Interesting Sheridan on Abbott, climate change and US centrality

Comments on Greg Sheridan “Tony Abbott's rise starts a great political battle”, 3/12/2009, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/tony-abbotts-rise-starts-a-great-politcal-battle/story-e6frg76f-1225806318042

Mr Sheridan, you seem always to dislike many developing countries in general and China in particular.

Your have said “Elements of the Copenhagen model seem to me unlikely to be implemented. It calls for billions of dollars to be given, beyond the normal aid budget, from developed countries to developing countries to finance green energy.
China insists it is a developing country. China also has international reserves of more than $US1 trillion ($1.08 trillion). Just imagine President Barack Obama, or any US politician, standing up in congress to argue that unemployed auto workers in Detroit should receive lower benefits so the US can give billions of dollars in extra aid to China.”

How can you assume that China has called money to be given to it for it to take actions in combating climate change, given that China has announced it would reduce its carbon intensity by 40 to 45 per cent by 2020 from its 2005 level?

Just compare this with China’s pledge with your argument that “There is no particular benefit to Australia from moving early on an ETS. Many greenhouse moves are open to us that don't involve an ETS. We need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions but at the same time we don't want to impose costs to our economy beyond those that similar economies, such as the US, will bear. To do that would be highly counter-productive.”

Don’t forget that China is a developing country and Australia is a developed country, and further Australia has the highest per capita emissions on earth.

So who is the selfish and slef-interested one?

Distorted minds generate distorted arguments. That is what happens with your point of view on this issue; that I hate but have to say that, unfortunately.

Further, you argue that “He is sometimes too sentimental about Britain, but as a political hardhead and natural national security hawk, he understands very deeply the centrality of the US to the global system, such as it is.”

I am afraid it is a highly laughable view to have now, given the rapidity of the changes in world balances. How long will that centrality be able to last, Mr Sheridan?

Some people will have the wrong view that the sun revolves around the earth until they die and take that view with them to their resting places.

There is no slightest difference here.