

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.

Daisee Francour
+14153125958
daisee@ienearth.org
The UNFCCC Conference of the Parties concluded its 27th session in the early hours of Sunday, November 20, 2022 with the adoption of the Sharm El-Sheikh Implementation Plan. Despite the extended COP, Parties failed to take adequate steps and action to address climate change. The most glaring omission in the Plan is a failure of the Parties to cut fossil fuel emissions at the source and there were only vague references towards achieving the Paris Agreement temperature goal of 1.5 degrees Celsius.
False solutions such as REDD+, carbon markets, carbon offsets, climate-smart agriculture, climate geoengineering technologies, and nature-based solutions were focal points at COP27. Additionally, climate finance, adaptation and mitigation as well as loss and damage were at the forefront of negotiations at this year's session.
In the final days of the COP, various changes were made in the final documents that will have a direct impact on Indigenous Peoples and frontline communities. Under mitigation, Parties are called upon to "accelerate the development, deployment, and dissemination of technologies," which opens the door to streamline harmful, false solutions like climate geoengineering technology. Moreover, the mitigation text also calls for "accelerating efforts towards the phase down of unabated coal and phase-out of inefficient fossil fuel subsidies." Ultimately, this text does not call for the necessary climate action to phase out fossil fuels with any set dates for action, letting big polluters yet again off the hook, enabling them to continue to pollute and to not be held accountable for their immense contributions to the climate crisis.
While there was an acknowledgement of the rights of Indigenous Peoples as well as a recognition of the important role Indigenous Peoples have in addressing and responding to climate change in the preamble of the Sharm El Sheikh Implementation Plan, there is no other reference to Indigenous Peoples, Traditional [Indigenous] Knowledge, Indigenous Peoples' rights or human rights in any other text, and instead replaced with references like "social and environmental safeguards."
In terms of loss and damage, small islands and developing countries pushed for the large, developed countries to pay up for their contributions to climate change. While the text calls for Parties to provide "targeted support to the poorest and most vulnerable in line with national circumstances and recognizing the needs for support towards a just transition", there is no reference to Indigenous Peoples, and therefore the gap widens Indigenous Peoples receiving direct financial resources for loss and damage.
Although the architecture for loss and damage was agreed in Sharm El-Sheik, the details on implementation will be passed along to the next COP. IEN continues to be concerned on how the finance for loss and damage will be used to create more wealth for countries in the Global North through multilateral development banks and other financial mechanisms.
Furthermore, the Parties took steps backwards in Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, as the implementation process was fast-tracked without meaningful and democratic dialogue that centered around false solutions and no reference to Indigenous Peoples or our Traditional Indigenous Knowledge.
Article 6 relies far too heavily on the assumption that by educating and training citizens of the Parties on the ways and means of local and global efforts to mitigate the sources of climate change it will enable them to make contributions toward reductions of the impacts, wherein reality the Parties engagement is voluntary and they do not actively reduce emissions at source.
In reference to Article 6 and carbon markets, IEN Climate Justice Program Coordinator, Tamra Gilbertson shares, "When carbon pricing is attempted to be placed inside of democratic system to create compliance-based tracking and trading platforms, the whole system collapsed under the weight of attempted tracking, monitoring and accounting because carbon pricing systems are inherently flawed and cannot function within a system that would actually attempt to track and account for real emission's 'units'."
Tom BK Goldtooth, IEN Executive Director also shares his thoughts on the lack of progress made at COP27, "The bottom line at COP27 should have been for rich countries such as the U.S. to commit to a full unqualified phase-out of all fossil fuels, namely oil, gas and coal. This was not done. The door was kept wide open prolonging subsidies for and reliance on fossil fuels and new fossil fuel exploration. There was some headway on the establishment of a loss and damage fund, but only in principle and it could take years before real funding is made available for Indigenous Peoples and non-Indigenous communities in developing countries. There was no COP27 progress in mitigation and adaptation. We did see the UN, the World Bank, other multilateral development banks, and the private sector pushing the financialization of climate change that has nothing to do with addressing the root cause of climate change, allowing polluters to keep on polluting. This coming year IEN will be part of a global movement of grassroots and civil society taking back our power by planning our own regional and global Peoples' climate action summits."
While the COP attempted to galvanize Parties to pay up to those impacted by climate change through loss and damage, however after much resistance, the Parties remained unmoved to intervene on addressing the source of climate change which includes stopping big polluters and keeping fossil fuels in the ground.
The UNFCCC COP process yet again, fails to take necessary climate action to address the climate crisis and false solutions noted in the final text will continue to devastate Indigenous and frontline communities. To learn more about the false solutions at COP27, review IEN's three-part Climate Justice Program Series and critical analyses on Climate Finance, Climate-Smart Agriculture, and Nature-Based Solutions.
Established in 1990 within the United States, IEN was formed by grassroots Indigenous peoples and individuals to address environmental and economic justice issues (EJ). IEN's activities include building the capacity of Indigenous communities and tribal governments to develop mechanisms to protect our sacred sites, land, water, air, natural resources, health of both our people and all living things, and to build economically sustainable communities.
"While Susan Collins’ campaign is backed by billionaire donors, our campaign is built on a movement funded by the people, with an average donation of $26," said Graham Platner's campaign manager.
A new analysis of campaign finance data shows that nearly 100 billionaires and their spouses have contributed to Republican Sen. Susan Collins' reelection bid so far, funneling nearly $10 million to the incumbent's campaign committee and PACs supporting her effort to fend off progressive challenger Graham Platner.
The Maine Monitor on Thursday published a list of billionaires who have donated to Collins and Platner, who has called his Republican opponent a "corrupt" protector and beneficiary of an oligarchic political system. The outlet noted that Collins' billionaire donation total "stands in stark contrast with the fundraising of her opponent... whose campaign has mostly attracted smaller amounts of funds but from many more people."
The $9.8 million that Collins' fundraising network received from billionaires and their spouses between January 2025 and late May 2026 represents "a third of what groups supporting Collins raised from all donors," according to The Maine Monitor's analysis.
Platner's reelection bid has received donations from billionaires George Soros, Pat Stryker, Jon Stryker, Christy Walton, and Jennifer Pritzker. Those contributions represent "a fraction of 1% of his total haul," The Maine Monitor noted. The Democratic candidate's campaign said Thursday that "grassroots donors chipping in $200 or less have given Graham Platner $9.6 million."
“While Susan Collins’ campaign is backed by billionaire donors, our campaign is built on a movement funded by the people, with an average donation of $26,” Ben Chin, Platner's campaign manager, said in a statement. “The establishment can bring it on—they cannot defeat the will of working Mainers, 15,000+ volunteers, and a campaign powered by small-dollar donors from nearly every zip code in Maine.”
Collins' largest billionaire donor to date came from Ken Griffin, a hedge fund manager who pumped $2.5 million into Pine Tree Results, a Super PAC supporting the five-term Republican incumbent. Collins' network has also received at least $1 million from Blackstone CEO Stephen Schwarzman, New Balance chair James Davis, and hedge fund manager Paul Singer.
this is oligarchy — pass it on pic.twitter.com/hU3nsRx9w4
— David Sirota (@davidsirota) June 12, 2026
The Maine Monitor observed that "the majority of the billionaire donations to Collins this cycle are from billionaires who made their money in alternative investments, including hedge funds and private equity."
In 2017, Collins voted for legislation that delivered massive tax breaks to large corporations and American billionaires, whose collective wealth surged to $8.1 trillion last year. ProPublica reported that private equity became Collins' "most reliable source of donations" after she withdrew an amendment to the 2017 legislation that would have targeted one of the industry's beloved tax breaks.
On top of billionaire funding, Collins' campaign has benefited from massive ad spending by dark-money groups such as One Nation. The group, which is aligned with Sen. Mitch McConnell, has spent more than $19 million on advertising for Collins so far.
"The US regime's secretary of state, driven by ambitions of conquest, presidential aspirations, and the vengeful sentiments of the elitist clique that propelled his political career, now further tightens the economic and energy stranglehold against Cuba," said the island's foreign minister.
Amid mounting global calls for President Donald Trump to end his administration's "economic genocide" in Cuba, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Thursday announced sanctions against the state-owned oil and gas company, a move expected to worsen the island's fuel shortage and related humanitarian crisis.
Trump, in recent months, has repeatedly threatened to "take" Cuba and ramped up the 65-year US embargo against the country, including by imposing an oil blockade—disrupting food supplies, healthcare, education, transportation, and more—and issuing a May executive order that Rubio cited in his statement about the sanctions against Union Cuba-Petroleo (CUPET).
Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants and a longtime advocate of regime change on the island, claimed Thursday "that like every resource on the island, energy has long been weaponized by Cuba's communist government as a tool of both repression and self-serving regime kleptocracy."
"While the Cuban people have suffered fuel shortages and blackouts because of decades of under-investment in critical infrastructure," Rubio continued, "Cuba's communist leaders have diverted energy resources to line their own pockets: reselling countless barrels of scarce energy on the secondary market, hoarding energy supplies for its military, intelligence, and repressive forces, and rationing energy as a tool of social control."
Warning of the new sanctions' likely impact, William LeoGrande, a Cuba expert at American University in the United States, told The Associated Press: "It appears that they're all in on strangling the Cuban economy... Their policy is a contradiction. They claim they don't want to create a humanitarian crisis, although that's exactly what they’re doing."
As some Florida Republicans in Congress celebrated the secretary of state's announcement, Cuban officials fired back, with Bruno Rodríguez, Cuba's foreign affairs minister, taking aim at Rubio in a social media post.
"The US regime's secretary of state, driven by ambitions of conquest, presidential aspirations, and the vengeful sentiments of the elitist clique that propelled his political career, now further tightens the economic and energy stranglehold against Cuba," he wrote in Spanish. "To justify it, he does not resort to excuses prepared by his State Department, but to the usual crude lies, the most aggressive, uncouth, and rabid among Cuba's enemies."
Ernesto Soberón, Cuba's permanent representative to the United Nations, accused Rubio of "peddling crude lies" while the US ambassador to the UN, Mike Waltz, "mindlessly parrots the claim that the blockade does not exist and is, therefore, not primarily responsible for the suffering of the Cuban people."
"The cynicism of top US officials knows no bounds," Soberón said. "Stop the collective punishment of the Cuban people."
This week alone, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk, the International Association of Democratic Lawyers, and thousands of Italian medical professionals have spoken out against the US blockade of Cuba.
“The fuel restrictions imposed since early 2026 and recent tightening of extraterritorial sanctions, taken together, are directly harming Cubans, especially the most vulnerable," said Türk. "Children are dying because doctors lack access to essential medical supplies and medicines. This is unacceptable. These sanctions must be lifted immediately."
The Trump administration's targeting of CUPET came a week after it sanctioned Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel, his wife, and three other individuals.
"We just want them to be a nicely run country," Trump told journalists in the Oval Office last week, when asked whether those sanctions were meant to accelerate Cuba's collapse. "The country is starving, and it's got no energy, it's got no oil, it's got no money, it's got nothing. It's got a beautiful piece of land. You could have beautiful resorts."
Trump said that Cuba had already "sort of collapsed" and "we're going to handle that as soon as we've finished" military operations in Iran. He added, "I like to do one thing at a time."
Earlier this week, Elena Gutiérrez, a Mexican American activist at Global Exchange, wrote for Foreign Policy In Focus about returning from three trips to the island this year "with my heart a little more broken, but also with a stronger conviction that we need to defend Cuba."
"But can US citizens truly stop the madness their own empire imposes on them and on the rest of the world? Let us hope so, because only the people of the United States—and no one else—can carry out the transformations their own country needs," according to Gutiérrez. "Only then will Cuba, the United States, Mexico, and the rest of the world be free."
"For light at the end of the tunnel, you’d have to look to the 2030s," says the World Bank's chief economist.
The World Bank on Thursday lowered its global growth forecast for the remainder of 2026 as the illegal US-Israeli war of choice on Iran drives up energy prices, inflation, and the cost of debt.
"The global economy is facing another major shock," the World Bank's latest biannual Global Economic Prospects report states. "The conflict in the Middle East has triggered sharp increases in energy prices, renewed inflationary pressures, and fueled expectations of tighter monetary policy."
"Global growth is projected to slow to 2.5% in 2026, from 2.9% in 2025—the lowest rate since the Covid-19 pandemic—amid weaker prospects for economies dependent on energy imports and those directly affected by hostilities," the report continues. "Activity is expected to firm in 2027-28 as energy supplies recover, monetary easing resumes, and trade strengthens."
The Iran War has resulted in the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, through which around 30% of the world’s fertilizer and 20% of its oil previously passed. In addition to increasing the risk of a global food crisis, the strait’s closure has sent fuel and fertilizer prices soaring, with US farm diesel costing nearly 50% more than it did on the war’s eve in February and various fertilizer products spiking by between one-quarter and one-half.
The war has affected the economies of countries far removed from Iran, as the World Bank reports forecasts that "growth in emerging market and developing economies (EMDEs) is expected to slow to 3.6% this year."
"The level of per capita income across EMDEs excluding China and India, relative to advanced economies, is not expected to return to the pre-pandemic level until after 2028, implying nearly a decade of lost income convergence," the international financial institution predicted.
World Bank Group president Ajay Banga said in a statement Thursday that "developing countries have faced a series of challenges over the last decade."
“The impact differs by country, but the basic test is the same: Protect people and preserve stability today, without giving up on growth and jobs tomorrow," Banga added. "In response to the current shock, we are providing liquidity where it is needed now—and we are ready with additional financing, guarantees, and private-sector solutions if pressures deepen. Our job is to help countries steady the ship, keep reforms moving, and emerge stronger on the other side.”
The bank said in April that up to $100 billion would be made available over the next 15 months for nations suffering the most acute economic shocks caused by the war.
As US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu allegedly undermine efforts to end the war, the World Bank cautions that the global economic outlook "remains skewed to the downside."
“A renewed escalation of hostilities or more prolonged disruptions to commodity flows could further raise commodity prices, intensify inflationary pressures and food insecurity, trigger financial stress, and lower growth,” the bank's report warns.
In his foreword to the new Global Economic Prospects report, World Bank Group chief economist Indermit Gill warned that "barring a miracle, the 2020s will prove to be what their ominous opening foreshadowed: a lost decade—not just for a couple of outliers, but for dozens of developing economies.'"
"Amid one of the densest clusters of global shocks since the 1970s, nearly 1 out of every 2 developing economies has failed since 2019 to advance on the most rudimentary promise of development: narrowing the income gap with the world’s most prosperous economies," Gill added. "For light at the end of the tunnel, you’d have to look to the 2030s."