Monday, November 11, 2024

 

China Unveils a New Unmanned Warship, The "Killer Whale"

Drone ship
Via Chinese social media

Published Nov 10, 2024 6:25 PM by The Maritime Executive

 

 

An unusual trimaran drone ship was spotted at Guangzhou Shipyard earlier this year, and it has now made its first public appearance. On Friday, at the Zhuhai Airshow, the PLA Navy unveiled a new surface combatant called the "Killer Whale" - a miniature warship with an operating concept much like the U.S. Navy's Independence-class Littoral Combat Ship, but smaller and potentially without crew. 

According to Chinese media, the vessel has a length of 190 feet and displaces about 300-500 tonnes, with a maximum speed of 40 knots and a range of about 4,000 nautical miles. It is reportedly fitted to carry a wide array of weaponry - antiship missiles, antiaircraft missiles, torpedoes, and a drone helicopter on the rear deck. 

Its most notable feature might be the resuscitation of the "modular mission package" concept, which first entered full-scale service with the debut of the Littoral Combat Ship in the 2010s. The underlying concept was to field a multipurpose vessel that could carry "swappable" weapons packages for different missions - mine warfare, antisubmarine warfare and surface warfare. In practice, the U.S. Navy was not able to develop or operationalize the "swappable" concept aboard its two LCS classes, and each LCS vessel is now permanently fitted with specific equipment.

According to local media, the new Killer Whale's mission sets include surveillance patrols, surface warfare, anti-submarine operations, and air defense missions. It can be reconfigured for "sea battlefield environment surveys and rescue in distress," making it an "all-around warrior."

Though designed by CSSC's autonomous vessel specialists and designated as unmanned, the new USV also has a prominent wraparound bridge deck for human watchstanders. Naval analysts have noted that it bears a striking resemblance to Indonesia's manned Klewang-class fast attack craft: The carbon fiber Klewang-class is longer, narrower, and has less range and payload, but has a comparable top speed and a superficially similar appearance. 

Illustrations and scale models of the Killer Whale's design have appeared at Chinese defense trade shows over the past two years under the program name "JARI-USV-A." Open-source intelligence analysts first spotted the full-size prototype in satellite imagery at CSSC Guangzhou Shipyard last month.

 

Minesweeper Burns and Capsizes Off Japan

Courtesy Fukuoka Coast Guard
Courtesy Fukuoka Coast Guard

Published Nov 10, 2024 9:01 PM by The Maritime Executive

 


On Sunday, a Japanese minesweeper caught fire and capsized off Fukuoka Prefecture, Japan, leaving one crewmember injured and one missing. 

At about 1000 hours on Sunday, the Japan Maritime Self Defense Force minesweeper Ukushima departed the Shimonoseki Naval Base for a routine training cruise. At about 0940, a blaze broke out on board, initially reported as an engine room fire. Local television broadcasts from the scene showed smoke pouring from the ship's stacks and engine room vents. 

One crewmember, Petty Officer 3rd Class Tatsunori Koga, 33, was in the engine room at the time of the fire and remains missing. One additional crewmember suffered injuries from smoke inhalation and was evacuated for treatment.

 

/media/images/article/Photos/Wreckage_Salvage/Ukushima-Fukuoka-Coast-Guard-3.jpg

Initial firefighting efforts appeared successful and the smoke from the stacks was much reduced, above (Fukuoka Coast Guard)

With assistance from another nearby minesweeper, the Toyoshima, the crew put out the fire. However, it soon reignited, and when it became clear that it would be unsafe to remain aboard, the remaining 36 crewmembers ceased firefighting efforts and evacuated safely to the Toyoshima.  

The Ukushima burned throughout the day, and several explosions were heard onboard. At a press conference at about 2030 hours, JMSDF Chief of Staff Adm. Akira Saito said that the wooden-hulled vessel could potentially sink if the fire continued unabated. 

 

 

Just after midnight, the Ukushima capsized, extinguishing the fire. The ship continued to gradually slip lower in the water through the night, and by 0700 hours on Monday, just the bow was visible above the water, according to NHK. 

 

 

At a press conference Sunday, Adm. Saito said that a board of inquiry would be set up to determine the cause of the fire. 

Ukushima was a Sugashima-class minesweeper built in 2003. Japan ordered 12 of these small vessels in the 1990s-2000s to fill a need for shallow-water minesweeping operations. They were constructed out of wood to reduce their magnetic signature; non-metallic hulls are common for vessels of this type. 

 

Taiwan Drops Local-Content Rules, Smoothing the Path for Offshore Wind

Offshore wind farm
iStock / Bing-Jhen Hong

Published Nov 10, 2024 10:27 PM by The Maritime Executive

 

 

Taiwan has agreed to scrap its local content requirements in its recent offshore wind auction, marking the end of a trade dispute with the EU. Taiwan is now committed to introduce flexibility in its offshore wind tenders, starting with auction round 3.2 completed in August. This added flexibility will address supply chain difficulties faced by offshore wind developers, including those from Europe.

Taiwan introduced a localization policy in 2021, aiming to spur development of the domestic offshore wind supply chain. Per the local content rules, at least 60 percent of parts used in offshore wind farm development must be sourced locally, except for products and services that the Taiwanese supply chain cannot readily provide.

In July, the EU filed a formal challenge at the World Trade Organization (WTO) contesting Taiwan’s localization policy. The EU argued that by Taiwan implementing stringent local content rules, it discriminated against imported goods and services, which is inconsistent with WTO regulations.  

Last week, the European Commission revealed that its director-general for trade Sabine Weyand and Taiwan’s Minister of Economic Affairs Jyh-Huei Kuo exchanged letters, setting out new terms that saw the local content rules removed. This means that Taiwan can no longer include localization requirements in future allocation rounds, either as eligibility conditions or as award criteria.

“Provided that Taiwan follows through with the outlined commitments, the EU does not intend to pursue this matter further within the WTO. Addressing barriers in Taiwan’s offshore wind market is crucial for a sector of strategic importance to the EU,” said the European Commission.

In the recent 3.2 offshore wind auction round, Taiwan awarded 2.7 GW of capacity across five projects. During this round, local developers such as Synera and Shinfox appeared to have a head start, possibly due to local content compliance. A big surprise was the Danish energy multinational Orsted missing out on its 570 MW Greater Changhua 3 project. Analysts speculated that Orsted was likely edged out in the bid due to low local content compared to competitors.

 

Stalking The Nightmare of Control

Stalking The Nightmare of Control by Invecchiare Selvatico

Invecchiare Selvatico Reflects on War of Dreams: A Field Guide to DIY Psy-Ops by Jason Rodgers (Autonomedia 2024)

In my review of Jason Rodger’s first book, Invisible Generation: Rants, Polemics, and Critical Theory Against The Planetary Work Machine (see anarchistnews.org/content/‘cause-i-see-you), I wrote: “As they ponder the banality and degradation of modern life, non-ideological anarcho-primitivism meshed and mashing with anarcho-surrealism, critiques of contemporary and historical philosophical pitfalls and their self-referential trappings, and so much more, Jason emotes provocation. In a time where almost anything remotely interesting or transgressive has been absorbed, reconstituted, and sold back to the anemic herd willing to lap up just about anything served to them and call it “radical”, Jason still finds edges that have not been smoothed down, still pokes, tears, and rips at the silicone and ideological flesh of control, still engages in psychic warfare against civilization…. It is rare in a world of posers, of fakes, of superficial trend surfers, of programed zombies, of reified rebels, of performative soldiers, of plastic identities, and such, to find someone who critically grapples with complexity and nuance and is not afraid to dip toes into the dangerous, a true free-spirit, an anarchist, or at least what that once meant before it all became so safe, so comfortable, so predictable, so non-anarchist. And when I am pleasantly surprised, usually by accident, that my paths come across one of these kindred spirits and their creative little explosions into the world, I am moved to respond. I begin to realize that I am not alone. There are others out there who are still alive, who have not been lobotomized and neutered by this displaced and dispirited post-modern techno-reality. I see you.”

Well, War of Dreams: A Field Guide to DIY Psy-Ops, Jason’s follow-up offering, not only confirms my suspicions, and dare I say hopes, but hits me smack in my wet thinking flesh with even deeper, more expansive, more clever, more biting analysis, and provocatively belly-shaking laughter than I had even imagined. Well done. Read these two books and call me in the morning (on my landline, it is all I got). I am sure there will be no shortage of things to discuss.

As in their previous book, War of Dreams combines Rodger’s dense and provocative collages and flyers with detailed essays and other assorted wordplay on a significant spectrum of subjects and over a decent chunk of time. I am not sure of their process for linking writings with collages (topic, chronology, chaos theory, drunken blind darts, etc), but they fit perfectly together as an unfolding journey of critique. Similar to their first book, and throughout their collage and flyer project, Campaign to Play for Keeps (CtPFKs), Jason seems to have rejected the current trend to oversimplify, reproduce, and dumb things down in analysis and presentation. Jason crams so much content, both visual and in critique, that a highly complex density of meaning is created, what I view as an anti-meme (or a least what memes have come to mean today). The writing and subjects are at times moderately complicated, but Jason manages to express and explain in a way that reads clearly and smoothly, never a chore, and always interesting. The range is phenomenal. Not yer one trick ideological pony here. The only thing you can pin Jason down on is their unabashed heretical digging, prodding, and poking, as well as their insatiable appetite for reading (from actual dead-tree flesh and ink books), in every direction that can be conceived as interesting, an immoral (amoralists are almost as big of cop-outs as atheists) and precise mesh of ideas filtered through a creative, perceptive, and intense person. Although Jason does seem to have some personal favorites, like Walter Benjamin, Jerry Mander, The Situationists, Bob Black, Freddy Perlman, Hakim Bey, Feral Faun, William Burroughs, John Zerzan, Renzo Novatore, Genesis P-Orridge, and a whole lotta old school and hardcore punk, they never get old and they bring them into the analysis in fresh ways, clever angles, and from a place of comprehension, unlike the googled and wikied name-dropping turds who love to puke out phrases and unbaked concepts they haven’t even begun to digest (I can still see the nuts and corn you morons).

The chorus: “Can we clone this mutant?”

No.

“Why Not!” they cry.

Because this is someone who is still very much alive and kicking and unique and breathing, someone who is present in this world with their eyes pried wide open. They engage in living critique, not dead games, not redundant gestures and ptsd ticks. And not online.

One of the many things I love about Jason’s writing is that I continually expand my vocabulary with every page. Who knew a word like “teledildonics” existed and how perfectly it names cybersex? Jason uses this evocative language as they come out swinging at social alienation and the technologies and processes which deepen, expand, and accelerate its control in their opening piece “Alienation Cycles Of The Identity Image”. This essay sets a solid tone for the book, only slightly distracting for me by a subtle attitude towards what feels framed as an almost obligatory, more active refusal over supposedly more passive escape. In this regard, Rodgers has previously called what they perhaps at times perceive as a more dormant, stagnant, self-referential, or even resigned response as “quietism” (which comes up more specifically further in the book). It is a term I think that can be too liberally applied, especially when its really hard to know what people do in their real world, away from print, cameras, and screens, in the middle of nowhere, between each other, underground, anonymously, without report-backs, away from scenes, behind fences and doors, in locked damp basements or dim dusty attics, in minds and hearts, off-the-grid, obscured by costumes and masks, up my nose, in the darkness, away from peeping eyes and measurements of the spectacle that is society. There are lots of ways to be willfully disobedient and to attack. Rejection and refusal can occur in many ways, including what may be termed as certain kinds of escape (either brief and temporary or more extended). I know Jason gets this. It is clear in so much of their writing, but what feels sometimes like a more overt call-to-duty may still go unrecognized by many with touches of lingering revolutionary residue and still a slight smear of social baggage along these lines. This is one of the few places Jason and I seem to meet across the creek a bit, but I actually enjoy the pushing and pulling, tussling and tugging. I find it inspiring, provoking, and challenging. I am all in.

Section One: Media is an analytically-leaning, yet not overly detached, attack on the post-modern cyber-world of global communication and control. Some of it feels like a freshening up and recontextualizing of the Situationists within the current cyber-hell (“Cyberia” as Jason cleverly describes the barren wasteland most have self-banished themselves to), but from a specifically anarchist and anti-civ perspective. In “The Object of Alienation and Reification” Rodgers examines the almost totalizing power of the technologically mass-ified illusion and its all-consuming affects on understanding and meaning. “As the world becomes more and more saturated with images it becomes more difficult to draw conclusions… Everything becomes fake news. The image is objectified into just more discrete components to be reassembled as entertainment.” Again, Jason’s proposal for a disconnection from the tentacles of fiber-optic mass media and their DIY prioritization seems to be the most relevant pushback to this mostly all-invasive and almost all-encompassing force.

Section Two: Anti-Media has a more nuts and bolts, active-oriented approach. This was one of my favorite sections and lets you really get to know what motivates Jason, their DIY attitudes, influences, their love of zines, punk rock aesthetics, deconditioning and decentering activities, and strategy of chaos and Dis Information, which Rodgers explains as “the scattering of the formation, allowing elements to reform in new, unpredictable, and dynamic ways.” This section is not only filled with their usual (unusual) collaged flyers, drawings, and essays, but also very playful and pointed correspondence, letters to editors and zines, stories, reviews, and some really off-the-map and forgotten or only marginally known micro-histories. I specifically appreciated Jason’s shinning the light on Susan Poe and Gerry Reith, two essential, yet virtually forgotten about, figures in the early incubation of a general perspective that became post-Left anarchy.

“My Date With Susan Poe” is Rodgers “fictionalizing an actual meet-up with a marginal” and offers glimpses into a time, place, person, and attitude that is typically only poorly and superficially understood and mimicked these days. Suzy “Crowbar” Poe seemed like a truly an anarchic unique one. She was a co-conspirator with Rodgers on a zine, a cult formation, some general mayhem, and, according to Jason, was a “butt sniffer”, oh, and she also put out Popular Reality, a staple of radical deviants and early post-Left anarchist appetites, with all the usual seemingly compulsory controversies (but more about all that in future Jason Rodgers releases).

Even more enlightening for me was “Gerry Reith’s Terminal Clarity”, a review of a compilation of Reith’s writings put out by Nine Banded Books called Neutron Gun Reloaded: a Gerry Reith Reader. It recalled for me this barely mentioned yet crucial embryonic element who helped facilitate the particular version of anarchy that I would dive into in the late 90s, but someone I knew almost nothing about. After reading Jason’s piece I quickly asked my ol’ pal Staplecide if he had heard of Neutron Gun, of which he had multiple copies of different editions. Reith seems to be an invaluable lost piece in the puzzle for many of my generation of anarchists going forward. In his very short and volatile life (he ended it abruptly at the age of twenty-five with a bullet to his head at his typewriter in 1984), Gerry seemed to have provoked, offended, picked apart, and smashed politics, complicity, collectivism, and society with a cynical “post-right anarchist” individualist OG-edge-lordy transgression that is so desperately needed today as one of many important infusions (Sorry you thin-skinned over-sensitive lil’ neo-emo liberal-lefties, its true, but that’s another story). Unlike many of his contemporaries (and most anarchists today), Reith entered anarchy from a libertarian background, which probably contributed to his very interesting and unique offering. According to Rodgers, “He was a crucial part of the start of a movement towards a new politics, towards a new writing, towards a new form of adversarial media.” Thanks Jason for reminding us, and for passing on the history to those few of us who can still read, and still want to.

Section Three: Politics starts to really cut into the meat of the multifaceted motivations, motions, and maneuvers of control, and some of Rodgers’ proposals for an “insurrectionary guerilla-ontology attack on multiple fronts” to “cause damage that will resonate through the whole totality” as they conclude “Internalized Control (In Hopes of a Short Circuit)”, a concise piece on contemporary forms of systematic power. While “Against Alienated Rationality” offers a sober critique of the “reductive conception of humanity” as well as enthusiastic calls for divergent and resonating infusions of irrationality. Jason accurately sights dada as one historical precedent for the “free sovereign” and “the anarch” to be inspired by in this way. There is so much in this section and the next (Anti-Politics) to keep diving back into again and again, way too much for summing up in review and well worth an in-depth one-on-one investigation. Whether it is work, academia, careers, activism, collectivism, progress, morality, or the misinterpreted, weaponized, or forbidden authors like HL Mencken or Ragnar Redbeard, when Rodgers is dissecting an idea, author, or tendency, they use well-oiled precession tools and maintain the wide-eyed fascination, unconstrained curiosity, and unabashed honesty of a young’n in the basement with a bloated roadkill bunny. That’s how the political is best treated.

Section Four: Anti-Politics follows the biting CtPFKs flyer “Food Not Bombs: Diarrhea for the People!” which asks the politicized culinary questions: “Have you internalized enough guilt to think that you deserve to eat half rotten (but not fermented) produce, handled (but not washed) by junky traveler kids?” and “Do you consider expecting those preparing your food to wash their hands after a bowel movement to be an example of a privilege to be checked?” and responds with the anti-political just dessert: “People are too full of shit. Food Not Bombs can Help! One meal and your system is clear!” Turn the page and Divine’s Invasion Squad takes aim and fires off: “FILTH IS MY POLITICS” as Jason then opens the section with a concise and clarifying distillation: “For every negative about my philosophy and program there is also a positive. You may notice that my positive still contains a negation. I suppose this is an example of a point in which I differ from a nihilist: a nihilist believes in nothing. I, however, believe in negation. Furthermore, this destruction can also be creative. From carrion compost left by negation, imaginal blossoms may bloom.” This is a crucial distinguishing position, one I absolutely resonate with, and Rodgers fleshes it out well in the section that follows. It is a continuation of the previous section’s attack on the political, handled with the same Rodgers’ standard of concision and derision, but from the opposite direction.

The first major piece in this section, “Chaos Is Immanent: Struggle, Ontology, and The Condition Of Freedom” gets to the heart of Jason’s project. It also fleshes out in more detail the subject of minor points of divergence I have had with them over what they term “quietism”. I find their more extended and contextual explanations of this concept more agreeable, nuanced, and useful, yet, in moments, still a bit stuck in the concept of “struggle” for my taste. Although, I think most of the residual divergence to be only partially of substance, and mostly semantical and very close in actual perspective in reference to the goals, inspirations, and tensions concerning the self-willed individual in society. I think this quote from the piece sums up Jason’s admirable motivations quite well: “Hope should be thrown out to begin with, and instead a joy of a life in struggle adopted. Why bother seeking easily attainable goals that are really just more banal miserabilism? Instead I’d like to seek a pataphysical objective, something so wonderful that it has never happened (or at least hasn’t happened since Babylon erected ziggurats). I’d rather lose at the great work than a lifetime of success maintaining a sewer system.” I cannot argue with this at all.

This section contains worlds within worlds of subjects and perspectives, becoming a swirling dervish of ideas connected in very interesting ways. “Feral Magik” is one of these gleaming gems, a spider-webbing pursuit covering vast terrains of the occult, deconditioning, altered states, telepathy, language, rewilding, resistance, and much more with a rigor and enthusiasm deserving of considerable note. In “Consensus Submission Making” Jason aptly critiques the herd mentality and hive mind that most people submit to on a daily basis due mostly, according to Jason, to their internalization of the external authority of society. Rodgers brings their analysis back to the more activist and collectivist of the so-called anarchist milieu who “sit through long-drawn-out-consensus-based meetings with rigid, formalized procedure, easily prone to abuse by politico-pervo authoritarian types drawn to these sort of structures. They join a community of peer pressure and shame, where comrades will pressure them into engaging in behavior they don’t want to engage in, just like they were initially pressured by mass society. They confront the alienation of mass society by submerging themselves into a hive, reduced to a number on a membership roll.” Instead, Rodgers proposes a revolt on every level against the Totality, especially, perhaps, on the micro, in our daily lives, a suggestion I could not agree with more. “Field Studies in Misanthropology”, a subject dear to my little black heart, is a brief and quite personal piece that stems from a very revealing journal entry which includes: “I often find it nearly impossible to relate to people I encounter in my daily life. I can’t relate to anything about them. I find nothing of interest in their interests. When I try to share how I feel, to communicate something about my being, I feel like I might be speaking a foreign language. I speak, but most often I am met by blank stares or mild disgust.” Jason’s response to these very understandable yet potentially crippling misanthropic tendencies in their own and in others’ hearts and minds is a very thoughtful temporary acceptance without an overwhelming submission into despair, and yes, quietness.

This section continues to flow into a very impressive arch through a seemingly unending set of deeply engaging and furthering pieces like “Affinity and Passional Conspiracy”, “The Journey Beyond Anarchism”, “Individuality, Identity, and The Creative Nothing”, “Notes On the Death of the Social”, “Trajectories Against Civilization”, “Uncivilized and Queer: An Anti essentialist Critique of Gender”, “Sodomy and Sigils In the Circle Pit” and much more to sink your ravenous feral fangs into. The section concludes with one of my favorite pieces in the book, “Escapism”. It fleshes out the sometimes touchy subject historically, philosophically, and practically, and comes up with a fairly adjacent assessment to my own, that without an intentional situation to sustain, protect, and nourish us, and without people of deep affinity (yet containing unique and individual difference), our resistance to civilization will not only be limp and fruitless, it will be unsatisfying on so many levels. This terrain is complicated and vast, for sure, fraught with many potential trappings, pitfalls, and leechings, but one worth the dangerous, endless, and satiating lived experimentation. We are not soldiers, we are living beings who need to be filled with a continual vitality to resist civilization and our precious energy needs to be replenished directly and daily in our lives. Surrogate activities and might-sucking distractions magnate all around us as we attempt to be at home in our world.

And finally, Section 5: Schiz/Misc wraps it all up with an assortment of oddities, misfits, and loose ends. Personally, for me this concluding section was slightly less interesting, but I appreciate Jason’s enthusiasm for their endlessly veining-out unconventional interests and it does help dissipate the heaviness of the previous sections into a more dream-like and playful goo, sending us all on our limitless little ways. In this almost afterward-like section we rub elbows with visionary artist Paul Laffoley and their psychotronic art, chomp down some amanitas with a shamanistic and hermetic Santa, and get a few other entertaining conspiratorial tutorials. Most relevant to me was the opening statement to the final section, pulled out in part for the back cover: “I am interested in ideas that don’t fit… The limitations of an alien reality must be smashed. It isn’t important to reach the masses, instead we want a growing lunatic fringe, schizoid anarchs who are uncontrollable and irresistible.” Delightful.

If it were not for the likes of Jason Rodgers and a ragged assortment of other such kindred deviants scattered about I would have left anarchists behind long ago. These rare crackles, sparks, and glimmers lighten my darkening heart, blow out my dusty mind, and rattle my creaking bones. They put a crooked skip in my step and rowdy stomp in my boot. They don’t delude, distract, or soothe with such false balms as hope or lofty philosophical ideals, but instead invigorate with a potent rejection and intoxicating honesty so sorely needed. It hurt so good.

Jason is no mere propagandist, that is a project for politics and power. Rodgers is a provocateur of the highest degree and a psychic warrior of great finesse. In their attempt to corrupt the perceptions and attitudes of individuals, groups, and powers, Jason’s psychological operations have no limits, but don’t expect the played out and obtuse knuckle-headed full-frontal attack! attack! attack! No, Rodgers is like a brilliant little termite, chewing away the rotting structures and shitting out the detritus for dreams to grow in as the mutherfucker crumbles from within. Chew!

“I know life is a game and I intend to play for keeps.
Time to get serious about joking and work at play.
It is time to play hard and play the ultimate game, war games.”
- Campaign to Play for Keeps

————

Jason Rodgers can be reached at:
Campaign to Play for Keeps
PO Box 701 Cobleskill, NY 12043
(no email)
Invisible Generation and War of Dreams
are available from Jason directly
or
autonomedia.org
or
underworldamusements.com

Invecchiare Selvatico
was a primary editor and writer for Green Anarchy magazine
and is the author of Black Blossoms At The End Of The World (LBC)
available from underworldamusements.com
Contact: nazelpickens@gmail.com
PO Box 316 Williams, OR 97544

*Both Jason Rodgers and Invecchiare Selvatico (as well as some other interesting deviants)
can be found writing for the preeminent anti-civilization anarchist publication:
OAK JOURNAL - PO BOX 485, WV 26851 - oakjournal@protonmail.com

Trump’s Win Casts Shadow over US Climate Progress, Global Leadership

He won support with pledges to solve economic woes. But his fossil-fueled solutions and retreat from international cooperation would worsen the climate crisis.

By Marianne Lavelle
November 10, 2024
Source: Inside Climate News





Former president Donald Trump’s victory on Tuesday jeopardizes the hard-fought climate progress of the past four years in the United States and sets back the global effort to curb warming at a time when the overwhelming scientific consensus is that delay will rapidly escalate the hazards for the planet.

Voters decided to return to the White House a president who dismisses the threat of climate change in a year that is on track to be the second consecutive hottest on record, just weeks after Hurricanes Helene and Milton wreaked devastation over six states and unprecedented heat gripped the Southwest.

When they’re written, the annals of the 2024 presidential race could focus on any number of factors—the economic dislocation of the working class, attitudes on race and gender, media fragmentation—but any fair record would have to include this note about climate change: It barely was mentioned during the campaign.

Vice President Kamala Harris chose not to emphasize her administration’s achievement in getting the nation’s first comprehensive climate change legislation through a closely divided Congress—a bill for which she cast the tie-breaking vote in 2022. Her campaign labored not to alienate voters in the middle of the political spectrum who have mixed feelings on climate action, or those in the all-important swing state of Pennsylvania, which has become the nation’s No.2 natural gas producing state due to fracking.

In the end, Trump took Pennsylvania, gaining wider margins in all regions—rural, suburban and urban—than he had garnered in 2020. Pre-election polling indicated that fracking was not a big issue for Pennsylvanians. But the economy clearly weighed heavily on voters’ minds. Two-thirds of the electorate in battleground states said the economy was “not so good or poor,” and 69 percent of those voters chose Trump, according to exit polling by a consortium of news organizations.

The exit polls also showed there never was a large group of undecided moderates for either of the candidates to win over. Nearly 80 percent of voters told pollsters they made their decision before September. Among the 4 percent who said they decided “in the last few days,” Trump had an edge (45 percent to 43 percent), with 13 percent voting for a third-party candidate.

Environmental activists pledged that they would fight to preserve the gains that have been made on climate, and would work—not only in Washington, but at the state, local and tribal government levels—to advance policies to protect public health and the planet.

“As our environment and health are put at risk, we will defend our families and communities from threat,” said Manish Bapna, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council, in an emailed statement. “We’ll work with our partners and allies, the philanthropic community and those in the private sector that grasp the economic opportunity and the moral imperative to confront the climate crisis.

“Our purpose will not be shaken,” he added. “Our voice will not go dim.”
Investing in an Energy Transition vs. Solving Economic Woes

In an election where economic concerns loomed large, voters chose the candidate who offered quicker solutions—those that happen to involve increased production and use of fossil fuel.

Harris told voters she planned to continue federal investment in clean energy manufacturing so that “the next generation of breakthroughs, from advanced batteries to electric vehicles,” would be made in the U.S. And in her final speeches on the campaign trail, Harris said she saw the “promise of America” in young people who were determined to tackle climate change. But Harris did not include in her final pitch details on how she would seek to fulfill that particular promise, or go beyond what President Joe Biden’s administration had done on climate.

Aru Shiney-Ajay, executive director of the Sunrise Movement, a youth-led climate action group, said the Democrats failed to convey clearly how a Harris administration would provide the change that voters were clearly looking for. Too many voters, she said, felt they were choosing between two bad options and voted for “the meager change our political system could offer.

“The frank truth is our political system is bought and owned by billionaires and vested interests,” she said. “The Democratic Party cannot win office running as Republicans-Lite. To win, we will need to run on our values and govern on our morals.”

Young voters favored Harris by 13 percentage points (55 percent to 42 percent), according to exit polls, significantly less than the 25-point edge that Biden enjoyed in 2020. Also, young people made up less of the electorate this year, casting 14 percent of all ballots, compared to 17 percent in 2020. It’s too early to know what share of registered young voters went to the polls.

Nathaniel Stinnett, executive director of the nonprofit Environmental Voter Project, said the election results should be a “wake-up call.”

“The climate movement urgently needs more political power because the climate crisis is moving infinitely faster than our politics right now,” he said. His group had identified 4.8 million voters in 19 states who were not likely to vote even though they placed a high priority on climate action; by election day, about 13 percent of them had voted early. “That’s good news—but we clearly need more,” Stinnett said.


“The Democratic Party cannot win office running as Republicans-Lite. To win, we will need to run on our values and govern on our morals.”— Aru Shiney-Ajay, Sunrise Movement executive director

Liam Donovan, a senior political strategist with the Washington, D.C. lobbying firm Bracewell, which represents a range of energy businesses and interests, said he believed climate became “an uncomfortable topic to touch on for the Democrats” because Trump and Republicans successfully put them on the defensive.

“It was messaged by Republicans as ‘your gas is costing more, your cost of living is above where it had been before,’” Donovan said. “And there was a recognition on the Democratic side of the danger of putting climate front and center. You ended up with this weird, untenable business where Harris is on the stage in Pennsylvania talking about how she’s not going to ban fracking.”

Trump won Michigan after blanketing the swing state with ads warning that Harris would “end all gas-powered cars,” and he recast the Inflation Reduction Act as the cause of inflation during Biden’s presidency. In fact, consumer prices ran up worldwide as economies recovered from the COVID-19 pandemic. And despite inflation in the United States falling to its lowest level since 2021 in the weeks before the election, a faster recovery than other nations, Trump advanced the argument that the United States was in the grip of economic woes that he could solve “easily.”

“Every citizen, I will fight for you, for your family and your future,” Trump said early Wednesday morning as victory seemed within his grasp. “Every single day I will be fighting for you with every breath in my body. I will not rest until we have delivered the strong, safe and prosperous America that our children deserve and that you deserve.”

Trump’s promised solutions would ramp up carbon emissions, and further secure the U.S.’ place as the largest contributor to the cumulative overload of heat-trapping gas in the atmosphere. The few times during the campaign that Trump responded directly to questions about climate change, he suggested that its effects would be slight and far off. He said sea level is expected to rise one inch every 300 or 400 years, and suggested rising seas would create more oceanfront property, contrary to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s conclusion that damaging impacts already are evident, with sea levels on track to rise 10 inches in the next 30 years.President Joe Biden delivers remarks on the first anniversary of the Inflation Reduction Act in the East Room at the White House on Aug. 16, 2023. Credit: Win McNamee/Getty Images.

Trump has pledged to withdraw or redirect billions of dollars of spending Congress committed to clean energy, putting at risk billions of dollars more of private investment in electric vehicle and battery plants and renewable energy projects. The nonprofit group Environmental Entrepreneurs has tracked 334 new clean energy and vehicles project announcements in 40 states since passage of the Inflation Reduction Act, totaling $125 billion in investment. But Trump disdains wind energy as “too expensive,” and asserts that “it doesn’t work,” in addition to harming birds and whales and causing cancer. Electric vehicles are fine for “a small slice” of the public, but “they don’t go far,” he has said.

As in his first term, when he rolled back more than 100 environmental regulations, Trump has promised to undo rules that the Biden administration put into place to cut carbon pollution from cars, trucks, power plants and oil and gas industry operations. Trump’s deregulatory efforts were slowed and sometimes stymied by the federal courts during his first term, but since then, the Supreme Court has established new precedents that restrain federal regulatory authority. The three appointees Trump named in his first term bolstered the court’s conservative majority.

Trump has voiced a commitment to domestic oil and gas production, which is already at historic levels in the United States. Pumping more of this “liquid gold” into the economy would lower prices, boost manufacturing and jobs and make the nation more secure, Trump has argued. “To keep pace with the world economy that depends on fossil fuels for more than 80 percent of its energy, President Trump will DRILL, BABY, DRILL,” said the Trump campaign’s Agenda 47, the closest thing to an official Republican platform this election. Among the steps his administration could take quickly is to move forward paused natural gas export terminal proposals and rescind steps Biden took to limit drilling in the Arctic.
This story is funded by readers like you.

Our nonprofit newsroom provides award-winning climate coverage free of charge and advertising. We rely on donations from readers like you to keep going. Please donate now to support our work.

Donate Now

Unlike in his first term, when Trump hesitated before exiting the Paris climate agreement due to objections from many of his top advisers and cabinet members, he has made clear he would remove the United States from the 2015 treaty it helped to design. “President Trump will once again exit the horrendously unfair Paris Climate Accords,” reads an excerpt from Agenda 47.

Trump’s victory surely will undercut the credibility of the Biden administration’s negotiating team as it heads to this year’s international climate conference in Azerbaijan, which begins on Monday. Climate finance is high on the agenda, and the U.S. has been pushing for contributions from a broader set of countries—including China—for a new fund designed to help developing nations cope with the impacts of climate change.
Considered Cuts to Existing Programs

The budgets of federal environmental, science and public lands agencies would be in the sights of the new efficiency commission Trump has promised to establish in an effort to cut government waste. Trump mega-donor Elon Musk, who is in line to head up the effort, has declared that he could cut “at least $2 trillion” in federal spending, around 30 percent of the budget, even though it will involve “some temporary hardship.” In that role, Musk, the CEO of Tesla Motors, the largest U.S. electric car company, would have a say over agencies and federal programs that directly impact his own business and those of his competitors.

Some analysts believe Trump will not be able to fully undo Biden climate policy, if only because so much of the federal clean energy spending is benefiting GOP-led states and Congressional districts. Only Congress can fully withdraw the investments it voted to make, and there is sentiment for keeping them in place even if the GOP holds onto the House—a result that won’t be known until California’s votes are counted. A number of Republican members of Congress this summer wrote a letter to Speaker of the House Mike Johnson opposing “prematurely repealing energy tax credits, particularly those which were used to justify investments that already broke ground.”


“Trump’s highest performing states benefit the most from the massive investments and millions of jobs from the Inflation Reduction Act, so he’d be a fool to reverse course.”— Kaniela Ing, Green New Deal Network national director

Advocates for a clean energy transition expressed determination. “No matter what Trump may say, the shift to clean energy is unstoppable and our country is not turning back,” said Gina McCarthy, who served as White House National Climate Advisor under Biden, in an emailed statement. “Our coalition is bigger, more bipartisan, better organized, and fully prepared to deliver climate solutions, boost local economies, and drive climate ambition. We cannot and will not let Trump stand in the way of giving our kids and grandkids the freedom to grow up in safer and healthier communities.”

Kaniela Ing, national director of the Green New Deal Network, called the election “a heavy loss,” but said that Trump can’t change the fact the majority of Americans prefer affordable clean energy over fossil fuels.

“Solar and wind are already cheaper than oil and generate more power than coal,” Ing said. “Trump’s highest performing states benefit the most from the massive investments and millions of jobs from the Inflation Reduction Act, so he’d be a fool to reverse course.”

Trump’s second term sets the stage for conflict between those regions of the country that wish to maintain federal support for their new clean energy projects and the forces that wish to eliminate the effort, either for ideological reasons, like the former advisers who authored the conservative policy roadmap Project 2025, or for commercial reasons, like the oil and gas executives who helped support his campaign.

The oil and gas magnates who gathered at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago compound last spring never brought in the $1 billion that the former president asked them to raise for his re-election effort. But the industry did pour more money into the 2024 election than to any other U.S. election on record: $208.5 million, with 88 percent of it going to Republicans, led by Trump, according to the watchdog group Open Secrets.

The president-elect has laid out an agenda that would remove for at least the next four years one of the greatest threats to business as usual for those donors: a federal government that is determined to act on climate change, and to lead other nations to follow suit.
The World According to Trump
 – The Chris Hedges Report
November 10, 2024
Source: The Chris Hedges Report

Joining host Chris Hedges on this episode of The Chris Hedges Report is Lawrence Wilkerson, a retired Army colonel and former chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell. With his extensive insights and expertise into the Middle East and American foreign policy, Wilkerson provides a valuable understanding into what a Trump presidency may look like outside of the borders of America.


 

November 11 Was Originally Armistice Day, a Peace Holiday

November 11, declared Armistice Day at the end of World War I, is celebrated in the U.S. as Veterans Day. Understanding why requires us to recall World War I and its aftermath.

World War I was an international conflict, 1914-18, that embroiled most of the nations of Europe, along with Russia, the United States, the Middle East, and other regions.  The war pitted the “Central Powers” – mainly Germany, Austria-Hungary and Turkey – against the “Allies” – mainly France, Great Britain, Russia, Italy and (from 1917) the United States. The war was unprecedented in the slaughter, carnage, and destruction it caused. Over 15 million people were killed – both soldiers and civilians, and over 25 million were wounded.

The First World War ended in November 1918 when an armistice was declared at the “eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month,” marking a moment of hope and the promise of peace. It was also a moment of great sadness and a sense of great tragedy. Many people prayed this would be “the war to end all wars,” and that Armistice Day would serve as an eternal warning never to repeat the past.  But then came World War II.

After the end of World War II and the Korean War in 1945, veterans’ organizations pushed the Congress to switch the holiday’s name to Veterans Day, a day to honor those who fight in war. Could it be that – having emerged from World War II unscathed and more powerful than ever, the United States was not ready to abandon militarism? Whatever the intention, the holiday’s meaning was turned on its head – a day for war instead of a day for peace.

The national organization Veterans For Peace has been working to Reclaim Armistice Day as  a day that is dedicated to ending war once and for all. Veterans lead Armistice Day activities around the country, many incorporating the ringing of bells at the “11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month.” Now the veterans group is also calling for Peace in the Middle East.

The looming threats of climate catastrophe and nuclear annihilation have been overshadowed this year by Israel’s horrific ongoing genocide of Palestinian civilians in Gaza – up to 50,000 killed, 70% of whom are women and children. For thirteen months straight, unspeakable atrocities have filled our screens and haunted our consciences. We can see clearly that the US government is complicit in Israel’s merciless ethnic cleansing. The bombs that Israel drops on Palestinian children are made in the USA and delivered by the US government. US-backed Israeli wars have now expanded to the Palestine’s West Bank, to Lebanon and to Iran, risking a wider war, possibly even a global war that could “go nuclear.”

According to Wikipedia: Scholars trying to understand the cause of World War I “look at political, territorial and economic competition; militarism, a complex web of alliances and alignments; imperialism, the growth of nationalism; and the power vacuum created by the decline of the Ottoman Empire.” One hundred and six years after the end of World War I, another such deadly concoction is brewing. War is permanent. Genocide is on TV.  A desperate empire is pushing human civilization toward a tragic end.

NO MORE US BOMBS TO ISRAEL

This year, Veterans For Peace is calling for an Armistice – a permanent Ceasefire in Palestine, Lebanon and throughout the Middle East, and for an end to US arms shipments to Israel.

“When US bombs stop dropping on Palestinian children, the genocide will end” said VFP Vice President Joshua Shurley.

The 39-year-old veterans’ organization, with chapters in over 100 US cities, recently issued a statement in support of Israeli and US soldiers who refuse to take part genocide, illegal wars and war crimes.

Gerry Condon is Vietnam-era veteran and war resister who is a past president and a current Board member of Veterans For Peace.

Visions of an Asian NATO

The Musings of Shigeru Ishiba


Japan’s new prime minister, Shigeru Ishiba, is stirring the pot – notably on regional security matters.  He has proposed something that has done more than raise a few eyebrows in the foreign and defence ministries of several countries.  An Asian version of NATO, he has suggested, was an idea worth considering, notably given China’s ambitions in the region.  “The creation of an Asian version of NATO is essential to deter China by its Western allies,” he revealed to the Washington-based Hudson Institute in September.

During his campaign for office, Ishiba had mooted changes to the deployment arrangements of the Japan Self-Defence Forces and the need to move beyond the purely bilateral approach to regional security anchored by US agreements with various countries, be it with Japan, South Korea, the Philippines and others.

Ishiba’s suggested changes to Japan’s self-defence posture builds on a cabinet decision made during the Abe administration to reinterpret the country’s constitution to permit exercising the right of collective self-defence.  It was a problematic move, given the pacifist nature of a text that renounces the use of force in the resolution of international disputes.

In September 2015, then Prime Minister Shinzo Abe convinced the Diet to pass a package of security bills known as the Legislation for Peace and Security, thereby allowing Japan to participate in limited forms of collective self-defence.  Opponents warned, understandably, that the legislation paved the way for Japan to attack a country in concert with another on the premise of collective self-defence, despite not itself being directly attacked.  They have every reason to be even more worried given Ishiba’s recent meditations.

The intention to broaden the remit of how Japan’s armed forces are deployed is also a reminder to the United States that Tokyo is no longer interested in playing a subordinate role in its alliance with Washington. “The current Japan-US security treaty,” complains Ishiba, “is structured so that the US is obligated to ‘defend’ Japan, and Japan is obligated to ‘provide bases’ to the US.”  He suggests “expanding the scope of joint management of US bases in Japan”, a move that would reduce Washington’s burden, and revising the Japan-US Security Treaty and Status of Forces Agreement to permit the stationing of Japanese forces on Guam.

What makes his suggestions disconcerting is not merely the establishment of a power bloc bound by the glue of collective self-defence – an arrangement that has much to do with defence as a growling provocation.  Ishiba is intent on being even more provocative in suggesting that any such “Asian version of NATO must also specifically consider America’s sharing of nuclear weapons or the introduction of nuclear weapons into the region.”

Were such a move taken, it would, at least from a Japanese perspective, fly in the face of a doctrine in place since December 1967, when Prime Minister Eisaku Sato articulated the three non-nuclear principles of “not possessing, not producing and not permitting the introduction of nuclear weapons, in line with Japan’s Peace Constitution.”

As with so many in the business of preaching about international security, false paradigms and analysis are offered from the pulpit.  The Japanese PM, much like neoconservative hawks in Washington and Canberra, prove incapable of seeing conflict in generic, transferrable terms. “Ukraine today is Asia tomorrow,” he falsely reasons. “Replacing Russia with China and Ukraine and Taiwan, the absence of a collective self-defense system like NATO in Asia means that wars are likely to break out because there is no obligation for mutual defense.” Ergo, he reasons, the need for an Asian version of NATO.

Ishiba’s suggestions have yet to gather momentum. Daniel Kritenbrink, US assistant secretary of state for East Asia and the Pacific, told a forum on Indo-Pacific security at the Stimson Center in September that he preferred the current “latticework” approach to US regional alliances featuring, for instance, the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue involving Japan, India and Australia, and AUKUS, featuring Australia and the UK. “It’s too early to talk about collective security in that context, and [the creation of] more formal institutions.” It was far better to focus on “investing in the region’s existing formal architecture and continuing to build this network of formal and information relationships.”

Kritenbrink’s analysis hardly gets away from the suspicion that the “latticework” theory of US security in the Indo-Pacific is but a form of NATO in embryo. As Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said with tartness in 2022, “The real goal for the [US] Indo-Pacific strategy is to establish an Indo-Pacific version of NATO. These perverse actions run counter to common aspirations of the region and are doomed to fail.”

From New Delhi, the view towards such an alliance is not a glowing one.  On October 1, at an event held by Washington’s Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Indian Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar proved dismissive of any NATO replication in Asia. “We don’t have that kind of strategic architecture in mind.” India had “a different history and different way of approaching” its security considerations.

With the return of Donald Trump to the White House, the collective defence hawks so keen on adding kindling to conflict will have their teeth chattering.  Ishiba’s ideas may well have to be put back into cold storage – at least in the interim.  And as luck would have it, his own prime ministerial tenure already looks threatened.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.comRead other articles by Binoy.