Despite … existing concessions, China is demanding a price that is five times lower than current export levels and eight times cheaper than rates paid by Russia’s remaining international customers.

Looks like an ironclad Russian-Chinese friendship (/s, just to be safe).

Here is another video:

Polish PM Tusk: “This crisis has gone too far” (alt Invidious link)

Emotions are running high around Polish-Ukrainian relations and the dispute over the UPA’s historical legacy. During a press conference, [Poland’s] Prime Minister Donald Tusk responded to questions about the escalating tensions online, including the emergence of videos targeting Polish companies and containing aggressive slogans referencing the Volhynia tragedy. The Prime Minister unequivocally pointed out that the provocations are the work of nationalist extremists on both sides of the border and the organized activity of Russian bots, who view the diplomatic crisis between Warsaw and Kyiv as a strategic propaganda target.

Yeah, and one more reason not to buy this car.

Just don’t let this know China. It’s a major importer of fruits and similar food stuff, and the country tripled such imports in the last then or so years.

As an addition: A Russian on vacation in Georgia (1 min video)

Read the comments here. Many aren’t just questioning accountability, they are openly defending left-wing violence just because it apparently aligns with their world view.

According to the BfV, both right-wing and left-wing violence is on the rise, with the left-wingers gaining ground of late which is what this article is about. The number of incidents goes in the range of +1,000 in the meantime, it’s not just this electrification sabotage in Berlin.

These are criminal activities that do nothing but harm. These are criminals, and it doesn’t matter whether they are “right-wing” or leftw-ing" and anything else. Downplaying one of them is dishonest to say the least, and it discredits you completely.

@CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de

If someone deliberately sabotages a railway or destroys an electricity station then I call this out. The reason for such sabotage doesn’t make a difference to the 100,000 innocent citizens who are left without power, and it doesn’t help the environment nor anything or anyone else. It’s just unnecessary, useless violence that achieved absolutely nothing except harm. This is criminal and undemocratic behaviour.

Very telling to see how many accounts in this instance justify violence against innocent people. I was aware already about the mindset here from the way this comm is moderated, but this is a new low. The saddest thing is that feddit. org is hosted by an foundation in Austria, an EU member. It should be a matter of course to comply with democratic values and the rule of law, but I don’t see this here.

Edit: feddit .org isn’t the only instance here with such a spin, unfortunately.

And honestly how much damage could this actually do other than break peoples balcony solar panels?

Is this satirical?

Calling China insufficient without any explanation or any numbers …

All these links link to well-sourced analyses by reputable and highly reliable organizations. Just read it.

What makes this conversations useless is your unwillingness to accept the truth that China is far behind in climate actions by any comparative standards. Your offensive language doesn’t change that.

You’re again repeating claims andnumbers without reliable sources of evidence.

I posted several links in this thread clearly showing that China is far behind regarding climate actions by all comparative standards.

The next distraction.

You’re just frequently change the subject if you run out of arguments.

Is it 5 times now? Or 10 times? Where do you get these numbers?

Your tonality alone is very revealing. Just telling the ‘China story’ amounts to propaganda.

In its own 15th five-year plan, the Chinese Communist Party says that fossil fuel energy consumption would increase by 8-10%, reversing the slow-down in fossil fuel energy consumption during the 14th five-year period period.

China’s own goal to reach carbon neutrality is set for 2060, ten years later than the EU’s.

This comes from official Chinese sources, while the independent sozrces I cited are highly trustworthy, and they show that China is the world’s biggest polluter and far behind when it comes to climate actions.

China’s production of renewables heavily relies on coal, making the country the worst emitter of CO2.

In its own 15th five-year plan, the Chinese Communist Party says that fossil fuel energy consumption would increase by 8-10%, reversing the slow-down in fossil fuel energy consumption during the 14th five-year period period.

China’s own goal to reach carbon neutrality is set for 2060, ten years later than the EU’s.

You said,

China invest about 5-10 times more than USA in reducing emissions.

Neither of your links prove this claim. (Is it 5 times now? Or 10 times?) Where do you get these numbers?

You’re just making baseless claims while posting links that don’t prove yoyr claims. And it is this that is ‘decidely dishonest’ if you want to put it that way.

China invest about 5-10 times more than USA in reducing emissions, and have lower emissions than USA, but USA is “ranked” 27 and China 129

Unlike in China where freedom of opinion is practically non-existent, It is your full right here in the West to question any report and stats. It would be nice if you came up with exact numbers to foster your arguments.

China itself officialy aims to reach ‘net zero’ in 2060, ten years later than the EU which aims to reach that goal in 2050 already. Germany is an EU outlier so far as the country is set to reach carbon neutrality by 2045. But now, as German industry representatives urge Berlin to ‘delay’ the German goal for five years and compky with the EU’s 2050 goal, Chinese propaganda tries to exploits that, slamming Germany for being slow.

The Climate Action Tracker also rates China as one of the worst emitters, far behind by global comparison in climate actions.

The same is with Climate Watch, rating China’s climate actions as comparibly poor and Beijing’s transparency on future commitments as very low.

You’ll find more stats by various institutions. The hard truth is that no country is on track, except maybe a few low-emission states in the Global South.

Among the big emitters, however, China has not only risen to the biggest polluter in the world but ranks also among those countries with the lowest commitment regarding climate change.

[Edit typo.]

Here is the article by CCC (in German)

Edit:

China Holds a Kill Switch to European Power Grids (May 2025)

Despite years of debate about supply chain resilience, more than 70 percent of world’s solar inverters come from Chinese manufacturers. The three biggest players – Huawei, Sungrow, and Ginlong Solis – are all Chinese. Here lies the first paradox: Huawei has been banned from a large portion of Europe’s 5G networks due to national security concerns, yet its technology is welcomed into the power grid.

Here is the article by CCC (in German)

Edit:

China Holds a Kill Switch to European Power Grids (May 2025)

Despite years of debate about supply chain resilience, more than 70 percent of world’s solar inverters come from Chinese manufacturers. The three biggest players – Huawei, Sungrow, and Ginlong Solis – are all Chinese. Here lies the first paradox: Huawei has been banned from a large portion of Europe’s 5G networks due to national security concerns, yet its technology is welcomed into the power grid.

Instead of 2045, Germany should adopt the European target year of 2050 … Germany’s current special path of aiming to become climate-neutral five years earlier than the European Union makes the country more expensive as a business location without achieving any additional climate impact.

It would be better if the world would move toward the German goal rather than the other way around.

But the world doesn’t seem to want that, particularly the world’s biggest emitters: the U.S. seems to quit any emissions reductions at all, and China aims to reach carbon neutrality in 2060, ten years later than the EU (yet China is hailed as the global leader in climate change actions).

The world isn’t on a good path, but I somehow feel Germany isn’t the biggest problem here.

In principle this is possible, if and when all other circumstances remain unchanged, but this is very unlikely. First, there must be strong safeguards - such as strict fiscal rules, mutualized guarantees - which will mitigate upward pressure on interest rates for better-rated states.

But what is more important in my humble opinion are the new geopolitical and economic realities we are facing - like climate change, an aging population, immigration, the war in Ukraine, China’s coercive policies, etc. All these issues can and must be tackled together rather than in isolated/national measures. A joint defense bond, for example, would also solve the free-riding problem.

The urgency of further sharing public goods across EU countries will undoubtedly increase, and so it increasingly makes sense to share the burden. Some EU measures in recent years - such as the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) - are first steps to address these issues, although they do not (yet) offer the possibility of full debt mutualization. But we in Europe must take the next steps in this direction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TARGET2

TARGET2 has been replaced three years ago. It is essentially the payments mechanism for the euro. I don’t know why you post this here in this context.