by Charlie Edwards | May 20, 2008 | Conflict and security, Cooperation and coherence, Economics and development, Influence and networks
I’ve just been sent an invitation from the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) to their Land Warfare Conference (VIII). It strikes me (an idea not the invite) that this should be an illuminating and insightful conference – certainly worth the £800 ‘I’ would have to fork out. The conference agenda is ambitious:
examine the role of armed forces in helping to defuse complex crises in the world today and will ask how the Army, the government and the nation at large can better support its soldiers to meet the challenges of these operational theatres
But it doesn’t take long, while reading through the conference agenda, to become thoroughly depressed. This is a conference for the Army by the Army.
While it’s important for the armed forces to discuss their respective roles, debate the merits of new doctrine and network with like minded souls, surely if you are serious about wanting to understand the role of the armed forces in defusing complex crises it would be sensible to look beyond MoD HQ, and the General Staff to other organisations and individuals who play a role. At the very least invite speakers from DFID, or USAID, the Red Cross or perhaps a senior police officer – after all as the armed forces constantly remind us their role is to create the space for political, economic and social change to flourish – so one might think having some other views around the table might be useful.
by Alex Evans | May 20, 2008 | Climate and resource scarcity, Conflict and security, Global system
A whole page, no less (including transition towns, too). Not much new content here, but what’s interesting is that the FT now reckon the concept of peak oil is respectable enough to give it the space to cover it in such detail.
I still maintain that you don’t have to be a peak oiler to be very worried indeed about the medium to long term outlook on energy, even more so when climate’s added to the mix. Even so, very interesting to watch peak oil making its way slowly from the fringes to the centre.
by Alex Evans | May 20, 2008 | Climate and resource scarcity
For all the media comment criticising biofuels lately, you might have thought that the tide had clearly turned against the increasing trend of using crops for fuel. But you’d be wrong. In fact, as Javier Blas repoted in the FT last week, the proportion of American corn going to biofuels is going up: from 22 per cent of the crop last year to a third this time around.
The reason why is simple: oil price. With oil now at $126 – that’s up $10 just since the start of the month – and lots of analysts pondering $200 by year end, biofuels look like part of a route that leads towards energy independence. And even though corn-based ethanol is about the most idiotic substitute for oil imaginable (on a climate change as well as an energy independence basis), the truth is that in its messed-up way, it kind of works.
The proof: look at the front of today’s FT, where the headline is “US begins to break foreign oil ‘addiction’“. Foreign oil made up 57.9 per cent of imports in the first quarter of this year – as opposed to 58.2 last year. A small drop, you might think, but the Department of Energy is already forecasting a fall to 50 per cent by 2015. And here’s the grim bit:
Although the reduction in oil demand growth is partly because of slower economic growth and a projected 1m-barrel-a-day rise in output from the US’s Gulf of Mexico oil fields by 2012, experts also believe that legislation will accelerate the trend. The Energy Information Administration expects the energy act to help boost biofuel production from 8bn gallons this year to at least 32bn by 2030…
And that’s not all: even as the US starts the long hike towards weaning itself, the oil price is expected to keep on going up, as demand in China continues its ascent skywards. In the background, the International Energy Agency is warning that “the world can not easily afford to retreat from bio-fuels in spite of their possible role in driving up food prices”:
Biofuels already make up about 50 per cent of the extra fuel coming to the market from sources from outside of the Opec oil cartel this year. This explains why fears of a retreat this week helped drive oil prices to record levels. William Ramsey, deputy executive director of the IEA, said: “If we didn’t have those barrels, I am not sure where we would be getting those half a million barrels.”
Bottom line: we must not kid ourselves that we can deal with the food security issue separately from the energy security issue. They’re fundamentally intertwined in over a dozen ways – and the fact that hardly any multilateral institutions cover both energy and food is something that should worry us a lot…
by Alex Evans | May 19, 2008 | Climate and resource scarcity, Economics and development, Global system
What can you do but shake your head in wonderment at the debacle over the UK government’s £800m Environmental Transformation Fund? As John Vidal reported in the Guardian on Saturday, the initial idea seemed such a good one:
The UK environmental transformation fund was announced by the prime minister to international acclaim in November 2007, and was widely expected to be made in direct grants to countries experiencing extreme droughts, storms and sea level rise associated with climate change
But now, a small detail has emerge: the Fund’s cash is in fact loans rather than aid – so they’ll have to be repaid with interest by developing countries. Odd, then, that Gordon Brown forgot to say so when trumpeting the Fund in his climate speech last year, and that International Development Secretary Douglas Alexander also overlooked it when he came to CIC to speak on climate change last month.
As the Guardian reports, it seems the problem lies not with DFID or Defra, but with the Treasury, which overruled both departments. This makes it astonishing that Chancellor of the Exchequer Alistair Darling should have co-authored an FT comment piece on the Fund with US Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson back in February – which said nothing whatsoever about loans, instead giving a clear impression that the money would be given as grant aid.
(more…)
by Charlie Edwards | May 18, 2008 | Conflict and security, Global system, UK
Apropos of Alex’s post on the FCO’s new website, I’ve been checking out the MoD’s aptly named media blog ‘Defence News’ which like a tin of Ronseal doesn’t mix sophisticated narrative with insightful analysis but servers a single purpose: to defend the MoD against negative publicity and refute any allegation the press team can find. A taster:
A number of media cover the publication by the MOD of its Spring Performance report with some claiming that the armed forces are “seriously under strength”. The Armed Forces are stretched but Senior Military Officers advise that the situation is manageable.
Or
It is simply ludicrous to suggest that there is any truth to these offensive allegations. There is no shortage of personal kit or body armour in either Iraq or Afghanistan. All personnel are issued with sufficient supplies before being deployed on operations and there is no requirement for soldiers to buy or obtain their own boots, guns or shirts. Soldiers on the ground and their commanding officers regularly praise their equipment. I beg to differ.
These comments are interspersed with daily diaries of what Ministers are doing, images and an assortment of press releases. Think media communication 1.0 – for beginners. In short the MoD website needs an overhaul. All of which reminds me I am giving a talk at the Defence Image Projection and Reputation Management conference in June on the image of the armed forces in civilian environments.
