IHT Quick Read: April 23

NEWS Levels of deadly pollutants up to 40 times the recommended exposure limit in Beijing and other cities have struck fear into parents and led them to take steps that are radically altering the nature of urban life for their children. Edward Wong reports from Beijing.

On Tuesday afternoon, France is expected to become the 14th country to legalize marriage for all couples, regardless of gender or sexual orientation. The final vote in the legislature is expected to be quick, but there has been an intensification of opposition to the bill in the past few weeks, as Mr. Hollande’s critics have used demonstrations against it as a way of attacking the president himself. Steven Erlanger and Scott Sayare report from Paris.

The United States and China held their highest-level military talks in nearly two years on Monday, with a senior Chinese general pledging to work with the United States on cybersecurity because the consequences of a major cyberattack “may be as serious as a nuclear bomb.” Jane Perlez reports from Beijing.

As President Giorgio Napolitano of Italy was sworn in for a second term on Monday, he used his inaugural address to scold Italy’s bickering political parties for creating the impasse that led to his re-election. Elisabetta Povoledo reports from Rome.

Lying wounded in a hospital bed, the surviving suspect in the Boston Marathon bombings admitted on Sunday to playing a role in the attacks, said law enforcement officials, and on Monday he was charged with using a weapon of mass destruction that resulted in three deaths and more than 170 injuries. Katharine Q. Seelye reports from Boston, Michael S. Schmidt from Washington and William K. Rashbaum from New York.

In the highest-profile criminal trial of a politician in Greece in more than two decades, a former defense minister, Akis Tsochatzopoulos, appeared in court on Monday charged with setting up a complex money-laundering network to cover the trail of millions of dollars in bribes he is accused of pocketing from government weapons purchases. Niki Kitsantonis reports from Athens.

A German privacy regulator fined Google €145,000 on Monday for the systematic, illegal collection of personal data while it was creating the Street View mapping service, and called on European lawmakers to significantly raise fines for violations of data protection laws. Kevin J. O’Brien reports from Berlin.

Teams of Boeing engineers and technicians began fanning out across the globe Monday to modify the battery systems of 50 of the company’s 787 Dreamliner jets and get the grounded fleet back in the air. Nicola Clark reports.

Uli Hoeness, a former soccer champion who acknowledged keeping a secret bank account to evade taxes, has turned himself in to prosecutors. Nicholas Kulish reports from Berlin.

ARTS Richie Havens, who marshaled a craggy voice, a percussive guitar and a soulful sensibility to play his way into musical immortality at Woodstock in 1969, improvising the song “Freedom” on the fly, died on Monday. He was 72. Douglas Martin’s obituary.

Alfredo Guevara Valdés, a Marxist intellectual and ally of Fidel Castro who presided over Cuba’s powerful state-financed film industry and its many acclaimed movies for much of the Castro era, died on Friday. He was 87. Victoria Burnett reports from Havana.

SPORTS Generalizations like German power against Spanish flair can be forgotten. The makeup of any team that reaches this stage of Europe’s ultimate competition is far too cosmopolitan to be considered along narrow nationalistic lines. Rob Hughes writes from London.

China’s Criticism of U.S. on Human Rights Draws Support (and Mockery)

BEIJING â€" “Gun shootings in America are unceasing, how is it qualified to talk about human rights?”

So ran the title of a furious, unsigned commentary today in Shanghai’s Eastday.com news portal, which accused the United States, in its annual human rights report on other countries issued last Friday, of “pointing fingers, blaming and denouncing other countries while showing itself off.”

China, which was criticized in the State Department report, hit back hard with its own report on human rights in America, issued Sunday, just two days after the U.S. report. The Chinese report was titled “The Human Rights Record of the United States in 2012″.

For years, the United States and China have engaged in a tit-for-tat of this kind â€" America criticizes, China responds, in an angry ritual of reports.

This year, the Chinese government focused on gun crime, citing “astonishing casualties”; growing poverty in the United States and a wide wealth gap; and America’s overseas wars, which it said had killed tens of thousands since 2011. It also singled out what it said was low voter participation in U.S. elections (57.5 percent in the 2012 presidential election, it said). “The U.S. citizens have never really enjoyed common and equal suffrage,” the report said, and criticized the detention of terrorism suspects in Guantánamo.

But it’s the issue of gun crime that perhaps has been most seized upon here: Eastday.com’s commentary, echoing the report, listed three recent mass shootings in the United States, in Oakland, Colorado and Connecticut, tallying the dozens who died. The United States was not protecting its citizens’ physical safety, it said. “Alone from this series of bloody shootings one can see the reality of America’s human rights.” (In the report, the government noted that gun violence was a “serious threat to the lives and personal security of citizens in the U.S.”)

Online, where ordinary Chinese people speak their minds relatively freely (and get censored, though much does evade the censor’s delete button â€" senior leaders are known to follow microblogs closely to track public opinion), the comments were multiplying. Search for “America” and “human rights” on Sina Weibo, China’s biggest microblog site, and nearly 2.6 million entries pop up in total.

Yet many of those sampled were critical of China, not the United States, despite the fact that many of the criticisms in China’s report are gathered from reports that originated in the West â€" such as the tally of deaths overseas from America’s “war on terror” since 2001, gathered, the Chinese government said, from the Web site of the Stop the War Coalition.

Sarcasm was widespread, especially over the report’s criticism of low voter participation. (Chinese people cannot choose their government, though there are local elections where candidates are carefully vetted by the Communist Party.)

“I wonder what is the voter participation in this honorable country?” quipped Shui Shan X.

“Of these problems, except for the first,” the shootings, “which of them has not happened in China, and more seriously than in other places?” wrote Chenmo de mouzi.

In a post addressed to the State Council, which issued the report, Merlin_MaWT seemed to warn the government that Chinese people cannot be fooled any longer. “Do you think that we people today are really the people of 30 years ago? Do you really think that information today is the same as 30 years ago when there was only your media?” the person wrote.

And referring to the criticism of U.S. elections, Zhaini ruocao wrote, simply: “Chinese-style humor.”

Is America’s apparent inability to stem gun violence a human rights issue? Is the Chinese government right on this issue? What do you think?

Nollywood: Censored at Home, Available on the Internet

Nigeria’s movie industry â€" often dubbed Nollywood â€" has been a source of pride and escape for years for many of Nigeria’s 160 million residents.
But the recent banning of a Nigerian documentary on corruption and the country’s oil wealth, “Fuelling Poverty,” has left many crying foul.

“Fuelling Poverty,” a 30-minute film depicting the massive street protests in 2012 over the removal of billions of dollars in oil subsidies had been online for months before the director, Ishaya Bako, was told he could not screen it at home.

The film, which features Nobel Prize laureate Wole Soyinka and civil rights activists, explores the siphoning of billions of dollars from government coffers to private companies.

It can be seen in its entirety here but is “prohibited from exhibition in Nigeria” according to officials from the National Film and Video Censors Board.

The film has been viewed more than 50,000 times on YouTube as of Tuesday.

The director told the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) that the board’s decision means no Nigerian cinemas or television stations can show the film. “I am so disappointed because all the information in the film is actually available on the Internet.”

CPJ officials urged a reversal. “Instead of banning the documentary “Fuelling Poverty,” authorities should look into the important questions it raises about corruption and impunity in the country’s oil sector and at the highest levels of government,” said Mohamed Keita of CPJ in a statement. “We urge Nigeria’s National Film and Video Censors Board to overturn this censorship order.”

Instead the board warned Mr. Bako that national security agents were on alert and a government spokesman told the Associated Press that this was done for “security reasons.”

“What is national security for Nigeria is different from that of the U.S.A.,” Tanko Abdullahi said. “We made that determination because of the content of the film. That’s why you have regulators.”

“Fuelling Poverty” was screened at the 20th New York African Film Festival this month and won the Best Documentary at the 2013 African Movie Academy Awards on April 20.

All the censor board’s members are appointed by the Nigerian president, Goodluck Jonathan. Mr. Jonathan has grown increasingly unpopular with many who voted for him believing he’d usher in an era of change.

“We don’t have government. It’s a whole big banana republic,” Emmanuel Tom Ekin, a barber, says in the film. “They’ve been coming telling us story all the time, deceiving us. And right now, in our faces, they are still deceiving us.”

Last week many Nigerians who normally might be appalled shrugged off the comparison of Goodluck Jonathan’s name to a children’s book character on the American TV show, Who Wants To Be a Millionaire.

All this comes on the heels of journalists critical of the government being jailed on forgery charges. The Associated Press also points out that reporters who wrote about abuses by the military have been harassed by security agencies.

In spite of this, Nigeria’s film industry could get a boost next month if the film “Half of A Yellow Sun” is screened at the Cannes Film Festival.

The $8-million production featuring Hollywood stars Thandie Newton and Chiwetel Ejiofor marks the first true collaboration between Hollywood and Nigeria.

You can see a first look here.

The film, and book, examine a time in Nigeria’s history where more than 1 million people died during the Biafran war.

The conflict and the blockade of aid led to the formation of Medecins sans Frantieres or Doctors Without Borders.

An Earth Day Debate: Is There a ‘Carbon Bubble’?

The Hague â€" Today many are celebrating Earth Day by admiring the beauty of our planet and by calling attention to the environmental dangers it faces.

While the focus is on the planet, economists are warning that carbon emissions could cause grave damage to something else green and dear.

The value of carbon-based investments â€" many traded publicly â€" could implode once governments start seriously curbing emissions, bursting what some have dubbed “the carbon bubble.”

A report released by the Carbon Tracker Initiative and the London School of Economics on Friday, shows that 60 to 80 percent of coal, oil and gas reserves held by the top 200 oil and gas and mining companies listed on the world’s stock exchanges could be considered unburnable and therefore far less valuable than thought.

“Smart investors can already see that most fossil fuel reserves are essentially unburnable because of the need to reduce emissions in line with the global agreement by governments to avoid global warming of more than 2°C,” said Professor Lord Stern of Brentford, Chair of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics.

But if current trends continue, a further $6 trillion will be spent developing fossil fuels in the next decade, while the world’s global carbon budget â€" the amount of carbon it is safe to burn â€" remains limited and fixed.

The authors of Unburnable Carbon 2013: Wasted capital and stranded assets propose that a carbon budget of 900 gigatonnes of CO2 in the atmosphere from now to mid century would give an 80 percent chance of 2 degree warming. And unless carbon capture and storage technology changes drastically, say the researchers, its use will not cause the planet’s carbon budget to change significantly.

The researchers found that the top oil and gas and mining companies are already sitting on $4 trillion of fossil fuel. And though much of the reserves cannot be used if global warming measures are enacted, the markets continue to value the dirty energy assets.

Last year alone the companies invested $674 billion in fossil fuel reserves exploration, some of which was undertaken in environmentally sensitive areas.

This interactive map shows where energy reserves are traded around the world.

“Pretending business models reliant on more carbon emissions fit with increasing carbon constraints is the equivalent of the emperor’s new clothes,” said James Leaton the research director at Carbon Tracker.

Together with Bill McKibben of 350.org, who is leading a successful divestment campaign at American colleges, Mr. Leaton wrote in an Op-Ed in the Guardian newspaper:

The six trillion dollar bet is that this calculation remains entirely theoretical, and that fossil-fuel companies will be allowed to keep pumping up the carbon bubble by investing more cash to turn resources into reserves, and continue booking them at full value, assuming zero risk of devaluation. It’s a bet that effectively says to government: “nah, we don’t believe a word you say. We think you’ll do nothing about climate change for decades.”

News organizations in Britain made the link between a carbon bubble and further troubles for financial markets, with the Guardian running the report on its front page. Of course, not everyone is convinced of the financial danger that would only be present if the world’s government actually got serious about curbing carbon emissions.

Tim Worstall, a fellow with the free-market Adam Smith institute in London, charged on Forbes.com that among numerous, serious errors, the environmentally “safe” carbon budget allocated by the report is too low, which leads to a low estimate on the value of fossil fuel reserves on companies’ books.

But the report is not the first to warn of a “carbon bubble.” In January, a group of investors, environmentalists and businessmen wrote an open letter to the Financial Policy Committee of the Bank of England warning against heavy investments in carbon.

Last month the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives released its report on Canada’s “stranded” fossil fuel assets.

What do you say? Is talk of a “carbon bubble” actually wishful thinking from environmentalists? Is there any break on the amount of carbon humankind will use, other than the amount of reserves it can exploit? Is the L.S.E. report useful?

An Earth Day Debate: Is There a ‘Carbon Bubble’?

The Hague â€" Today many are celebrating Earth Day by admiring the beauty of our planet and by calling attention to the environmental dangers it faces.

While the focus is on the planet, economists are warning that carbon emissions could cause grave damage to something else green and dear.

The value of carbon-based investments â€" many traded publicly â€" could implode once governments start seriously curbing emissions, bursting what some have dubbed “the carbon bubble.”

A report released by the Carbon Tracker Initiative and the London School of Economics on Friday, shows that 60 to 80 percent of coal, oil and gas reserves held by the top 200 oil and gas and mining companies listed on the world’s stock exchanges could be considered unburnable and therefore far less valuable than thought.

“Smart investors can already see that most fossil fuel reserves are essentially unburnable because of the need to reduce emissions in line with the global agreement by governments to avoid global warming of more than 2°C,” said Professor Lord Stern of Brentford, Chair of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics.

But if current trends continue, a further $6 trillion will be spent developing fossil fuels in the next decade, while the world’s global carbon budget â€" the amount of carbon it is safe to burn â€" remains limited and fixed.

The authors of Unburnable Carbon 2013: Wasted capital and stranded assets propose that a carbon budget of 900 gigatonnes of CO2 in the atmosphere from now to mid century would give an 80 percent chance of 2 degree warming. And unless carbon capture and storage technology changes drastically, say the researchers, its use will not cause the planet’s carbon budget to change significantly.

The researchers found that the top oil and gas and mining companies are already sitting on $4 trillion of fossil fuel. And though much of the reserves cannot be used if global warming measures are enacted, the markets continue to value the dirty energy assets.

Last year alone the companies invested $674 billion in fossil fuel reserves exploration, some of which was undertaken in environmentally sensitive areas.

This interactive map shows where energy reserves are traded around the world.

“Pretending business models reliant on more carbon emissions fit with increasing carbon constraints is the equivalent of the emperor’s new clothes,” said James Leaton the research director at Carbon Tracker.

Together with Bill McKibben of 350.org, who is leading a successful divestment campaign at American colleges, Mr. Leaton wrote in an Op-Ed in the Guardian newspaper:

The six trillion dollar bet is that this calculation remains entirely theoretical, and that fossil-fuel companies will be allowed to keep pumping up the carbon bubble by investing more cash to turn resources into reserves, and continue booking them at full value, assuming zero risk of devaluation. It’s a bet that effectively says to government: “nah, we don’t believe a word you say. We think you’ll do nothing about climate change for decades.”

News organizations in Britain made the link between a carbon bubble and further troubles for financial markets, with the Guardian running the report on its front page. Of course, not everyone is convinced of the financial danger that would only be present if the world’s government actually got serious about curbing carbon emissions.

Tim Worstall, a fellow with the free-market Adam Smith institute in London, charged on Forbes.com that among numerous, serious errors, the environmentally “safe” carbon budget allocated by the report is too low, which leads to a low estimate on the value of fossil fuel reserves on companies’ books.

But the report is not the first to warn of a “carbon bubble.” In January, a group of investors, environmentalists and businessmen wrote an open letter to the Financial Policy Committee of the Bank of England warning against heavy investments in carbon.

Last month the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives released its report on Canada’s “stranded” fossil fuel assets.

What do you say? Is talk of a “carbon bubble” actually wishful thinking from environmentalists? Is there any break on the amount of carbon humankind will use, other than the amount of reserves it can exploit? Is the L.S.E. report useful?