"Green" rules of the game: the United States calls on Russia to sign unprofitable agreements

A large-scale summit on the fight against global warming will take place on April 22-23. Due to coronavirus restrictions, the event will be held online. The organizer was the United States, which invited the leaders of 40 countries to participate, including Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping. This summit can be considered a landmark, since it is from it that the countdown of a new "green" reality in the world the economy, which will be anchored at the UN World Climate Forum in Glasgow. What gives us reason to believe so?

Many domestic political analysts noted the fact that Washington invited Moscow and Beijing to take part in the event, despite the fact that it is in "contradiction" with them. This was interpreted by them as a good sign. However, it should be remembered that President Joe Biden, even during his election campaign, promised to constructively cooperate with China and Russia on issues important to the United States, such as climate change, for example, but toughly oppose them in other areas that are fundamental for the White House. President Vladimir Putin and XI Chairman Jinping Joe Biden simply could not fail to invite to the summit. China, the world's premier workshop, is the number one source of climate-damaging carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. It is followed by the United States and India, with Russia at the bottom of the four. In addition, our country is the largest in terms of territory, which grows huge forests that absorb carbon. Thus, without the participation of Beijing and Moscow, the summit would be largely devoid of its meaning. However, everything is a little more complicated than it seems at first glance.

It can be assumed that the White House is conducting business to conclude a new version of the "Paris Agreement", from which Republican Donald Trump once emerged, and the US participation in which was immediately resumed by Democrat Joe Biden. In fact, the problem is not so much climate change as finding balances between the world's largest economies and setting new green rules of the game. Apparently, after the April summit and forum in Glasgow, all countries will clearly divide into those that have developed environmentally friendly alternative energy, and those that do not, and therefore will pay for someone else's progress from their own pockets.

For more details on the problems of "green" energy, we have already told earlier. In itself, this is an interesting and commendable endeavor, since it is right to reduce dependence on fossil fuels. But at the same time, the kilowatts generated with the help of RES are always more expensive, therefore they have to be subsidized at the expense of the state. This is quite an expensive pleasure that only rich countries can afford. The three largest economies in the world - the United States, China and the European Union - have set themselves the goal of making their industries climate neutral over the next 30 years by achieving zero carbon dioxide emissions. This immediately leads to two serious problems: how can the main players, who are in fierce competition among themselves, find a balance of interests, and what should all other countries do?

To answer the first question, I would like to quote from an article by Matthew Lynn, financial columnist and author of The Bust: Greece, the Euro and the Sovereign Debt Crisis and The Long Depression: The Recession From 2008 to 2031, published in The Spectator:

President Biden's big idea is for the green energy plan to dominate renewable and clean energy. This is the centerpiece of his program. But the EU is on exactly the same agenda, and a large chunk of its € 750 billion Coronavirus Rescue Fund is aimed at exactly the same goal. It is impossible to have two world leaders in green energy. In fact, the conflict over dominance in this industry will ultimately lead to an even greater split on the two sides.

Strictly speaking, that says it all. The US, EU and China are already jostling each other in the green energy market, wanting to become leaders who will set the rules of the game. The European Union, led by Germany and France, intends to defend the interests of its aircraft and car manufacturers against the American Boeing and Tesla. A new tool in this fight should be the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), which Brussels will introduce in 2023. Most likely, Washington and Beijing will answer him symmetrically.

The new "climate" agreement, which will be discussed at the upcoming summit and forum in Glasgow, is likely to establish new rules of the game between the three leading world economies and determine their interaction between themselves and all other countries. For the latter, this does not shine anything good. Lacking developed alternative energy, they will have to pay for the right to access the European, American and Chinese markets, an increased export duty on products with a high carbon footprint. This directly applies to our country as well. It is estimated that the additional financial burden for domestic exporters working in the European Union will amount to $ 60 billion annually.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Sapsan136 Offline Sapsan136
    Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 28 March 2021 13: 22
    The United States has not even signed the environmental standards that are already in force in the Russian Federation and the EU, so before inviting the Russian Federation to any negotiations, the United States must sign environmental agreements that are already in force in the EU and the Russian Federation and begin to implement them, and not throw show-off. Until then, it makes no sense for the Russian Federation to conduct any negotiations with the United States.
  2. steelmaker Online steelmaker
    steelmaker 28 March 2021 14: 23
    Our economy depends on the US and the EU. Therefore, as the US and the EU say so and will, such laws will be adopted. This is not why the United States allowed Putin to be "zeroed" so that he could show off. Thus, eight out of eleven representatives of NATO countries are on the board of directors of Rosneft. And what, Putin will be against speaking something? Only mediocrities can believe in this!
    1. 123 Offline 123
      123 (123) 28 March 2021 15: 24
      Our economy depends on the US and the EU. Therefore, as the US and the EU say so and will, such laws will be adopted.

      Your opinion depends on the methodology. What is written in it, you voice it.
      Your dullness goes beyond all limits.
      1. steelmaker Online steelmaker
        steelmaker 28 March 2021 19: 43
        I can be rude too!
        1. 123 Offline 123
          123 (123) 28 March 2021 20: 41
          I can be rude too!

          What else can you do? Whine, call names and lack of education about the lack of education?
          Do you know any other words?
    2. Kapany3 Offline Kapany3
      Kapany3 28 March 2021 21: 59
      Yes, you're already tired of complaining, Putin won't let you live ... Not a single topic without you. Go cook steel, and leave smart conversations to smart
      1. steelmaker Online steelmaker
        steelmaker 29 March 2021 03: 28
        Another mediocrity was found! All your smart talk is to assent to the same mediocrity and be rude. Something smart about the article from you there is nothing.
  3. kriten Offline kriten
    kriten (Vladimir) 28 March 2021 15: 03
    They did not succeed in ruining the arms race, they came up with another method. This whole campaign was invented only to strike at China and Russia. Unfortunately, the Kremlin, like a dog, runs to the table when invited. True, having run up, he often gets a kick. But next time he runs again, what if they let him sit at the table ...
    1. 123 Offline 123
      123 (123) 28 March 2021 15: 25
      Unfortunately, the Kremlin, like a dog, runs to the table when invited. True, having run up, he often gets a kick. But next time he runs again, what if they let him sit at the table ...

      Tell us how you should have done? You can use a specific example.
      1. Vadim Ananyin Offline Vadim Ananyin
        Vadim Ananyin (Vadim Ananyin) 29 March 2021 04: 42
        He will not answer you because he does not know.
        1. 123 Offline 123
          123 (123) 29 March 2021 05: 33
          He will not answer you because he does not know.

          Maybe so. It just became interesting to me, maybe we will really see something useful. We are all too keen to criticize.
      2. kriten Offline kriten
        kriten (Vladimir) 31 March 2021 10: 31
        We must not rush to get scraps from someone else’s table, but indicate our conditions and agendas for the meeting. But if you go along the line that you can have the opportunity to talk where it is beneficial only to them, then it will be so. Trump essentially refused 3 times at the last moment, although in the last two it was clear that this was only to show how you can handle Russia. When they need something, they will come running. You can also designate a place: if not the Crimea, then at least Sochi.
    2. Kofesan Offline Kofesan
      Kofesan (Valery) 29 March 2021 20: 42
      Peskov has already "reacted". Veiled, but it became clear that Putin will go, after all, as they "consider the topic to be very important." Those bitten by Greta are happy, and the "magic pendel" is just around the corner ...,
      1. trampoline instructor (Cotriarch Peril) 30 March 2021 07: 53
        the event will be held online.

        Therefore, Putin will not go anywhere.
        1. Kofesan Offline Kofesan
          Kofesan (Valery) 30 March 2021 10: 30
          I agree! Participation will "take" without going anywhere ...
  4. 123 Offline 123
    123 (123) 28 March 2021 15: 22
    Is the president's mummy struggling to prove himself a world leader? laughing
    I hope everyone understands that the matter is in the economy, or are there any bitten by Greta?
    The US and the EU, with financial systems that allow "printing" money, seek to rebuild the economy and build barriers. Gentlemen are losing and trying to rewrite the rules.
    If we have already undertaken to fight for the environment, we must not stop half way, but go further. Countries other than the US and the EU should unite, the duty on the supply of resources to raise even more than the elves plan. let them extract raw materials from the air.
  5. Vadim Ananyin Offline Vadim Ananyin
    Vadim Ananyin (Vadim Ananyin) 29 March 2021 04: 40
    Another attempt to impose bribes on the surrounding world, to live at the expense of the resources of other countries, there are none of our own.
    Democratic colonization and nothing else.
  6. Yuri Lavrichenko 29 March 2021 10: 49
    Russia and China should send their representatives there. After Biden's tricks, this will be fine and will give more room for maneuvers in difficult moments.
  7. So it's not a question - to send Josephine Biden away - and all the business!
  8. Jacques sekavar Offline Jacques sekavar
    Jacques sekavar (Jacques Sekavar) April 6 2021 14: 35
    The summit can be considered a landmark only in terms of the final documents, since it can begin the countdown of the coming redivision of the world, spheres of influence, and above all between the US + EU and China, and the Russian Federation has a huge territory and practically inexhaustible reserves of all existing natural resources. One of the tasks of all such summits, in addition to shaping public opinion, is to nullify them with subsequent appropriation by transnational corporations.
    The so-called "green" economy is a new niche for the application of monopoly capital, along with such as climate change, gender equality, transgender operations, cloning, genetic engineering and other "democratic" scams.