peut envisager le recours aux marchés lorsqu’ils apportent une valeur ajoutée. Ainsi en matière de retraite, un pilier de capitalisation peut garantir que le plus grand nombre de personnes bénéficie du rendement généralement élevé des marchés, plutôt que d’en rester aux sommes relativement modestes du système par répartition.

La fiscalité est un autre levier essentiel de la lutte contre les inégalités, car elle génère des recettes permettant de financer des politiques sociales inclusives et de réduire les écarts de revenus et de patrimoine. Il ne s’agit pas de traiter la richesse comme un problème en elle-même, mais plutôt de suivre le Principe de différence du philosophe John Rawls, selon lequel les inégalités ne sont justifiées que si elles profitent aux moins bien lotis. L’économiste Philippe Aghion a montré que l’innovation remplit cette condition : si elle accroît le poids des 1% les plus riches, elle tend aussi à accroître la mobilité sociale, et elle n’augmente pas nécessairement les inégalités dans le reste de la population.

Ceci dit, la structure de la fiscalité pourrait être améliorée pour répondre à des objectifs souhaitables tels que la simplicité, l’efficacité, la stabilité, l’équité (en éliminant les échappatoires qui ne profitent qu’aux riches), de meilleures incitations (à travailler ou à protéger l’environnement) et la neutralité (afin qu’un euro gagné en un an ne soit pas davantage taxé qu’un euro gagné en 10 ans).

Enfin, réformer le capitalisme contemporain exige de revoir les règles de la concurrence. En matière de détermination des prix et de diffusion des informations économiques, le marché est bien plus efficace que tout système centralisé, mais les autorités publiques doivent le superviser et le réguler rigoureusement. La réglementation et le contrôle en faveur d’une concurrence équitable sont devenus d’autant plus importants que les technologies digitales et la robotique ont restructuré les marchés et ouvert la voie à ce que Shoshana Zuboff de la Harvard Business School qualifie de “capitalisme de surveillance“.

Cette pathologie se reflète dans la montée en puissance des inégalités dans les résultats des entreprises. En 2016, le Conseil économique de la Maison Blanche a souligné que “le retour sur investissement des entreprises du 90eme centile est plus de 5 fois supérieur à sa valeur médiane. Il y a un quart de siècle ce ratio était proche de 2“. Par ailleurs, ainsi que le montre Aghion, les 1% des plus grands exportateurs comptent maintenant pour 67% de l’ensemble des exportations, tandis que les 1% des entreprises qui déposent des brevets comptent pour 91% de tous les brevets déposés et pour 98% des citations dans les articles scientifiques (un indicateur des brevets les plus importants). Les bénéfices des 10% des plus grandes entreprises ont augmenté de 35% depuis le début des années 2000, et leur rentabilité a fait un bond de 50%. Ces indicateurs n’ont guère bougé pour la plupart des autres entreprises.

Les réformes proposées ci-dessus pourraient rassembler les voix très nombreuses qui exigent l’équité au nom de l’efficacité. Elles assureraient une véritable égalité des chances, tant pour les individus que pour les entreprises. L’alternative consiste à revenir à une société hiérarchisée de manière rigide, avec moins de liberté, sauf pour ceux au sommet de la pyramide.

Il reste à voir si l’enchaînement des crises financières, écologiques et géopolitiques donnera l’impulsion voulue pour ce type de réformes. Ces crises pourraient tout aussi facilement détourner l’attention, ou pire, devenir une excuse pour le fatalisme et l’autosatisfaction.

______

Bertrand Badré est fondateur et PDG de la société d’investissement Blue Like an Orange Sustainable Capital et ancien directeur général de la Banque mondiale. Il est l’auteur d’un livre intitulé Can Finance Save the World? [Et si la finance sauvait le monde ?] (Berrett-Koehler, 2018). Yann Coatanlem est économiste, PDG d’une start-up spécialisée dans les technologies financières et président du Club Praxis. Il a écrit un livre intitulé Le Capitalisme contre les inégalités (Presses Universitaires de France, 2022).

(traduit de l’anglais par Patrice Horovitz)

Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2022.
www.project-syndicate.org

Lire l’article sur le site de La Tribune

https://www.latribune.fr/opinions/tribunes/pour-un-capitalisme-equitable-913734.html

Cinq universitaires européens, Gabriel Felbermayr, Arancha Gonzalez, Moritz Schularick, Shahin Vallée et Guntram Wolff, proposent dans une tribune au « Monde » de lancer un programme international de financement des besoins budgétaires immédiats de l’Ukraine, qui ont explosé.

Publié le 30 mai 2022 à 11h30 – Mis à jour le 30 mai 2022 à 17h28