> China, you mean, not changing the subject?

No I mean all developing countries including China. For example, India's emissions are rapidly rising and people in the West love using that as a secondary pretext for their own inaction.

> So you mean that China wants the west to make some emission reductions, and then China will cut back on industry.

China already has reduced fossil fuel use in electricity generation and industry. I gave you two sources earlier. Here's a third: https://ember-energy.org/latest-insights/china-energy-transi...

Now if you're intent on blaming solely China regardless of the facts, I really can't help you. You should examine your blindspots and biases before continuing the discussion.

> I'm inclined to think they might be happy just with the first part and not bother with the second.

I'm not. China is more exposed to climate change than most Western countries. And also PV and batteries are legitimately cheaper than burning coal. So they might just race ahead on sheer economics while we bicker.

> I think that 32% is instrumental to the rest of the world's political will,

I really don't think so. They'll just pick on India or some other poor country trying to haul themselves out of poverty. Because "political will" was never about what China or India do. It's about protecting the fossil fuel industry and its cheap energy.

A ton of carbon is a ton of carbon. It doesn't matter who reduces their emissions. Since we both agree on that logic, then the question is "who reduces emissions first?".

To me it's obvious: the richest countries first, because they have the most money to do it. This is where our views diverge.