The Biden administration's climate policy toward China. Supporters and opponents

The article is devoted to the analysis of the contemporary US-Chinese relations in the climate sphere and forecasting the prospects for their development in the near future. In the context of the evolution of the problem in the past, as well as taking into account the differences in approaches to the problem in the United States from the two leading parties and the most influential political and ideological groups, the authors investigate the causes of the aggravation of climate relations between Washington and Beijing. It is noted that having occupied the White House, the Democratic administration of J. Biden began to increase pressure on the Chinese government in order to force it to accelerate the passage of "green transit", i.e. the transition from the use of fossil fuels in the economy to renewable energy sources. It is assumed that such a strategy should slow down China's economic development, thus giving America time for internal reforms aimed at achieving its global "green" leadership, which, in turn, should ensure economic dominance in the post-crisis period. Tactically, the administration uses a "separate" methodology, i.e. declares the need to isolate from each other the climate and all other components of the Chinese policy of the United States. This approach is not supported by most political and ideological groups. Thus, the progressive wing of the Democratic Party insists on close climate cooperation with China, which implies a possibility of geopolitical concessions. Moderate Republicans ("realists") consider "constructive competition" with Beijing in the climate sphere possible. Conservatives are confident that China will not fulfill its promises, and therefore they advocate "climate realism", which means carrying out internal reforms in the United States only taking into account what has been done by other countries, primarily China. The neoconservative group demands to abandon climate pressure and rely on tough geopolitical steps against Beijing. It is concluded that disagreement within the ruling elite with Biden's Chinese policy will greatly complicate the approval of the climate reform program in Congress, therefore the "containment" of the PRC will be primarily economic and geopolitical in nature.

1. Antonio R., Brulle R. (2011). The Unbearable Lightness of Politics: Climate Change Denial and Political Polarization. Sociological Quarterly. Vol. 52. No. 2. P. 195–202.

2. Banks J. (2021). Fossil Fuel Divestment Prompts Backlash. The Progressive Magazine. URL: https://progressive.org/op-eds/fossil-fuel-divestment-banks-220221/ (accessed: 20.12.2021).

3. Bledsoe P. (2021). Biden Must Compel China and Russia to Act on Climate. Progressive Policy Institute. URL: https://www.progressivepolicy.org/pressrelease/biden-must-compel-china-and-russia-to-act-on-climate/ (accessed: 20.12.2021).

4. Chen H., Lin A. (2019). US Withdraws from Paris – Don’t Expect China to Follow Suit. Natural Resources Defense Council. URL: https://www.nrdc.org/experts/alvin-lin/us-withdraws-paris-dont-expect-china-follow-suit (accessed: 20.12.2021).

5. Conrad B. (2012). China in Copenhagen: Reconciling the “Beijing Climate Revolution” and the “Copenhagen Climate Obstinacy”. The China Quarterly. Vol. 210. P. 435–455.

6. Derek S. (2020). Coercing China on climate change? American Enterprise Institute. URL: https://www.aei.org/foreign-and-defense-policy/asia/coercing-china-on-climate-change/ (accessed: 20.12.2021).

7. Dmitriev S.S. (2021). “Аmerikanskij plan sozdaniya rabochikh mest” s antikitajskim aktsentom ["American Job Creation Plan" with Anti-Chinese Emphasis]. SSHА & Kanada: ehkonomika, politika, kul'tura. No. 12. P. 86–100.

8. Erickson A., Collins G. (2021). Competition With China Can Save the Planet. Foreign Affairs. May/June 2021. URL: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2021-04-13/competition-china-can-save-planet (accessed: 20.12.2021).

9. Golub Y., Shenin S. (2022). Аdministratsiya Bajdena i problemy “zelyenogo tranzita” [The Biden administration and problems of the "green transit"]. Mirovaya ehkonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. Vol. 66. No. 2. P. 5–14.

10. Gritsevich I.G. (2011). Perspektivy i stsenarii nizkouglerodnogo razvitiya: ES, Kitaj i SSHА v global'nom kontekste [Prospects and scenarios for low-carbon development: the EU, China and the USA in a global context]. Moscow: Skorost' tsveta. 36 p.

11. Jacques P. et al. (2008). The organization of denial: Conservative think tanks and environmental skepticism. Environmental Politics. Vol. 17. No. 3. P. 349–385.

12. Klare M. (2021). The Burning Future of U.S.-China Relations. TomDispatch. URL: https://tomdispatch.com/how-to-save-the-world-from-a-climate-armageddon/ (accessed: 20.12.2021).

13. Kochis D. (2021). Biden Wants NATO To Focus on Climate Change. What About Russia? Heritage Foundation. URL: https://www.heritage.org/node/24749293/print-display (accessed: 20.12.2021).

14. Ladislaw S. (2021). Productive Competition: A Framework for U.S.-China Engagement on Climate Change. CSIS. URL: https://www.csis.org/analysis/productive-competition-framework-us-china-engagement-climate-change (accessed: 20.12.2021).

15. Matveev V.А. (2021). Bor'ba s izmeneniem klimata – novaya arena protivoborstva Kitaya i SSHА [The fight against climate change is a new arena of confrontation between China and the United States]. Kitaj v mirovoj i regional'noj politike. Vol. 26. P. 337–351.

16. Mazzocco I. (2021). What Is China’s Climate Agenda? CSIS. URL: https://www.csis.org/analysis/what-chinas-climate-agenda (дата обращения: 20.12.2021).

17. McCright A., Dunlap R. (2011). The Politicization of Climate Change and Polarization In The American Public's Views of Global Warming. Sociological Quarterly. Vol. 52. No. 2. P.155–194.

18. Prikhod'ko O. V. (2020). Menyayushhijsya balans sil v mire: amerikano–kitajskij kontekst [The changing balance of power in the world: the US-China context]. SSHА & Kanada: ehkonomika, politika, kul'tura. No. 8. P. 30–51.

19. QI Y., Wu T. (2021). China’s ‘yes’ to new role in climate battle. Brookings Institution. URL: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/chinas-yes-to-new-role-in-climate-battle/ (accessed: 20.12.2021).

20. Shenin S.YU. (2016). Аmerikano–rossijskie otnosheniya: “menyu” dlya novogo prezidenta [US-Russian relations: the "menu" for a new president]. SSHА & Kanada: ehkonomika, politika, kul'tura. No. 12. P. 3–27.

21. Smith T. (2021). Experts React: COP26 Preview. CSIS. URL: https://www.csis.org/analysis/experts-react-cop26-preview (accessed: 20.12.2021).

22. Sokolov V.I. (2012). Ekologicheskaya povestka dnya pravitel'stva B. Obamy [The environmental agenda of the B. Obama Government]. SSHА & Kanada: ehkonomika, politika, kul'tura. No. 3. P. 99–114.

23. Stepanov А.S. (2021). Аmerikanskie ehksperty o protivostoyanii SSHА – KNR [American experts on the US – China confrontation]. SSHА & Kanada: ehkonomika, politika, kul'tura. No. 9. P. 89–105.

24. Stern T. (2020). Can the United States and China reboot their climate cooperation. Brookings Institution. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/can-the-united-states-and-china-reboot-their-climate-cooperation/ (accessed: 20.12.2021).

25. Tubb K. (2021). Climate Change Report Isn’t a Blank Check for Green Policies. Heritage Foundation. URL: https://www.heritage.org/environment/commentary/climate-change-report-isnt-blank-check-green-policies (accessed: 20.12.2021).