

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.

The first draft of the Glasgow final decision text at COP26 completely fails to mention fossil fuels, despite expert consensus on the need to end new coal, oil and gas immediately to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement 1.5C goal.
Thanks to blocking by fossil fuel interests, the first version of the official text, published by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, fails to acknowledge that fossil fuels are driving the climate crisis, nor does it make any commitment to tangible actions to end global reliance on coal, oil and gas. The text is just 850 words long.
Campaigners are gravely concerned because ordinarily, the first draft of a COP text is relatively ambitious, and becomes weaker over the second week as countries work in caveats for themselves. For the first draft to be so weak does not bode well.
This glaring omission comes despite the fact that experts at the International Energy Agency have made clear there can be no new fossil fuel projects, beyond those already underway this year, if we're to deliver the goal of keeping global temperature rise to 1.5C. And after the most recent IPCC report the UN Secretary General has said that the latest climate science must sound a "death knell for fossil fuels" and that countries should end all new fossil fuel exploration and production.
Campaigners are calling on negotiators to stand up to fossil fuel producing countries like Saudi Arabia and Australia, which have blocked fossil fuel reduction even being mentioned in the last 25 COP texts and are crippling ambition in the negotiations at Glasgow. The key markers of success for the week ahead are as follows:
Jennifer Morgan, Executive Director of Greenpeace International, has been to every COP and every time the mention of fossil fuels has been blocked by the same countries. She said: "What's very concerning here in Glasgow is that the first draft of the climate pact text is already exceptionally weak. Usually the text starts with some ambition, which then gets watered down. "To keep 1.5 alive, four words must be added: 'fossil fuels phase out', and countries must come back next year to close the gap."
Edwin Namakanga, aged 27, from Uganda is a climate activist from Fridays for Future, Most Affected People and Areas, who arrived at COP on board the Greenpeace Rainbow Warrior ship last week, with a message for world leaders: stop failing us.
Edwin said: "In my lifetime I've seen first hand the destructive impact of the climate crisis, which everyone knows is driven by fossil fuels.
"The result from Glasgow must be the end of new fossil fuels, and there must be proper financial support for countries in the Global South. We need solidarity and just transition to renewable energy, because anything less is a death sentence for whole peoples, countries and areas."
Kate Blagojevic, Greenpeace UK's head of climate, said: "The UK Presidency has let the most vulnerable nations down by supporting such a weak first draft text. Alok Sharma can still fix this and insist world leaders up their game through stronger commitments on phasing out fossil fuels and significantly increasing pledges on adaptation finance in the next draft. And that action can start in the UK today by ruling out all new fossil fuel projects, including the Cambo oil field, and making sure the UK's climate finance contributions don't eat into the aid budget."
Negotiators at COP26 have just five more days to reach an agreement which will inform how countries tackle the climate crisis, and will seek to nail down a final text for countries to sign.
At the halfway point of the talks, countries have so far announced a string of voluntary agreements that contain vague language and big loopholes.
Last week the Taskforce for Scaling Voluntary Carbon Markets, put forward by UN Special Envoy on Climate Action and Finance, and former Bank of England governor, Mark Carney, was widely criticized as a greenwash operation, including by Greta Thunberg. On Wednesday Greenpeace activists staged a protest to disrupt the launch event, and ensure the Taskforce does not press ahead unchecked.
Over the weekend, Saudi Arabia came under fire for trying to block the creation of any 'cover decision' for the final text whatsoever, for deleting references and for trying to block efforts to achieve progress on adaptation. A key pillar of the Paris Agreement, adaptation is the effort to help millions of people around the world cope with the impacts of rising temperatures. Lack of progress on adaptation would make it difficult for vulnerable countries, including the African block of nations, to embrace any final agreement, making success at COP26 less likely.
And the Saudi government has already tried to influence the wording of a landmark UN climate science report, due out in March next year. The BBC and Unearthed revealed that representatives from the Saudi oil ministry pushed the authors of the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report on mitigation to remove a reference to published literature that found fossil fuels need to be phased out if we're to avoid the worst effects of climate change. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is one of the world's biggest oil exporters.
And today [MON] Global Witness revealed that there are more delegates at COP26 associated with the fossil fuel industry than from any single country. Fossil fuel activists outnumber the UNFCCC's official indigenous constituency by almost two to one.
Given that the next two conferences will be held in Egypt and then the United Arab Emirates, campaigners fear that it's crunch time for getting the COP text to commit to fossil fuel phaseout.
Arshak Makichyian, aged 27, is a Russian activist who is attending COP26. He said: "It is astonishing to me that in all these years that world leaders have had to deliver the big solution to climate change - over my whole life - not once have they mentioned the cause of the problem. My future is resting on just 850 words - but we need four more: phase out fossil fuels.
"What the hell have they been doing? We are out of time. Glasgow must mean a total and immediate fossil fuel phaseout. That's it."
Greenpeace is a global, independent campaigning organization that uses peaceful protest and creative communication to expose global environmental problems and promote solutions that are essential to a green and peaceful future.
+31 20 718 2000"If Trump is using this justification to use military force on any individuals he chooses... what’s stopping him from designating anyone within our own borders in a similar fashion and conducting lethal, militarized attacks against them?"
A Democratic senator is raising concerns about President Donald Trump potentially relying on the same rationale he's used to justify military strikes on purported drug trafficking vessels to kill American citizens on US soil.
In an interview with the Intercept, Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) argued that Trump's boat strikes in the Caribbean and the Pacific Ocean have been flatly illegal under both domestic and international law.
Diving into specifics, Duckworth explained that the administration has been justifying its boat-bombing spree by arbitrarily declaring suspected drug traffickers as being part of "designated terrorist organizations," which the senator noted was "not grounded in US statute nor international law, but in solely what Trump says."
Many other legal experts have called the administration's strikes illegal, with some going so far as to call them acts of murder.
Duckworth, a military veteran, also said it was not a stretch to imagine Trump placing terrorist designations on US citizens as well, which would open up the opportunity to carry out lethal strikes against them.
"If Trump is using this justification to use military force on any individuals he chooses—without verified evidence or legal authorization—what’s stopping him from designating anyone within our own borders in a similar fashion and conducting lethal, militarized attacks against them?" Duckworth asked. "This illegal and dangerous misuse of lethal force should worry all Americans, and it can’t be accepted as normal."
Independent journalist Ken Klippenstein reported last week that Attorney General Pam Bondi recently wrote a memo that directed the Department of Justice (DOJ) to compile a list of potential “domestic terrorism” organizations that espouse “extreme viewpoints on immigration, radical gender ideology, and anti-American sentiment.”
The memo expanded upon National Security Presidential Memorandum-7 (NSPM-7), a directive signed by Trump in late September that demanded a “national strategy to investigate and disrupt networks, entities, and organizations that foment political violence so that law enforcement can intervene in criminal conspiracies before they result in violent political acts."
The Intercept revealed that it reached out to the White House, the DOJ, and the US Department of Defense and asked whether the tactics used on purported Caribbean drug traffickers could be deployed on the US citizens that wind up on Bondi's list of extremists. All three entities, reported the Intercept, "have, for more than a month, failed to answer this question."
The DOJ, for instance, responded the Intercept's question about using lethal force against US citizens by saying that "political violence has no place in this country, and this Department of Justice will investigate, identify, and root out any individual or violent extremist group attempting to commit or promote this heinous activity."
Rebecca Ingber, a former State Department lawyer and current professor at Cardozo Law School, told the Intercept that the administration's designation of alleged cartel members as terrorists shows that there appears to be little limit to its conception of the president's power to deploy deadly force at will.
“This is one of the many reasons it is so important that Congress push back on the president’s claim that he can simply label transporting drugs an armed attack on the United States and then claim the authority to summarily execute people on that basis," Ingber explained.
The Intercept noted that the US government "has been killing people—including American citizens, on occasion—around the world with drone strikes" for the past two-and-a-half decades, although the strikes on purported drug boats represent a significant expansion of the use of deadly force.
Nicholas Slayton, contributing editor at Task and Purpose, pointed the finger at former President Barack Obama for pushing the boundaries of drone warfare during his eight years in office.
"Really sucks that Obama administration set a legal precedent for assassinating Americans," he commented on Bluesky.
"The American public is demanding decisive action to end US complicity in the Israeli government’s war crimes by stopping the flow of weapons to Israel."
Jewish Voice for Peace Action on Friday led a coalition of groups demanding that the Democratic Party stop providing arms to the Israeli government.
Speaking outside the Democratic National Committee’s Winter Meeting in Los Angeles, Jewish Voice for Peace Action (JVP Action) held a press conference calling on Democrats to oppose all future weapons shipments to Israel, whose years-long assault on Gaza has, according to one estimate, killed more than 100,000 Palestinian people.
While carrying banners that read, "Stop Arming Israel," speakers at the press conference also called on Democrats to reject money from the American Israeli Political Action Committee (AIPAC), which has consistently funded primary challenges against left-wing critics of Israel.
JVP Action was joined at the press conference by representatives from Health Care 4 US (HC4US), Progressive Democrats of America, the Council on American-Islamic Relations Action (CAIR Action), and the United Teachers of Los Angeles (UTLA) Board of Directors.
Estee Chandler, founder of the Los Angeles chapter of Jewish Voice for Peace, warned Democrats at the press conference that they risked falling out of touch with public opinion if they continued to support giving weapons to Israel.
"The polls are clear,” Chandler said. "The American public is demanding decisive action to end US complicity in the Israeli government’s war crimes by stopping the flow of weapons to Israel, and the Democratic Party refusing to heed that call will continue to come at their own peril."
The press conference came a day after the progressive advocacy group RootsAction and journalist Christopher D. Cook released an "autopsy" report of the Democratic Party's crushing 2024 losses, finding that the party's support for Israel's assault on Gaza contributed to last year's election results.
Chandler also called on Democrats to get behind the Block the Bombs Act, which currently has 58 sponsors, and which she said "would block the transfer of the worst offensive weapons from being sent to Israel, including bombs, tank rounds, and artillery shells that are US-supplied and have been involved in the mass killing of Palestinian civilians and the grossest violations of international law in Gaza."
Although there has technically been a ceasefire in place in Gaza since October, Israeli forces have continued to conduct deadly military operations in the enclave that have killed hundreds of civilians, including dozens of children.
Ricardo Pires, a spokesperson for the United Nations Children’s Fund, said last month that the number of deaths in Gaza in recent weeks has been "staggering" given that they've happened "during an agreed ceasefire."
"She can't even be effective as a shill," said one critic of the ex-senator's lobbying.
Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was among those celebrating after the Chandler, Arizona City Council on Thursday night unanimously rejected an artificial intelligence data center project promoted by former US Sen. Kyrsten Sinema.
"Good!" Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) simply said on social media Friday.
The defeat of the proposed $2.5 billion project comes as hundreds of advocacy groups and progressive leaders, including US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), are urging opponents of energy-sucking AI data centers across the United States to keep pressuring local, state, and federal leaders over climate, economic, environmental, and water concerns.
In Chandler, "the nearly 43,000-square-foot data center on the corner of Price and Dobson roads would have been the 11th data center in the Price Road Corridor, an area known for employers like Intel and Wells Fargo," the Arizona Republic reported.
The newspaper noted that around 300 people attended Thursday's meeting—many holding signs protesting the project—and city spokesperson Matthew Burdick said that the government received 256 comments opposing the data center.
Although Sinema skipped the debate on Thursday, the ex-senator—who frequently thwarted Democratic priorities on Capitol Hill and ultimately ditched the party before leaving office—previously attended a planning and zoning commission meeting in Chandler to push for the project. That stunt earned her the title of "cartoon villain."
Sinema critics again took aim at her after the 7-0 vote, saying that "she can't even be effective as a shill" and "Sinema went all in to lobby for a data center in Chandler, Arizona and the council told her to get rekt."
Progressive commentator Krystal Ball declared: "Kyrsten Sinema data center L. Love to see it."
Politico noted Friday that "several other Arizona cities, including Phoenix and Tucson, have written zoning rules for data centers or placed new requirements on the facilities. Local officials in cities in Oregon, Missouri, Virginia, Arizona, and Indiana have also rejected planned data centers."
Janos Marton, chief advocacy officer at Dream.Org, said: "Another big win in Arizona, following Tucson's rejection of a data center. When communities are organized they can fight back and win. Don't accept data centers that hide their impacts behind NDAs, drive up energy prices, and bring pollution to local neighborhoods."
When Sinema lobbied for the Chandler data center in October, she cited President Donald Trump's push for such projects.
"The AI Action Plan, set out by the Trump administration, says very clearly that we must continue to proliferate AI and AI data centers throughout the country," she said at the time. "So federal preemption is coming. Chandler right now has the opportunity to determine how and when these new, innovative AI data centers will be built."
Trump on Thursday signed an executive order (EO) intended to block states from enforcing their own AI regulations.
"I understand the president has issued an EO. I think that is yet to play itself out," Chandler Mayor Kevin Hartke reportedly said after the city vote. "Really, this is a land use question, not [about] policies related to data centers."