An insurance policy against global warming
Climate change science has had bad press recently, acknowledges The Economist. Revelations that the IPCC had overstated certain global warming outcomes, “have provided heavy ammunition to those who doubt the seriousness of the problem.” Climate science, however, is subject to ambiguity. “The wide range of the outcomes it predicts – from a mildly warming global temperature increase of 1.1°C by the end of the century to a hellish 6.4°C – illustrate the uncertainties”. Which “sit uncomfortably with the demands of politics.” The slogan “Six months to save the planet” garners more support than measured statements about possible climate change impacts. While the range of outcomes may be large, The Economist argues that for governments “the costs of averting climate change are comparatively small. Just as a householder pays a small premium to protect himself against disaster, the world should do the same.”
In a time of crisis with high unemployment, young Lithuanians are following in the footsteps of their emigrant ancestors. Tens of thousands have left the country in search of a better life, mainly in the British Isles and Scandinavia. The weekly Veidas reports: 
The new Eurogroup meeting on February 9 is not enough to banish the spectre of a Greek bankruptcy. While Athens may largely be responsible for the crisis, the EU and its partners are not blameless themselves. La Stampa argues that their confused messages and the absence of any strategy have transformed a resolvable problem into an explosive chaos. 
Two camps, two theories, and two visions of France: 18 years after the massacre of 800,000 Tutsis, the precise role played by Paris is still the subject of heated debate, fueled by the findings of successive criminal investigations.