拜登政府对中国的气候政策

Q1 Arts and Humanities
Y. Golub, S. Shenin
{"title":"拜登政府对中国的气候政策","authors":"Y. Golub, S. Shenin","doi":"10.17994/it.2022.20.2.69.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article is devoted to the analysis of the contemporary US-Chinese relations in the climate sphere and forecasting the prospects for their development in the near future. In the context of the evolution of the problem in the past, as well as taking into account the differences in approaches to the problem in the United States from the two leading parties and the most influential political and ideological groups, the authors investigate the causes of the aggravation of climate relations between Washington and Beijing. It is noted that having occupied the White House, the Democratic administration of J. Biden began to increase pressure on the Chinese government in order to force it to accelerate the passage of \"green transit\", i.e. the transition from the use of fossil fuels in the economy to renewable energy sources. It is assumed that such a strategy should slow down China's economic development, thus giving America time for internal reforms aimed at achieving its global \"green\" leadership, which, in turn, should ensure economic dominance in the post-crisis period. Tactically, the administration uses a \"separate\" methodology, i.e. declares the need to isolate from each other the climate and all other components of the Chinese policy of the United States. This approach is not supported by most political and ideological groups. Thus, the progressive wing of the Democratic Party insists on close climate cooperation with China, which implies a possibility of geopolitical concessions. Moderate Republicans (\"realists\") consider \"constructive competition\" with Beijing in the climate sphere possible. Conservatives are confident that China will not fulfill its promises, and therefore they advocate \"climate realism\", which means carrying out internal reforms in the United States only taking into account what has been done by other countries, primarily China. The neoconservative group demands to abandon climate pressure and rely on tough geopolitical steps against Beijing. It is concluded that disagreement within the ruling elite with Biden's Chinese policy will greatly complicate the approval of the climate reform program in Congress, therefore the \"containment\" of the PRC will be primarily economic and geopolitical in nature.","PeriodicalId":37798,"journal":{"name":"Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Biden Administration’s Climate Policy toward China\",\"authors\":\"Y. Golub, S. Shenin\",\"doi\":\"10.17994/it.2022.20.2.69.2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article is devoted to the analysis of the contemporary US-Chinese relations in the climate sphere and forecasting the prospects for their development in the near future. In the context of the evolution of the problem in the past, as well as taking into account the differences in approaches to the problem in the United States from the two leading parties and the most influential political and ideological groups, the authors investigate the causes of the aggravation of climate relations between Washington and Beijing. It is noted that having occupied the White House, the Democratic administration of J. Biden began to increase pressure on the Chinese government in order to force it to accelerate the passage of \\\"green transit\\\", i.e. the transition from the use of fossil fuels in the economy to renewable energy sources. It is assumed that such a strategy should slow down China's economic development, thus giving America time for internal reforms aimed at achieving its global \\\"green\\\" leadership, which, in turn, should ensure economic dominance in the post-crisis period. Tactically, the administration uses a \\\"separate\\\" methodology, i.e. declares the need to isolate from each other the climate and all other components of the Chinese policy of the United States. This approach is not supported by most political and ideological groups. Thus, the progressive wing of the Democratic Party insists on close climate cooperation with China, which implies a possibility of geopolitical concessions. Moderate Republicans (\\\"realists\\\") consider \\\"constructive competition\\\" with Beijing in the climate sphere possible. Conservatives are confident that China will not fulfill its promises, and therefore they advocate \\\"climate realism\\\", which means carrying out internal reforms in the United States only taking into account what has been done by other countries, primarily China. The neoconservative group demands to abandon climate pressure and rely on tough geopolitical steps against Beijing. It is concluded that disagreement within the ruling elite with Biden's Chinese policy will greatly complicate the approval of the climate reform program in Congress, therefore the \\\"containment\\\" of the PRC will be primarily economic and geopolitical in nature.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37798,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17994/it.2022.20.2.69.2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17994/it.2022.20.2.69.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文致力于分析当代中美关系在气候领域的发展,并预测其近期的发展前景。在过去气候问题演变的背景下,并考虑到美国两个主要政党和最有影响力的政治和意识形态团体在解决问题的方法上的差异,作者调查了华盛顿和北京之间气候关系恶化的原因。值得注意的是,民主党拜登政府入主白宫后,开始加大对中国政府的压力,迫使其加快“绿色交通”的进程,即从经济中使用化石燃料转向使用可再生能源。人们认为,这样的战略应该减缓中国的经济发展,从而给美国时间进行内部改革,以实现其全球“绿色”领导地位,从而确保后危机时期的经济主导地位。从战术上讲,政府使用了一种“单独”的方法,即宣布需要将气候和美国对华政策的所有其他组成部分相互隔离。这种做法不受大多数政治和意识形态团体的支持。因此,民主党的进步派坚持与中国进行密切的气候合作,这意味着地缘政治让步的可能性。温和派共和党人(“现实主义者”)认为有可能在气候领域与北京展开“建设性竞争”。保守派相信中国不会履行承诺,因此他们提倡“气候现实主义”,这意味着在美国进行内部改革时,只考虑其他国家(主要是中国)已经做过的事情。这个新保守主义团体要求放弃气候压力,转而依靠强硬的地缘政治措施来对付北京。结论是,执政精英内部对拜登中国政策的分歧将极大地使国会对气候改革计划的批准复杂化,因此对中国的“遏制”将主要是经济和地缘政治性质的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Biden Administration’s Climate Policy toward China
The article is devoted to the analysis of the contemporary US-Chinese relations in the climate sphere and forecasting the prospects for their development in the near future. In the context of the evolution of the problem in the past, as well as taking into account the differences in approaches to the problem in the United States from the two leading parties and the most influential political and ideological groups, the authors investigate the causes of the aggravation of climate relations between Washington and Beijing. It is noted that having occupied the White House, the Democratic administration of J. Biden began to increase pressure on the Chinese government in order to force it to accelerate the passage of "green transit", i.e. the transition from the use of fossil fuels in the economy to renewable energy sources. It is assumed that such a strategy should slow down China's economic development, thus giving America time for internal reforms aimed at achieving its global "green" leadership, which, in turn, should ensure economic dominance in the post-crisis period. Tactically, the administration uses a "separate" methodology, i.e. declares the need to isolate from each other the climate and all other components of the Chinese policy of the United States. This approach is not supported by most political and ideological groups. Thus, the progressive wing of the Democratic Party insists on close climate cooperation with China, which implies a possibility of geopolitical concessions. Moderate Republicans ("realists") consider "constructive competition" with Beijing in the climate sphere possible. Conservatives are confident that China will not fulfill its promises, and therefore they advocate "climate realism", which means carrying out internal reforms in the United States only taking into account what has been done by other countries, primarily China. The neoconservative group demands to abandon climate pressure and rely on tough geopolitical steps against Beijing. It is concluded that disagreement within the ruling elite with Biden's Chinese policy will greatly complicate the approval of the climate reform program in Congress, therefore the "containment" of the PRC will be primarily economic and geopolitical in nature.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy
Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
34 weeks
期刊介绍: “International Trends” (“Mezhdunarodnye protsessy”) was established in 2002 as the first Russian TIR journal. As of the early 2010s, it holds a strong position among the top three Russian thematic academic journals (according to the Russian Science Citation Index). The Journal’s key mission is a theoretical comprehension of the world as a whole, of international tendencies and the planetary political environment, and of the world-integrity our country finds herself in and develops with.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信