정책비교/국제정치2020. 3. 31. 03:15


2차 세계대전 당시 반-나치 운동가, 그리스 전설, 마놀리스 글레조스 (Glezos) 가 98세 일기로 별세하셨다. R.I.P 그리스 좌파들도 조선,한국만큼 비극적 역사를 안고 있다. 


2차 세계대전 이후, 승전국 미국-영국은 발칸 반도에서 그리스를 '자본주의 블럭'으로 편입했고, 소련 스탈린은 나머지 국가들을 '공산주의 블럭'으로 가져갔다. 반 나치 전선에 싸웠던 그리스 좌익들은 고향으로 돌아왔지만, 영국 보수당 처칠 수상은 특공대를 파견해 그들을 숙청했다. 비운의 그리스 빨치산들이었다. 


반나치 동맹국 소련과 미-영의 갈등은 2차 세계대전 도중에 잠복해 있다가, 대전이 끝나갈 무렵, 이 발칸 반도에서 '냉전 cold war'가 시작되었다. 그러나 소련과 미-영-프는 유럽에서 다시 전쟁을 일으킬 수 없었다. 


결국,1950년 소련 대 미-영 국제전쟁은 한반도에서 발생했다. 발칸 반도와 한반도에서 좌익의 숙명은 여러가지로 유사했다. 아테네 아크로폴리스 광장에서 독일 나치 깃발을 내려버린 마놀리스 클레조스, 죽는 날까지 신자유주의 독재와 맞서 싸운 그의 명복을 빈다.

https://bit.ly/2JpnkEH



Greek Resistance Hero Manolis Glezos Dies at 98

By Tasos Kokkinidis -Mar 30, 2020



Second World War Resistance fighter turned politician Manolis Glezos passed away on Monday at the age of 98.


Glezos is best remembered for his heroic act, together with Lakis Santas in 1941, of climbing Athens’ Acropolis Hill at night and taking down the Nazi swastika flag flying there early the next morning, dealing a powerful symbolic blow to the powerful occupying forces.


This incredibly courageous move later proved to be just the beginning of the great Greek resistance to the Nazi terror.


It was a gallant act, an act of proud defiance, which ultimately raised the spirits of all the Greek people and made them believe that they could indeed resist the Nazis despite their military might.


It was a clear demonstration of the indomitable power of the human spirit against the power of guns.



Born in the village of Apiranthos (Aperathu), Naxos, Glezos moved to Athens in 1935 together with his family, where a few years later he participated in the creation of an anti-fascist youth group opposed to the Italian occupation of the Dodecanese and the dictatorship of Ioannis Metaxas.


Glezos asked to join the Greek Army along the Albanian front to fight against Italy at the onset of World War II, but he was rejected because he was underage. During the Axis occupation of Greece, he worked for the Hellenic Red Cross and the municipality of Athens, while still being actively involved in the Resistance.


The end of World War II was not the end of Glezos’ tribulations, however. On March 3, 1948, in the midst of the Greek Civil War, he was put on trial for his political convictions and sentenced to death multiple times by the national government.


His death sentence was reduced to a life sentence in 1950. Despite still being imprisoned, Glezos was elected as a member of the Hellenic Parliament in 1951, under the flag of the United Democratic Left, also known as EDA.


Over the course of four decades, Glezos had been imprisoned numerous times by the Germans, the Italians and then by Greek rightwing and military governments, and was even tortured and put in solitary confinement.


“They say to survive in prison you should love yourself, eat and read. Well, I never loved myself, I didn’t care about food — but I constantly read,” he told the Financial Times in 2016.


After the restoration of democracy in Greece in 1974, Glezos participated in the revival of EDA. He was elected a member of the Greek Parliament on a Panhellenic Socialist Movement (PASOK) ticket in the elections of October, 1981 and June, 1985.


In 1984 he was elected Member of the European Parliament, again on a PASOK ticket.



Standing alone in the rain, and with the support of a cane, Manolis Glezos pays tribute to the dead of the 1973 Students’ Uprising at the Polytechnic University in downtown Athens.

Glezos was elected as an MP for the Coalition of Radical Left (SYRIZA) party in Greece’s June, 2012 parliamentary elections.


He also served as a SYRIZA candidate for the European Parliament in the elections of May 25, 2014. He was elected to that body with over 430,000 votes, receiving more than any other candidate in Greece.


At age 91, the Resistance hero also became the oldest individual ever elected to the European Parliament in the 2014 elections.


Glezos publicly apologized in January of 2016 for having trusted Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras after the government negotiated a painful third financial bailout. The political veteran remarked at that time “I’m not disappointed, I’m furious.”





Posted by NJ원시

댓글을 달아 주세요

정책비교/국제정치2020. 3. 12. 12:12

[미국 민주당 대선 후보 경선, 단상] 필자는 2016년과 달리,2020년 민주당 경선에서 버니 샌더스 돌풍을 그렇게 크게 기대하지는 않았다. 두 가지 이유에서인데, 하나는 버니 샌더스와 20대 신진스타 알렉산드리아 오케이시오 코테즈 등 그룹 사이에 미드필더가 존재하지 않는다는 약점 때문이었다.

#정의당_심상정_리더십의 한계도 버니 샌더스와 비슷하다는 점을 필자는 2008년부터 거의 100개 넘는 글을 통해서 "미드필더 강화론"을 제안해오고 있다. 빠른 시일 내에 교정하지 않거나, 대안을 찾지 못하면, 또다시 시행착오를 범할 확률이 크다.


두번째는 미국 민주당 내, 흑인 민주당 기득권 층이 엄청나게 두텁다는 것인데, 이에 대한 버니 샌더스 팀의 대안이 약했다. 2016년에도 힐러리 클린턴을 민주당 후보로 만든 주력군대가 민주당내 흑인 간부들이다. 이는 미국 현대정치사에서 역사적으로 형성된 것이기 때문에, 세밀한 수술을 가하지 않으면 바꾸기가 쉽지 않다.


[아래 가디언 분석기사]에서 주목해서 볼 것은,

버니 샌더스 지지층은 고졸 백인 청년들, 이에 비해 조 바이든의 경우, 노년 흑인층, 노년 중도층 교외 거주 백인들이다.

청년들은 소셜 미디어,트위터에서 버니 샌더스를 지지하지만,

막상 프라이머리, 코커스 투표장에는 나오는 숫자가, 조 바이든 지지자들보다 적었다.  본선도 그렇지만, 18세~30세 사이 투표율이 낮다는 지적이다. 


[논평] 2020 11월 대선에서, 러스트 벨트, 전통적인 민주당 '주'였다가, 지난번 트럼프를 지지해버린 미시건 주는 '부동 주 swing state'이다. 2016년 버니 샌더스는 49.68%로 48.26%을 얻은 힐러리 클린턴을 역전승하고 기염을 토했다. 그러나 2020년 조 바이든이 53%, 버니는 36%밖에 얻지 못했다.


미시건 프라이머리에서 버니의 패배는 쓰라리다.


미국 민주당은 아직도 버니 샌더스를 품기에는 당기득권층이 관료주의적이고 관성에 빠져있다. 그리고 민주당 주류는 아직 거대 기업의 로비의 틀 안에 갇혀 있고, 정경유착에 빠져있다.


과연 새로운 대중운동이 투표장으로까지 이어지게 만들 차세대 버니 샌더스가 나올 것인가?


이번 민주당 경선이 버니에게 굉장히 어렵게 되었지만, 그리고 많이들 예견했지만, 그가 지난 40년 넘게 보여준 일관된 민주적 사회주의 노선과 지방자치 '시장' 경험은 향후 미국 정치에 균열을 내고 새로운 정치가들을 만드는데 기여할 것이다.







(조 바이든 지지: 18세~44세 사이 36%, 45세 이상은 64% : 미시건 주) 






(미국 거대 제약회사의 로비력은 세계에서 가장 막강하다. 미국인들에게 병원비,약값 부담은 OECD 국가들 중에서도 단연 최상이다. )



(미국 노조가 약화되자, 그 노동 소득도 줄어들었다)


참고 기사: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/10/why-bernie-sanders-lost-michigan


https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/2020-michigan-primary-election-results/story?id=69437035

Posted by NJ원시

댓글을 달아 주세요

정책비교/국제정치2020. 1. 24. 15:42

Nakjung Kim

January 9 at 1:04 PM · 


10억 아랍인들의 눈이 미국 트럼프 재선보다 더 중요하다.


한국 정부가 호르무즈 해협에 미국의 요구에 따라 연락장교를 파견했다는 뉴스를 접하고 :


(1) 실익도 명분도 전혀 없는 한국군사력 '파병' 및 지원은 하지 말아야 한다. 만약 미국과 이란이 호르무즈 해협에서 군사적 충돌을 일으키면, 브렌트 원유는 현재 68.78달러에서 1배럴당 100달러까지 치솟을 것이고, 석유수입국인 한국 (일본,중국 등)은 직격탄을 맞을 것이기 때문이다.


(2) 다행히 이란과 미국의 확전은 없을 것으로 보인다. 이란과 미국이 자존심 살리는 정도의 군사행동을 개시했기 때문이다.


(3) 전망: 하지만 이란과 미국의 충돌은 전면전은 아니더라도, 이라크, 레바논, 에맨, 시리아, 쿠르드 주거지역 등에서 친이란-시아파와 미국 동맹군 사이 국지전과 테러양상은 지속될 것이다. 미국은 11월 대선 때문에, 이란은 국내경제 악화와 시민들 불만으로 전면전을 수행할 수 없다.


(4) 트럼프는 미국의 오랜 외교전술을 따라, 내치를 위해 외교전쟁을 일으켰다. 11월 대선과 탄핵국면탈피를 위해, 이란의 보수강경파 솔레이마니를 제거했다. 이는 이라크에 대한 미국의 지배력 재확인, 이스라엘과 사우디 등 동맹국에 대한 힘 과시 용이기도 하다. 하지만 트럼프는 이란과의 장기전이나 전면전은 시도할 수 없고, 하지도 않을 것이다. 트럼프는 '비지니스맨' 노선을 견지해 '화폐 가치'를 추구하고, 선거에 이길 수 있는 경제성장과 미국의 힘 과시 정도로 만족할 것이다.


(5) 트럼프와 미국의 군사적 공격은 아랍권의 민주화, 경제적 종교적 자립에 전혀 도움이 되지 않는다. 이번 트럼프의 솔레이마니 보수파 거두 제거로, 이란, 이라크, 레바논 및 아랍권에서 일어나고 있는 시민들의 '반부패 운동'과 민주화 운동에는 더 불리한 정치적 환경이 조성되었다.


(6) 911 테러 지원국이 이라크 사담 후세인이고, 미국과 전면전을 벌일 수 있는 대량학살무기를 이라크가 제조하고 있기 때문에, 미국이 이라크를 침략했다. 하지만 실제 이라크에서는 대량학살무기도 발견되지 않았고, 911 테러 지원국이라는 증거도 없었다. 이것은 조지 부시 II 대통령도 자기 실수라고 인정했다.

미국이 이라크를 점령하고 있는 한, 미국과 이란, 미국동맹국들과 다른 아랍권 국가들의 긴장은 더 악화될 것이다.


(7) 한국은 미국의 이해관계가 걸린 아랍국가들과의 외교에서, 미국의 군사적 동맹요구를 수용할 필요가 없다. 아랍 국가들과의 다양한 방식의 외교관계들을 만드는 게 한국이 해야할 일이며, 아랍 국가들 내부에서 일어나고 있는 다양한 민주화 운동세력들을 지원해야 한다.


호르무즈 해협이 경제적,군사적으로 요충지인 이유 요약 (bbc news)


미국 아브라함 링컨 항공모함 호르무즈 해협으로 진출, 긴장 상태 유지.


(1) 오만에 위치한 호르무즈 해협은 아시아 유럽 북아메리카 등으로 석유를 수출하는데 가장 중요한 통로이다.


(2) 호르무즈 해협은 오만과 이란 사이에 위치하고, 가장 가까운 거리는 21마일 (34 km) 이다. 배가 들어오고 나가는 길은 2차선 해양로이고, 이 두 구간 사이 거리는 3.2 km 이다. 전 세계 석유 수출의 5분의 1이 이 호르무즈 해협을 통해 각 국가들로 팔려나간다.


호르무즈 해협 1일 물동량은 1900만 배럴 

말라카 (Malacca) 해협을 통해 나가는 석유 수출량은 1600만 배럴 

수에즈 운하를 통해 수출되는 석유량은 550만 (1일) 이다.


(3) 지정학적 특징: 교통 대란이 발생하기 쉬운 가장 혼잡 지역임.


호르무즈 해협은 전 세계 석유수출 교통요지들 중에 가장 교통대란이 심한 지역이다.


(4) 이란 경제에 필수적인 지역


또한 이란 경제에서도 가장 중요한 해협이다. 석유 수출이 이란 수출에서 차지하는 비중은 3분의 2이다. 2017년의 경우 660억 달러에 육박했다. 따라서 미국 트럼프가 호르무즈 해협 해상 봉쇄를 하는 것에 대해 이란은 극렬 반대할 수 밖에 없다.


(5) 이란과 미국의 갈등, 이란의 위협 방식


트럼프에 맞서서 이란이 들고나온 카드는, 이란이 다른 나라의 석유 수출도 막아버리겠다고 미국과 사우디를 협박하는 것이다. 이란은 호르무즈 해협을 봉쇄하고 석유수출을 아예 봉쇄하겠다고 미국에 대들었다.


(6) 이란과 이라크 사이 '탱커 전쟁' 1908년대


실제로 이런 일이 발생한 적이 있다. 1980년대 이란과 이라크 전쟁 당시, 상대 국가의 석유 수출을 막기 위해 호르무즈 해협에서 전투를 벌였다. 이것이 '탱커 전쟁'이다. 240 석유 화물 탱커가 공격당했고 그것들 중 55개가 난파당해 침몰했다.


(7) 이란 전투 준비 방식


이란은 어떻게 호르무즈 해협에 군사적 영향력을 행사할 수 있는가? 해상 어뢰를 설치. 잠수함을 배치하고, 선박 공격용 미사일을 발사하고, 전투용 보트를 석유 탱커 가까이에 포진시킨다.


(8) 이란과 미국이 전쟁을 벌인다면, 세계 경제, 정치에 미칠 영향


이러한 무력 시위는 전 세계 석유 가격을 상승시킬 것이다. 그리고 석유를 원자재로 사용하는 다른 제조업에 치명타가 될 것이다. 특히 자동차 원료의 70%를 차지하는 석유 가격 상승은 당장 일상 생활에 영향을 끼친다.


호르무즈 해협 봉쇄로 인해 이란과 미국 동맹국 사이에 전쟁이 벌어질 가능성도 크다. 이란과 미국 모두 전쟁을 원치 않는다고 말하지만, '자위권 발동' '자국 방어'를 위해서는 전쟁도 불사할 것이라고 발표했다.



Posted by NJ원시

댓글을 달아 주세요

정책비교/국제정치2020. 1. 5. 02:19
새옹지마다. '한 자녀 ' 인구 정책으로 본 한 역설이다. 한 자녀 정책이 아들 선호로 이어지고, 이는 '신부값'을 천정부지로 솟구치게 만들었고, 부익부빈익부를 더 강화시키고, 없는 집 아들들은 신부감을 구하지 못해 40대 노총각들이 발생했다. '아들 선호' 사상이 '아들 부담'으로 새옹지마가 되었다. 


중국이 1979년 '한 자녀 정책'을 실시했다. 인구 증가를 막기 위함이었다. 그러나 중국인들은 아들이 노후를 책임져줄 수 있다고 믿고, 여자 아이를 낙태시켰고, 현재 남녀 인구 구성에서 남자가 여자보다 6천만명이 더 많다. 이는 신랑 신부 짝맺기에 심각한 문제점을 던져줬다. 여성 짝을 찾지 못하는 중국 남자들이 생겨나고, 이들은 주로 소득이 상대적으로 낮은 농촌 지역에 몰려있다. 

농촌 남성들은 돈도 벌고 짝을 찾기 위해서 도시로 몰려들고 있다.


출처: economist 페이스북

중국 남녀 성비 불균형 심각. 

중국 여성, 6천만명 부족 신부 부족으로 인해 중국 사회가 뒤틀리고 있다. 
신부감 부족은 중국이 '한 자녀 정책'으로 취한 다음 더 심각해졌다. 

'한 자녀 정책'은 인구 증가를 막기 위해 1979년 도입되었다. 중국 부모들은 남자 아이가 노후생활을 책임져줄 것이라고 믿었다. 수백만의 여아가 낙태수술로 사라졌다. 중국의 '한 자녀 정책'은 2015년 폐지되었으나, 그 악영향은 지금까지도 이어지고 있다. 

중국에서 결혼할 때 전통적으로 '신랑' 측 부모가 결혼비용을 지불하고, 그 신랑 신부에게 돈도 주고 재산도 줘야한다. 이러한 관례는 '신부 값'이라고 불리운다. 신부감이 부족한 탓에, 이 '신부값'이 천정부지로 솟구쳤다. 10년 전 중국 농촌 지역에서 '신부값'이 2천~3천 위안이었으나 이제는 20만~30만 위안으로 100배나 올랐다. 

'신부값'은 구매자 시장이다. 중국에서 성비 불균형은 아들 가진 부모들을 '양극단'으로 내몰고 있다. 부모들은 아들에게 돈을 줘서 보석을 구매하게 하고, 값비싼 결혼식 사진을 찍어줄 것도 약속한다. 

중국 부모들은 가처분소득의 38%를 저축하고 있고, 대출도 한다. 

중국 여자들은 이러한 성비 불균형으로 생긴 이득을 취하고 있다. 여자들이 부잣집 남자들과 결혼하는 등. 

반면에 가난하고 많이 배우지 못하고 농촌지역에 사는 남자들은 '노총각' 신세로 전락한다. 이렇게 짝을 구하지 못한 노총각들은 지역적으로 사회적으로 주로 가난한 농촌지역에 몰려있다. 


이러한 '노총각' 급증은 중국사회를 불안정하게 만들 수도 있다는 우려가 나오고 있다. 짝을 구하지 못한 노총각으로 인해, 매춘, 여성 납치, 범죄조직의 증가 등 사회적 우려가 터져 나오고 있다. 


하지만 이러한 범죄보다는, 짝을 구하지 못한 남자들이 직장을 구하기 위해서, 또 돈을 벌어 신부감을 만들기 위해서 도시로 몰려들고 있다.  


40대까지도 결혼을 못해 '결혼 포기자'가 되더라도, 이제 너무 나이가 많아서 사회적 반란을 일으키킬 수도 없다. 중국은 앞으로 수십년간 신부감 부족으로 고통스런 '결혼 압박' 시대를 맞이하고 있다. 


신부감 부족난을 해소하기도 전에, 농촌 지역에 사는 부모들은 자기 아들들을 이미 '경제적인 짐'으로 간주하기 시작했다. 과거에는 자기들 노후를 책임져줄 것으로 믿었지만, 이제는 그 반대가 되었다.




China's population is missing 60m women—partly as a result of the country's one-child policy. The gender imbalance is bending the country's society and economy out of shape https://econ.st/2MCnCdL



중국 남녀 성비 불균형 심각.




중국 여성, 6천만명 부족



신부 부족으로 인해 중국 사회가 뒤틀리고 있다.




신부감 부족은 중국이 '한 자녀 정책'으로 취한 다음 더 심각해졌다.




'한 자녀 정책'은 인구 증가를 막기 위해 1979년 도입되었다.



중국 부모들은 남자 아이가 노후생활을 책임져줄 것이라고 믿었다.




수백만의 여아가 낙태수술로 사라졌다.



중국의 '한 자녀 정책'은 2015년 폐지되었으나,



그 악영향은 지금까지도 이어지고 있다.





중국에서 결혼할 때 전통적으로 '신랑' 측 부모가  


결혼비용을 지불하고, 그 신랑 신부에게 돈도 주고 재산도 줘야한다.




이러한 관례는 '신부 값'이라고 불리운다.



신부감이 부족한 탓에, 이 '신부값'이 천정부지로 솟구쳤다.



10년 전 중국 농촌 지역에서 '신부값'이 2천~3천 위안이었으나 


이제는 20만~30만 위안으로 100배나 올랐다.



'신부값'은 구매자 시장이다.



중국에서 성비 불균형은 아들 가진 부모들을 '양극단'으로 내몰고 있다.




부모들은 아들에게 돈을 줘서 보석을 구매하게 하고,



값비싼 결혼식 사진을 찍어줄 것도 약속한다.



중국 부모들은 가처분소득의 38%를 저축하고 있고, 



대출도 한다.



중국 여자들은 이러한 성비 불균형으로 생긴 이득을 취하고 있다.



그래서 여자들이 부잣집 남자들과 결혼도 하고,



반면에 가난하고 많이 배우지 못하고 농촌지역에 사는 남자들은 '노총각' 신세로 전락한다.





이렇게 짝을 구하지 못한 노총각들은 지역적으로 사회적으로 주로 가난한 농촌지역에 몰려있다.



이러한 '노총각' 급증은 중국사회를 불안정하게 만들 수도 있다는 우려가 나오고 있다.



짝을 구하지 못한 노총각으로 인해, 매춘, 여성 납치, 범죄조직의 증가 등 사회적 우려가 터져 나오고 있다.




하지만 이러한 범죄보다는, 짝을 구하지 못한 남자들이 직장을 구하기 위해서, 또 돈을 벌어 신부감을 만들기 위해서  도시로 몰려들 가능성이 더 크다.








40대까지도 결혼을 못해 '결혼 포기자'가 되더라도, 이제 너무 나이가 많아서 사회적 반란을 일으킬 수도 없다.






중국은 앞으로 수십년간 신부감 부족으로 고통스런 '결혼 압박' 시대를 맞이하고 있다.







신부감 부족난을 해소하기도 전에, 농촌 지역에 사는 부모들은 자기 아들들을 이미 '경제적인 짐'으로 간주하기 시작했다.


과거에는 자기들 노후를 책임져줄 것으로 믿었지만, 이제는 그 반대가 되었다.







Posted by NJ원시

댓글을 달아 주세요

정책비교/국제정치2019. 12. 13. 19:58

.

보리스 존슨 (영국 보수당) 선거 승리


브렉시트 가속화



Election results 2019: Boris Johnson hails 'new dawn' after historic victory

Media captionBoris Johnson says he will work "night and day, flat out" to prove his backers right

Boris Johnson has promised to deliver Brexit and repay the trust of voters after he led the Conservatives to an "historic" general election win.

The prime minister - who is meeting the Queen to ask to form a new government - has a Commons majority of 78, with one seat still to declare.

He said he would work "flat out" and lead a "people's government".

Jeremy Corbyn said he would not fight another election as Labour leader, amid recriminations over the party's defeat.

The opposition was swept aside by the Conservatives in its traditional heartlands in the Midlands and north-eastern England and lost six seats in Wales.

With just one constituency - the Cornish seat of St Ives - left to declare, the Conservatives have 364 MPs, Labour 203, the SNP 48, Liberal Democrats 11 and the DUP eight.

Sinn Fein has seven MPs, Plaid Cymru four and the SDLP has two. The Green Party and Alliance Party have one each.

The Brexit Party - which triumphed in the summer's European Parliament elections - failed to win any Westminster seats.

The Conservative Party's Commons majority is its largest since Margaret Thatcher won a third term in 1987.

In his victory speech, Mr Johnson told activists it was a "new dawn" for the country, echoing comments Labour's Tony Blair made when he won the general election of 1997.

He thanked Labour voters, many of whom, he said, had backed the Conservatives for the first time, vowing to lead a "people's government" and fulfil the "sacred trust" placed in him.

"You may intend to return to Labour next time round, and if that is the case, I am humbled that you have put your trust in me, and I will never take your support for granted," he said.

"I will make it my mission to work night and day, flat out to prove that you were right in voting for me this time, and to earn your support in the future."

Media captionElection 2019: The story of the night as the results came in

Mr Johnson said the electorate's "voice" had "been heard", adding: "The people want change... We cannot and we must not let them down."

Labour has suffered its worst defeat since 1935, losing seats across northern England, the Midlands and Wales in areas which backed Brexit in the 2016 referendum.

And Jo Swinson has quit as Liberal Democrat leader after losing her Dunbartonshire East seat to the SNP by 149 votes

More on Election 2019
Presentational line

Mr Johnson said the Tories' thumping victory had "smashed the roadblock" in Parliament over Brexit and put an end to the "miserable threats" of another referendum on Europe.

He said: "We will get Brexit done on time by 31 January - no ifs, no buts, not maybe."

Speaking after he was re-elected as MP for Uxbridge and South Ruislip, he said there had been a "political earthquake".

During the six-week campaign, Mr Johnson - who became prime minister in July after a Tory leadership contest - focused relentlessly on a single message, to "get Brexit done".

Labour primarily campaigned on a promise to end austerity by increasing spending on public services.

Presentational grey line
Analysis box by Laura Kuenssberg, political editor

Johnson's gamble pays off

The same prime minister. But a new map.

A victory bigger than the Tories, haunted by 2017, had dreamt of. As the hours ticked by, red flipped to blue, familiar faces forced out of their seats.

Boris Johnson gambled that he could win an election with support from towns and communities where voting Conservative might almost have seemed a sin.

And he won.

The Conservatives' majority will have an almost immediate effect on the country - unless something strange happens we will leave the European Union next month because behind him on the green benches will be new Tory MPs who will vote through his Brexit bill, his position strong enough to subdue any opposition.

Presentational grey line

At 33%, the party's share of the vote is down around eight points on the 2017 general election and is lower than that achieved by Neil Kinnock in 1992.

Some traditional Labour constituencies, such as Darlington, Sedgefield and Workington, in the north of England, will have a Conservative MP for the first time in decades - or in the case of Bishop Auckland and Blyth Valley - for the first time since the seat was created.

Speaking at his election count in Islington North, where he was re-elected with a reduced majority, Mr Corbyn said Labour had put forward a "manifesto of hope" but "Brexit has so polarised debate it has overridden so much of normal political debate".

Jo SwinsonImage copyrightPA MEDIA
Image captionJo Swinson was the highest-profile casualty of the night

The BBC's Iain Watson said he understood Mr Corbyn wanted to stay on for a "few more months" but he could face "sustained pressure" to go sooner, given the scale of the defeat.

Former Labour MP John Mann said the leader's unpopularity on the doorstep was palpable and Mr Corbyn should have "gone already".

Others have blamed the party's support for another Brexit referendum and the long-running anti-Semitism row. Margaret Hodge, MP for Barking, said Labour had become the "nasty party".

Labour chairman Ian Lavery said he was "desperately disappointed", adding that voters in Labour's "heartlands" were "aggrieved" at the party's Brexit stance.

In other developments:

  • Sir Ed Davey and Lib Dem president Sal Brinton are taking over as interim leaders of the Lib Dems
  • The Lib Dems took Richmond Park, in south-west London, from Conservative minister Zac Goldsmith, but high-profile former Tory and Labour recruits Chuka Umunna, Luciana Berger and Sam Gyimah all fell short
  • Nigel Dodds, the leader of the Democratic Unionist Party at Westminster, lost his Belfast North seat to Sinn Fein
  • Labour's Caroline Flint - who backed the Tory Brexit deal in defiance of her party - and the party's longest-serving MP, Dennis Skinner, were among high-profile opposition figures to be defeated
  • Remain-backing former Tory minister Dominic Grieve came second to the Conservative candidate in Beaconsfield
  • Anna Soubry, who quit the Tories to form a pro-Remain group of MPs, lost her Nottinghamshire seat to the Tories, as did the other members of The Independent Group for Change
  • Nigel Farage said his Brexit Party had taken votes from Labour in Tory target seats, although he himself had spoiled his ballot paper "as I could not bring myself to vote Conservative".

Scottish National Party leader and Scotland's First Minister Nicola Sturgeon said it had been an "exceptional night" for her party.

She said Scotland had sent a "very clear message" that it did not want a Boris Johnson Conservative government and the prime minister did not have a mandate to take Scotland out of the EU.

It was also a "strong endorsement" for Scotland having a choice over its own future in an another independence referendum, she added.

Mr Johnson has been congratulated on his "great win" by US President Donald Trump and the EU's top official, Charles Michel, who said he hoped Parliament would approve the Brexit withdrawal treaty agreed in October as "soon as possible".

The legislation paving the way for Brexit on 31 January is due to come before the new Parliament for the first time next Friday.

There is expected to be a minor cabinet reshuffle on Monday, to fill vacant positions such as Welsh and culture secretaries.

A more thorough reshaping is likely to be put on hold until February, after the UK has left the EU, with a Budget statement in March.

















General Election 2019: What's behind the Conservative victory?

Woman carrying a ballot boxImage copyrightGETTY IMAGES

Boris Johnson has won a decisive majority, on the back of a big swing from Labour to the Conservatives in Leave-voting Britain.

Yet north of the border the SNP dramatically almost swept the board.

With almost all results now declared, the prime minister is set to win a majority of 78 seats - the biggest Tory majority since 1987.

Meanwhile, at 44%, the party's share of the vote is set to be at its highest since 1979, when Margaret Thatcher became prime minister.

Labour, in contrast, finds itself with little more than 200 seats, even fewer than the party won in its previous worst post-war result in 1983.

The difference between Leave and Remain seats

However, the swing in the Tories' favour varied dramatically across the country.

In those seats where more than 60% of voters backed Leave in the 2016 EU referendum, the increase in Conservative support on average was 6%.

However, in those seats where more than 60% voted Remain, the party's vote actually fell by three points.

How the parties' share changed in strong Leave and strong Remain areas.

In contrast, Labour's vote fell on average by more than 10 points in the most pro-Leave areas.

Its vote fell by more than six points in the most pro-Remain ones.

Working-class and middle-class voters

This pattern had a clear impact on the geography of the election.

Support for the Conservatives rose by four points in the Midlands, the North East and Yorkshire - the regions of England that voted most heavily in favour of Leave.

In contrast, the party's vote fell back by a point in London and the South East.

And in Scotland, the party's vote fell by as much as four points.

Conversely, Labour saw its vote fall by 12 to 13 points in the North East and Yorkshire, while it fell by only six or seven points in London and the South of England.

The result also saw Labour lose ground heavily in its traditional working-class heartlands.

BBC north of England election results map

Support for the party fell by 11 points in those constituencies with most voters in working-class jobs.

Its share of the vote fell by only seven points in those with most middle-class voters.

The bond between Labour and its traditional working-class base is now badly strained.

In the EU referendum working-class voters voted heavily to leave the EU. These voters had already swung quite strongly to the Conservatives in 2017.

Labour tried to retain their support - remaining ambiguous about whether it was a pro-Remain or a pro-Leave party.

But this election simply saw the pro-Conservative trend continue yet further.

As a result, Labour dramatically lost many a seat in the North of England and the Midlands - places such as Ashfield, Bishop Auckland, and Workington - that had never previously elected a Conservative MP in a general election.

An emboldened SNP

The success of the Conservatives in England and Wales was matched by that of the SNP in Scotland.

The party has won 48 of the 59 seats north of the border, and 45% of the vote across Scotland as a whole.

It is a result almost as good as the party's historic performance in the 2015 election.

Presentational line

Scotland vote share

After 59 of 59 seats

Party% share
Scottish National Party45.0%
Conservative25.1%
Labour18.6%
Liberal Democrat9.5%
Green1.0%
The Brexit Party0.5%

Scotland vote share change since 2017

After 59 of 59 seats

  • Scottish National Party+8.1Gained
  • Liberal Democrat+2.8Gained
  • Green+0.8Gained
  • The Brexit Party+0.5Gained
  • Conservative-3.5Lost
  • Labour-8.5Lost
Presentational line

And, in a country that voted in favour of Remain, it is likely to embolden the SNP in its pursuit of a second independence referendum.

That is a ballot to which the Conservatives are strongly opposed. So, a constitutional clash between the Scottish and UK governments seems likely.

Liberal Democrat losses

One of the SNP's biggest scalps was the Dunbartonshire East seat of Liberal Democrat leader Jo Swinson - a defeat that capped a miserable night for the Liberal Democrats.

Despite advancing more strongly in pro-Remain areas, the party seems likely to end up with only 11 or 12 seats.

This will be no more than the number they won in 2017, even though their share of the vote is up by four points.

None of the many MPs who defected to the party during the last Parliament have been able to retain their seats.

Presentational grey line

More from Sir John Curtice

Presentational grey line

Fewer than half backed Brexit parties

The announcement of the election was greeted with concern about the level of turnout, for a ballot held just a fortnight before Christmas.

In the event, about 67% of voters made it to the polls - just two points down on 2017.

Turnout fell most markedly in seats where Labour are relatively strong, suggesting that some of those who usually support the party opted to stay at home.

Turnout at UK elections, 1979-2019

The Conservatives' success means that Britain will now leave the EU at the end of January.

However, it seems unlikely to end the debate about Britain's relationship with the EU.

The country's divisions over Brexit were exposed in the very different swings across the country.

Meanwhile, at 47%, fewer than half of voters backed the Conservatives or the Brexit Party - the parties in favour of leaving the EU without another referendum.

This is a point to which opponents of Brexit are likely to point in the weeks and months to come.

But for now at least, the day clearly belongs to Mr Johnson.


Posted by NJ원시

댓글을 달아 주세요

정책비교/국제정치2019. 11. 23. 02:20


거시적인 외교 노선이 부재했다. 즉흥적인 몇 가지 조치들을 취한 탓이다. 

문제 출발점이 일본 제국주의자들이 조선인 강제징용이었고, 일본 아베 수상이 '더이상 2차 세계대전 조선인 강제징용과 배상 문제를 논의하지 말라'고 대응하면서, 한국의 대일 수출의 호혜적 조치들을 박탈했다. 

문재인 정부가 이에 대한 대응책으로 내세운 것이 한일군사정보보호협정 (GSOMIA 지소미아) 종료 카드였다.


한국과 일본이 티격태격 기싸움만 하다가, 한미일 동맹의 맹주 미국의 압박으로 다시 원점으로 되돌아왔다.


여러가지 평가들이 나온다. 한국의 외교적 승리, 혹은 일본에게 더 많이 내준 꼴, 미국의 패권 재확인 등.

이번 한일 갈등에서 드러난 것은, 총체적인 군사, 경제, 정치적 힘관계였다. 

그리고 장기적인 외교 정책들이 얼마나 효과적으로 작동하고 있었는가, 또는 그렇지 못했는가를 보여줬다.


냉전체제의 관성인 한미일 대 북중러의 대결구도, 혹은 두 동맹체제 내부 강화를 깨부수기 위한 한국의 외교 노선이 필요하다.

그런데 북미 핵회담과 이번 한일 역사청산,무역갈등,지소미아 종료 등에서 드러난 것은, 한국이 경제규모에 비해서 독립적인 외교노선이 수립되지 못했다는 것이다. 말로는 '독립과 자주'를 외치고, 일본과 미국의 패권주의를 넘어서자고 '민족주의' 의식을 고취했지만,

실제 세부적인 외교 정책들은 부재했다. 



외교란 그냥 영어 통역가나 번역가에 그쳐서는 곤란하다. 외국어는 분명히 능통해야 하고, 탁월한 외교에 필수조건이지만, 충분조건은 아니다. 





출처: http://news.kbs.co.kr/news/view.do?ncd=4329474


하룻밤 새 극적 반전…‘지소미아’ 막판 유예 결정 이유는?

입력 2019.11.22 (21:03)




하룻밤 새 극적 반전…‘지소미아’ 막판 유예 결정 이유는?



[앵커]


그동안 우리 정부는 '일본의 태도변화 없이는 지소미아를 예정대로 종료하겠다'고 밝혀왔었죠.


그래서 종료 수순을 밟는 게 아니냐는 관측이 다수였었는데, 막판에 반전이 있었습니다.


그 배경을 알아보겠습니다.


청와대를 연결합니다.


이병도 기자, 어제(21일)만해도 종료 가능성이 무게가 실렸었는데 갑자기 분위기가 반전됐어요?


[기자]


어제(21일) 오후만 해도 청와대 안에서 종료 관측이 지배적이었습니다.


그런데 오늘(22일) NSC 상임위에 문 대통령이 이례적으로 직접 참석한 데다, 강경화 장관이 G20 외교장관회의가 열리는 일본으로 간다는 사실이 알려지면서 무게 추는 반전 가능성으로 급격히 쏠렸습니다.


[앵커]


이렇게 극적 반전이 일어난 이유가 있을 텐데요,


어떻게 분석해볼 수 있을까요?


[기자]


청와대는 반전 이유를 밝히진 않았습니다.


그러면서도 "문재인 외교의 승리"라고 자평했는데요.


지난 4일 아베 총리와 깜짝 회담을 이끈 문재인 대통령의 한일 관계 정상화 의지가 반영된 결과라는 겁니다.


하지만 G20 외교장관회의에 온 스틸웰 미 국무부 차관보가 물밑에서 중재 역할을 활발하게 한 것으로 알려졌습니다.


미국이 한일 양국을 압박하며 중재했다는 겁니다.




[앵커]


그런 미국의 압력, 미국의 영향이 컸다, 이렇게 봐야되겠죠?​


[기자]


이달 들어 미국무부와 국방부 고위 인사들이 잇따라 방한했던 것 기억하실 겁니다.


지소미아 유지해야 한다, 공개적으로 압박했고요.


그래서 지난 월요일 김현종 2차장이 극비리에 미국을 다녀오기도 했습니다.


한미 관계 균열 우려까지 나오는 상황에서 일단은 지소미아를 연장하고 대화를 시작하는 게 국익에 도움이 되겠다, 판단한 것으로 보입니다.


[앵커]


얻은 거 없이 양보만 한 게 아니냐, 일부에선 이런 말도 나옵니다.


어떻게 봐야될까요?


[기자]


정부는 일본의 논리를 깼다는 점에 의의를 두고 있습니다.


강제징용 배상 문제를 수출규제와 연결시킨 일본의 주장을 지소미아와 수출규제를 엮어 깼다는 겁니다.


청와대는 다음달 한일 정상회담을 갖기로 했다고 밝혔는데요.


다음 달 중국에서 열리는 한중일 정상회의에서 아베 총리와 만나 보다 실질적인 논의가 이뤄질 것으로 기대하고 있습니다.

Posted by NJ원시

댓글을 달아 주세요

정책비교/국제정치2019. 11. 22. 12:25

제레미 코빈, 60초 영국노동당 정책 설명,Jeremy Corbyn 



Posted by NJ원시

댓글을 달아 주세요

정책비교/국제정치2019. 11. 7. 13:25

Nakjung Kim,November 6, 2012 · 


미국 대선


미국 대통령 선거는 한국과 다르다. 한국의 경우 다수 투표 획득자 1위가 바로 당선자가 된다. 그러나 미국은 전국 50개 주에 배당된 <선거인단> 538개 중 과반을 넘겨야 대통령에 당선된다.


각 주에 할당된 <선거인단 Electoral College 칼리지> 숫자는 위 지도 안에 표기되어 있다. 



캘리포니아 주가 55 표로 가장 많고, 알래스카 주는 3개로 가장 적습니다.






아래는 각 주별로 electoral college 표


Here is a list of the states and their electoral college votes:

:: Alabama 9

:: Alaska 3

:: Arizona 11

:: Arkansas 6

:: California 55

:: Colorado 9

:: Connecticut 7

:: Delaware 3

:: District of Columbia 3

:: Florida 29

:: Georgia 16

:: Hawaii 4

:: Idaho 4

:: Illinois 20

:: Indiana 11

:: Iowa 6

:: Kansas 6

:: Kentucky 8

:: Louisiana 8

:: Maine 4

:: Maryland 10

:: Massachusetts 11

:: Michigan 16

:: Minnesota 10

:: Mississippi 6

:: Missouri 10

:: Montana 3

:: Nebraska 5

:: Nevada 6

:: New Hampshire 4

:: New Jersey 14

:: New Mexico 5

:: New York 29

:: North Carolina 15

:: North Dakota 3

:: Ohio 18

:: Oklahoma 7

:: Oregon 7

:: Pennsylvania 20

:: Rhode Island 4

:: South Carolina 9

:: South Dakota 3

:: Tennessee 11

:: Texas 38

:: Utah 6

:: Vermont 3

:: Virginia 13

:: Washington 12

:: West Virginia 5

:: Wisconsin 10

:: Wyoming 3







Nakjung Kim

November 6, 2012 · 


역사적 사례를 보자. 1960년 유명한 TV 연설시대 개막과 섹시 맨의 등장 존 에프 케네디의 경우, 투표숫자에서는 0.2% 차로 겨우 이겼으나 (한국같은 경우 재검토에 해당), 선거인단 숫자는 303 대 219로 압도적인 표차로 공화당 후보 닉슨에 승리했다.


캘리포니아 주의 경우, 32표가 배정되는데, 민주당이 캘리포니아 주에서 이겼으므로 32표가 배정되고, 공화당 0표가 된다







Nakjung Kim


November 6, 2012 · 

2000년 선거에서 조지 부시가 민주당 알 고어를 이겼다. 유명한 플로리다 주 사건. 앨 고어 후보가 재검표를 포기.


만약 플로리다 주 25표를 민주당 후보 고어가 가져왔으면, 291표를 획득, 270표 과반을 넘겨 조지 부시를 이겼을 것이다.


2000년 선거 유권자 숫자로는 민주당 후보 앨 고어가 조지 부시에 0.5% 이겼다.


다수표결에 이기고도, 선거인단에서 패배해서, 낙선된 경우이다.


미국 연방 제도의 특징, 각 주의 주권을 인정한다는 의미에서 다수 투표 획득보다, 각 주의 선거인단 숫자를 존중해주고 있으나, '공정성' 논란이 계속되다. —





Nakjung Kim

November 6, 2012 · 

세계 각국은 온통 미국 선거 결과를 예상하고 보도하고 있다. 영국 BBC 오바마 우세 예상, 270표 과반 획득이 관건이다.







Posted by NJ원시

댓글을 달아 주세요

정책비교/국제정치2019. 10. 11. 18:12

트럼프와 김정은의 협상이 진척되지 못한 탓으로, 그들은 노벨 평화상을 수상하지 못한 것으로 보인다.

분발해서 성과를 내오기 바란다.





에티오피아 수상 아비 아메드가 2019년 노벨 평화상을 수상했다. 


수상 이유는 아비 아메드 수상이 지난 20년간 에티오피아와 에리트리아간의 군사적 대치상황을 타개했기 때문이다.


아비 아메드는 100번째 노벨 평화상 수상자가 되었다.


223명 개인 후보와 78개 단체가 이번 노벨 평화상 후보에 올랐다.





The 2019 Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded to Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed.

He was awarded the prize for his efforts to "achieve peace and international cooperation".

A peace deal, signed last year, ended a nearly 20-year military stalemate with Eritrea following the 1998-2000 border war.

He was named as the winner of the 100th Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo.

A total of 301 candidates had been nominated for the prestigious award, including 223 individuals and 78 organisations.

There had been great speculation over who would win the prize. Under the Nobel Foundation's rules, nomination shortlists are not allowed to be published for 50 years.


https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/nobel-peace-prize-2019-winner-dle-scli-intl/index.html



에티오피아 아비 아메드 수상과 에리트리아 대통령 이샤아 아프베키 



Posted by NJ원시

댓글을 달아 주세요

정책비교/국제정치2019. 9. 29. 14:48



캐나다 2019년 10월 연방 총선에서도 기후변화, 지구온난화가 쟁점이 될 것이다.


여론조사 기관에 따르면, 캐나다 83% 국민들이 2011~2018년 사이 기후 온난화를 경험했다고 답했다.

선거에서 기후 정의 주제가 중요한가? 퀘백 주 답변, 건강의료 35% 다음으로, 기후정의 34% (퀘백)가 중요하다.

캐나다 전체로는 건강의료 정책(35%),  기후정의 25% 로, 지구온난화에 대한 캐나다인의 우려를 보여줬다.

퀘백 주의 경우, 2017년, 2019년 홍수로 많은 피해를 입었다.



https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/parties-greening-up-pitches-as-environment-tops-list-of-voter-concerns



참고 1.http://Climate crisis as election catalyst: Will it change votes in Quebec? A growing number of Quebecers identify the environment as a top priority. It remains to be seen what impact that will have on voting day. MICHELLE LALONDE, MONTREAL GAZETTE Updated: September 28, 2019 SHARE ADJUST COMMENT PRINT 


Climate change has surged to the top of voter concern lists across the country during this federal campaign, nowhere more so than here in Quebec, where politicians are scrambling to respond to an unprecedented public call to action on the climate crisis. 


On Friday, Montreal was the backdrop to a massive climate rally, and dozens of other marches, protests and strikes demanding climate action took place all across Quebec and around the world this week. 


A number of federal, political and environmental leaders attended Montreal’s event, including marquee guest 16-year-old Swedish environmental activist Greta Thunberg who stood front and centre. 


Some businesses closed for the day on Friday, and many schools, CÉGEPs and universities cancelled classes or closed for the day to encourage participation by students, teachers and employees.


 “We are beginning to see a real shift in people’s attitudes,” said Erick Lachapelle, associate professor of political science at the Université de Montréal.


 “Whether or not that translates into what party they vote for come election day, that remains to be seen, but it’s probably one of the first elections in which the environment, which is rarely an election issue, might actually be one.” 


Lachapelle is one of the lead researchers on the Canadian Climate Opinion Maps project, an interactive map that allows voters and politicians to take the pulse of climate change awareness at the riding level. 


Using national surveys of more than 9,000 respondents from 2011-2018, the latest version of the project suggests 83 per cent of Canadians, and 89 per cent of Quebecers, believe that the planet is getting warmer. 


According to the map, a majority in every single riding in the country now believe the climate is changing and 79 per cent of Quebecers say this province is already experiencing the impacts of climate change.


 Federal, political and environmental leaders attended Montreal’s climate march Friday, including marquee guest 16-year-old Swedish activist Greta Thunberg who stood front and centre.

 JOHN MAHONEY / MONTREAL GAZETTE 


The map offers up some interesting surprises. 


For example, more than half of those surveyed in the riding of Beauce — where People’s Party of Canada Leader and climate change denier Maxime Bernier is seeking re-election — agreed with the scientific consensus that “Earth is getting warmer partly or mostly because of human activity.”


 And support for the idea of putting a price on carbon pollution is quite popular in the 12 Quebec ridings that voted Conservative in the 2015 election. 


In those ridings, support for a cap and trade system, which Quebec already has in place, hovers around 60 per cent, while support for the idea of increasing taxes on carbon-based fuels is around 50 per cent. 


Meanwhile, the Conservatives are campaigning on a promise to scrap the carbon tax. 


Lachapelle flagged the spike in Quebecers’ concern about climate change in the fall of 2018. 


He suggests awareness began to rise with the springtime flood waters in 2017 and surged again when Québec Solidaire put climate change firmly onto the political agenda during the 2018 provincial election. 


That October, the International Panel on Climate Change warned the world had little more than a decade to reduce CO2 emissions by 45 per cent in order to avoid the large-scale drought, famine, species loss, heat wave deaths, poverty and other dire consequences of warming beyond 1.5 degrees C. 


Record flooding in Quebec again last spring has only heightened awareness. 


A recent Ipsos poll suggests that 34 per cent of Quebecers say climate change will be the most important issue in determining how they will vote, almost on par with health care, which 35 per cent said was their number one concern.



 In Canada as a whole, 25 per cent said climate change was their key issue, after health care (35 per cent) and affordability and cost of living (27 per cent). 


This week on the campaign trail, Conservative Party Leader Andrew Scheer made a stop in Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau’s Montreal riding, where he raised the issue of the SNC-Lavalin scandal. 


He might want to take note of another recent poll that suggested 63 per cent of Quebecers say the environment is more important to their voting choice than issues of ethics


. Environmentalist Steven Guilbeault, the Liberal Party’s star candidate in Quebec, says:

 “I think we have a very good platform and I think we have a very good chance of being able to implement large chunks of it.” JOHN KENNEY / MONTREAL GAZETTE


 Trudeau, meanwhile, has been touting his Liberal Party as the only one that can really deliver on climate protection.


 The party’s star candidate in Quebec is Steven Guilbeault, a lifelong environmental activist who campaigned for Greenpeace for many years before he co-founded the environmental group Équiterre in 1998.


 He is running in Laurier—Saint-Marie riding. Guilbeault admits he took some flack from friends and fellow environmentalists when he joined the Liberals, considering the party approved the expansion of the Trans Mountain pipeline in its first mandate and then bought the project from Kinder Morgan for $4.5 billion.


 In a recent interview, Guilbeault said he disagrees with his party’s decisions on Trans Mountain, but he nonetheless chose to run with the Liberals because of their performance on climate issues.


 In its first mandate, he notes, the Liberal government managed to put a price on carbon pollution across the country, committed to eliminating coal plants by 2030, and is investing significantly in renewable energy. 


This week, Guilbeault announced the Liberals, if re-elected will commit Canada to attaining zero net emissions of carbon pollution by 2050.


 “Concretely, that means we would not produce more emissions than we eliminate. To be honest, it is an ambitious target.” He said the party would enshrine that target in a new law.


 “This doesn’t mean changing our lifestyles or eliminating our industries in a drastic way. It requires a transition. We would compensate for emissions produced with measures and technologies that capture carbon pollution, like planting trees, for example.” 


Guilbeault acknowledges that the Green Party and the New Democratic Party also have strong programs on climate change. “Fundamentally, if you look beyond some of the nuances, we all want to put a price on carbon, we want more transit, we want more green technologies, more electrification, we want less money to go to fossil fuel companies,” he said. 


But Guilbeault said he joined the Liberals because he didn’t believe the NDP or the Greens have a chance of forming the government any time soon.


 “I think we have a very good platform and I think we have a very good chance of being able to implement large chunks of it. I don’t think, unfortunately, that my NDP or Green friends can say the same thing, with all the respect I have for them.”


 In the last federal election, the Liberals took 35.7 per cent of the vote in Quebec, the NDP took 25.4, the Bloc 19.3, the Conservatives 16.7, and the Greens 2.3. Daniel Green, a well-known whistle-blower on environmental issues and the Green Party’s deputy leader, says: “We will not save the environment by investing in oil.”


 JOHN KENNEY / MONTREAL GAZETTE 


The Green Party, led by Elizabeth May, has its own star environmental candidate in Quebec. 


The party’s deputy leader, Daniel Green, a well-known toxicologist and whistle-blower on environmental issues, is running in Outremont riding. Green held a news conference this week in Montreal to denounce the other parties for supporting, or at least not denouncing loudly enough, a proposed natural gas pipeline project that he says is a “symbol of what is wrong with energy development in Canada.” 


The scheme would bring natural gas along a 750-kilometre pipeline from B.C. and Alberta through northern Ontario into Quebec, across Abitibi-Témiscamingue to a proposed liquefaction plant in La Baie in Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean. From there, the liquified natural gas would be transported via tankers down the Saguenay River to the St. Lawrence, through a protected feeding area for the endangered beluga whale. 


The goal is to export 11 million tonnes of liquefied natural gas per year to overseas markets. The Quebec government seems favourable to the project, despite the fact that about 50,000 Quebecers so far have signed a petition against it. 


GNL Québec, the company developing the liquefaction plant part of the project (Énergie Saguenay), is expected to submit its project to the independent Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement (BAPE), which will advise the Quebec government. 


The provincial and federal governments will also assess the environmental impact of the project, possibly in three separate parts: the pipeline, liquefaction plant and maritime transportation, which Green says will make it difficult to assess its overall impact on emissions. 


Green estimates the project will generate 7.8 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions, and says all the other parties have adopted a wait-and-see attitude toward it, waiting for studies by the BAPE and others. 


The Green Party platform calls for cancelling all new fossil fuel pipeline projects, including Trans Mountain and GNL Québec’s project. The Greens would allow existing oil and gas operations to continue but on a declining basis, with bitumen production phased out by 2035. Green said there is simply no way Trudeau can reach his zero net emissions target by 2050 if his government keeps approving pipelines to transport fossil fuels. 


“Justin Trudeau has to stop being schizophrenic. We will not save the environment by investing in oil,” Green said. For his part, Guilbeault acknowledged he has concerns about increased tanker traffic in the Saguenay River and the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and suggested the entire project could be subjected to a joint federal-provincial environmental assessment.


 He said a Liberal government would not approve such a project unless it could compensate for its carbon emissions. “Our very ambitious target for 2050 will need to be taken into account when evaluating the impacts of projects. If your project is going to emit a lot of greenhouse gases, you will have to show how you will compensate for those over time,” he said.


 While NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh has not taken a position on the GNL Québec project, his deputy leader in Quebec, Alexandre Boulerice, made his own position clear in a recent interview with the Montreal Gazette.


 “The question of GNL shouldn’t even be asked … It’s just not realistic if we are serious and coherent about the climate emergency,” said Boulerice, who is the NDP incumbent in the riding of Rosemont—La-Petite-Patrie. The floods of 2017 and 2019 sensitized Montrealers and the rest of Quebec to the scope of the climate crisis. 




ALLEN MCINNIS / MONTREAL


 GAZETTE Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet, who declared recently on Quebec’s most popular talk show, Tout le monde en parle, that the Bloc “has the most green and ecological program of all the federal parties,” has said he will wait for the BAPE’s advice on GNL Québec’s project.


 Blanchet took over as leader of the teetering party in January, and said he sees this election campaign as “an opportunity to really attach the idea of the environment to the idea of (Quebec’s) independence.” 


On the campaign trail, Blanchet is taking every opportunity to tell Quebecers how much greener Quebec is than the rest of Canada and how the federal government is using Quebec taxpayers’ money to expand pipeline projects and invest in fossil fuel projects.


 “For more than 100 years, Quebec has been operating on clean energy, but Ottawa, even as recently as this past mandate, sunk $19 billion into new investments in fossil fuel energy,” Blanchet said earlier this month in Mont-Laurier. Blanchet is proposing a new scheme to replace equalization payments, through which the federal government helps so-called “have-not” provinces, with a program that would reward provinces with the lowest greenhouse gas emissions and penalize those with higher emissions.


 He said Quebec would be entitled to “at least as big a cheque” as it gets now, if not more. But the NDP’s Boulerice said the Bloc’s credibility on environmental issues is “a bit stained” by decisions Blanchet made when he was environment minister of Quebec.


 “Yves-François Blanchet clearly opened the door to the exploitation of oil on Anticosti Island. So when he accuses Canada of being a petrol state,” he is being hypocritical, Boulerice suggested. He noted that as environment minister, Blanchet also green-lighted a heavily polluting cement factory in the Gaspé and approved the inversion of Enbridge’s 9B pipeline. 


“We are beginning to see a real shift in people’s attitudes,” said Erick Lachapelle, associate professor of political science at the Université de Montréal. The climate rally on Friday demonstrates that. J


OHN MAHONEY / MONTREAL GAZETTE As for the Greens, Boulerice said: “The biggest difference between the NDP and the Greens is that our program is based on environmental justice but also social and economic justice. 


We can’t fight climate change if we don’t fight social inequalities at the same time … notably by taxing the super rich and helping people in need.” “And what distinguishes us from the Liberals is that we don’t buy pipelines,” Boulerice said. He described the Liberal Party’s promise of net zero emissions by 2050 as a “bedtime story for children … completely ridiculous.” “The Conservatives are at least consistent,” Boulerice said. 


“They say they will exploit all the gas and oil imaginable and hope for a kind of miracle solution (to climate change), the magic wand of technology will solve everything.” Scheer has indeed made it clear the Conservatives favour natural gas projects like GNL Québec. Richard Martel, the Conservative incumbent in the riding of Chicoutimi—Le Fjord where the liquefaction plant would be built, touts the jobs it would bring. 


Conservatives say Canada’s natural gas could replace dirtier fuels in foreign markets. When Scheer annouced his party’s climate plan in Gatineau in June, he called it “the most comprehensive environmental platform ever put forward by a political party in Canada.”


 A Conservative government would impose emissions limits on heavy industrial emitters and require companies that exceed those limits to make investments in research into emissions-reduction technology.


 The plan also includes tax credits for homeowners to encourage energy-saving retrofits. Scheer hasn’t committed to a specific emissions reduction target, but says only that his plan “gives Canada the best possible chance of achieving” the Paris Agreement target of 30 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030.


 The Conservatives would scrap the carbon tax that the Trudeau government has imposed on provinces that refused to put a price on carbon pollution and his campaign is mainly focused on warning Canadians that the carbon tax will shoot up if the Liberals get back into power. 


That kind of talk may not go over well in Quebec, a province that introduced its own carbon tax in 2007, without major opposition. That tax was replaced by a cap and trade program in 2012 when Quebec joined the Western Climate Initiative. 


The program puts limits on industrial sites and on businesses that import or distribute oil or fuels sold in Quebec for use in the transportation or building sectors.


 Those who exceed their cap must buy credits, while those who emit less than their limits can sell credits. The money raised from the carbon market goes into a provincial green fund, to be used for environmental protection projects. This has meant slightly higher gas prices in Quebec, but the populace has not revolted, notes Chris Ragan, an economist at McGill University and director of the Max Bell School of Public Policy. 


“Nobody debates this in Quebec. It is not debated at the lunch table, in the streets or by political parties.” So he doesn’t think Conservatives will improve their fortunes in Quebec by fear-mongering about a carbon tax that doesn’t even apply here or by threatening to cut the clean fuel standard, which Scheer has called a hidden carbon price.


 “If the logic is that any policy that has a cost is a hidden carbon price, then you are going to do nothing on climate,” Ragan said. “They say they will promote technological advancement and that’s great but it’s aspirational. It’s not really a policy designed to reduce emissions.” 


Then there is the People’s Party of Canada, the only one of the six parties with a chance of winning a seat in parliament that actually denies scientists’ assertions that climate change is caused by human activity or that fighting it is an urgent issue. “The main reason for climate change, it is not human activity,” Bernier said at his party’s first convention in August. 


In its platform, the party promises to pull Canada out of the Paris Accord, abolish the carbon tax and “leave it to provincial governments to adopt programs to reduce emissions if they want to,” abolish subsidies for green technologies and invest in adaptation strategies “if problems arise as a result of any natural climate change.” 


In the end, observers agree the parties that are taking the climate crisis seriously have the best chance of winning over voters in Quebec. In Ragan’s opinion, the Liberals are on solid ground with their climate plan, but they need to do a better job explaining to Quebecers how pipelines fit into it. 


The NDP and the Greens will appeal to what he called “hardcore environmentalists” for their calls for stronger emissions targets, although he said many voters, including himself, worry Canada’s economy would suffer if heavy industrial emitters aren’t cut some slack. 


The Conservatives, he said, might win some votes by emphasizing other kinds of environmental action, but if they avoid explaining how their plan will reduce emissions, “they are probably the most vulnerable” of the mainstream parties in Quebec. But with three weeks to go before the vote, Ragan says it’s too soon to say whether the climate change issue will truly decide the election, even in Quebec. “Federal elections are like the Grey Cup. 


You don’t leave the stadium in the last five minutes, because stuff can change.” mlalonde@postmedia.com RELATED Montreal climate march: 'We are the change,' Greta Thunberg tells throng ‘It’s our future’: Youth take the lead in Montreal's massive climate march Hanes: Plante puts Montreal front and centre at UN Climate Action Summit













Posted by NJ원시

댓글을 달아 주세요