In today’s global financial crisis, the image of a black swan has become a symbol for the seemingly impossible that somehow occurs, turning the world upside down. This year will afford us ample opportunity to examine the black swans that are already among us and to prepare for the arrival of even more.
November, for example, marks the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. The night of Nov. 9, 1989, marked the beginning of the end of the Soviet Union and its empire and thus also of the bipolar world that had, for five decades, divided Germany and Europe. A year before, few people considered this world-shaking event even a remote possibility. Yet it happened and the world changed almost overnight.
After the disappearance of the Soviet Union and the bipolar world order, victorious Western capitalism, under the leadership of the only world power, the US, reigned supreme in global politics and even more so in the global economy. Nothing and no one, it seemed, could stem the global triumph of the market, with its transcendence of all previous limits on wealth — that is, until Sept. 15, the fateful date when Lehman Brothers went bust and the meltdown of the global financial system began.
While a distraught world is still trying to fathom the consequences of this global crash and to mitigate its impact, the call of the next black swan can already be heard: the global climate disaster.
It seems to be part of human nature to willfully deny the possibility of great crises, or at least to downplay them. “Impossible” or “It won’t be all that bad” are the two magic formulae on which we tend to rely.
And we refuse to learn the lesson of the black swan even when the next one is already visible for all to see! Although the generations alive today have witnessed two completely unexpected crises of epic proportions within the last 20 years, we indulge in a shocking collective repression of a climate disaster with far more serious — and foreseeable — consequences.
But, in fact, by linking the answers to the global climate and economic crises, we can find a way out of both. The solutions to the climate crisis are already well known, the money is available, and so are the technologies, or where they aren’t, they could be developed. What is lacking is the strategic vision and determined action of the major political players.
As for the economic crisis, bailouts and stimulus packages on the order of billions of dollars, euros, yen or yuan have been planned or implemented to stem the further slide of the global economy. But, while references to the Great Depression are justified, the lesson of that crisis, and of the New Deal, is that effective programs can at best cushion the fall and bring about stabilization. The real economic recovery — and this is the bad news — came only with World War II and the long Cold War that followed.
Rather than relying on war as an economic mega-project to end today’s recession, the international community should bet on the fight against the climate crisis, because globalization will continue, rapidly increasing the threats to the world’s climate.
In 1929, there were slightly more than 2 billion people living on the planet; today, there are 6.7 billion, and in 2050 there will be 9 billion. All of them, thanks to globalization and new communication technologies, will strive for the same standard of living, give or take, which will necessarily lead to an overstretched global ecosystem.
The question of whether to use coal or nuclear power is simply no longer apposite: without a breakthrough in renewable energies, global energy demand cannot be met, not to mention the dangers of a new Chernobyl.
Where this will lead the world can be seen even today: China already has the world’s most ambitious scheme for expanding nuclear energy, and every year it builds coal-fired power plants whose electricity output is roughly equivalent to the capacity of the entire British power grid.
So the black swan of the climate crisis is already preparing to land. To fight the climate crisis effectively demands nothing less than a green revolution of the global economy, the mega-project of the 21st century.
Only the rich industrial nations of Europe, the US and Japan can afford to pay for the necessary investments in emerging countries. But this green revolution must be about more than spending money; it must also be about laws and standards, about political regulation and new technologies, as well as new products and markets, which mean new economic opportunities.
This year, a new global climate agreement will be negotiated in Copenhagen to replace the Kyoto Protocol. This is effectively the last chance to prevent the next black swan from landing. But we must understand that Copenhagen is also a big chance to revive the global economy.
All of the relevant powers of the 21st century are represented in the G20 and they should see the success of Copenhagen as part of their direct responsibility. This time, unlike at the London G20 meeting, they should do the job properly — both to protect our climate and to reboot the global economy.
Joschka Fischer, a leading member of Germany’s Green Party for almost 20 years, was Germany’s foreign minister and vice chancellor from 1998 until 2005.
COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE/INSTITUTE OF HUMAN SCIENCES
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
US political scientist Francis Fukuyama, during an interview with the UK’s Times Radio, reacted to US President Donald Trump’s overturning of decades of US foreign policy by saying that “the chance for serious instability is very great.” That is something of an understatement. Fukuyama said that Trump’s apparent moves to expand US territory and that he “seems to be actively siding with” authoritarian states is concerning, not just for Europe, but also for Taiwan. He said that “if I were China I would see this as a golden opportunity” to annex Taiwan, and that every European country needs to think
For years, the use of insecure smart home appliances and other Internet-connected devices has resulted in personal data leaks. Many smart devices require users’ location, contact details or access to cameras and microphones to set up, which expose people’s personal information, but are unnecessary to use the product. As a result, data breaches and security incidents continue to emerge worldwide through smartphone apps, smart speakers, TVs, air fryers and robot vacuums. Last week, another major data breach was added to the list: Mars Hydro, a Chinese company that makes Internet of Things (IoT) devices such as LED grow lights and the
US President Donald Trump is an extremely stable genius. Within his first month of presidency, he proposed to annex Canada and take military action to control the Panama Canal, renamed the Gulf of Mexico, called Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy a dictator and blamed him for the Russian invasion. He has managed to offend many leaders on the planet Earth at warp speed. Demanding that Europe step up its own defense, the Trump administration has threatened to pull US troops from the continent. Accusing Taiwan of stealing the US’ semiconductor business, it intends to impose heavy tariffs on integrated circuit chips
RSS