Made Europe More Fearful Of A Possible Russia Attack

Made Europe More Fearful Of A Possible Russia Attack

The eyebrow-raising US visit to Europe by Donald Trump has confirmed the worst fears of Europeans: If Russia attempts another Crimea-like, takeover somewhere on the continent, it will be theirs alone.

Trump made it clear that European leaders cannot rely on the US to protect them. Not only was he harshly criticize by his party for not being more conciliatory with Russian President Vladimir Putin at their Helsinki summit, but he also lashed back at US allies, calling the European Union a foe.

Although the US may have more troops in Europe than it has soldiers, a Pentagon report recently stated that they are evaluating the effects of possible troop reductions. This is coupled with Trump’s unpredictable behavior, which cause America’s traditional allies to be nervous. Trump has actually weakened the West by launching trade wars and constantly attacking his closest allies.

A Second War In Europe Is Possible

Despite Trump’s assurances last week that the US values NATO, Trump may have encouraged Putin to visit Europe in divisive fashion. He may be assessing that more European land might not be subject to much military resistance, despite his assurances.

Poland is so worry that it recently offered to pay up to US$2bn for a permanent deployment of an armour division on their soil.

The unease between Moscow and the West is further exacerbate by the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and Putin’s recent emphasis on Russia’s rights and obligations to protect Russians and Russian speakers outside its borders. This is especially evident in the Baltic States, where two of them (Estonia and Latvia), have large Russian minority populations.

It’s not helpful when Russia conducts military drills and dispatches warplanes at the borders with the Baltics. This gives the impression that there is a possibility of military escalation.

Eastern Europe Russia Is Experiencing Tensions

A narrow strip of land lying between Poland and Lithuania, known as the Suwalki Gap, could be the focus of any Russian military incursion. It is name after the Polish town of Suwalki. This would allow Russia to strengthen its only access to Baltic Sea via its Kaliningrad exclave. The Baltics would then cut off from the rest Europe.

The Suwalki Gap links Kaliningrad and Belarus, a loyal Russian ally. Moscow organizes joint strategic military exercises with Minsk regularly, including the Zapad war games in September last year.

Kaliningrad is also strategically important because it is the location of recently deployed nuclear-capable long-range missiles with nuclear capabilities and an upgraded nuclear weapons storage facility.

NATO members held military drills last June to address their fears about an invasion. They focused on the defense of this 104km area from possible Russian attacks. NATO then held the Trojan Footprint 18 joint exercise in Poland and Baltics last month. This was one of the largest-ever war games in this region.

These NATO military builds-ups on NATO’s eastern flank are reminiscent the Cold War. They feed both Russia’s deeply-rooted sense of vulnerability vis–a-vis the West as well as Europe’s own feelings and insecurity.

Do It All Alone Russia

However, if Russia invaded the Suwalki Gap would Europe go to war? It might not be possible. NATO doesn’t have the military resources to wage war against Russia, so European military options are limited. European leaders were acutely aware of this and launched a new regional defense fund last year to help develop the continent’s military capability outside of NATO.

A direct Russian invasion of NATO members would be the worst case scenario. However, it is more likely that Putin would seek further destabilisation of the bloc’s east. Flank through a hybrid conflict that includes cyber-attacks and divisive propaganda campaigns. He would also use armed proxy forces such as the little green men who appeared in the Ukraine conflict.

Southeast Europe Swelters Through Another Heatwave

Southeast Europe Swelters Through Another Heatwave

Some parts of Europe are experiencing a scorching summer. Already, heat records have broken in western Europe by June. Now, a heatwave called Lucifer, is causing severe heatwave conditions in parts of southern and eastern Europe.

Many countries are dealing with the extreme heat’s effects, including wildfires and water restrictions. Temperatures rose to 40 degrees in some parts of Italy, Greece, and the Balkans. The extreme heat has spread north to the Czech Republic, and south into southern Poland.

Some regions are experiencing the hottest temperatures since 2007, when extreme heat brought dangerous conditions to the southeast.

Heat is associate with a high-pressure system over southeast Europe. The jet stream guides weather systems in Britain and northern Europe. This split weather pattern was present in Europe for several weeks in 2007. It brought heavy rains to England and flooding. Then came the scorching heat from Greece and the Balkans.

Europe is an area that has been extensively studied for heatwaves. This is due to two reasons: First, Europe has a lot of weather observations that allow us to assess our climate. Models and quantify climate change’s effects with high confidence. The second reason is that many of Europe’s leading climate science groups are fund. To increase understanding of the effects of climate change on Europe.

The record-breaking 2003 European summer was the first to examine how climate change could be link to an extreme weather event. Multiple studies have done since then to assess the impact of human influence on European extreme weather. We expect this region to experience hotter summers, more intense heatwaves, and frequenter and more intense heatwaves.

We know from other sources that climate change caused an increase in deaths during the 2003 heatwaves, and that future climate change-related deaths will likely rise.

This Heatwave Is Cause By Climate Change

To understand the role climate change played in the recent European heatwave, I examined changes in the hottest summer day over southeast Europe, which includes Italy, Greece, and the Balkans.

In a series of climate simulations, I calculated the frequency and duration of very hot summer days under four scenarios. These were: A natural world without human influence, a world with about 1 degree of global warming, a 1.5 world that is warming at 1.5 degrees, and a world that is warming at 2 degrees. Because they correspond to the Paris Agreement targets, I chose the 1.5- and 2 benchmarks.

We don’t know how hotter than normal this heatwave will be as it is still ongoing. Multiple thresholds were used to account for the uncertainty. They are based on very hot summer days in the past. These thresholds represent a historical 1-in-10-year hot day, 1-in-20-year hottest days, and a new record in the region that exceeds the 2007 value.

We don’t know where 2017 will lead, but we know it will surpass the threshold of 1 in 10 years and may even exceed it.

Clear Human Fingerprint Europe

No matter what threshold I used to determine the possibility of very hot summer days, climate change greatly increased their likelihood. Climate change has caused an increase in the likelihood of extremely hot summer days like this one by at least fourfold.

My analysis shows that extreme heat like the one we are seeing in southeast Europe. Under natural conditions would be uncommon. Heatwaves such as this are not unusual in the world today and future, according to the Paris Agreement thresholds.

Limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees rather than 2 is also beneficial as it reduces. The frequency of extreme heat events.

We know that Europe can expect more heatwaves similar to this one as this event ends. However, we can prevent extreme heat becoming the new norm by keeping. Global warming below or at the level agreed to in Paris.

Carbon Tax Whether The Prime Minister Likes It Or Not

Carbon Tax Whether The Prime Minister Likes It Or Not

Ten years ago, businesses were most concerned about losing carbon out to non-taxed companies overseas. Instead of purchasing Australian carbon-taxed goods, Australian and export customers could buy untaxed (possibly more dirty) products from elsewhere.

It would allow late-movers (countries without a carbon tax) to get a free kick. This could be in any industry, from coal and steel to aluminum to liquefied gas to cement to meat and milk products to copy paper.

This is why the Gillard government gave free permits to trade-exposed industries so that they wouldn’t be subject to unfair competition. It worked as a temporary solution. The companies with the greatest loss were purchase.

It was not a solution. What if every country had done this? Trade-exposed industries would then be exempt from any carbon tax. It wouldn’t be enough to reduce emissions.

Carbon Tariffs Are Coming To The United States

The European Union has realise the shortcomings of workarounds offered by Australia and is now moving in the opposite direction.

Instead of treating local and foreign producers equally by letting them off the hook, it will place both on the hook.

It is about to ensure that producers from higher-emitting nations like China (and Australia), don’t subcut those who pay carbon prices.

Unless foreign producers pay the same carbon price as Europe, the EU will impose carbon prices on imported goods. This known as the carbon tariff or Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism.

Angus Taylor, Australia’s Energy Minister, says he is against carbon tariffs. This a position that unlikely to taken seriously in France or any other EU countries.

Australia Is Well-Verse In The Arguments For Them

Europe will begin to apply the tariff to direct emissions of imported iron, steel and cement from 2026. Other products (and perhaps indirect emissions) may add later.

They can only do so if they are not from a country that has a carbon price

Canada is also considering the idea as part of “leveling the playing field”. Joe Biden, the US President, is also interest in this idea. He wants to stop countries polluting our workers and manufacturers.

These arguments are similar to those made in Australia during the lead-up for our carbon price. A local carbon tax will force local employers to pollution havens, which areas where emissions are not tax.

In practice, Australia cannot stop Europe and other countries imposing carbon taxes.

Australia learned the hard way that a free trade agreement or the World Trade Organisation can’t do much when China blocks its wine and barley exports. Former US President Donald Trump blocked all appointments to the WTO appellate body. This left it without staff, which Biden has not reversed.

However, the EU still believes that such an action would be permitted under trade rules. This is a reference to Australia’s precedent.

Legality Is Not The Point Carbon

In 2000, Australia introduced the Goods and Services Tax. It passed laws that allowed it to tax imports the same as locally produced products. This move was recently extended to small parcels and online services.

Paul Krugman, a Nobel Prizewinning economist and trade expert, says he is open to arguing the toss with Australian politicians about legality and whether carbon tariffs are protectionist.

He Says It’s Irrelevant

Protectionism is not without its costs. But these costs are often exaggerated and insignificant when compared to the potential consequences of climate change. The Pacific Northwest, or the Pacific Northwest. — have been baking in triple-digit temperatures. Now, we will worry about Article III of General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.

If we are to address an existential threat to the environment, it is crucial that there be some international sanctions for countries that do not take steps to reduce their emissions.