Category Archives: Energy

China to continue to push forward financial reforms after RMB’s SDR inclusion: senior official

WASHINGTON, Dec. 1 (Greenpost) — China will continue to push forward financial reforms after the International Monetary Fund (IMF) decided to include the Chinese currency, the RMB or Chinese yuan, into its Special Drawing Rights (SDR) basket of currencies, a senior Chinese official said here Tuesday.

The IMF executive board on Monday approved the inclusion of the RMB into its SDR basket as a fifth currency, along with the U.S. dollar, the euro, the Japanese yen and the British pound, marking a milestone in the RMB’s global march.
“(The) Chinese yuan joining the SDR does not mean (the) end of reform of the financial sector in China,” Chinese Vice Finance Minister Zhu Guangyao said at the Washington-D.C.-based Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE).
“(Chinese) President Xi (Jinping) said to the whole nation (that) reform is an ongoing process … We must continue reforms,” Zhu said after delivering a speech on China’s 13th Five-Year Plan, the country’s development blueprint for the next five years (2016-2020).
Zhu said it is in China’s interest to continue pushing forward reforms and the government has been following the financial reform agenda laid out at the Third Plenary Session of the 18th Communist Party of China Central Committee in late 2013. “That’s our guidance. We follow that exactly.”
Zhu said the IMF board’s decision to include the RMB in its SDR basket of currencies really reflects “global consensus” on the RMB’s eligibility of joining the currency basket, and it will make the SDR “more representative and attractive,” benefiting both China and the world.
Nicholas Lardy, a senior fellow at the PIIE and a leading expert on China’s economy, also described the decision as “a win-win for the global economy,” dismissing the speculative view of competition between the RMB and the U.S. dollar.
Lardy said the RMB-denominated assets now account for roughly 1 percent of global reserves held by central banks and the transition to more holdings of RMB-denominated assets will be very gradual.
“It should not be thought of in competitive terms, you know, the Chinese are gaining their share at the expense of the U.S., I think that’s a misreading,” he said.
PIIE President Adam Posen echoed Lardy’s view, saying that “there have been long periods in modern economic history when you have more than one so-called reserve currency.”
“Having a more balanced basket, not just in the SDR but in world portfolios” will help reduce the burden of global imbalances, he said. “I think that’s something the U.S. and China both want.”
Zhu also said the 13th Five-Year Plan is very important for China to complete the building of a moderately prosperous society and overcome the so-called “middle income trap,” as the country is making efforts to restructure the economy and shift to an innovation-driven mode.
He said that the average annual growth rate must be at least 6.5 percent during the next five years for China to double the 2010 GDP and the per capita income of both urban and rural residents by 2020.
Zhu said the main purpose of his trip to Washington this week was to discuss the agenda of the 2016 Group of Twenty (G20) summit with U.S. officials as China formally took over the presidency of the G20 on Tuesday.
Chinese President Xi Jinping and his U.S. counterpart, Barack Obama, gave instructions to working teams of both sides to strengthen coordination in the G20 during their bilateral meeting in Paris one day ago, he said, noting that the two countries displayed “really good policy coordination” in the past ten G20 summits.  Enditem

Source Xinhua

China eyes high-level talents to boost innovation

BEIJING, Nov. 30 (Greenpost) — China is eying high-level talents to accelerate its national strategy of mass entrepreneurship and innovation.
In a meeting with representatives of Chinese postdoctoral researchers on Monday, Premier Li Keqiang encouraged them to concentrate on innovative studies to make technological breakthroughs and focus on market demand to actively transform research achievements into productivity.
Li said Chinese researchers should also strengthen international exchanges and cooperation and participate in global competition.
His words came in as China celebrated the 30th anniversary of its postdoctoral system, which has covered all disciplines and major fields of economic and social development.
“Postdoctoral researchers have made their own contribution in economic and social development, scientific research and industrial upgrade,” Li said.
He urged more efforts to build a better postdoctoral system that values talents and facilitates innovation.    Enditem

Source Xinhua

China has confidence, resolve to fulfill climate commitments: Xi

PARIS, Nov. 30 (Greenpost) — Chinese President Xi Jinping said here Monday that his country has confidence and resolve to fulfill its climate change commitments.

Xi made the remarks when delivering a speech at the opening ceremony of a United Nations climate change conference, officially called the 21st Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

As a developing country, China has taken bold actions to reduce carbon emissions while setting ambitious climate goals.

In his speech, Xi reiterated China’s pledge made in June to cut its carbon emissions per unit of GDP by 60-65 percent from 2005 levels by 2030, and increase non-fossil fuel sources in primary energy consumption to about 20 percent and peak its carbon emissions by the same date.

These pledges represent a big step further from the world’s second largest economy’s previous emission control targets.

“This requires strenuous efforts but we have confidence and resolve to fulfill our commitments,” Xi said.

China has been actively engaged in the global campaign on climate change, now topping the world in terms of energy conservation, and utilization of new and renewable energies, Xi said.

China’s Five-Year Plan from 2016 to 2020, aiming at a more sustainable and balanced way of development, seeks to promote clean industrial production, low-carbon development and energy conservation to ensure sustainable growth in the next five years.

On the basis of technological and institutional innovation, China will adopt new policy measures to improve industrial mix, build low-carbon system, develop green building and low-carbon transportation and establish a nationwide carbon-emission trading market, the president said.

To act on climate change is not only driven by China’s domestic needs for sustainable development in ensuring its economic, energy and food security, but also driven by its sense of responsibility to fully engage in global governance and to forge a community of shared destiny for humankind, according to an action plan China submitted to the Secretariat of the UN Framework Convention on climate change late June.

The highly-anticipated Paris climate conference, opened by leaders from over 150 countries, aims to yield a new international agreement to reduce greenhouse gases beyond 2020 when the 1997 Kyoto Protocol expires.

Such an accord is seen as crucial for keeping the rise in global temperatures within 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial times, a goal scientists say should be met to avoid risky changes in the climate.  Enditem

 Source Xinhua 

 

Morgan Stanley CEO optimistic about China’s economy

BEIJING, Nov. 29 (Greenpost) — The head of Morgan Stanley maintained his positive outlook on the Chinese economy despite a continued slowdown amid lackluster domestic demand and rising external uncertainties.

James P. Gorman, chairman and CEO of the leading global investment bank, said during a lecture in Peking University that the growth rate is down but the increase is still enormous and China’s contribution to global economy remains the highest of any countries in the world.
The economy expanded at 6.9 percent year on year in the first three quarters of 2015, down from 7 percent in the first half and marking the lowest reading since the second quarter of 2009.
The lingering slowdown has triggered market worries about the economic outlook.
However, Gorman dismissed the concerns. “The market gets obsessed by percentages. Is China growing at six, seven, eight or ten percent?” He pointed out the economic transition is more significant than growth pace.
A pioneer in exploring the Chinese market, the global leading investment bank still regards China as a major impetus for its international business.
It celebrated its 20th anniversary in China in 2014 with more than 1,000 local employees, and held its first China Summit in Beijing in May, which brought together more than 1,100 global investors looking for new opportunities in the country.
A latest Morgan Stanley report said China’s reforms and opening up policies, especially those in tertiary sector, will generate more business opportunities in health care, Internet and technologies.
The bank maintained its annual GDP growth forecast for the full year at 7 percent and expects mild improvement in the next several months thanks to pro-growth measures including fiscal and monetary easing.  Enditem

Source Xinhua

Editor Xuefei Chen Axelsson

诺贝尔和平奖颁奖仪式在奥斯陆举行

北欧绿色邮报网报道(记者陈雪霏)--诺贝尔和平奖颁奖仪式10日在挪威首都奥斯陆举行。

突尼斯“全国对话四方大会”获得颁奖。颁奖理由是为他们的和解和对话。

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wv6veGSCqw

Nobel Prize awarding ceremony to be held soon

By Xuefei Chen Axelsson

Stockholm, Dec. (Greenpost)–The awaiting Nobel Prize awarding ceremony is scheduled to take place in Stockholm Concert Hall at 16:30 Stockholm local time .

IMG_9364Tu Youyou and her counterparts in medicine and two physics laureates, three chemistry laureates and one laureate in literature as well as on laureate in economics will receive their Nobel Prize from the hands of the Swedish King Carl XVI  Gustaf.

A grand banquet will be held at 19:00 in the Stockholm City Hall.

IMG_9358During the week, Chinese Nobel winner in Medicine Tu Youyou has attended a press conference to answer the journalists questions, given Nobel lectures and today she will attend the awarding ceremony and the banquet.

IMG_9403

Tu Youyou gave Nobel Lecture in Chinese at Karolinska Institute.

Left, Jan Andersson. middle, Tu Youyou and right, interpretor.

Photo by Xuefei Chen Axelsson from live screen on Dec. 7, 2015.

 

Video: Interview with Professor Jan Andersson, Nobel Assembly Member

By Xuefei Chen Axelsson

Stockholm, Oct. 5(Greenpost)– Greenpost has interviewed Jan Andersson, Nobel Assembly Member and Professor at Infectious Disease Department of Karolinska Institute in Huddinge.  The following is the text of the interview:

Filmed by Anneli Larsson on Oct. 5, 2015 at Nobel Forum.

Hello I am Xuefei Chen Axelsson, I am in the Nobel Forum and we just had the press conference about this year’s Nobel Prize in Medicine, and Chinese Tu Youyou won the prize, so here we have the expert(Nobel Assembly Member Jan Andersson) explain this.

 

Xuefei Chen Axelsson: So can you tell us why Tu Youyou wins this prize?

Jan Andersson: So Youyou Tu got half of this Nobel Prize for her discovery of Arteminsinen. And she did that from a herb, so she was the one who identified that Artemisinin annua herb, the Chinese Artemisinin branch contains compound Artemisinin that actually has the best effect against Malaria Parasite that has ever been found. So she discovered a way to elute out the active compound from the herb. She also discovered how to elute away the toxic compartments from the herb, so actually it could be developed a safe and very efficacy drug Artemisinin for the treatment of severe Malaria.

DSC_3746Chen Axelsson: How do you comment the contribution of this discovery?

Jan Andersson: Her component to identify how to elute out the biological activity or type of compound that was, how to purify it and then make it crystals and identification of molecular formulation for that, she set the stage for this whole development. It was a team effort, but she did the paradigm shift, the shift that open the doors for other scientist to go about, to contribute to the further development. She went in this process. It was a national process, when there were some success, but there were also failures, and they were wondering which way to go. There was a part of the projects that look for all types of traditional Chinese medicine, to see whether you can find something there.

And she went in then with knowledge of chemistry and pharmacy in how to elude out things, how to isolate things and how to test them for biological activity, and that was really a paradigm shift. She made the change to our knowledge. Then after she had identified this biological compound, and it was safe, and has got rid of the toxicity, then there was a lot of other groups in China who took this further on, to try it in different animal models, and then try it more on human infected with malaria, and then eventually there was companies that took on large scale production. But you know there is always someone to lead, and we were very happy when we saw who that was and we could identify down to Youyou Tu in specific moments in her career when she did it.

Chen Axelsson: And can we say that if without this medicine, we would have millions millions of people lost their lives.

Jan Andersson: Yes, we can say that because there was clinical trials done later on with pure substance of Artemisinin. The pure substance of Artemisinin was tested against conventional chimin Mefluquin, and it was demonstrated significant reduce mortality….30 percent reduction of mortality in children below age of five with severe malaria. So we can say that at least a hundred thousand lives are saved every year by that. We can also say that the total morbidity illness goes down because there is completely new medicinic action so that Artemisinin involves much earlier on in the life cycle of the disease.

Chen Axelsson: It’s like vaccination?

Jan Andersson: No, you cannot say it’s vaccination, it is a cure. And we do not use it for prevention. We keep it for the cure of the infected ill people.

Chen Axelsson: Maybe briefly talk about the other half of the prize?

Jan Andersson: Yes, the other half goes to scientist in Japan, Satoshi Ömura and then his collabrator in the United States, William Campbell, together, they collectively discovered a new compound for treatment of roundworm infections, calling them in Latin Namatom infections, they infect a third of the human population, and generate chronic worm infections. There are two examples of that, quite well-known, river blindness and elephantiasis, those affected 25 million who get river blindness infection and you get 120 million who have elephantiasis, they are called filariasis. And they discovered the compound that by single yearly doze cure if you repeat in a number of years because it kills the microfilaria, the small children or the adult filaria extremely effective with single doses in 12 months.

This are predominantly affecting Africa, but there are also in Americas and South East Asia, Asia like Yemen that has problems for that. Predominantly in Sub-Sahara Africa. River Blindness in 31 nations, and elephantiasis in 81 nations affected by this disease.

Campbell was born in Ireland and lived in America. Ömora screened the bacteria, he screened 45 thousand bacteria, and then he selected 50 that he gave to Campbell. And Campbell has specific means eluting out biological activity against numbers of different microbs. And he discovered the novel theraphy against infections caused by roundworm parasites.

Xuefei Chen Axelsson: Thank you very much!

Nobel Laureate in Literature Alexievich: On the Battle Lost

By Xuefei Chen Axelsson

Stockholm, Dec. 7(Greenpost)– Nobel Laureate in Literature Svetlana Alexievich Monday gave a very sad yet very striking speech titled On the Battle Lost at Swedish Academy for her Nobel lecture.

am-alexievich-signed-chair

Alexivich signed her signature in the back of a chair at Nobel Museum on Dec. 6.  Photo  Alexander Muhamoud.

From the very first paragraph, she began to use her novel style to quote the interviewees words to express what kind of people as a Russian, a Belarussian and even Ukrain is like.

” I grew up in the countryside. As children, we loved to play outdoors, but come evening, the voices of tired village women who gathered on benches near their cottages drew us like magnets. None of them had husbands, fathers or brothers.I don’t remember men in our village after World War II: during the war, one out of four Belarussians perished, either fighting at the front or with the partisans.”

Just with a couple of sentences she has summerised about her background.

“After the war, we children lived in a world of women. What I remember most, is that women talked about love, not death. They would tell stories about saying goodbye to the men they loved the day before they went to war, they would talk about waiting for them, and how they were still waiting. Years had passed, but they continued to wait: “I don’t care if he lost his arms and legs, I’ll carry him.” No arms … no legs … I think I’ve known what love is since childhood …”

Then she directly quoted her interviews which present people in front  and let the people say.

First voice:

“Why do you want to know all this? It’s so sad. I met my husband during the war. I was in a tank crew that made it all the way to Berlin. I remember, we were standing near the Reichstag – he wasn’t my husband yet – and he says to me: “Let’s get married. I love you.” I was so upset – we’d been living in filth, dirt, and blood the whole war, heard nothing but obscenities. I answered: “First make a woman of me: give me flowers, whisper sweet nothings. When I’m demobilized, I’ll make myself a dress.” I was so upset I wanted to hit him. He felt all of it. One of his cheeks had been badly burned, it was scarred over, and I saw tears running down the scars. “Alright, I’ll marry you,” I said. Just like that … I couldn’t believe I said it … All around us there was nothing but ashes and smashed bricks, in short – war.”

Second voice:

“We lived near the Chernobyl nuclear plant. I was working at a bakery, making pasties. My husband was a fireman. We had just gotten married, and we held hands even when we went to the store. The day the reactor exploded, my husband was on duty at the firе station. They responded to the call in their shirtsleeves, in regular clothes – there was an explosion at the nuclear power station, but they weren’t given any special clothing. That’s just the way we lived … You know … They worked all night putting out the fire, and received doses of radiation incompatible with life. The next morning they were flown straight to Moscow. Severe radiation sickness … you don’t live for more than a few weeks … My husband was strong, an athlete, and he was the last to die. When I got to Moscow, they told me that he was in a special isolation chamber and no one was allowed in. “But I love him,” I begged. “Soldiers are taking care of them. Where do you think you’re going?” “I love him.” They argued with me: “This isn’t the man you love anymore, he’s an object requiring decontamination. You get it?” I kept telling myself the same thing over and over: I love, I love … At night, I would climb up the fire escape to see him … Or I’d ask the night janitors … I paid them money so they’d let me in … I didn’t abandon him, I was with him until the end … A few months after his death, I gave birth to a little girl, but she lived only a few days. She … We were so excited about her, and I killed her … She saved me, she absorbed all the radiation herself. She was so little … teeny-tiny … But I loved them both. How can love be killed? Why are love and death so close? They always come together. Who can explain it? At the grave I go down on my knees …”

Third Voice:

“The first time I killed a German … I was ten years old, and the partisans were already taking me on missions. This German was lying on the ground, wounded … I was told to take his pistol. I ran over, and he clutched the pistol with two hands and was aiming it at my face. But he didn’t manage to fire first, I did …

It didn’t scare me to kill someone … And I never thought about him during the war. A lot of people were killed, we lived among the dead. I was surprised when I suddenly had a dream about that German many years later. It came out of the blue … I kept dreaming the same thing over and over … I would be flying, and he wouldn’t let me go. Lifting off … flying, flying … He catches up, and I fall down with him. I fall into some sort of pit. Or, I want to get up … stand up … But he won’t let me … Because of him, I can’t fly away …

The same dream … It haunted me for decades …

Alexievich has a deep reflection about Russian or socialist history and culture.

“I lived in a country where dying was taught to us from childhood. We were taught death. We were told that human beings exist in order to give everything they have, to burn out, to sacrifice themselves. We were taught to love people with weapons. Had I grown up in a different country, I couldn’t have traveled this path. Evil is cruel, you have to be inoculated against it. We grew up among executioners and victims. Even if our parents lived in fear and didn’t tell us everything – and more often than not they told us nothing – the very air of our life was poisoned. Evil kept a watchful eye on us.

I have written five books, but I feel that they are all one book. A book about the history of a utopia …”

According to her reflection, it seems to me that the communist idea is so deep in the Russian federation that it broke.

Please read yourself for the following and draw your own conclusion.

Twenty years ago, we bid farewell to the “Red Empire” of the Soviets with curses and tears. We can now look at that past more calmly, as an historical experiment. This is important, because arguments about socialism have not died down. A new generation has grown up with a different picture of the world, but many young people are reading Marx and Lenin again. In Russian towns there are new museums dedicated to Stalin, and new monuments have been erected to him.

The “Red Empire” is gone, but the “Red Man,” homo sovieticus, remains. He endures.

My father died recently. He believed in communism to the end. He kept his party membership card. I can’t bring myself to use the word ‘sovok,’ that derogatory epithet for the Soviet mentality, because then I would have to apply it my father and others close to me, my friends. They all come from the same place – socialism. There are many idealists among them. Romantics. Today they are sometimes called slavery romantics. Slaves of utopia. I believe that all of them could have lived different lives, but they lived Soviet lives. Why? I searched for the answer to that question for a long time – I traveled all over the vast country once called the USSR, and recorded thousands of tapes. It was socialism, and it was simply our life. I have collected the history of “domestic,” “indoor” socialism, bit by bit. The history of how it played out in the human soul. I am drawn to that small space called a human being … a single individual. In reality, that is where everything happens.

Right after the war, Theodor Adorno wrote, in shock: “Writing poetry after Auschwitz is barbaric.” My teacher, Ales Adamovich, whose name I mention today with gratitude, felt that writing prose about the nightmares of the 20th century was sacrilege. Nothing may be invented. You must give the truth as it is. A “super-literature” is required. The witness must speak. Nietzsche’s words come to mind – no artist can live up to reality. He can’t lift it.

It always troubled me that the truth doesn’t fit into one heart, into one mind, that truth is somehow splintered. There’s a lot of it, it is varied, and it is strewn about the world. Dostoevsky thought that humanity knows much, much more about itself than it has recorded in literature. So what is it that I do? I collect the everyday life of feelings, thoughts, and words. I collect the life of my time. I’m interested in the history of the soul. The everyday life of the soul, the things that the big picture of history usually omits, or disdains. I work with missing history. I am often told, even now, that what I write isn’t literature, it’s a document. What is literature today? Who can answer that question? We live faster than ever before. Content ruptures form. Breaks and changes it. Everything overflows its banks: music, painting – even words in documents escape the boundaries of the document. There are no borders between fact and fabrication, one flows into the other. Witnessеs are not impartial. In telling a story, humans create, they wrestle time like a sculptor does marble. They are actors and creators.

I’m interested in little people. The little, great people, is how I would put it, because suffering expands people. In my books these people tell their own, little histories, and big history is told along the way. We haven’t had time to comprehend what already has and is still happening to us, we just need to say it. To begin with, we must at least articulate what happened. We are afraid of doing that, we’re not up to coping with our past. In Dostoevsky’sDemons, Shatov says to Stavrogin at the beginning of their conversation: “We are two creatures who have met in boundless infinity … for the last time in the world. So drop that tone and speak like a human being. At least once, speak with a human voice.”

That is more or less how my conversations with my protagonists begin. People speak from their own time, of course, they can’t speak out of a void. But it is difficult to reach the human soul, the path is littered with television and newspapers, and the superstitions of the century, its biases, its deceptions.

I would like to read a few pages from my diaries to show how time moved … how the idea died … How I followed in its path …

1980–1985

I’m writing a book about the war … Why about the war? Because we are people of war – we have always been at war or been preparing for war. If one looks closely, we all think in terms of war. At home, on the street. That’s why human life is so cheap in this country. Everything is wartime.

I began with doubts. Another book about World War II … What for?

On one trip I met a woman who had been a medic during the war. She told me a story: as they crossed Lake Ladoga during the winter, the enemy noticed some movement and began to shoot at them. Horses and people fell under the ice. It all happened at night. She grabbed someone she thought was injured and began to drag him toward the shore. “I pulled him, he was wet and naked, I thought his clothes had been torn off,” she told me. Once on shore, she discovered that she had been dragging an enormous wounded sturgeon. And she let loose a terrible string of obscenities: people are suffering, but animals, birds, fish – what did they do? On another trip I heard the story of a medic from a cavalry squadron. During a battle she pulled a wounded soldier into a shell crater, and only then noticed that he was a German. His leg was broken and he was bleeding. He was the enemy! What to do? Her own guys were dying up above! But she bandaged the German and crawled out again. She dragged in a Russian soldier who had lost consciousness. When he came to, he wanted to kill the German, and when the German came to, he grabbed a machine gun and wanted to kill the Russian. “I’d slap one of them, and then the other. Our legs were all covered in blood,” she remembered. “The blood was all mixed together.”

This was a war I had never heard about. A woman’s war. It wasn’t about heroes. It wasn’t about one group of people heroically killing another group of people. I remember a frequent female lament: “After the battle, you’d walk through the field. They lay on their backs … All young, so handsome. They lay there, staring at the sky. You felt sorry for all of them, on both sides.” It was this attitude, “all of them, on both sides,” that gave me the idea of what my book would be about: war is nothing more than killing. That’s how it registered in women’s memories. This person had just been smiling, smoking – and now he’s gone. Disappearance was what women talked about most, how quickly everything can turn into nothing during war. Both the human being, and human time. Yes, they had volunteered for the front at 17 or 18, but they didn’t want to kill. And yet – they were ready to die. To die for the Motherland. And to die for Stalin – you can’t erase those words from history.

The book wasn’t published for two years, not before perestroika and Gorbachev. “After reading your book no one will fight,” the censor lectured me. “Your war is terrifying. Why don’t you have any heroes?” I wasn’t looking for heroes. I was writing history through the stories of its unnoticed witnesses and participants. They had never been asked anything. What do people think? We don’t really know what people think about great ideas. Right after a war, a person will tell the story of one war, a few decades later, it’s a different war, of course. Something will change in him, because he has folded his whole life into his memories. His entire self. How he lived during those years, what he read, saw, whom he met. What he believes in. Finally, whether is he happy or not. Documents are living creatures – they change as we change.

I’m absolutely convinced that there will never again be young women like the war-time girls of 1941. This was the high point of the “Red” idea, higher even than the Revolution and Lenin. Their Victory still eclipses the GULAG. I dearly love these women. But you couldn’t talk to them about Stalin, or about the fact that after the war, whole trainloads of the boldest and most outspoken victors were sent straight to Siberia. The rest returned home and kept quiet. Once I heard: “The only time we were free was during the war. At the front.” Suffering is our capital, our natural resource. Not oil or gas – but suffering. It is the only thing we are able to produce consistently. I’m always looking for the answer: why doesn’t our suffering convert into freedom? Is it truly all in vain? Chaadayev was right: Russia is a country without memory, it’s a space of total amnesia, a virgin consciousness for criticism and reflection.

But great books are piled up beneath our feet.

1989

I’m in Kabul. I don’t want to write about war anymore. But here I am in a real war. The newspaper Pravda says: “We are helping the fraternal Afghan people build socialism.” People of war and objects of war are everywhere. Wartime.

They wouldn’t take me into battle yesterday: “Stay in the hotel, young lady. We’ll have to answer for you later.” I’m sitting in the hotel, thinking: there is something immoral in scrutinizing other people’s courage and the risks they take. I’ve been here for two weeks and I can’t shake the feeling that war is a product of masculine nature, which is unfathomable to me. But the everyday accessories of war are grand. I discovered for myself that weapons are beautiful: machine guns, mines, tanks. Man has put a lot of thought into how best to kill other men. The eternal dispute between truth and beauty. They showed me a new Italian mine, and my “feminine” reaction was: “It’s beautiful. Why is it beautiful?” They explained to me precisely, in military terms: if someone drives over or steps on this mine just so … at a certain angle … there would be nothing left but half a bucket of flesh. People talk about abnormal things here as though they’re normal, taken for granted. Well, you know, it’s war … No one is driven insane by these pictures – for instance, there’s a man lying on the ground who was killed not by the elements, not by fate, but by another man.

I watched the loading of a “black tulip” (the airplane that carries casualties back home in zinc coffins). The dead are often dressed in old military uniforms from the ‘40s, with jodhpurs; sometimes there aren’t even enough of those to go around. The soldiers were chatting: “They just delivered some new ones to the fridges. It smells like boar gone bad.” I am going to write about this. I’m afraid that no one at home will believe me. Our newspapers just write about friendship alleys planted by Soviet soldiers.

I talk to the guys. Many have come voluntarily. They asked to come here. I note that most are from educated families, the intelligentsia – teachers, doctors, librarians – in a word, bookish people. They sincerely dreamed of helping the Afghan people build socialism. Now they laugh at themselves. I was shown a place at the airport where hundreds of zinc coffins sparkle mysteriously in the sun. The officer accompanying me couldn’t help himself: “Who knows … my coffin might be over there … They’ll stick me in it … What am I fighting for here?” His own words scared him and he immediately said: “Don’t write that down.”

At night I dream of the dead, they all have looks of surprise on their faces: what, you mean I was killed? Have I really been killed?”

I drove to a hospital for Afghan civilians with a group of nurses – we brought presents for the children. Toys, candy, cookies. I had about five teddy bears. We arrived at the hospital, a long barracks. No one has more than a blanket for bedding. A young Afghan woman approached me, holding a child in her arms. She wanted to say something – over the last ten years almost everyone here has learned to speak a little Russian – and I handed the child a toy, which he took with his teeth. “Why his teeth?” I asked in surprise. She pulled the blanket off his tiny body – the little boy was missing both arms. “It was when your Russians bombed.” Someone held me up as I began to fall.

I saw our “Grad” rockets turn villages into plowed fields. I visited an Afghan cemetery, which was about the length of one of their villages. Somewhere in the middle of the cemetery an old Afghan woman was shouting. I remembered the howl of a mother in a village near Minsk when they carried a zinc coffin into the house. The cry wasn’t human or animal … It resembled what I heard at the Kabul cemetery …

 

I have to admit that I didn’t become free all at once. I was sincere with my subjects, and they trusted me. Each of us has his or her own path to freedom. Before Afghanistan, I believed in socialism with a human face. I came back from Afghanistan free of all illusions. “Forgive me father,” I said when I saw him. “You raised me to believe in communist ideals, but seeing those young men, recent Soviet schoolboys like the ones you and Mama taught (my parents were village school teachers), kill people they don’t know, on foreign territory, was enough to turn all your words to ash. We are murderers, Papa, do you understand!?” My father cried.

Many people returned free from Afghanistan. But there are other examples, too. There was a young fellow in Afghanistan who shouted to me: “You’re a woman, what do you understand about war? You think that people die a pretty death in war, like they do in books and movies? Yesterday my friend was killed, he took a bullet in the head, and kept running another ten meters, trying to catch his own brains …” Seven years later, the same fellow is a successful businessman, who likes to tell stories about Afghanistan. He called me: “What are your books for? They’re too scary.” He was a different person, no longer the young man I’d met amid death, who didn’t want to die at age twenty …

I ask myself what kind of book I want to write about war. I’d like to write a book about a person who doesn’t shoot, who can’t fire on another human being, who suffers at the very idea of war. Where is he? I haven’t met him.

1990–1997

Russian literature is interesting in that it is the only literature to tell the story of an experiment carried out on a huge country. I am often asked: why do you always write about tragedy? Because that’s how we live. We live in different countries now, but “Red” people are everywhere. They come out of that same life, and have the same memories.

I resisted writing about Chernobyl for a long time. I didn’t know how to write about it, what instrument to use, how to approach the subject. The world had almost never heard anything about my little country, tucked away in a corner of Europe, but now its name was on everyone’s tongue. We, Belarussians, had become the people of Chernobyl. The first to encounter the unknown. It was clear now: besides communist, ethnic, and new religious challenges, there are more global, savage challenges in store for us, though for the moment they are invisible. Something opened a little bit after Chernobyl …

I remember an old taxi driver swearing in despair when a pigeon hit the windshield: “Every day, two or three birds smash into the car. But the newspapers say the situation is under control.”

The leaves in city parks were raked up, taken out of town, and buried. The ground was cut out of contaminated areas and buried, too – earth was buried in the earth. Firewood was buried, and grass. Everyone looked a little crazy. An old beekeeper told me: “I went out into the garden that morning, and something was missing, a familiar sound. There weren’t any bees. I couldn’t hear a single bee. Not a one! What? What’s going on? They didn’t fly out on the second day either, or on the third … Then we were told that there was an accident at the nuclear station – and it isn’t far away. But we didn’t know anything about it for a long time. The bees knew, but we didn’t.” All the information about Chernobyl in the newspapers was in military language: explosion, heroes, soldiers, evacuation … The KGB worked right at the station. They were looking for spies and saboteurs. Rumors circulated that the accident was planned by western intelligence services in order to undermine the socialist camp. Military equipment was on its way to Chernobyl, soldiers were coming. As usual, the system worked like it was war time, but in this new world, a soldier with a shiny new machine gun was a tragic figure. The only thing he could do was absorb large doses of radiation and die when he returned home.

Before my eyes pre-Chernobyl people turned into the people of Chernobyl.

You couldn’t see the radiation, or touch it, or smell it … The world around was both familiar and unfamiliar. When I traveled to the zone, I was told right away: don’t pick the flowers, don’t sit on the grass, don’t drink water from a well … Death hid everywhere, but now it was a different sort of death. Wearing a new mask. In an unfamiliar guise. Old people who had lived through the war were being evacuated again. They looked at the sky: “The sun is shining … There’s no smoke, no gas. No one’s shooting. How can this be war? But we have to become refugees.”

In the mornings everyone would grab the papers, greedy for news, and then put them down in disappointment. No spies had been found. No one wrote about enemies of the people. A world without spies and enemies of the people was also unfamiliar. This was the beginning of something new. Following on the heels of Afghanistan, Chernobyl made us free people.

For me the world parted: inside the zone I didn’t feel Belarussian, or Russian, or Ukrainian, but a representative of a biological species that could be destroyed. Two catastrophes coincided: in the social sphere, the socialist Atlantis was sinking; and on the cosmic – there was Chernobyl. The collapse of the empire upset everyone. People were worried about everyday life. How and with what to buy things? How to survive? What to believe in? What banners to follow this time? Or do we need to learn to live without any great idea? The latter was unfamiliar, too, since no one had ever lived that way. Hundreds of questions faced the “Red” man, but he was on his own. He had never been so alone as in those first days of freedom. I was surrounded by people in shock. I listened to them …

I close my diary …

What happened to us when the empire collapsed? Previously, the world had been divided: there were executioners and victims – that was the GULAG; brothers and sisters – that was the war; the electorate – was part of technology and the contemporary world. Our world had also been divided into those who were imprisoned and those who imprisoned them; today there’s a division between Slavophiles and Westernizers, “fascist-traitors” and patriots. And between those who can buy things and those who can’t. The latter, I would say, was the cruelest of the ordeals to follow socialism, because not so long ago everyone had been equal. The “Red” man wasn’t able to enter the kingdom of freedom he had dreamed of around his kitchen table. Russia was divvied up without him, and he was left with nothing. Humiliated and robbed. Aggressive and dangerous.

Here are some of the comments I heard as I traveled around Russia …

 

“Modernization will only happen here with sharashkas, those prison camps for scientists, and firing squads.”

“Russians don’t really want to be rich, they’re even afraid of it. What does a Russian want? Just one thing: for no one else to get rich. No richer than he is.”

“There aren’t any honest people here, but there are saintly ones.”

“We’ll never see a generation that hasn’t been flogged; Russians don’t understand freedom, they need the Cossack and the lash.”

“The two most important words in Russian are ‘war’ and ‘prison.’ You steal something, have some fun, they lock you up … you get out, and then end up back in jail …”

“Russian life needs to be vicious and despicable. Then the soul is uplifted, it realizes that it doesn’t belong to this world … The filthier and bloodier things are, the more room there is for the soul …”

“No one has the energy for a new revolution, or the craziness. No spirit. Russians need the kind of idea that will send shivers down your spine …”

“So our life just dangles between bedlam and the barracks. Communism didn’t die, the corpse is still alive.”

 

I will take the liberty of saying that we missed the chance we had in the 1990s. The question was posed: what kind of country should we have? A strong country, or a worthy one where people can live decently? We chose the former – a strong country. Once again we are living in an era of power. Russians are fighting Ukrainians. Their brothers. My father is Belarussian, my mother, Ukrainian. That’s the way it is for many people. Russian planes are bombing Syria …

A time full of hope has been replaced by a time of fear. The era has turned around and headed back in time. The time we live in now is second-hand …

Sometimes I am not sure that I’ve finished writing the history of the “Red” man …

I have three homes: my Belarussian land, the homeland of my father, where I have lived my whole life; Ukraine, the homeland of my mother, where I was born; and Russia’s great culture, without which I cannot imagine myself. All are very dear to me. But in this day and age it is difficult to talk about love.

Translation: Jamey Gambrell

 

En ledsen ju stark tal av Svetlana Alexievich

Av Xuefei Chen Axelsson

Stockholm, Dec.7(Greenpost)–Jag vet inte vad ska skriva efter jag hade läst Alexievichs Nobelföreläsning.

DSC_4687Jag läste på engelska, tårarna föll och jag kunde inte hålla på.

Det är en ledsen men stark nobelföreläsning. Det är som sin bok. Det är som politiska tal, men det är sentimentallt också. När Xi Jinping och Ma Yingjiu skakade händerna, måste vi tänka att vi är lykliga. Vi kineserna är bröderna också.

Alexievich reflecterade livet så djupt och hon hade tre länderna och hon inte vill se att Ryssland och Belarus slår varandra för att de är bröderna. Men historier passade precis som det är nu.

Jag tycker att det är så ledsen att vi måste tänka om vad man vill.

Jag vill gärna flera människor kan läsa sin nobelföreläsning också.

Var så god.

am-alexievich-signed-chairAlexievich  Photo:Alexander Mahmoud

Om ett förlorat fältslag

Jag står inte ensam i den här talarstolen … Runt omkring mig finns röster, hundratals röster, de är alltid med mig. Ända sedan min barndom. Jag bodde i en by. Vi barn älskade att vara ute och leka, men på kvällen drogs vi, som av en magnet, till bänkarna där de slitna kärringarna – som man säger hos oss – brukade samlas bredvid sina hus eller stugor. Ingen av dem hade några män, fäder eller bröder, jag minns inga män i vår by efter kriget – under andra världskriget hade var fjärde man i Belarus dött vid fronten eller i partisanförband. Vår barnavärld efter kriget var en kvinnornas värld. Mest av allt minns jag att kvinnorna inte talade om döden, utan om kärlek. De brukade berätta om hur de den sista dagen hade tagit farväl av sina käraste, och om hur de hade väntat på dem, och om hur de fortfarande väntade. Åren hade gått, men de väntade ändå: “Han får gärna återvända utan armar och ben – jag ska bära honom på mina händer.” Utan armar … utan ben … Det känns som om jag ända sedan barndomen har vetat vad kärlek är …

Här är bara några av de sorgsna melodier som jag lyssnar på …

Den första rösten:

“Varför ska du veta det här? Det är så sorgligt. Jag mötte min man i kriget. Jag var stridsvagnssoldat. Jag hade kommit fram till Berlin. Jag minns hur vi stod vid riksdagshuset, då var han ännu inte min man, och han sade till mig: “Vi kan väl gifta oss. Jag älskar dig”. Men jag tog så illa vid mig av de där orden – hela kriget hade vi levt i smuts och damm och blod och runt omkring fanns bara svordomar. Jag svarade honom: “Först får du göra en kvinna av mig: ge mig blommor, säg ömsinta ord, så snart jag blir demobiliserad ska jag låta sy en klänning åt mig.” Jag var så arg att jag rent av ville slå till honom. Han kände allt det där, hans ena kind var brännskadad och full av ärr, och över de där ärren såg jag tårar rinna. “Visst, jag ska gifta mig med dig.” Så sade jag … jag kunde själv inte tro att jag sade det … Runt omkring oss var det sot, och krossat tegel – vi var, kort sagt, omgivna av kriget …”

Den andra rösten:

“Vi bodde i närheten av kärnkraftverket i Tjernobyl. Jag arbetade som konditor, jag gjorde tårtor. Men min man var brandman. Vi hade just gift oss, vi brukade till och med gå hand i hand till affären. Just den dagen reaktorn exploderade hade han jourtjänstgöring på brandstationen. När larmet gick åkte de dit i sina skjortor, i sina vanliga kläder, det var en explosion på ett atomkraftverk, men man delade inte ut några specialkläder åt dem. Det var så vi hade det … Ni vet … Hela natten höll de på att släcka branden och med de radioaktiva stråldoser de fick kan man inte överleva. På morgonen skickades de genast iväg med flyg till Moskva. Akut strålsjuka … en människa kan bara leva några veckor … Min man var stark, han var idrottare, han var den siste som dog. När jag kom dit sade de till mig att han låg i en speciell box, dit de inte släppte in någon. “Jag älskar honom”, sade jag vädjande. “Det är soldater som sköter om dem. Vad skall du där att göra?” – “Jag älskar honom.” – De försökte tala mig till rätta: “Det är inte längre en människa att älska – det är ett saneringsobjekt. Förstår du?” Men jag upprepade bara en och samma sak för mig själv: Jag älskar, jag älskar … På natten klättrade jag upp till honom på brandstegen … Eller så bad jag nattvakterna, jag gav dem pengar för att de skulle släppa in mig … Jag övergav honom inte, jag var med honom ända till slutet … Efter hans död … några månader senare födde jag en liten flicka, hon levde bara i ett par dagar. Hon … Vi hade längtat så efter henne, men jag dödade henne … Hon räddade mig, hela det radioaktiva angreppet hade hon tagit emot. Hon var så liten … Den lilla … Men jag älskade dem båda. Kan man döda med sin kärlek? Varför är de så nära varandra – kärleken och döden? Alltid är de tillsammans. Kan någon förklara det för mig? Jag kryper på knäna vid graven …”

Den tredje rösten:

“När jag för första gången dödade en tysk … Då var jag tio år, partisanerna tog redan med mig ut på uppdrag. Den där tysken låg sårad … Jag hade blivit tillsagd att ta ifrån honom pistolen, jag sprang fram, men tysken hade gripit tag i pistolen med bägge händerna och lyfte den mot mitt ansikte. Fast det var inte tysken som hann först, det var jag …

Att jag hade dödat skrämde mig inte … Och under kriget brukade jag inte minnas honom. Runt omkring fanns många som blivit dödade, vi levde bland döda. Jag blev förvånad när en dröm om den där tysken plötsligt dök upp många år senare. Det var oväntat … Drömmen hemsökte mig gång på gång … Jag flyger, men han släpper mig inte. Eller så lyfter jag … Jag flyger … och flyger … Men han jagar ifatt mig, och tillsammans faller vi. Jag ramlar ner i en grop. Jag vill resa mig … ställa mig upp … Men han hindrar mig … Han låter mig inte flyga iväg …

En och samma dröm … Den förföljde mig i flera decennier …

Jag kan inte berätta om den där drömmen för min son. När han var liten kunde jag det inte, jag läste sagor för honom. Nu har min son blivit vuxen – men jag kan ändå inte göra det …”

 

Flaubert brukade säga om sig själv att han var en pennans människa. Jag kan säga om mig själv att jag är en örats människa. När jag går längs en gata och några ord och uttryck eller utrop letar sig fram till mig tänker jag alltid: Så många romaner som spårlöst försvinner i tiden! I mörkret. Det finns en bit av människolivet – den talspråkliga ­– som vi inte lyckas erövra åt litteraturen. Vi har ännu inte insett dess värde, eller häpnat och hänförts av den. Men mig har den förhäxat och gjort till sin fånge. Jag älskar när en människa talar … Jag älskar den ensamma människorösten. Det är min allra största kärlek och passion.

Min väg till denna talarstol har varit nästan fyrtio år lång – från människa till människa, från röst till röst. Jag kan inte säga att denna väg aldrig har varit mig övermäktig – många gånger har jag blivit chockad och skrämd av en människa, jag har känt hänförelse och vämjelse, och jag har velat glömma det som jag har hört och återvända till den tid då jag ännu svävade i okunskap. Åtskilliga gånger har jag också velat gråta av glädje, över att jag har fått se hur underbar en människa är.

Jag har levt i ett land där man ända sedan vi var små lärde oss att dö. Det gavs undervisning i död. Man sade till oss att människan existerar för att överlämna sig, för att brinna upp, för att offra sig. Man lärde oss att älska en människa med gevär. Om jag hade vuxit upp i ett annat land skulle jag inte ha kunnat gå denna väg. Ondskan är skoningslös, man måste vara vaccinerad mot den. Men vi växte upp bland bödlar och offer. Våra för-äldrar levde visserligen i skräck, så de berättade inte allt för oss, och oftast ingenting alls, men själva vår livsluft var förgiftad av detta. Ondskan spionerade hela tiden på oss.

Jag har skrivet fem böcker, men för mig känns det som om alltsammans är en enda bok. Boken om en utopis historia …

Varlam Sjalamov skrev: “Jag deltog i ett stort förlorat fält-slag, för en verklig förnyelse av mänskligheten”. Jag försöker rekonstruera detta fältslags historia, dess segrar och dess nederlag. När man ville bygga Himmelriket på jorden. Paradiset! Solstaden! Fast det slutade med att allt som blev kvar var ett hav av blod och miljontals förödda människoliv. Men det fanns en tid när inte en enda av 1900-talets politiska idéer kunde mäta sig med kommunismen (och med Oktoberrevolutionen, så som dess symbol), eller attrahera västerländska intellektuella och människor i hela världen lika starkt och intensivt. Raymond Aron kallade kommunismen ett “opium för de intellektuella”. Idén om kommunism är åtminstone två tusen år gammal. Vi finner den hos Platon – i läran om den riktiga idealstaten. Och hos Aristofanes – i drömmarna om en tid då “allt blir gemensamt” … Och sedan hos Thomas More och Tommaso Campanella … Och hos Saint-Simon, Fourier och Robert Owen. I den ryska själen finns det någonting som har tvingat oss att försöka göra dessa önskningar och drömmar till verklighet.

För tjugo år sedan tog vi avsked av det “röda” imperiet med förbannelser och tårar. Idag kan vi redan lugnt betrakta denna näraliggande händelse som en historisk erfarenhet. Det är viktigt, eftersom dispyterna om socialismen ännu inte har tystnat. Det har vuxit upp en ny generation, som har en annan världsbild, men åtskilliga unga människor läser åter Marx och Lenin. I ryska städer öppnar man Stalinmuseer och reser monument över honom.

Det finns inget “rött” imperium, men den “röda” människan finns kvar. Hon lever vidare.

Min far, som dog för inte så länge sedan, var ända till slutet en troende kommunist. Han bevarade sin partibok. Jag kan aldrig ta ordet “sovjetmänniska” i min mun, för då skulle jag bli tvungen att kalla min far för det, och mina nära och kära, och folk jag känner. Och mina vänner. De kommer alla därifrån – ur socialismen. Bland dem finns många idealister. Eller romantiker. Idag har man en annan benämning på dem – slaveriets romantiker. Eller utopins slavar. Jag tror att de alla hade kunnat leva ett annat liv, men de har levt ett sovjetiskt. Varför? Jag har länge sökt svaret på den frågan – jag har rest kort och tvärs genom det väldiga land som nyligen kallades Sovjetunionen, jag har spelat in tusentals band. Det var socialismen och det var helt enkelt vårt liv. Korn för korn, smula för smula har jag samlat ihop den “hemgjorda”, “inre” socialismens historia. Hur den levde i människosjälen. Jag lockades av just den där lilla rymden – människan … en människa. I själva verket är det också där som allting sker.

Alldeles efter kriget var Theodor Adorno skakad: “Att skriva dikter efter Auschwitz – det är barbari.” Min lärare Ales Adamovitj, vars namn jag idag vill nämna med tacksamhet, ansåg också att det var hädiskt att skriva prosa om 1900-talets hemskheter. Där får man inte hitta på. Man måste återge sanningen, sådan den är. Det krävs en “hyperlitteratur”. Det är ett vittne som måste tala. Man kan minnas Nietzsche och hans ord om att det inte finns en enda konstnär som står ut med verkligheten. Och som inte upphöjer den.

Jag har alltid plågats av att sanningen inte ryms i ett enda hjärta, eller i ett enda intellekt. Den är liksom uppdelad ­– det finns många av den, den är olika och utspridd i världen. Hos Dostojevskij finns tanken att mänskligheten vet mer om sig själv, oändligt mycket mer än vad den har hunnit nedteckna i litteraturen. Vad gör jag? Jag samlar känslornas, tankarnas och ordens vardaglighet. Jag samlar min tids liv. Själens historia intresserar mig. Själens vardag. Sådant som den stora historien vanligtvis försummar och ringaktar. Jag sysslar med den försummade historien. Åtskilliga gånger, också nu, har jag fått höra att detta inte är litteratur, utan dokument. Men vad är egentligen litteratur idag? Vem kan svara på den frågan? Vi lever snabbare än förr. Innehållet spränger formen. Bryter sönder och förändrar den. Allt svämmar över sina bräddar: musiken, måleriet, och i dokumentet sliter sig ordet loss och överskrider dokumentets gränser. Det finns inga gränser mellan ett faktum och någonting skapat, det ena flyter över i det andra. Inte ens ett vittne är opartiskt. När en människa berättar skapar hon – hon brottas med tiden, som en skulptör med marmorn. Hon är en skådespelare och skapare.

Den lilla människan intresserar mig. Den lilla stora människan, skulle jag vilja säga, eftersom lidandet förstorar henne. I mina böcker berättar hon själv sin lilla historia, och samtidigt med sin egen historia också den stora historien. Vad som hänt och händer med oss har ännu inte blivit förstått, det måste utsägas. Åtminstone utsägas, till att börja med. Vi är rädda för det, ännu är vi inte i stånd att klara av vårt förflutna. I Dostojevskijs Onda andar säger Sjatov till Stavrogin innan de börjar samtala: “Vi är två varelser som mötts i gränslösheten … för sista gången i världen. Överge er ton och anta en som är mänsklig! Tala för en gångs skull med mänsklig röst!”

Ungefär så inleds mina samtal med mina hjältar. Naturligtvis talar en människa från sin tid, hon kan inte tala från ingenstans! Men att ta sig fram till en människosjäl är svårt, den har blivit nedskräpad av tidens vidskepelser, av dess fördomar och lögner. Av teve och tidningar.

Jag skulle vilja ta några sidor ur mina dagböcker, för att visa hur tiden har rört sig … hur en idé har dött … Hur jag har följt dess spår …

1980–1985

Jag skriver en bok om kriget … Varför om kriget? För att vi är krigiska människor – endera har vi krigat eller har vi gjort oss redo för krig. Om man tittar noga så har vi alla ett krigiskt sätt att tänka. Hemma, och på gatan. Därför är ett människoliv så lite värt hos oss. Allt är som i ett krig.

Jag började med tvivel. Alltså, ännu en bok om kriget … Varför?

Under en av mina journalistiska resor mötte jag en kvinna, hon hade varit sjukvårdsinstruktör under kriget. Hon berättade: om vintern hade de gått över sjön Ladogas is, fienden hade lagt märke till rörelsen och börjat skjuta. Hästar och människor försvann under isen. Allt skedde om natten, och hon hade, som hon trodde, gripit tag i en sårad, som hon släpade in till stranden. “Den som jag släpade var våt och naken – jag trodde att kläderna hade slitits av”, berättade hon. “Men på stranden upptäckte jag att jag hade släpat med mig en jättelik skadad belugastör. Och jag svor och förbannade: människorna lider, men varför skall djuren, fåglarna och fiskarna behöva göra det?” Under en annan resa fick jag höra en som varit sjukvårdsinstruktör vid en kavalleri-skvadron berätta om hur hon under en strid hade släpat iväg en sårad tysk till en grop, fast att det är en tysk upptäcker hon först i gropen. Hans ben är krossat, han håller på att förblöda. Fast det är ju en fiende! Vad skall hon göra? Där uppe håller de egna grabbarna på att dö! Men hon förbinder honom och kryper vidare. Hon släpar dit en rysk soldat, han är medvetslös, när han vaknar upp vill han döda tysken, och när tysken vaknar upp griper han kpisten och vill döda ryssen. “Först slår jag den ene på käften, och sedan den andre. Våra ben var alldeles blodiga”, mindes hon. “Blodet hade blandats.”

Detta var ett krig som jag inte kände till. Ett kvinnligt krig. Det handlade inte om hjältar. Inte om hur vissa människor hjältemodigt dödade andra människor. En kvinnas klagan har stannat kvar i minnet: “Efter striden går du över fältet. Och där ligger de … Alla är de unga, och de är så vackra. De ligger och tittar upp i himlen. Och man tycker synd både om de egna och de andra.” Just det där “både om de egna och de andra” väckte tanken på vad boken skulle handla om. Om att krig är mord. Och om hur detta har bevarats i det kvinnliga minnet. Nyss fanns där en man som log och rökte – och nu finns han inte mer. Mest av allt talar kvinnorna om försvinnandet – om hur snabbt allting i kriget förvandlas till ingenting. Såväl en människa som en mänsklig tid. Visst, vid 17 eller 18 års ålder hade de själva bett att få komma till fronten, fast de ville inte döda. Men de var redo att dö. Dö för fosterlandet. Och för Stalin också – man kan inte slänga ut ord ur historien.

Under två år tryckte de inte boken, den trycktes inte innan perestrojkan. Eller innan Gorbatjov. “Efter er bok kommer ingen att gå ut i krig”, sade censorn förmanande till mig. “Ert krig är hemskt. Varför finns det inga hjältar hos er?” Jag hade inte sökt några hjältar. Jag hade skrivet historien utifrån berättelser av de vittnen och deltagare som ingen hade uppmärksammat. Det var aldrig någon som hade frågat ut dem. Vad människor, bara vanliga människor, tänker om de stora idéerna vet vi inte. Direkt efter kriget skulle en människa ha berättat ett krig, flera decennier senare berättar hon ett annat – naturligtvis är det något som förändras hos henne, eftersom hon lägger in hela sitt liv i minnena. Hela sig själv. Hur hon levt under dessa år, vad hon läst och sett, vem hon mött. Vad hon tror på. Och slutligen om hon är lycklig eller olycklig. Dokument är levande väsen, de förändras tillsammans med oss …

Men jag är absolut övertygad om att sådana flickor som de som deltog i kriget år 1941 kommer det aldrig mer att finnas. Detta var den “röda” idéns allra största tid – den var till och med större än revolutionen och Lenin. Deras Seger skymmer fortfarande GULAG. Jag älskar de där flickorna oerhört mycket. Men det gick inte att tala med dem om Stalin, eller om tågen som efter kriget for till Sibirien med segrare, med dem som var allra djärvast. De andra återvände och teg. En gång fick jag höra: “Fria var vi bara i kriget. Vid frontlinjen.” Vårt största kapital är lidandet. Inte olja eller gas, utan lidandet. Det är det enda som vi ständigt utvinner. Hela tiden söker jag ett svar: Varför konverteras inte allt vårt lidande till frihet? Har det verkligen varit förgäves? Tjaadajev hade rätt: Ryssland är ett land utan minne, den totala amnesins plats, ett jungfruligt medvetande för kritik och reflexion.

Vi har hur många storslagna böcker som helst …

1989

Jag är i Kabul. Jag ville inte skriva mer om kriget. Men nu är jag i ett riktigt krig. Ur tidningen Pravda: “Vi hjälper det afghanska broderfolket att bygga socialismen”. Överallt är krigets folk, krigets saker. Krigets tid.

Igår tog de inte med mig till striden: “Stanna på hotellet, lilla damen. Annars blir det jag som får skulden.” Jag sitter på hotellet och tänker: det finns något omoraliskt i betraktandet av andras mod och risktagande. Det är redan andra veckan jag är här och jag kan inte frigöra mig från känslan att kriget är en för mig obegriplig produkt av den manliga naturen. Men krigets vardaglighet är grandios. Jag har upptäckt att vapnen är vackra: kpistar, minor, stridsvagnar. Människan har funderat mycket över hur man på bästa sätt skall kunna döda en annan människa. Den eviga dispyten mellan sanning och skönhet. Man visade mig en ny italiensk mina, min “kvinnliga” reaktion: “Den är vacker. Varför är den vacker?” På militärt vis förklarade man för mig att om man skulle råka köra över eller trampa på en sådan där … från en viss vinkel … då är en halv spann kött det enda som blir kvar av en människa. Om det onormala pratar man här som om det vore något normalt och självklart. Det är kriget, säger man … Ingen blir galen av de där bilderna, eller av att här på marken ligger det en människa som inte dödats av naturkrafter och inte av ödet, utan av en annan människa.

Jag såg lastningen av en “svart tulpan” (ett flygplan som fraktar zinkkistorna med de stupade till fosterlandet). De döda kläs ofta i den gamla militäruniformen som fanns redan på fyrtiotalet, med ridbyxor, men det händer att de uniformerna inte heller räcker till. Soldaterna pratade med varandra: “De har kommit med nya döda till kylen. Det luktar som en gammal galt.” Jag ska skriva om detta. Jag är rädd för att man inte kommer att tro mig där hemma. I våra tidningar skriver man om vänskapsalléerna som de sovjetiska soldaterna planterar.

Jag pratar med grabbarna, många har kommit hit frivilligt. De bad att få komma hit. Jag har märkt att de flesta kommer från akademikerhem: deras föräldrar är lärare, läkare, bibliotekarier – kort sagt, bildat folk. De drömde uppriktigt om att hjälpa det afghanska folket att bygga socialismen. Nu gör de narr av sig själva. De visade mig ett ställe på flygplatsen där det låg hundratals zinkkistor, de glänste hemlighetsfullt i solen. Officeren som ledsagade mig kunde inte hejda sig: “Kanske finns min kista också här … De kommer att stoppa ner mig i den … Men vad är det jag strider för här?” Han blev genast rädd för sina egna ord: “Det där får ni inte spela in.”

På natten drömde jag om de döda, de hade alla förvånade ansikten: Hur kan det komma sig att jag har blivit dödad? Har jag verkligen blivit dödad?

Tillsammans med sjuksköterskorna åkte jag till ett sjukhus för fredliga afghaner, vi hade med oss presenter till barnen. Leksaker, konfekt och kex. Ett halvdussin nallebjörnar fick jag ta hand om. Vi kom fram till sjukhuset – det var en lång barack, i sängarna fanns inga lakan, alla hade bara varsitt täcke. En ung afghansk kvinna kom fram till mig med ett barn i famnen, hon ville säga något, efter tio år hade alla här lärt sig att tala lite ryska, jag gav barnet en leksak, det tog emot den med tänderna. “Varför gör han så där?” frågade jag häpet. Den afghanska kvinnan ryckte bort täcket från den lilla kroppen, pojken saknade armar. “Det var dina ryssar som bombade.” Någon grep tag i mig, jag föll …

Jag har sett hur vår raketavfyrningsramp Grad förvandlar afghanska byar till upplöjd mark. Jag har varit på en afghansk kyrkogård, långsträckt som en österländsk by. Någonstans i mitten av kyrkogården skrek en gammal afghansk kvinna. Jag mindes hur en zinkkista bars in i en by utanför Minsk, och hur en moder tjöt. Det var ett skrik som varken var mänskligt eller djuriskt … Det liknade det jag hörde på kyrkogården i Kabul …

Jag erkänner att jag inte genast blev fri. Jag var ärlig mot mina hjältar, och de anförtrodde sig åt mig. Var och en av oss hade sin egen väg till frihet. Innan Afghanistan trodde jag på en socialism med mänskligt ansikte. Jag återvände därifrån fri från alla illusioner. “Förlåt mig, far”, sade jag när vi möttes, “du uppfostrade mig med en tro på de kommunistiska idealen, men det räcker med att en enda gång få se hur de som nyligen var sovjetiska skolbarn, sådana som du och mamma undervisar (mina föräldrar var byskollärare), på främmande mark dödar människor de inte känner, för att alla dina ord skall förvandlas till stoft. Vi är mördare – förstår du det, pappa!?” Far började gråta.

Från Afghanistan återvände det många fria människor. Men jag har också ett annat exempel. Där, i Afghanistan, var det en kille som skrek åt mig: “Kvinna, vad kan du begripa av kriget? Tror du kanske att folk dör i kriget så som de dör i böcker och på bio? Där dör de vackert, men här dödade de min vän igår – kulan träffade i huvudet. Han fortsatte att springa i kanske tio meter till och försökte fånga sin hjärna …”

Men sju år senare älskar samma kille, som nu är en framgångsrik affärsman, att berätta om sin tid i Afghanistan. Han ringde till mig: “Vad är det för vits med dina böcker? De är alldeles för hemska.” Detta var redan en annan människa, inte den jag mötte mitt i döden, och som inte ville dö vid tjugo års ålder …

Jag har frågat mig själv hurdan bok om kriget jag skulle vilja skriva. Jag skulle vilja skriva om en människa som inte skjuter, som inte kan skjuta på en annan människa och som lider av själva tanken på krig. Var finns han? Jag har inte mött honom.

1990–1997

Den ryska litteraturen är intressant genom att det bara är den som kan berätta om det unika experiment som det väldiga landet har genomgått. Man frågar mig ofta: Varför skriver ni hela tiden om det tragiska? För att det är så vi lever. Nu lever vi visserligen i skilda länder, men den “röda” människan finns ändå överallt. Kommen ur det livet och med de minnena.

Länge ville jag inte skriva om Tjernobyl. Jag visste inte hur man skulle kunna skriva om detta – med vilka verktyg och från vilket håll skulle man närma sig? Namnet på mitt lilla land, som glömts bort i Europa och som världen tidigare nästan aldrig hört talas om, började höras på alla språk, och vi, belarusier, blev Tjernobylfolket. Vi var de första som kommit i beröring med det okända. Det stod klart att förutom de kommunistiska, nationella och religiösa utmaningarna stod vi nu också inför sådana som var grymmare och fullständigare, men ännu dolde sig för våra blickar. Efter Tjernobyl var det något som öppnats på glänt …

Jag minns hur en gammal taxichaufför förtvivlat svor när en duva slog emot framrutan: “Varje dag är det två-tre fåglar som krossas. Men i tidningarna skriver de att situationen är under kontroll.”

I städernas parker skyfflade man ihop alla löv och fraktade iväg dem till platser utanför staden, där begravde man dem. På smittade ställen hyvlades jorden bort och begravdes, den också – man begravde jorden i jorden. Man begravde ved och gräs. Alla hade lite galna ansikten. En gammal biodlare berättade: “På morgonen gick jag ut i trädgården, det var någonting som saknades – ett välbekant ljud. Inte ett enda bi … Man hörde inte ett enda bi. Inte ett enda! Varför? Vad var det som hade hänt? Nästa dag flög de inte heller ut, och likadant var det den tredje dagen … Sedan meddelade de oss att det hade skett en olycka på kärnkraftverket, och det låg alldeles intill. Men länge visste vi ingenting. Bina visste, men inte vi.” Tjernobylinformationen i tidningarna bestod helt och hållet av militära uttryck: explosion, hjältar, soldater, evakuering … Vid själva kraftverket arbetade KGB. Man sökte efter spioner och sabotörer, det gick rykten om att olyckan var en planerad aktion av västliga säkerhetstjänster, för att underminera det socialistiska lägret. I riktning mot Tjernobyl rörde sig krigsmateriel, soldater kom åkande. Systemet fungerade, som vanligt, på militärt vis, men soldaten med ny kpist var tragisk i denna nya värld. Allt som han kunde göra var att utsätta sig för stora doser radioaktiv strålning och dö när han kom hem.

Inför mina ögon förvandlas den förtjernobylska människan till en Tjernobylmänniska.

Den radioaktiva strålningen gick inte att se eller röra vid, man kunde inte känna dess doft … Sådan var den välbekanta men okända värld som redan omgav oss. När jag for in i zonen förklarade man snabbt för mig: du får inte plocka blommor, inte sätta dig i gräset, inte dricka vatten ur en brunn … Döden lurade överallt, men det var redan ett annat slags död. I okänd skepnad. Bakom nya masker. Gamla människor som överlevt kriget evakuerades återigen, och de tittade mot himlen: “Solen skiner … Här finns ingen rök och ingen gas. Och de skjuter inte. Det här är väl inget krig? Men ändå måste vi bli flyktingar.”

På morgonen grep alla girigt tidningarna men lade genast ifrån sig dem igen, besvikna – man hade inte funnit några spioner. Man skrev inte om folkets fiender. Världen utan spioner och folkfiender var också obekant. Något nytt hade börjat. Tjernobyl direkt efter Afghanistan gjorde oss till fria människor.

För mig hade världen vidgats. I zonen kände jag mig varken som belarusier, ryss eller ukrainare, utan som en företrädare för en biologisk art som skulle kunna utrotas. Två katastrofer sammanföll: en social – det socialistiska Atlantis hade försvunnit under vattnet, och en kosmisk – Tjernobyl. Imperiets fall oroade alla: folk bekymrade sig över livet och vardagen – hur skulle man få pengar att handla för, hur skulle man överleva? Vad skulle man tro på? Under vilka fanor skulle man åter resa sig? Eller skulle man bli tvungen att lära sig leva utan någon stor idé? Det sistnämnda var något som var obekant för alla, eftersom man ännu aldrig hade levt så. Den “röda” människan ställdes inför hundratals frågor, hon uthärdade dem i ensamhet. Aldrig hade hon varit så ensam som under frihetens första dagar. Runt omkring mig var chockade människor. Jag lyssnade på dem …

Jag stänger min dagbok …

Vad hände med oss när imperiet föll? Tidigare hade världen varit uppdelad: bödlar och offer – det var GULAG, bröder och systrar – det var kriget, väljare – det var tekniken, den moderna världen. Tidigare delades vår värld dessutom in i de som satt i fängelse och de som lät fängsla folk, idag finns det en uppdelning i slavofiler och västvänliga, och i nationalförrädare och patrioter. Och dessutom mellan dem som kan köpa och dem som inte kan köpa. Den sistnämnda uppdelningen är, skulle jag vilja säga, den allra svåraste prövningen efter socialismen, eftersom alla nyligen var jämställda. Den “röda” människan kunde således inte inträda i det frihetens rike som hon drömt om hemma i sitt kök. Man hade delat upp Ryssland utan hennes medverkan, och hon blev kvar utan någonting. Förnedrad och bestulen. Aggressiv och farlig.

Vad jag hört när jag har rest runt i Ryssland …

– En modernisering är möjlig hos oss, med hjälp av avrätt-ningar ochsjarasjkor [specialarbetsläger för vetenskapsmän].

– En ryss vill liksom inte bli rik, han är till och med rädd för det. Men vad vill han då? Det finns en enda sak som han alltid vill: att ingen annan skall bli rik. Eller rikare än han själv.

– Någon hederlig människa kan du inte finna hos oss, men det finns helgon.

– Några framtida generationer som inte blivit hunsade och slagna skall vi inte hoppas på; ryssar förstår sig inte på frihet, de behöver kosacker och piskor.

– De två viktigaste ryska orden: krig och fängelse. Man stjäl, är ute och svirar ett slag, sitter i fängelse … kommer ut och hamnar där igen …

– Det ryska livet bör vara hårt och torftigt – då reser sig själen och inser att den inte tillhör denna världen … Ju smutsigare och blodigare, desto större utrymme blir det för den …

– Det finns varken kraft eller galenskap nog för en ny revolution. Det saknas djärvhet. Ryssarna behöver en idé som får blodet att isas i ådrorna …

– Så pendlar vårt liv mellan lössläppthet och fängelse-tillvaro. Kommunismen har inte dött, liket lever.

Jag tar mig friheten att säga att vi har missat den chans vi hade under 1990-talet. När frågan ställdes: Hurdant land bör vi ha – ett som är starkt och mäktigt, eller ett hedervärt, där det är gott att leva för människorna? Då valde vi den första varianten: ett som är starkt och mäktigt. Nu har vi åter en tid av styrka och våld. Ryssarna krigar med ukrainarna. Med sina bröder. Min far var belarusier och min mor var ukrainare. Och vi är många som har det så. Ryska flygplan bombar Syrien …

Förhoppningarnas tid har ersatts av rädslans tid. Tiden har börjat gå baklänges … Tiden second hand …

Nu är jag inte längre så säker på att jag har skrivit färdigt den “röda” människans historia …

Jag har tre hem: mitt belarusiska hemland – där min far föddes och där jag själv har levt i hela mitt liv, Ukraina – min mors hemland, där jag föddes, och så den stora ryska kulturen, som jag inte kan föreställa mig att vara utan. De är mig alla kära. Men att i vår tid tala om kärlek är svårt.

Översättning: Kajsa Öberg Lindsten

 

 

Video: Tu Youyou says there is much more to be done in health cause

By Xuefei Chen Axelsson

Stockholm, Dec. 6(Greenpost)–Tu Youyou, Chinese  Nobel Prize Laureate in Medicine has said that there is more to be done in health cause.

She called on young people to follow the requirement of the World Health Organization and further research on new drugs to prevent the resistance to Artemisinin. See the live video of the press conference at Nobel Forum at Karolinska Institutet on Dec. 6.  filmed by Anneli Larsson from Green Post.

Action called on short-lived climate pollutants to reduce climate warming

By Xuefei Chen Axelsson

STOCKHOLM, Dec. 3(Greenpost)– A new assessment by Arctic Monitoring Assessment Program has called for action on short-lived climate pollutants to reduce climate warming in the short-term.

This is because a complement to action on carbon dioxide Short-lived climate pollutants (SLCPs) are air pollutants that, like carbon dioxide, are causing the Earth’s climate to warm.

The Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP) has examined the Arctic climate impacts of the SLCPs methane, black carbon and tropospheric ozone, according to a statement from AMAP.

The new AMAP assessments outline key findings regarding: how global and regional reductions in SLCPs may influence projected Arctic warming and which emission sources and regions contribute most to Arctic climate change.

At the ongoing COP in Paris governments will discuss actions aimed at preventing global average temperatures rising by more than 2 degrees C by 2100.

Carbon dioxide emissions are the major driver of anthropogenic climate change and reductions in carbon dioxide emissions are therefore necessary and urgent if the threats posed by climate change are to be addressed.

However, other air pollutants including black carbon and methane also contribute to global warming.

Unlike carbon dioxide, short-lived climate pollutants (SLCPs) have a relatively short residence time in the atmosphere (of a few days to about a decade – hence the term short-lived). The shorter the lifetime, the more quickly atmospheric concentrations can be reduced by lowering emissions.

This means that action on SLCPs has the potential to slow the rate of climate warming on a comparatively shorter time scale.

Action to reduce SLCPS should be seen as a complement to, and not a replacement for action to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide. Human activities have caused increased air concentrations of methane, black carbon, and ozone, affecting both global and Arctic climate.

However, technological measures to reduce emissions of SLCPs and coemitted pollutants already exist. Actions to reduce methane emissions could slow the global warming expected by 2050 by approximately 0.2 degrees C.

Arctic warming is part of global warming. Consequently, reducing overall global warming will also result in reduced Arctic warming and slow the rate of melting of snow and ice.

A reduction of about 0.25 degrees C in the Arctic could be achieved through global actions to reduce emissions of black carbon and co-emitted air pollutants.

Much of the avoided warming from black carbon is associated with reducing black carbon on snow and ice.

Thus, if these existing measures were introduced to their maximum extent globally, the AMAPs assessments indicate that Arctic warming could be reduced by roughly half a degree C by 2050.

The assessments did not consider the cost or likelihood of maximum feasible reduction.

These estimates of avoided warming can be compared with an expected Arctic warming due to all climate forcers over the period to 2050 of approximately 2 degrees C from current level.

Arctic temperatures are warming at about twice the global average and this is resulting in unprecedented changes in Arctic sea ice, land ice, permafrost, and snow cover.

While uncertainties associated with climate warming and effects of mitigation actions exist for these SLCPs, they should not be an impediment to taking action.

Action on black carbon and ozone has added benefits since these pollutants are also harmful to human health.

Arctic countries are responsible for substantial amounts of SLCPs and co-emitted air pollutants from sources associated with important anthropogenic emissions sectors.

 

Xinhua Insight: Subsidies to boost eco-appliances market?

BEIJING, Nov. 27 (Xinhua) — Once a largely honorary recognition of a fridge or TV’s green credentials, home appliances’ official energy-efficiency ratings are assuming more importance after the Beijing government promised firms subsidies if they score highly in the tests.

The Beijing Municipal Commission of Commerce made that promise earlier this month to makers of nine types of products, including fridges, air conditioners and water heaters.

It did not elaborate on the size of subsidy when announcing the policy, but manufacturers on its list say top-performing products labeled “grade-1” can have 13 percent of the prices refunded when sold in Beijing, and for grade-2 products, 8 percent.

The move has been hailed a step forward from the announcement by central government recently that it would favor energy-efficient appliances in government purchases and industrial projects.

China has been urging production of energy-efficient home appliances as it encourages domestic consumption and industrial upgrades and tries to make good on its commitment to fighting climate change.

It has pledged to cut carbon emissions per unit of GDP by 40 percent by 2020 from the 2005 level.

As well as shifting from fossil fuels to cleaner solar and wind power, the country is mulling tighter vehicle emission standards. According to a study by the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate, tougher energy efficient standards could cut annual global greenhouse gas emissions by 10 percent by 2030.

There is a precedent for the subsidy scheme. In 2012, the central government piloted a similar deal nationwide on fridges, air conditioners, washing machines, panel TVs and water heaters, though it ceased a year later amid concern of a market bubble.

LOWER PRICES

Wang Xiaoming, general manager of the Henan subsidiary of water heater maker Usaton, said a subsidy of 13 and 8 percent is a huge boon for the home appliance industry, given the products’ low profit margins.

“If applied nationally, it will surely increase sales of energy-saving appliances and boost their production,” Wang told Xinhua.

Despite its short-lived nature, the 2012 subsidy buoyed the market and encouraged energy conservation technology in industry, he added.

The company now produces mostly grade-1 and grade-2 water heaters, while products under grade-3 are already rare in China.

There’s less of a fresh breeze blowing through the market for air conditioners though. A search on shopping website Tmall.com shows the best-selling air conditioners are mostly grade-3 products.

Interviews with customers also suggest the concept of energy efficiency alone may have limit appeal to price-savvy shoppers.

“When selecting an air conditioner, my priorities are still its brand, price, quality and after-sales service,” said Liu Bo, a bank clerk who has just finished decorating his apartment in the central city of Zhengzhou.

“Energy saving is good, but I may still opt for a not so energy-efficient air conditioner if it is much cheaper,” Liu added.

Liu agreed that the subsidy could increase the appeal of energy-efficient appliances, but that this depends on “how much it can reduce the price.”

Some industry observers have argued that the most profound implications of the subsidy lie in raising eco awareness among Chinese shoppers and signaling future government support for energy-saving products. Enditem

 

China Focus: Social capital eyes booming EV charging market

BEIJING, Nov. 6 (Xinhua) — China’s electric vehicle (EV) charging sector, with an estimated market size of over 100 billion yuan, has been witnessing waves of investors vying to break into the lucrative business.

At an exhibition of charging technology held here on Friday, active players including Nari Technology (600406.SH), TGOOD Electric (300001.SZ), Nancal Energy & Engineering, and Wanbang BJEV all put on display their latest EV charging products and technology.

TGOOD Electric alone has set up EV charging joint ventures in 30 cities across China and plans to build 60,000 power poles in more than 80 cities by the end of this year. In an effort to further consolidate its market presence, TGOOD said it would invest an additional 4 billion yuan to expand the company’s charging network across the county next year.

Wanbang BJEV will have 10,000 power poles established nationwide by the yearend and plans to double the figure by March 2016.

In the meantime, cooperation between enterprises is getting deeper. Nancal Energy & Engineering has teamed up with leading Chinese refiner Sinopec to build multiple charging stations in Beijing and several other cities.

China’s major power grid operator the State Grid, another leading performer in the charging market, had build up 618 charging stations and 24,000 power poles by the end of 2014. The power grid giant is moving forward to build more charging networks along China’s highways and in more major cities and the Being-Tianjin-Hebei and the Yangtze River Delta regions.

The central government expects to establish a comprehensive charging network that could accommodate five million electric vehicles by 2020, said the State Council in late September.

In order to support the operation of 5 million electric vehicles, China needs to build up 4.8 million charging poles and 12,000 charging stations, which means that at least 960,000 charging poles should be built every year by 2020, said Tong Guangyi, vice-director of the Power Department of the National Energy Administration.

The direct market size of the EV charging sector would surpass 130 billion yuan in light of the booming demand, said Tong.

More than 40,000 public EV charging poles had been set up across China by the end of September, according to data provided by the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology. (Edited by Shi Chunjiao, shichunjiao@xinhua.org)

Big power diplomacy: China, Britain enhance trust and trade

BEIJING, Oct. 26 (Xinhua) — During what was dubbed as a “super state visit” to Britain, President Xi Jinping witnessed the signing of deals worth 40 billion pounds (61.5 billion U.S. dollars).

The most talked-about project will see China holding a one-third stake in Britain’s first new nuclear plant in a generation.

Observers are praising the China-Britain partnership as exemplary in China-Europe cooperation and beyond.

CHINA, BRITAIN’S BIG POWER DIPLOMACY

China’s approach to dealing with major powers was clarified by Xi during his visit to the headquarters of the United Nations; a relationship featuring non-conflict, non-confrontation, mutual respect and win-win cooperation.

His state visit to Britain was regarded as many as a test for China’s diplomacy with big powers, and it has proven to be fruitful.

Britain rolled out the red carpet for Xi, the first Chinese head of state to visit the country in a decade. Queen Elizabeth II hosted an informal lunch and formal banquet. While Prime Minister David Cameron took Xi to see that age-old British institution — the pub.

“The Financial Times” said Xi’s visit was the “most important diplomatic visit to Britain in several years,” and would recalibrate the UK’s great-power relations.”

During the visit, China and Britain issued a joint declaration on their “global comprehensive strategic partnership for the 21st century,” which will usher in a lasting, open, win-win “golden era.”

“The new definition of bilateral ties reflects both countries expect to achieve win-win cooperation with each other, but not only at the bilateral level,” said Feng Zhongping, vice president of China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations.

As globally-influential countries, the China-Britain partnership can set an example for China-Europe cooperation and at the global level, Chen Xin with the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences said.

“Though there are disagreements between China and Britain, both countries can learn to manage them. As long as Britain adheres to the consensus reached with China, the differences won’t affect bilateral cooperation,” said Cui Hongjian, a researcher at the China Institute of International Studies.

NUCLEAR DEAL, ECONOMIC TIES

Chinese and French companies signed an agreement to build an 18 billion pound nuclear power plant at Hinkley Point C, with the CGN-led Chinese consortium holding a one-third stake.

China’s third-generation nuclear reactor design, known as Hualong One, is expected to be used, following British inspections.

Cameron described the Hinkley Point C deal as “historic” as the project would provide clean electricity to nearly 6 million homes and create over 25,000 jobs.

“Britain […] lacks the funds for the nuclear power plant due to the international financial crisis and the European debt crisis,” said Wang Yiwei, a professor of international relations at Renmin University.

For China, the gains from the project go beyond economics. More important is the knock-on affect the project will have for China in the overseas nuclear market.

“Investment into overseas nuclear power plant is usually more substantial than at home. We will get returns from electricity sales and equipment procurement, because a large amount of this will be done in China,” said Zhou Dadi, a researcher with the energy studies center of the National Development and Reform Commission.

“The nuclear power plants in Britain will be benchmark projects for Chinese companies to develop the global market and increase people’s confidence in Hualong One in emerging markets,” CGN chair He Yu said.

Other deals included an agreement for BP to sell Huadian up to 1 million tonnes of liquefied natural gas per year; and Carnival UK and CSSC agreed to build seven new cruise ships over the next 10 years, among others.

During Xi’s visit, China’s central bank issued its first offshore renminbi note worth 5 billion yuan in London, and the two countries agreed to increase currency swaps.

These close economic and trade collaborations show that Britain is confident of China’s economic growth, and its leaders are aware of the opportunities emerging from China as it transitions from an economy driven by export and manufacturing to investment and services.

“By working with China to usher in a ‘golden era’, Britain has made it clear that they are willing to seize all the opportunities from China’s reform and growth,” Wang added.

RICH CULTURAL EXCHANGES

The president often attends cultural activities during his foreign visits, his time in Britain was no different.

Cameron accompanied Xi to a pub and the two enjoyed a plate of fish and chips washed down with a pint of British ale. Xi also watched a performance featuring British and Chinese artists at an creative-industry exhibition.

Xi also addressed the opening ceremony of the annual Confucius Institute meeting, saying the essence of Chinese and British culture had sparked a fantastic “chemical reaction” into the thinking and lifestyles of both nationalities through people-to-people exchanges.

“Britain is the birth place of modern culture and sports. President Xi’s activities reflect this admiration,” said Cui Hongjian, a researcher at the China Institute of International Studies.

Xi, a well known soccer fan, visited Manchester City Football Academy with Cameron. Xi called for more exchanges and cooperation between China and Britain on soccer as well as other sports.

For Britain, tourism has been pegged as an area that will generate more revenue. Britain announced that from 2016 the validity of new visitor visas for Chinese tourists will be extended from six months to two years.

For its part, during Xi’s time in Manchester, China announced that a direct flight linking Beijing and Manchester will be opened June 2016.

By strengthening people-to-people exchanges, China-Britain relations will have a more solid social foundation, analysts say. Enditem

Editor  Xuefei Chen Axelsson

China mulls routine navigation through Arctic to Europe

DALIAN, Oct. 26 (Greenpost) — Shipping experts are considering routine navigation through Arctic waters to link China and Europe, a shortcut to bypass the route that passes through the Malacca Strait and Suez Canal.

In October 2015, Chinese vessel Yong Sheng finished a record-setting round trip from Europe to north China by sailing through the Arctic waters of the Northeast Passage and docking at Tianjin Port.

The cargo ship operated by China Ocean Shipping (Group) Company (COSCO), the country’s top shipping line, is the first Chinese merchant ship to sail from Europe to China via the Northeast Passage, an icy path north of Russia and Scandinavia.

Yong Sheng sailed nearly 20,000 nautical miles (37,040 kilometers) during the 55-day voyage, according to COSCO.

Many experts expect the Arctic passage to become the next “golden waterway” for trade between China and Europe, according to a seminar held last week in the northeast China port city of Dalian.

The seminar focused on the possibility of normalizing the Yong Sheng’s Arctic shipping route.

“The company is considering increasing the number of ships sailing via the new path,” said Cai Meijiang, general manager of the safety and technical supervision department of COSCO.

The 19,000-tonne vessel first started its journey from Dalian to Rotterdam on August 8, 2013, sailing through the Northeast Passage and shortening the traditional shipping time by nine days.

Global warming has transformed the Arctic in recent years, and its summer ice cover has dropped over the last few decades, making it possible to sail along the Arctic sea routes with comparative ease. Enditem

Source   Xinhua