

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Katherine Quaid, WECAN International, katherine@wecaninternational.org, 541-325-1058
The World Bank's subsidizing of fossil fuels is fanning the flames of the climate emergency and must stop, a coalition of civil society organizations said in a letter sent to the Bank today. Despite the World Bank Group's (WBG) announcements at the Paris Climate Conference, it is clear that flagrant contradictions to climate pledges still exist.
Instead of helping countries make the transition out of fossil fuels, the WBG, from 2014 to 2018 alone, has assisted the development of fossil fuels in 45 countries, either through project finance or development policy finance and technical assistance, according to a database the climate group Urgewald built based on documents from the World Bank website.
During this time period, the WBG provided over $12 billion in project finance for 88 fossil fuel projects in 38 countries. In addition, the WBG assisted the development of fossil fuels through policy programs in at least 28 countries, including the development of coal in 6 countries.
But the World Bank Group can turn over a new leaf during its Annual Meetings this week. Member states should demand the Bank's managers to announce they are following the recommendations contained in the latter as set out by civil society and informed by the latest science:
Furthermore, the Bank should increase its investments in renewable energy, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, where access to electricity and clean cooking remains low.
The climate crisis is causing untold destruction across the world. The organizations calling on the Bank to correct course include those based, representing, or operating in parts of the world where millions of people have been hit by and are vulnerable to climate disasters.
"Beyond the greenhouse gas emissions of fossil fuel business lays the heavy health, social and cultural burdens that local communities carry on their backs. The World Bank cannot afford to continue to invest in a sector that negatively impacts the lives of these communities either directly or indirectly!" said Augustine Njamnshi, Coordinator of the African Coalition for Sustainable Energy and Access
"We are calling for the World Bank to stop financing fossil fuels--now is the time to show real climate leadership and dedication to ecological sustainability, and human and Indigenous rights, as we face the unprecedented dangers of a world plunging into climate chaos. The World Bank has invested billions of dollars into the fossil fuel industry since the signing of the Paris Climate Agreement. Business as usual cannot continue. Now is the time for investments in renewable, regenerative energy for all." said (Ms.) Osprey Orielle Lake, Executive Director of the Women's Earth and Climate Action Network (WECAN)
"Deep water drilling for oil in Guyana's ocean is illegal and it is madness. The climate emergency and biodiversity collapse already threaten life on earth. The World Bank must immediately stop supporting oil related activities in Guyana," said Melinda Janki, international lawyer and attorney-at-law in Guyana.
"Finance without fossils must be the policy of the World Bank Group. The business model based on coal, oil and gas has led the world into the climate crisis. We call on the shareholders to end any support for fossils," demands (Ms.) Ute Koczy, Director IFI Program, urgewald (Germany)
"As a public Bank, the World Bank has a legal mandate to use its funds to end long term poverty, and a moral obligation not to fund climate change which perpetuates poverty for those most affected and left behind. The World Bank should therefore lead on solutions that end poverty, especially for the most vulnerable. The Bank should be focusing on the type of renewable energy that will bring sustainable, affordable energy to people around the world who don't yet have energy access. Investing in energy for the future is the way to lift people out of poverty, not locking countries into dirty fossil fuels of the past." said Amanda Mukwashi, CEO, Christian Aid
"Right now, Catholic bishops from around the world are gathering in Rome to respond to the social and environmental costs of fossil fuel extraction and climate change in the Amazon. But these challenges are also global, affecting communities everywhere. The World Bank must provide moral leadership and divest from fossil fuel projects today." Chloe Noel, Faith Economy Ecology Program Manager for the Maryknoll Office for Global Concerns.
"As one of the major funders of fossil fuel projects, the World Bank must take responsibility for its part in bankrolling the climate crisis. That means a swift and deliberate halt to funding all fossil fuel infrastructure and projects. Not a single new mine, not another pipeline, not one more compressor station or power plant can be built. Instead, the World Bank must heed the call of the millions of people who took part in the global climate strikes and commit to equitably funding projects that will accelerate transition to a liveable future and habitable climate." Tamara Toles O'Laughlin, North America Director for 350.org
Case after case demonstrates World Bank fossil fuel-generating projects fail to consider intersectional gendered and environmental impacts. In the Bank's low-income target countries where women compose the vast majority of farmers - eg women produce about 80 percent of crops in Africa -- fossil-fuel generating projects expose them to handling polluted water and soil in the production, collection, processing and preparation of food stuffs and fish. Then entire populations consume toxic-laden crops and fish. The Bank must stop violating rights to access clean natural resources and livelihoods which fossil-fuel generating projects destroy. Elaine Zuckerman, President, Gender Action
"The World Bank and the IMF have been spectacularly slow to wake up to the reality of climate change. The Bank continues to fund destructive oil and mining projects in the Global South, that not only fuel the climate crisis and escalate inequality, but rob women and indigenous people of their lands and livelihoods. Meanwhile, the IMF prolongs debt and financial crises with its austerity policies, which leave countries unable to invest in the public services needed to achieve the sustainable development goals and less able to recover from climate disasters. Despite its rosy rhetoric on gender, the Bank's policies exploit women's unpaid labour, making their lives harder and leaving too many unable to access decent work." (Ms.) Wangari Kinoti, policy advisor - women's rights, ActionAid International
"World Bank resources are helping states in northeast Brazil to legalize land takeovers by large companies that are also engaged in deforestation, misuse of pesticides, depletion of water sources, and forced evictions. Their agents are evicting communities from their territories, using death threats against indigenous and traditional rural communities that are fighting for their right to exist. Altamiran Ribeiro represents the Pastoral Land Commission of the Catholic Church in the state of Piaui, Brazil
"The Caribbean lives in fear during hurricane season. Those storms, so much stronger and more frequent now, not only kill people and destroy homes and businesses and infrastructure -- they set us back years economically. We end up saddled with new debts on top of old ones, and then there are cuts in social programs in order to pay them off, putting us in a poverty spiral. The World Bank and IMF must support a UN fund that provides funds and debt relief automatically to countries following a climate disaster. (Ms.) Heron Belfon, Project Coordinator, Jubilee Caribbean,
The Bank has been bankrolling the climate crisis. In the face of a climate emergency, there is no longer a place for the World Bank operating as it had for decades resulting in the poverty of millions, environmental plunder, displacement of communities, systematic violations of human rights and climate change. Not only has the Bank been a detriment to countries like the Philippines, it remains a hazard to humanity's survival by continuing to finance climate-change inducing projects like coal plants. We must not allow the Bank to reduce our future to a mere business proposition in favor of fossil fuels. The World Bank should stay out of climate and our future! - Aaron Pedrosa, Secretary-General, Sanlakas-Philippines
The Women's Earth and Climate Action Network (WECAN) International is a solutions-based organization established to engage women worldwide in policy advocacy, on-the-ground projects, direct action, trainings, and movement building for global climate justice.
"We commend every Democrat and Republican who signed the discharge petition to bring the Protect America's Workforce Act to a vote, but the fight isn't over," said AFL-CIO president Liz Shuler.
Two Republicans in the US House of Representatives on Monday added their names to a discharge petition that will now force a vote on legislation to restore the collective bargaining rights of hundreds of thousands of federal workers targeted by GOP President Donald Trump.
US Reps. Jared Golden (D-Maine) and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) responded to Trump's legally contentious executive order by introducing the Protect America's Workforce Act in April. They began collecting petition signatures in June. At least 218 members had to sign it to override House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and force a vote on the bill.
Two New York Republicans, Congressmen Nick LaLota and Mike Lawler, signed the petition on Monday. It was previously signed by the sponsors, House Democrats, and GOP Reps. Rob Bresnahan (Pa.) and Don Bacon (Neb.). Their move came on the heels of an end to the longest government shutdown in US history, which left some federal workers furloughed and others working without pay.
"Every American deserves the right to have a voice in the workplace, including those who serve their country every single day. Supporting workers and ensuring good government are not opposing ideas," Lawler said in a statement. "They go hand in hand. Restoring collective bargaining rights strengthens our federal workforce and helps deliver more effective, accountable service to the American people."
"Speaker Johnson has run out of excuses to delay a vote on this legislation to restore federal workers' rights."
Golden, a former Blue Dog Coalition co-chair who recently announced his plans to retire from Congress after this term, thanked the newest signatories for joining the fight for his bill.
"America never voted to eliminate workers’ union rights, and the strong bipartisan support for my bill shows that Congress will not stand idly by while President Trump nullifies federal workers’ collective bargaining agreements and rolls back generations of labor law," Golden said. "I'm grateful to Reps. LaLota and Lawler for bringing this discharge petition over the finish line, and I'm calling on Speaker Mike Johnson to schedule a clean, up-or-down vote on this bill."
Liz Shuler, president of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO), the country's largest federation of unions, similarly welcomed the latest signatures and set her sights on the House speaker.
"The labor movement fought back against the largest act of union-busting in American history by doing what we do best: organizing," Shuler said in a Monday statement. "Working people built a bipartisan coalition to restore union rights to federal workers in the face of unprecedented attacks on our freedoms. We commend every Democrat and Republican who signed the discharge petition to bring the Protect America’s Workforce Act to a vote, but the fight isn't over."
"Speaker Johnson has run out of excuses to delay a vote on this legislation to restore federal workers' rights," she continued. "It's time to bring the Protect America's Workforce Act to a vote and restore federal workers' right to collectively bargain and have a voice on the job."
Other discharge petitions might be more salacious, but it is HUGE news tonight that two Republicans just got the Protect America’s Workforce Act discharge petition to 218 to restore federal workers’ union rights.Let’s get the job done. ✊
[image or embed]
— Lauren Miller (@laurenmiller.bsky.social) November 17, 2025 at 6:18 PM
Everett Kelley, national president of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE)—which is the largest federal workers union, representing 820,000 people in the federal and District of Columbia governments—also applauded the development on Monday.
"An independent, apolitical civil service is one of the bedrocks of American democracy," Kelley said in a statement. "Today, lawmakers stood up together to defend that principle and to affirm that federal workers must retain their right to collective bargaining. This is what leadership looks like."
"Federal workers do their jobs every day without regard to politics. Today's action honors that commitment," Kelley asserted.
"AFGE will continue fighting until these essential rights are fully restored, including by fighting to retain Section 1110 of the must-pass National Defense Authorization Act," he vowed, referring to an amendment to the NDAA that restores bargaining rights to hundreds of thousands of civilians working in the US Department of Defense.
While discharge petitions are rarely successful, this one secured the necessary 218 signatures following a similar victory last week, when the newest member of Congress, Rep. Adelita Grijalva (D-Ariz.), signed her name to an effort to force a vote on releasing files related to deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
CodePink said the plan "will leave Palestine in the hands of a puppet administration, assigning the United States, which shares complicity in the genocide, as the new manager of the open-air prison."
Palestine defenders decried Monday's approval by the United Nations Security Council of a US plan authorizing a so-called international stabilization force for Gaza—a plan decried by one peace group as a denial of Palestinian self-determination.
Thirteen UNSC members voted for the resolution, while no nation voted against the proposal. China abstained, as did Russia, which submitted a rival draft resolution.
While US Ambassador to the UN Mike Waltz hailed the approval of what he called a “historic and constructive resolution," Hamas, which has ruled Gaza since 2007, rejected what it said "imposes an international guardianship mechanism on the Gaza Strip, which our people and their factions reject."
“Assigning the international force with tasks and roles inside the Gaza Strip, including disarming the resistance, strips it of its neutrality, and turns it into a party to the conflict in favor of the occupation," added Hamas, which the US labels a terrorist organization.
After waging war on Gaza for over two years, Israeli officials also rejected the resolution for opening the door to Palestinian statehood—which is officially recognized by around 150 nations but is vehemently opposed by Israel—with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu slamming Monday's vote as "unacceptable."
The approved stabilization force will be tasked with securing Gaza’s borders, protecting civilians, facilitating humanitarian assistance, supporting a redeployed Palestinian police force, and supervising disarmament of Hamas and other militant resistance groups. Under the plan, Israeli occupation forces would fully withdraw from Gaza after the stabilization force achieves security and operational control of the Palestinian exclave.
Then, a transitional governing body—the so-called Board of Peace led by US President Donald Trump—would be established to coordinate security, humanitarian aid, and reconstruction. The plan, which builds on Trump's 20-point peace proposal adopted in last month's tenuous ceasefire, dangles the carrot of a pathway toward Palestinian self-determination and statehood under a reformed Palestinian governing authority.
Human Rights Watch criticized the vote in an X post stating that "the fact that the words ‘human rights’ don’t appear in the resolution adopted by the Security Council today speaks volumes."
The US-based peace group CodePink said in a statement that "the resolution, while disguised as a peaceful and humanitarian proposal, is in reality a blueprint for the internationalization of the Israeli occupation and a complete denial of Palestinian self-determination."
CodePink continued:
The resolution imposes a two-year mandate to "secure borders," "protect civilians," and "decommission weapons," with the stated goal of disarming Palestinian resistance. However, it does nothing to address and end the root cause of the violence: Israel's ongoing siege, occupation, and ethnic cleansing. The United States, which armed and shielded the Israeli government unconditionally as it killed and displaced hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, should not be considered a neutral actor of good faith. A military force that answers to a "Board of Peace" chaired by the US president is an extension of US and Israeli interests, plain and simple.
"The establishment of a 'technocratic Palestinian administration' that answers to a US-led board will strip the Palestinian people of political agency," CodePink added. "Essentially, it will leave Palestine in the hands of a puppet administration, assigning the United States, which shares complicity in the genocide, as the new manager of the open-air prison that Israel has already established."
Members of the New York branch of the Palestine Youth Movement led a demonstration outside the US mission to the UN in Manhattan to protest the resolution.
"We see through this thinly veiled attempt to strip the Palestinian people of their sovereignty, self-determination, and right of return," the group said on Instagram. "The people reject any and all occupation plans for Gaza. Our movement will continue to struggle against Zionism and imperialism until Palestine is free, from the river to the sea."
"Labour won't redistribute wealth from billionaires," said former party Leader Jeremy Corbyn. "But they will seize belongings from those fleeing war and persecution."
A new asylum policy announced Monday by the UK Labour Party will allow authorities to confiscate the jewelry and other belongings of asylum-seekers in order to pay for their claims to be processed.
The policy, which some critics said was "reminiscent of the Nazi era," was just one part of the Labour Party's total overhaul of the nation's asylum system, which it says must be made much more restrictive in order to fend off rising support for the far-right.
In a policy paper released Monday, the government announced that it would seek to make the status of many refugees temporary and gave the government new powers to deport refugees if it determines it to be safe. It also revoked policies requiring the government to provide housing and legal support to those fleeing persecution, while extending the amount of time they need to wait for permanent residency to 20 years, up from just five, for those who arrive illegally.
The UK government also said it will attempt to change the way judges interpret human rights law to more seamlessly carry out deportations, including stopping immigrants from using their rights to family life under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to avoid deportation.
In an article for the Guardian published Sunday, UK Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood called the reforms "the most significant and comprehensive changes to our asylum system in a generation." She said they were necessary because the increase in migration to the UK had stirred up "dark forces" in the country that are "seeking to turn that anger into hate."
Nigel Farage, the leader of the far-right Reform UK Party, is leading national polls on the back of a viciously anti-immigrant campaign that has included calls to abolish the UK's main pathway for immigrants to become permanent residents, known as "leave to remain."
Meanwhile, in September, over 100,000 people gathered in London for an anti-immigrant rally led by Tommy Robinson, a notorious far-right figure who founded the anti-Muslim English Defence League (EDL). The event saw at least 26 police officers injured by protesters.
Last summer, riots swept the UK after false claims—spread by Robinson, Farage, and other far-right figures—that the perpetrator of the fatal stabbing of two young girls and their caretaker had been a Muslim asylum-seeker. A hotel housing asylum-seekers was set on fire, mosques were vandalised and destroyed, and several immigrants and other racial minorities were brutally beaten.
Mahmood said that if changes are not made to the asylum system, "we risk losing popular consent for having an asylum system at all."
But as critics were quick to point out, the far-right merely took Labour's crackdown as a sign that it is winning the war for hearts and minds.
Robinson gloated to his followers that "the Overton window has been obliterated, well done patriots!" while Farage chortled that Mahmood "sounds like a Reform supporter."
Many members of the Labour coalition expressed outrage at their ostensibly Liberal Party's bending to the far-right.
"The government should be ashamed that its migration policies are being cheered on by Tommy Robinson and Reform," said Nadia Whittome, the Labour MP for Nottingham East. "Instead of standing up to anti-migrant hate, this is laying the foundations for the far-right."
In a speech in Parliament, she chided the home secretary's policy overhaul, calling it "dystopian."
"It's shameful that a Labour government is ripping up the rights and protections of people who have endured unimaginable trauma," she said. "Is this how we'd want to be treated if we were fleeing for our lives? Of course not."
The UK has signed treaties, including the ECHR, obligating it to process the claims of those who claim asylum because they face persecution in their home countries based on race, religion, nationality, group membership, or political opinion. According to data from the Home Office, over 111,000 people claimed asylum in the year from June 2024-25, more than double the number who did in 2019.
The spike came as the number of people displaced worldwide reached an all-time high of over 123.2 million at the end of 2024, according to the Norwegian Refugee Council, with desperate people seeking safety from escalating conflicts in Sudan, Ukraine, Myanmar, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and across the Middle East.
In her op-ed, Mahmood lamented that "the burden borne by taxpayers has been unfair." However, as progressive commentator Owen Jones pointed out, the UK takes in far fewer asylum-seekers than its peers: "Last year, Germany took over twice as many asylum-seekers as the UK. France, Italy, and Spain took 1.5 times as many. Per capita, we take fewer than most EU countries. Poorer countries such as Greece take proportionately more than we do."
The Labour government, led by Prime Minister Keir Starmer, already boasts that it has deported more than 50,000 people in the UK illegally since it came to power in 2024, but it has predictably done little to satiate the far-right, which has only continued to gain momentum in polls despite the crackdown.
Under the new rules, it is expected that the government will be able to fast-track many more deportations, particularly of families with children.
The jewelry rule, meanwhile, has become a potent symbol of how the Labour Party has shifted away from its promises of economic egalitarianism toward austerity and punishment of the most vulnerable.
"Labour won't redistribute wealth from billionaires," said former party leader Jeremy Corbyn, who is now an independent MP. "But they will seize belongings from those fleeing war and persecution."