US-China summit in Alaska shows road to fighting climate change is paved with political minefields
Is it possible for diplomats on the one hand to fervently criticise their counterparts and on the other hand, drop the animosity when it comes to dealing with climate change?
The world needs more diplomacy and less chest-beating.
There is agreement climate change presents an existential threat to mankind. Thus, despite the wide range of disputes between the United States and China, the United Kingdom and China, and between the European Union and China, they agree they should cooperate to decarbonise substantially within the next three to four decades. Yet, the extent to which governments can work together remains an open question.
The UK will play host to the UN conference in Glasgow on climate change in November, referred to as COP26. As the host country, the UK’s role includes rallying others to follow the Paris Agreement, a multilateral treaty on climate change agreed to in 2015.
The British prime minister and Chinese president spoke to each other last year, and confirmed they both wanted COP26, originally scheduled for 2020, to be a success. However, China, though invited by the British host, did not participate at the virtual ministerial conference on climate and development on March 31. China’s absence was likely due to a deterioration in relations between Britain and China on many issues, including Hong Kong over the national security law passed last year and Beijing’s recently proposed electoral changes.
Thankfully, ministers from the EU, Canada and China did co-convene their annual gathering on climate change on March 23, a trilateral arrangement they started in 2017 to show their commitment to the Paris Agreement.
As of now, China is expected to participate at the live-streamed Leaders Summit on Climate on April 22-23 called by US President Joe Biden, who was vice-president in 2014-15 when US-China cooperation helped to bring the nations of the world to sign on to the Paris Agreement.
Both the US and China have brought back two seasoned climate soldiers to help. John Kerry, former US secretary of state, is now Biden’s climate envoy, and Xie Zhenhua, who led the Chinese climate negotiation team for many years before retirement, was invited back by Beijing to be China’s climate tsar.
Both men are exceptionally well-placed to help their countries and the world on climate change policies. They both have long histories working on an issue they are personally knowledgeable and passionate about, they know their respective domestic politics intimately, they understand the international stage, they are well acquainted with counterparts from other countries and the UN system, and they are both trusted by their bosses and respected by all.
They should know where the political minefields are and how to avoid them – they had done it before. However, the situation is more complex and challenging today than in the past when they cooperated and built a strong relationship with each other.
Today, the US political establishment sees China as a major disrupter globally because it views China as the only country with the economic, military and technological clout to seriously challenge American leadership. The current US secretary of state said the country wants “the techno-democracies” – the advanced economies and allies – to band together to confront China.
The US portrays China as a threat ideologically because it is a communist country and argues that its rise will destabilise the global order if it is not stopped. There is scant acknowledgement that China has created a development model that has done well. Its ruling party is negatively portrayed at every turn, and Biden has called Chinese President Xi Jinping “a thug”.
Many assume and hope that these conflicts won’t get in the way of climate cooperation. Is it possible for diplomats on the one hand to fervently criticise their counterparts and on the other hand, drop the animosity when it comes to dealing with climate change?
The world saw an open altercation in Alaska in March when US and Chinese senior officials exchanged barbs. Their words went to the heart of some of their key differences.
The US, as host, opened fire by accusing China of being a threat to global stability, putting economic pressure on US allies, perpetrating cyberattacks and repressing Hong Kong, Xinjiang and Taiwan. China punched back by accusing the US of causing turmoil in many places around the world, holding on to a cold war mentality and not dealing with its own human rights problems, and said it had no right to interfere with China’s sovereign decisions on its own territories.
Most countries, especially emerging economies in Asia, don’t really want to get tangled up in great-power competition. They want socioeconomic development, to recover from the Covid-19 pandemic sooner rather than later, and work on problems like climate change. They want to see the big powers cooperate.
The worst case could be that Western countries and institutions insist China’s pledge to achieve carbon neutral by 2060 is not good enough and use that as another big stick, when cooperation on research and development, technology and finance is the way to go. After all, being carbon neutral represents an industrial and technological revolution that the US so fears about China’s advance.
The developed countries industrialised early, partly by way of brutal colonialism, to gain natural resources to power their high-carbon economies. Finger-pointing was not what got the nations of the world to sign the Paris Agreement. It was optimism about ongoing cooperation that did.
This article is written by Christine Loh, chief development strategist, Institute for the Environment, HKUST and board member of CDP Worldwide, London; and also Jade Yung who is a freelance content and creative writer. She writes about innovation in multiple disciplines, including arts and culture, wellness and sustainability.
The article is published in SCMP https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/article/3128779/us-china-summit-alaska-shows-road-fighting-climate-change-paved
