Howard Gutman, U.S. Ambassador To Belgium

Before even checking the facts, a number of high-profile Republicans called on Gutman to be fired or to resign. “President Obama must fire his ambassador to Belgium for rationalizing and downplaying anti-Semitism and linking it to Israeli policy toward the Palestinians,” said Mitt Romney. “Pres Obama should fire his ambassador to Brussels for being so wrong about anti-semitism,” tweeted Newt Gingrich.

And yet what all these Republicans and other right-wingers calling for Gutman to be fired failed to do was actually read the full remarks that he delivered. According to a transcript of his speech, Gutman — who is Jewish and whose father survived the Holocaust — clearly condemns Muslim anti-Semitism, saying that it is a “serious problem” and that no Jewish student should ever feel intimidated on a college campus, for example. He simply argues that this growing anti-Semitism and tension between Arabs and Jews in Europe is partly a result of the unresolved Arab-Israeli conflict:

What I do see as growing, as gaining much more attention in the newspapers and among politicians and communities, is a different phenomena. … It is the problem within Europe of tension, hatred and sometimes even violence between some members of Muslim communities or Arab immigrant groups and Jews. It is a tension and perhaps hatred largely born of and reflecting the tension between Israel, the Palestinian Territories and neighboring Arab states in the Middle East over the continuing Israeli-Palestinian problem.

It too is a serious problem. It too must be discussed and solutions explored. No Jewish student – and no Muslim student or student of any heritage or religion – should ever feel intimidated on a University campus for their heritage or religion leading to academic leaders quitting in protest. No high school or grammar school Jewish student – and no Muslim high school or grammar school student or student of any heritage or religion – should be beaten up over their heritage or religion.

Gutman goes on to argue that “Israel, the Palestinians and Arab neighbors in the Middle East” have the power to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and resolve tensions between Arabs and Jews worldwide. There is nothing bigoted about this conclusion. In no way did Gutman excuse or justify Muslim anti-Semitism. And the AP reported today that the Obama administration agrees, saying “it has full confidence” in Gutman and that he will “remain in his post.”

After 536 days without a government, Belgian opposition parties struck a deal today to form a new coalition led by Socialist Elio Di Rupo. On this side of the pond, 563 days without any congressional action on fiscal or budgetary measures would go most of the way toward achieving the deficit reduction Congress is longing for. As Center for American Progress Director of Tax and Budget Policy Michael Linden has pointed out, if Congress were do to nothing between now and January 2013 (just 397 days from now), the federal budget deficit would fall to just 1.6 percent of gross domestic product and continue dropping after that:

Similarly, debt as a share of GDP would fall to just 61 percent by 2021:

Such reductions would take place primarily due to the expiration of the budget-busting Bush tax cuts, which cost roughly $2.5 trillion over 10 years. The spending cuts triggered by the inability of the supercommittee to reach a deal would also take place, and multiple policies that Congress generally kicks down the road, like the alternative minimum tax, would also take effect.

Of course, there are policies Congress could enact to actually help unemployed Americans and the struggling economy, like passing laws that would create jobs and stimulate growth while addressing much-needed improvements in infrastructure and other areas. But if the goal is only to reduce debt and deficits, perhaps it’s better if members take their cue from the Belgians and just go home for a year or two.

Obama Questions China’s Clean Energy Practices

President Obama, asked about a trade case U.S. solar manufacturers have filed against China, said China has “questionable competitive practices” on clean energy and his administration has fought “these kinds of dumping activities.”

Oregon-based SolarWorld Industries America Inc., the largest U.S. maker of solar cells and panels, and six unnamed U.S. solar manufacturers petitioned the U.S. government Oct. 19 to halt what they said was the dumping of heavily subsidized products by China’s state-supported solar industry into the U.S. market.

Obama, in an interview Tuesday with KGW NewsChannel 8 of Portland, Ore., responded to a question about whether he’d be willing to look at “any kind of actions” to protect green jobs in the U.S. He answered:

“We have seen a lot of questionable competitive practices coming out of China when it comes to the clean energy space, and I have been more aggressive than previous administrations in enforcing our trade laws. We have filed actions against them when we see these kinds of dumping activities, and we’re going to look very carefully at this stuff and potentially bring actions if we find that the basic rules of the road have been violated.”

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE OR COMMENT

The Solar Energy Industries Association, an industry group that represents foreign as well as domestic companies, has not taken a position on the petition, which seeks anti-dumping and countervailing duties against Chinese manufacturers to offset alleged violations of trade laws.

“Just because a company receives subsidies doesn’t mean it’s unfair,” John Smirnow of the SEIA told reporters about the petition. China-based Suntech, which has a manufacturing plant in Arizona, issued a statement saying “anyone can file one of these actions” so a petition doesn’t validate the merits of a case.

Related Post: “Are the Chinese Using Predatory Pricing to Knock America Out of Solar Manufacturing?”

UN aviation body weighs in against EU carbon plan

The United Nations body responsible for civil aviation weighed in against the European Union’s emissions trading scheme on Wednesday, increasing pressure on the EU to back down in what threatens to become a serious trade dispute.

After months of rhetoric on both sides, the U.N.’s International Civil Aviation Organization voted to adopt a working paper from the United States, China and two dozen other nations urging the EU not to include non-EU carriers in its plan, according to sources at the meeting in Montreal.

Under the EU’s proposals to put a price on pollution, airlines will have to buy permits to help offset greenhouse emissions from jetliners operating in, to and from Europe

“It is disappointing that ICAO discussions once again focus on what States should not do instead of what they should do to curb growing aviation emissions,” Connie Hedegaard, the EU’s top climate action official, said in a statement.

“Unfortunately ICAO has missed again today the opportunity to tell the world when it will table a viable global solution.”

Europe looks to extend Kyoto commitments

A European environment committee passed a resolution to extend its commitment to the Kyoto Protocol on climate issues beyond 2012.

Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, said in September from Durban, South Africa, the site a November conference on climate change, there must be a “clear decision” on “how the global collective effort to reduce emissions will go forward.”

Provisions under the Kyoto Protocol, she warned, are to expire in 2012.

Members of the European environment committee passed a resolution with 53 votes in favor, four against and three abstentions that calls on the European Union to give full support to continue the Kyoto Protocol beyond 2012.

The resolution adds that EU countries would benefit from aiming higher with their greenhouse gas reduction commitments.

The European Parliament scheduled a vote on the resolution for mid-November, two weeks before the climate summit in Durban.

Global CCS investment on track, despite setbacks

The world is on track to have 20 carbon capture and storage (CCS) projects by 2020, despite the high-profile cancellation of $l.5 billion in funding for a British plant last month, a leading industry proponent said on Wednesday.

A report by the Global CCS Institute on Wednesday also says CCS can be a cost-effective tool to curb greenhouse gas pollution from coal and gas-fired power stations when compared with other low-carbon emission technologies.

CCS involves trapping carbon dioxide (CO2) otherwise emitted by fossil fuel power plants, and piping it underground for long-term storage in spent oil fields or aquifers. The technology is also used in the natural gas sector and fertiliser making.

CCS is not yet competitive for the power sector but governments and the International Energy Agency see it as a key way to fight climate change by trapping and burying greenhouse gas emissions, while maintaining stable energy supply.

While CCS is regarded as a part of the energy mix in coming decades, there are doubts about how quickly it will be adopted and the rate at which the technology’s costs will fall.

“Our view is a bit different,” said Brad Page, CEO of the Global CCS Institute, which is backed by governments and industry and based in Australia.

“Our latest status report shows there are 74 projects in progress around the world today. There are 8 in operation and another six under construction. Of those, 6 are power projects,” he told Reuters on the sidelines of the Singapore International Energy Week.

BASIC countries reach Kyoto consensus

Climate-change ministers from Brazil, South Africa, India and China, also known as the BASIC countries, have reached a consensus on a range of issues – including the Second Commitment Period of the Kyoto Protocol – a month in advance of a conference in Durban, South Africa.

“There must be a Second Commitment Period of the Kyoto Protocol,” said Xie Zhenhua, China’s top climate change official, after the Ninth BASIC Ministerial Meeting on Climate Change in Beijing on Tuesday.

“Countries should take action and put their promises into practice before 2020 and then further discuss the issues after that date on the basis of scientific analysis,” Xie said.

The extension of the Kyoto Protocol became a major focus of climate change negotiations after some countries opposed the Second Commitment Period at talks in Cancun, Mexico, in 2010.

Belgium to shut down nuclear plants by 2025

Belgium’s political parties have reached a conditional agreement to shut down the country’s two remaining nuclear power stations, owned by GDF Suez unit Electrabel, a government spokeswoman said earlier this week.

The plan for a shutdown of the three oldest reactors by 2015 and a complete exit by 2025 is conditional on finding enough energy from alternative sources to prevent any shortages.

“If it turns out we won’t face shortages and prices would not skyrocket, we intend to stick to the nuclear exit law of 2003,” a spokeswoman for Belgium’s energy and climate ministry said.

Belgium, which has seven nuclear reactors at two plants, had passed a law in 2003 outlining the planned shutdowns.

Sunday’s decision to affirm the law knocked GDF Suez shares lower Monday, closing down 4% in advance of Tuesday’s holiday in Belgium.

In 2009, atomic energy provided 55% of the country’s electricity generation, the latest available data from the International Energy Agency showed.

EU’s Hedegaard Calls on Countries to Enact Aviation Carbon Cuts

European Union Climate Commissioner Connie Hedegaard called on Russia and other nations to design domestic rules to cut carbon from airlines and earn exemption from the bloc’s emissions-trading program as of next year.

Hedegaard highlighted an option in the EU law that excludes incoming flights from countries that enact equivalent measures to cut pollution from its air transport sector.

“You could set a target for your aviation sector, you could make an incentive for them to improve fuel efficiency for aviation, it could be many things,” she said in an interview after a meeting with Alexander Bedritsky, a climate adviser to President Dmitry Medvedev in Moscow. “We do not define what that is. We invite a dialog.”

The EU, which aims to lead the battle against climate change, wants to impose carbon curbs on flights to and from the region from next year after airline discharges in Europe doubled in two decades. Countries including Russia, China and the U.S. are expected to lodge a formal complaint today about the EU’s first expansion of the emissions trading system beyond the bloc’s borders at a meeting of the United Nations’ International Civil Aviation Organization.

It’s none of my business, but reading about the surge in support for the Flemish separatist party in Belgium I feel pretty sympathetic to their cause. The specific case of Belgium turns out not to have most of the problems that you normally associate with national dissolution. For one thing, there’s already a well-defined boundary between Flanders and Wallonia. For another, thanks to the European Union the two successor states would continue to use the same currency, goods and people would continue to flow freely across the border, and in general life would continue exactly as before. The EU even provides a solution to the otherwise-sticky question of what to do with Brussels, a nominally bilingual but mostly French-speaking city geographically located in the French zone—you could turn it into a DC-style special European Capital Region or something.

Indeed, the whole nationalist dispute turns out to have a lot to do with money rather than language and culture. The Flemish-speaking part of Belgium is richer than the French-speaking part, so there are large net transfers from Flanders to Wallonia. Flemish people don’t like this, French-speakers like it fine. Under the circumstances, I’m actually slightly surprised that any Flemish people don’t vote for the NVA. This seems like a terrible deal for them with no real upside. Scott Sumner tries to make the case that even the Walloons would be better off:

Here the argument is a bit tougher, but I’ll try to make it using the analogy of Czechoslovakia. Before the split-up, the Slovaks represented the smaller and less prosperous part of Czechoslovakia. Being further east, their instincts were probably more statist. After the breakup they did flounder around for a few years, but then got their act together and instituted some important neoliberal reforms. And I think it is fair to say that the reforms were successful. Obviously Slovakia still has lots of problems, but their business-friendly tax regime did attract lots of investment from multinational car companies. So tough love can work.

That seems pretty speculative and utopian to me. It’s in Wallonia’s interests right now to adopt prosperity-inducing policies, and cutting them off from the Flemish teat doesn’t really change that. Slovakia has done well as an independent nation, but so have most post-communist Central European countries so it’s hard to see causation here. The main thing I would in favor of separation is that this seems to me to be a case where binationalism is creating nationalist rancor that otherwise wouldn’t exist. Nationalist rancor is, in my view, a bad thing and I’m normally skeptical of separatism on those grounds. But in this instance it doesn’t actually seem as if Flemings and Walloons have any major grievances against one another, it’s just that the effort to construct a perfectly fair and balanced brand of binationalism has created a politics that consists almost entirely of inter-communal bickering. If you did away with it, then both countries’ politics would focus on “regular” policy issues and I doubt you’d see much in the way of disgruntlement.

Schaerbeek Town Hall

Fascinating find from The Economist:

There can never be full integration of the migrants “swarming” into Brussels, according to a report by the Royal Belgian Geographical Society—at least among the current generation of adults. The immigrants are too different in their religious beliefs and customs, and their impact is too overwhelming. “When they are sufficiently numerous in a neighbourhood” they open their own hairdressing salons, grocery shops and bakeries, the report notes, not to mention “butcher’s shops where they sell meat from ritually slaughtered animals”. They have large families and cram twice the agreed number of tenants into flats, creating “deplorable” living conditions, annoying landlords and disturbing their neighbours. Perhaps “partial assimilation” may one day be achieved, it concludes, but it will be hard: the newcomers’ religion and language “do not ease any attempts at contact.”

The report in question? It dates from 1933 and describes the panic caused by Jewish immigrants from Poland, when they moved into Brussels neighbourhoods like Schaerbeek. It was recently unearthed by Anne Morelli, a professor of history of the Université Libre de Bruxelles. Prof Morelli reproduces a long extract from the report in this thoughtful essay for KVS Express, an excellent trilingual journal published by the Royal Flemish Theatre in Brussels. The report is in English on page 18 of this pdf file.

And of course you see this in the United States, too, as anti-immigration rhetoric tends to very precisely parallel what was said about the un-assimilability of Jews and Catholics before the first world war. There’s even a parallel between the very real problems associated with violent strains of Islamist ideology among European Muslim Communities and the only quite real problem of anarchist violence that was associated with U.S. immigrant communities. I assume that if Nicholas Sarkozy were to be shot and killed by a French Muslim tomorrow, we’d never here the end of talk about “Eurabia” and so forth yet Leon Czolgosz didn’t prefigure the destruction of the United States at the hands of mass wave of Polish political violence.