Group items tagged

The Obama administration established new federal greenhouse gas pollution limits. An October executive order requires federal government agencies to set greenhouse gas emission reduction targets that must be met by 2020. All of these actions, along with additional steps forward, will help enhance American economic competitiveness. And on December 7, Environmental Protection Agency Adminstrator Lisa Jackson announced the "endangerment finding" under the Clean Air Act. This enables EPA to finalize limits on global warming pollution from motor vehicles and large industrial sources. President Obama would prefer that Congress, rather than EPA, establish these pollution limits, but the endangerment finding means that EPA will act if Congress fails to do so.

China announced a carbon reduction target. The Obama administration’s hard work with China and India is starting to pay off. China announced on Thanksgiving Day a target of reducing carbon pollution per unit of gross domestic product by 40 to 45 percent from 2005 levels by 2020. This is the first time China has committed to specific carbon reductions. The November joint statement by Presidents Obama and Hu Jintao on the creation of a greenhouse gas inventory between the U.S. EPA and China will make it possible to measure and verify these reductions.

India announced a carbon reduction target. India announced on December 2, soon after the U.S.-India summit in Washington, that it intends to offer a target for decreasing its carbon intensity 24 percent from 2005 levels by 2020. This is the first time India has proposed its own specific carbon reduction target, which adds to its already established commitment to set the largest solar power generation target in the world.

It’s critical to keep Abbas and Netanyahu talking. The longer they talk, the greater chance they have at success. And despite the intense pessimism, there is reason to believe that this time really can be different.First, violence is down substantially from years past, and that works to build confidence. Second, settlement building is also down, despite the constant tension on this subject. Third, the public on both sides supports a two-state solution. And fourth, the big push is coming from the US.

The formation of a new government does not push back the specter of another war with Israel. In July 2006, Hezbollah abducted two Israeli soldiers in a cross-border raid, setting off a 34-day war that crippled Lebanon's infrastructure, displaced 1 million people, and killed more than 1,200 Lebanese – the majority of them civilians. Since that conflict ended, both sides have been preparing for a new round.Hezbollah leaders boast that the group now has an even larger and more potent cache of missiles than it did three years ago. Israeli officials, who are also escalating their war rhetoric, estimate Hezbollah's arsenal at between 40,000 and 80,000 rockets. On Nov. 3, the Israeli navy intercepted a ship in the Mediterranean Sea that was carrying 500 tons of rockets, mortars, and other weapons. Israeli officials claimed that it was an Iranian arms shipment intended to reach Hezbollah through Syria, which led to a new round of bellicose threats from both sides.The basic problem is that Hezbollah makes decisions that could lead to war – without consulting or involving the Lebanese state. And Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has threatened to hold the Lebanese government responsible for the militia's actions. This puts Hariri in a difficult position and it will make him reliant on the Obama administration to keep Israel at bay.

While Hezbollah has shown a willingness to adapt and evolve politically, it is unlikely that the movement would give up its weapons – or the idea of perpetual resistance – without a political settlement between the West and Hezbollah's main patron, Iran.The Obama administration can avert a new conflict by keeping its attention focused on Lebanon, continuing to support Hariri's government, and helping to strengthen state institutions like the Lebanese Army. But US officials must eventually reach out to Hezbollah, which is designated a terrorist organization by the State Department. Washington could begin indirect outreach through France and other Western countries that maintain contact with Hezbollah.

Obama recently pledged that the United States would reduce emissions about 17 percent by 2020 as compared with 2005 levels (though the Wall Street Journal is reporting that he might soon announce steeper cuts for 2050); his current pledge reflects numbers in bills now under review by Congress. The president probably can't offer much more without risking that any final treaty would later be rejected by Congress, similar to what happened when the U.S. Senate failed to ratify the Kyoto climate treaty in 1997.

Rather than absolute carbon cuts, some developing countries, including China and India, have declared goals of reducing the "carbon intensity" of their economies. In other words, they will use less carbon per unit of GDP growth, but as their overall economies grow, so too will carbon emissions, at least for the short term. China has pledged to reduce the carbon intensity of its economy by 40 to 45 percent. India has a target of 20 to 25 percent. The targets have been applauded by some as a step forward and pilloried by others as far too low.

The upshot: Nothing will happen unless there's money behind it, and for some countries, the financial pledge may be as politically difficult as the carbon-reduction pledge. (Sen. John Kerry has proposed that the United States pony up $2.5 billion to $3 billion, roughly equivalent to the annual budget of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.) With many industrialized countries stuck in recessions and struggling with high unemployment, short-term generosity will be difficult.

But presumably to appease his right-wing constituents he allowed building to continue in East Jerusalem and on 3,000 housing units elsewhere in the West Bank.

Though limited in scope, the freeze has aggravated an ideological fault line between settlers and Netanyahu.

While his rejection earlier this year of President Obama's call for a comprehensive settlement freeze sparked the most public Israel-US spat in two decades, Netanyahu's slowdown has been praised by the administration. George Mitchell, Obama's special envoy for Middle East Peace, said last week that Netanyahu's move "falls short of a full settlement freeze, but it is more than any Israeli government has done before and can help movement toward agreement between the parties."

The Obama administration has an opportunity to break the current logjam in the Middle East by focusing away from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — and pushing for renewed Syrian-Israeli negotiations. The Syrian-Israeli track can move faster than Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, where the two sides are still far apart on the central issues: Israeli settlements, the fate of Palestinian refugees and the final status of Jerusalem. By contrast, the Syrians and Israelis mainly need to negotiate over the return of the Golan Heights, and related security guarantees and water access issues.

Unlike the weak Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, Syrian President Bashar Assad can actually deliver on a peace deal. Such an agreement is possible during Obama's presidency, but it will not happen without the deep involvement of his administration. The United States has much to gain strategically from renewed Syrian-Israeli dialogue: Damascus could be pressed to play a more constructive role in the region, instead of being a spoiler. If there are serious negotiations, the United States can demand that Assad's regime stop interfering in Iraq, carry out domestic reforms, respect human rights and drop Syrian support for Hamas and other Palestinian groups that reject peace with Israel. To achieve peace, the United States must strongly push Israel back to negotiations and be willing to dispatch U.S. personnel as monitors of any final agreement.

With conditions deteriorating on the ground and the Taliban gaining strength across the country, coalition forces will be in an even worse position next year than they are now. The situation around the major cities of Jalalabad and Kabul is seriously deteriorating, and the state structure in the north is disappearing. In the southern city of Kandahar, a sustained U.S.-led effort has proved unable to dislodge the Taliban from their traditional stronghold; the Taliban have also launched a systematic campaign targeting anyone ready to work with the coalition, killing hundreds since last spring. Instead of being able to start pulling out troops next summer, as Obama has pledged, the United States will be forced to send additional troops just to hold ground. And the longer Washington waits, the harder it will be to negotiate. As the Taliban solidify their power, they will be less and less likely to talk. It's time to negotiate -- this is the only way forward.

the longer Washington waits, the harder it will be to negotiate. As the Taliban solidify their power, they will be less and less likely to talk.

With conditions deteriorating on the ground and the Taliban gaining strength across the country, coalition forces will be in an even worse position next year than they are now.

The agency is also on weak legal ground in interpreting a four-decade-old law that was never intended to deal with global warming. And its efforts might be hung up in courts for years, providing yet another excuse for Congress not to act. (Both businesses and some eco-activists are expected to challenge the EPA move.)

Letting the agency take the initiative also makes the effort against global warming vulnerable to a new president reversing its action in future years.

In 1976, the EPA tried to avoid regulating diverse sources for lead emissions, focusing on major ones. But in a lawsuit brought by the Natural Resources Defense Council, it lost in court. It should not try such a move again.

Iran is not known to have the technology to fabricate its own fuel rods. France and Argentina are practically alone in being able to supply the specific fuel needed by Iran's small reactor to continue producing medical isotopes in Tehran.

Obama administration statements "strongly suggest to me that we have their procurement network, at least a part of it, pretty well penetrated

Reuters reported on Wednesday from Moscow that Russia would join any "consensus" on more sanctions against Iran, which US officials suggest will be a top priority in the New Year if no compromise deal is reached.

In a flurry of coordinated television interviews, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and other top administration officials said that any troop pullout beginning in July 2011 would be slow and that the Americans would only then be starting to transfer security responsibilities to Afghan forces under Mr. Obama’s new plan.

• Mortgage problems rose during the third quarter, with 6.2 percent of all loans seriously delinquent (60 days or more past due) and an additional 3.2 percent of all loans in the process of foreclosure. Delinquency among prime mortgages – the largest and highest-quality category – rose significantly.

Policymakers hope to stabilize the housing market using several strategies. First, the Federal Reserve has been helping to keep interest rates low, but it's possible that rates could rise as the Fed backs off from its program of buying mortgage securities next year.Second, the Obama administration is encouraging lenders to reduce defaults through loan modifications. "Loan mods" that offer sizable cuts in monthly payments perform much better than less-generous modifications. But the re-default rate remains high for all modifications, possibly because of the tough economy (borrowers losing jobs) as well as because of under-water borrowers who choose to walk away from their mortgage.