IN “MINORITY REPORT”, a short story from Philip K. Dick, a certain type of mutant is able to foresee crimes before they are committed. The future culprits are named, arrested and found guilty of “pre-crime” on the word of a team of soothsayers, controlled by a special police unit. Such a system would be welcome in Brussels, where EU the wallahs are reflecting on the fate of its flagship european product, the Green Deal. For the moment, the project seems in poor health. A new climate law, which will force EU members to stop carbon emissions on a net basis by 2050, was officially unveiled on March 4. Fantastic amounts of funding have been announced. A range of other laws are planned. Yet diplomats and public servants are beginning to fear the worst. Who will kill the European Green Agreement?
The first potential culprit is Poland, which declared itself unbound by the 2050 target. Globally, climate policy is proving to be resentful in part because the countries that have benefited most from the conversion of the Carbon in cash now ask others not to follow the same easy route. Poor countries can, often rightly, argue that they are paying a bill led by rich countries. Such a debate also exists in a version reduced to European proportions. While Western Europe is preparing ways to reduce car use, parts of Eastern Europe complain that they still have to build highways in the first place. Cynical diplomats suggest that the Polish resolution could weaken if money is provided to mitigate the blow. Polish diplomats do little to deceive them. Warsaw’s resistance may not last long.
If there was a gang of mutants predictive of the crime of the Minority Report type, its natural seat would be at the European Commission. In Dick’s account, John Anderton, the pre-crime watchdog, is charged with a murder that has yet to be committed. Some leftists also wish to blame the commission for having stifled the Green Deal at birth, by not being ambitious enough in its proposals. At first glance, the accusation is absurd. No other major bloc has orchestrated a promise of net neutrality in its carbon emissions by 2050. In total, 1 billion euros ($ 1.1 billion) of investment has been reserved for green projects in the over the next decade.
However, the Brussels grain counters have a form to evoke strangely large, strangely round numbers. Reaching € 1 billion implies heroic assumptions about the EUThe ability to bring in private investment and the quick re-labeling of money that would have been spent anyway. In terms of cash, the EU only has 7.5 billion euros of truly new money to play with. It is not much when it is spread over seven years and between 27 countries.
Although the commission is considering ways to weaken its strict state aid rules to encourage governments to distribute more green liquidity, it has backed down from more effective measures. The prospects for easing fiscal rules, so that member states can invest heavily in green issues without being slapped by bureaucrats, seem bleak. Such a policy is anathema to the economical Nordic countries, such as Germany, who fear that governments will simply shovel money on pet projects by sticking a green label on them. Blaming the board for being kept on a short leash is unfair.
The most likely aggressor to be spat out by the mutants in the basement of the commission’s headquarters is Germany. Angela Merkel may have persuaded her skeptical center-right party to support the 2050 goal. But signing up for distant targets is easy for a leader who knows she will be gone a long time, said a diplomat. Concerning the shorter term measures, the complaints have already started. A German minister sent a letter to Brussels demanding that the EU go on to automakers on next year’s emission reduction plans. German MEPs smug about plans to reduce emissions between 50% and 55% of 1990 levels by 2030.
Eastern European objections can be resolved. Moving to a greener economy costs money because leaders are unwilling to leave a generation of workers on the carpet. It is politically difficult to spend taxpayers’ money to reimburse minors in a politician’s country, let alone the money next door. It is however doable. However, the German handbrake may be more difficult to release. Germany has a history of sinking into green ambitions. Merkel’s panicked decision to phase out nuclear power after the Fukushima disaster forced the country to burn large quantities of dirty coal. Even the “dieselgate” scandal, when German automakers engaged in harmful activities ranging from nobbling emissions to gassing monkeys in a laboratory while watching cartoons, did not prevent the German government from doing pressure against stricter application of anti-pollution rules.
Too big to bully, too big to bribe
Germany does not always have its own way, but it is generally powerful enough to prevent others from having their own. As a general rule, what Germany does not want, Europe does not get. Decades of advocacy have failed to convince large countries like France and Italy to implement structural reforms of their economies; they were tall enough to ignore these requests. Germany can be just as stubborn when it comes to “greening” its prosperous but carbon-intensive economy. The ironies of this situation quickly add up. The seat of Europe’s largest green party stands in the way of a comprehensive set of environmental laws. The reforms carried out by the first chairman of the German commission in five decades face the strongest opposition from his country of origin.
In “Minority Report”, John Anderton wrestles with the question of free will after learning that he is going to murder someone. Ultimately, he chooses to commit the murder, but only to ensure that the program remains accurate. Free will in politics is simpler than in science fiction. A green chancellor, once a kingdom of fantasy, is now imaginable, the Green Party being second in the polls. As the environment spreads on the agenda, even center-right parties must find a way to balance support for business with shrill greenery. Such a change could help save the Green Deal. But if there was a crime before Brussels, Germany would already be in prison. ■
This article appeared in the Europe section of the print edition under the title “Minority Report: Brussels edition”
