"There are no reserves left. It's a question of survival of the human race."

"There are no reserves left. It's a question of survival of the human race."

That was the reasoning of French president Nicolas Sarkozy to support the introduction of a national carbon tax to come into effect next year. The tax, at 17-Euros per ton of carbon emissions, makes France the largest nation in the EU to introduce a carbon tax.

From The Guardian:

The president stressed that the state would not reap any funds from the measure. All of the €3bn collected would be returned to families and business through tax credits, tax cuts and other green incentives.

The system will differentiate between people who live in urban areas with good public transport and those who live in rural areas and are more dependent on cars. The rural households will get more money back from the state, he said.

Although the tax will apply to oil, gas and coal, it will not apply to electricity. Sarkozy argued that with 80% of electricity produced in France coming from nuclear plants, which have low emissions, it would make no sense to increase the price of this form of power.

That probably sounds a lot like the Green Shift envisioned by Stephane Dion. It is. Sarkozy, however, knew better than to introduce it as an election issue - a critical point that eluded Mr. Dion.

Despite all the nonsense spewed by Stephen Harper and Jack Layton and, latterly, even Michael Ignatieff, we're all going to get to the point Sarkozy has brought France. The only reason we wouldn't go for a carbon tax in Canada, and even Stephen Harper won't be able to conceal it, is to shield the Athabasca Tar Sands projects from responsibility for their rapacious energy consumption and resulting carbon emissions.

It really is too bad that Iggy is being so outmaneuvered, yet again, by Harper. Mr. Ignatieff's vaunted "war room" is coming to look awfully wobbly and so, in the minds of a troubling and apparently growing number of Canadians, is the leader himself.

Maybe there's still time for Mikey to smarten up and stop running to the edge of that cliff, over and over and over again. Or he can try to trigger an election. Either he wins or the LPC gives him the boot - a "no lose" proposition. He could, however, start thinking like an astute politician and wait for Harper to hand him an issue that will resonate with and trouble the majority of Canadians. He's not going to have to wait very long. Harper has to come up with a climate change policy pretty soon. The government can't go empty handed to the Copenhagen climate summit in December.

Ignatieff could start pounding the climate change drum. He could castigate Harper for keeping the Canadian public in the dark about what the environment experts know is coming. He can depict Harper as a guy who doesn't want Canadians to know even if that means they can't plan and prepare for what's coming. If he's smart he could make Harper squirm like a worm on a hook because Harper is baiting that hook himself.

If Ignatieff is stupid enough to force an election before he can find something on which he can effectively connect with the voting public, the Liberals will get what they deserve and Canada will probably get what it doesn't deserve.

How Badly has Bush Damaged America?

There's no question that George w. Bush has crippled America's standing in the world. Bush never understood the narrow limits of American power or the degree of Washington's interdependence on America's allies. He failed to grasp his country's real strengths or its weaknesses.

It's tempting to judge America's health by looking at its rivals and potential adversaries, particularly China. But it may be events in Europe that are most telling. Once again we return to America's love/hate relationship with France.

When he came to power, Nicolas Sarkozy seemed to be Bush's instant BFF. Lately, however, Sarkozy has been staking out turf in a way that's decidedly anti-American.

The global meltdown triggered by the spread of bogus US derivative securities throughout world markets apparently infuriated Sarkozy. He saw the world's markets thrown into disarray by American greed and mismanagement. The second part of the one-two punch was the crisis in Georgia fueled by America's relentless pressure to push NATO to the very borders of Russia. Sarkozy hasn't come right out and said it but it's apparent that he sees NATO for what it's become under Bush, America's Foreign Legion.

Sarkozy knows that America's NATO policy toward eastern Europe has little or nothing to do with democracy and a great deal to do with securing control of the Caspian Basin oil and gas reserves. Georgia and Ukraine are essential to getting pipelines to bring that energy west and out of Russian domination. The alternative are pipelines running straight through the insurgent strongholds of Afghanistan and the unreliable and troubled regions of Pakistan. Washington has been remarkably indifferent to the headaches caused Europe by destablizing its relationship with Russia.

So what has Naughty Nick done? Without consulting the Americans, he's announced a European-Russian summit next summer to define Europe's future security relationship with Russia. America is invited to attend, of course, but Sarkozy has made it clear that Europe will make its own deals, in its own interests. It won't be shackled to American geopolitics any longer.

Then, in the aftermath of Bush's world economic summit convened to deal with the made-in-America/inflicted-upon-the-world meltdown, Sarkozy again gave Bush one up alongside the head. After leaving the meeting claiming to have tamed the animal instincts of America capitalism, the French president returned home to announce he'll be holding his own summit on the same problem in just a few weeks time, taking the Americans by surprise. From today's New York Times:

"Mr. Sarkozy said nothing about his plans to convene a meeting to President Bush or the 18 other leaders while he was here. A senior European diplomat said he found the French proposal “amazing,” while an American official said that that would be a charitable description.

"French officials said the gathering on Jan. 8 and 9, which is to be co-hosted by former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, is merely a conference, intended to bring together political leaders and prominent thinkers to discuss issues like globalization and the values of capitalism.

"..Much of this is posturing by ambitious leaders, but it also reflects a genuine philosophical debate about how best to fix the fractured global markets.

"On one side is Mr. Sarkozy, the supercharged French leader, determined to keep the initiative on what many in Europe regard as a long-overdue discussion of the excesses of American-style capitalism.

"On the other is Mr. Bush, playing out his final weeks in office but unwilling to allow Europeans, especially the French, to dominate the debate on how to overhaul international financial regulations.

"Certainly, the two leaders had sharply different interpretations of what happened at the meeting. Mr. Sarkozy portrayed it as a shift in power, saying, “Europe for the first time expressed its clear determination.” Americans had “never, ever” been willing to negotiate these kinds of regulatory changes, he said."

Last month Sarkozy called for an end to American style "speculative capitalism" and the institution of a new, global economic order based on what he termed "entrepreneurial capitalism" in its place. He's gone on record claiming he'll settle for nothing less than a "new financial world" with tough, international regulation.