

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.

As COP28 resumes for a second week, negotiators will be faced with answering the call for a commitment to a Fossil Fuel Phase Out in Dubai. Never before have we heard so many voices, coming from so many directions to seize the moment and commit to phasing out oil, coal and gas. And never before have alternative formulations on fossil fuel phase out made it this far into a draft text. But there are still no guarantees on a decision on fossil fuels, so all is in play.
Kaisa Kosonen, Head of the Greenpeace COP28 delegation said: “We are here to make fossil fuels history. By now governments know they can’t leave this summit without an agreement to end fossil fuels, in a fast and fair manner. Now the question is what is the package of solutions, support and cooperation that will get us over the finishing line. It’s clear that developed countries are the ones that need to take the lead here.
The solutions are ready – a fast and fair transition to renewable energy is possible – but it won’t happen fast enough unless we push the fossil fuel industry out of the way. And when it comes to money, just look at who made record profits last year – it’s the fossil fuel industry! There’s enough money in the world to deal with this crisis, but it has to be redirected from problems to solutions, so that polluters are made to pay.”
Yuan Ying, China Chief Representative, Greenpeace East Asia said: “COP28 can’t be called a success if there are no renewable energy targets and a full, fast, fair and funded fossil fuel phase-out. After the hottest decade ever, anything less is dropping the ball.
China is the world’s biggest wind and solar producer. And it has the capacity to respond to climate change on par with wealthy countries, while also sharing many of the same concerns as developing countries. This in-between role actually enables China to unlock those entangled negotiations in week two. The China-US Sunnylands statement provides keys for unlocking solutions here, but we still need to see them in action here in Dubai.”
Ghiwa Nakat, Executive Director, Greenpeace MENA, said: “Nobody wins a trophy at half-time, but this COP certainly got off to a strong and hopeful start. The historic consensus to operationalise the new Loss and Damage Fund could be a real lifesaver for frontline communities if the responsibility of developed countries to lead in resourcing the fund is recognised in the final COP decision.
However, such announcements are not enough if we don’t have a planet to live on. We’ve got to stop fueling more loss and damage. Everything so far has been just a prelude to what we really want to hear – commitment to a just and equitable phaseout of all fossil fuels by mid-century, coupled with key milestones for this critical decade.”
Dr. Camila Jardim, International Politics Specialist, Greenpeace Brasil said: “Brazil arrived at COP28 with important advances in the fight against deforestation and with an interesting proposal for a global financing fund for tropical forests, which escapes the harmful logic of the carbon market. However, the Brazilian government has avoided the most difficult and urgent conversation at this COP: negotiations for a global agreement to eliminate all fossil fuels by 2050, with a significant reduction by 2030. The science is clear: the 1.5º C mission launched by Brazilian diplomacy is completely impossible without an end of fossil fuels.
Brazil needs to stop hiding behind meaningless justifications: no country in the world has the potential that we have in renewable energy, which is the future of global energy geopolitics. We can lead and show the way for other countries, both by demanding financing and technology transfer to developing countries, and by building consensus around the urgency of this agreement and sharing our own experiences and technologies with partners.”
Thandile Chinyavanhu, Climate and Energy campaigner, Greenpeace Africa said: “Africa is making promising steps away from the outdated extractive practices of fossil fuel industries which for decades have locked communities in conflict, human suffering, and ecological death. We must encourage further development driven by innovation rooted in pan-Africanism. To achieve this future, we need our leaders to push back against further attempts at neo-colonial plundering of resources on the continent at the expense of Africans.”
Rolf Skar, National Campaigns Director, Greenpeace USA said: “The US signed on to an agreement on the phase out of fossil fuels at the G7, but here at COP28 they are sitting on the sidelines, apparently content to watch the world burn. The United States is on track to add more than a third of the world’s carbon pollution from new oil and gas production through 2050. They cannot hide behind the smokescreen of a coal phase out while ignoring their biggest problem: massive increases in oil and gas that will plunge our world deeper into climate catastrophe.
“No one is fooled. Americans bearing the brunt of fossil fuel extraction and export – who are disproportionately people of color – need policies that stop treating their communities like sacrifice zones for the oil and gas industry. The international community expects and needs the US to lead by example. There is still time for the US to change course. But no more time at COP28 should be wasted with half-steps and broken promises.”
Hirotaka Koike, Senior Political and External Affairs Officer, Greenpeace East Asia said: “While the world is experiencing the hottest year on record, Japan has been silent on the issue of fossil fuels. As the only country among G7 without a phase out date of coal use, Japan’s silence shows their unwillingness to honor the G7 commitment as a presidency and hide behind other blockers to do the dirty job.
The minister’s arrival should change that if Japan wants to be seen contributing to the global fight to keep 1.5 alive. Japan should take a chance to make it clear that they are on the right side of history by championing a fast, fair, and equitable fossil fuels phase out in the negotiating room.”
Shiva Gounden, Head of Pacific, Greenpeace Australia Pacific said: “AOSIS has been a powerful voice for our Small Island Developing states to keep 1.5℃ alive. They have consistently called on major emitters to address the elephant in the room – fossil fuels. AOSIS has been vocal about the urgent need to phase out all fossil fuels and inefficient fossil fuel subsidies, if the world has a fighting chance of nurturing its diversity for our future generations. For our islands, it is a matter of survival. It is not only a technical outcome we are fighting for, but one that is centered on the protection of our lands, oceans and people.”
Maarten de Zeeuw, Climate and Energy Campaigner, Greenpeace Netherlands said: “The EU has its eyes on the ball, to deliver the fossil fuel phase out that’s urgently needed from this summit. But they’ve still got to get their goals clear for this critical decade. Simply stopping the growth of fossil fuel use this decade isn’t enough, when the actual challenge is to get oil, coal and gas use significantly down already by 2030.
To get the energy package over the finishing line here, the EU needs to ensure support will be delivered for those in need, as opportunities today are not equal. We are calling on the EU and other rich countries to show leadership by committing to ending fossil fuel consumption and production fastest and by stepping up to provide financial support for a fair phase-out in poorer countries.”
Rebecca Newsom, Head of Politics at Greenpeace UK said: “The UK’s status as a leader in these global climate talks seriously hangs in the balance. While wildfires and floods wreak havoc across the world, the Prime Minister’s message to delegates in Dubai was that the UK has already done enough. While his negotiators continue to work hard behind the scenes, they still need to speak up more strongly for a full, fast, fair and funded fossil fuel phaseout, and to stop objecting to text proposals that would move talks forward on the substance of future climate finance obligations for developing countries. With Ministers now arriving, there’s still time for the UK to show real leadership in backing an ambitious – and equitable – outcome to end the fossil fuel age and build resilience in response to growing climate impacts. The public, business, investors and a growing coalition of countries are all calling for it – now is the time to act.”
Pedro Zorrilla Miras, Climate and Energy Campaigner, Greenpeace Spain said: “In this first week of COP28, the EU has been one of the frontrunner groups for the fossil fuel phase out, the key step needed to keep 1.5ºC alive and avert the worst catastrophic climate change. Spain has been a key country pushing for this, as shown by the statements by the Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez and by the Vice-president Teresa Ribera. Nevertheless, if we want to achieve this historical step, Spain needs to increase the ambition by saying no to abatement technologies and by showing a clear commitment for providing sufficient finance support for developing countries for a just fossil fuel phase out.”
ENDS
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“Through its third country deportation deals, the Trump administration is putting millions of taxpayer dollars into the hands of foreign governments, while turning a blind eye to the human costs," reads a new Senate report.
Using secretive agreements, often with countries that have histories of human rights abuses, the Trump administration has "expanded and institutionalized" a system in which the government deports migrants to nations where they have never lived, according to a report released Friday by Democrats on the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
The report, titled At What Cost? Inside the Trump Administration’s Secret Deportation Deals, was commissioned by Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) and is the first comprehensive review of the administration's coercive and secretive agreements with countries including El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, and Eswatini.
Third-country deportations were "previously a rare tool used only in exceptional circumstances," said the authors, but "the Trump administration has broadened this practice into a sprawling system of global removals," sending direct financial payments of $32 million in taxpayer money to foreign governments.
Five countries, which also include Palau and Rwanda, entered into those deals and have taken 300 people. In all, the administration has spent more than $40 million on the deportations, according to the report.
“This report outlines the troubling practice by the Trump administration of deporting individuals to third countries—places where these people have no connection—at great expense to the American taxpayer and raises serious questions,” said Shaheen, the ranking member of the committee. “Through its third country deportation deals, the Trump administration is putting millions of taxpayer dollars into the hands of foreign governments... For an administration that claims to be reigning in fraud, waste, and abuse, this policy is the epitome of all three.”
The senators conducted a 10-month review of the administration's agreements and third country deportations through January 2026, with staff traveling to the countries and meeting with people who have been deported, attorneys, US and foreign officials, and human rights organizations.
The agreements, said the senators, amount to an "expensive and dangerous form of shadow diplomacy that prioritizes the appearance of toughness over the security of Americans" and includes little oversight over whether public funds are being used to finance human trafficking or rights abuses.
While the agreements include "blanket language" on upholding international human rights laws, the report states, the senators' extensive review uncovered no evidence that the administration is conducting systemic monitoring or follow-up enforcement, "raising serious concerns that the assurances made by foreign governments exist only on paper and that the United States is turning a blind eye to what happens to migrants in third countries."
Cart Weiland, a deputy assistant secretary at the US State Department, was questioned by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee about his work helping to establish the third country agreements and "could not articulate whether any oversight on their treatment had been conducted. Instead, he reiterated that 'the agreement has a provision that explicitly mandates adherence to international human rights treaties and conventions.'"
Committee staff members also heard from US officials in one country that they had been instructed "not to follow up on the treatment of deportees."
A Trump administration attorney even acknowledged in a federal court case regarding deportations to Ghana, another country that has entered into agreements with the administration, that it appeared "Ghana was violating assurances it had provided the United States, including that it would comply with the Convention Against Torture, after sending a migrant onward to a country where they would likely be tortured."
The senators also found that the administration is likely using third countries to circumvent US immigration law—carrying out removals "that US law would otherwise prohibit, such as sending protected individuals onward to countries where they may face persecution or death."
The majority of migrants flown to third countries have had court-ordered protections prohibiting the US from sending them back to their home countries, where they could face persecution or torture.
"One migrant with protective orders stated: 'While at the fuel stop in the US Virgin Islands, the apparent head [US Immigration and Customs Enforcement] official on the plane... told me that those on the plane were being sent to Ghana and that Ghana would send us to our home countries," according to the report.
The document said that "the Trump administration’s defense is that the United States 'does not have the power to tell Ghana what to do,'" a claim it also made after garnering condemnation for its use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport about 250 Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador, where they were imprisoned in the notorious Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT).
The report also details how the administration has threatened some countries with increased tariffs, travel bans, or cuts to US foreign aid if they don't enter into the deals.
"The Trump administration is expending political capital in its bilateral relationships that could instead be used to advance more pressing USb national security interests, while not being transparent about the full extent of its deal-making, including what is being offered to foreign governments," reads the report.
The senators emphasized that they released their report "as the administration is aggressively seeking to strip hundreds of thousands of migrants of legal status in the United States through the ending of temporary protected status and humanitarian parole, among other avenues, increasing the risk of expanded third country deportations."
The Democrats on the committee said they would continue to conduct oversight of the agreements and demand transparency.
"The Trump administration should cease its use of these third country deportation deals," they said, "which are putting millions of taxpayer dollars into the hands of foreign governments without oversight while turning a blind eye to the potential human cost."
Analyst Mouin Rabbani said the deployment comes as “Netanyahu is seeking to... inject poison pills into the negotiations in order to ensure that they fail and thereby set the stage for a new armed conflict with Iran.”
President Donald Trump further escalated his threats to attack Iran on Thursday by deploying another massive aircraft carrier to the Middle East.
According to Axios, Trump decided to send the USS Gerald Ford to the region shortly after his Wednesday talk with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the seventh such meeting in just over a year since he returned to the presidency.
The Ford, America’s largest aircraft carrier, will take approximately 3-4 weeks to reach the Persian Gulf from Venezuela, where it was used as part of Trump’s operation to overthrow President Nicolás Maduro in January. It will join the USS Abraham Lincoln, which was sent to the region earlier this month.
Trump has said he wants to finalize a new nuclear deal with Iran by next month after ripping up the old one during his first term, and has threatened war if one is not reached.
Iranian President Masud Pezeshkian has said Iran is open to making a deal to limit its capabilities to develop nuclear weapons in the future and to allow weapons inspectors to ensure compliance with the deal.
“We are not seeking nuclear weapons, and we are ready for any kind of verification,” Pezeshkian said on Wednesday.
However, its leaders have said they are not willing to negotiate on their broader ballistic missile program, which they view as the only deterrent against attacks by Israel and the US.
Netanyahu, who met with Trump for nearly two and a half hours on Wednesday, has pushed the president to pursue maximalist demands that Iran is unlikely to accept.
"I said that any agreement must include... not just the nuclear issue, but also the ballistic missiles and the Iranian proxies in the region," Netanyahu said.
Middle East analyst Mouin Rabbani said in an interview Thursday with Democracy Now that "what Netanyahu is seeking to do with this visit is to inject poison pills into the negotiations in order to ensure that they fail and thereby set the stage for a new armed conflict with Iran."
So far, this appears not to have worked, as Trump has said he is willing to negotiate on the narrower issue of nuclear weapons.
But, according to Rabbani, "it's really impossible to take any statement he says either seriously or literally because his subsequent actions could either be a very accurate reflection of what he said or the precise opposite."
"Trump seems to think that a deal limited to the nuclear issue may be preferable to going to war to tackle everything else," said Christian Emery, an associate professor of international politics at the University College London. "Yet opponents of US military action, which include all of Washington’s Middle Eastern allies except Israel, should still be worried."
"It is far from clear whether Iran will offer the kind of nuclear deal Trump would find acceptable, and Trump himself does not seem to know what else to do other than double down on military threats," Emery said. "That alone may scupper the talks."
"The danger here... is that Washington, encouraged by Israel, is looking at Iran as a substantially weakened power," Rabbani said. "It has taken note of the widespread unrest in Iran last month. And coming straight off the successful abduction of the Venezuelan president, they may believe that it's just going to be one and done and that there can be a limited clean conflict with Iran."
“But of course, Iran is a very different kettle of fish than Venezuela,” he continued. “Iran has already indicated that should there be a new armed conflict, it will observe neither strategic patience nor restraint or proportionality as it has in previous realms.”
"Noem and Lewandowski are like the most toxic couple you have ever met given full rein of a government agency."
An explosive report published by the Wall Street Journal on Thursday shed fresh light on what critics have described as "outrageous corruption" by US Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.
Among other things, the Journal report highlighted Noem's relationship with top adviser Corey Lewandowski, whom sources said is romantically involved with the Trump Cabinet official despite both of them being married.
Of particular note, the Journal wrote, is the way Lewandowski has taken over the contracting process at the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) despite being classified as a special government employee whose service is supposed to be capped at a maximum of 130 days per year.
"Given Lewandowski’s continuing business interests in the private sector, his role in awarding contracts has raised alarm bells inside the White House and DHS," reported the Journal. "Several officials inside the department said contracts and grants are being awarded in an opaque and arbitrary manner, and some are being held up without explanation."
The report also claimed that Noem and Lewandowski have been flying around the country together on a luxury 737 MAX jet, complete with a private cabin.
DHS has been leasing the plane, although the Journal's sources said it is in the process of buying it for $70 million, which "would be double the cost of each of seven other commercial planes the department is also buying at the pair’s direction to carry out deportations."
Additionally, the report outlined allegedly abusive behavior by Noem and Lewandowski toward DHS staff members, as sources said they "frequently berate senior level staff, give polygraph tests to employees they don’t trust, and have fired employees," including one incident where "Lewandowski fired a US Coast Guard pilot after Noem’s blanket was left behind on a plane."
The report generated fierce reaction from critics on social media.
"Noem and Lewandowski are like the most toxic couple you have ever met," wrote New York Times columnist Jamelle Bouie, "given full rein of a government agency."
Veteran foreign policy journalist Laura Rozen described Noem and Lewandowski as "the most vile scumbags on Earth" after reading the report, highlighting the details about the pair flying on the luxury jet as particularly egregious.
Investigative journalist Sarah Posner found herself floored by the conduct outlined in the Journal's report.
"There is so much crazy shit, outrageous corruption, and naked, ham-fisted ambition in this WSJ piece about Noem, Lewandowski, and DHS," she wrote. "Read and take note of the of eye-popping number of sources who have knives out for Kristi and Corey."
Former Rep. Barbara Comstock (R-Va.) argued the report showed Noem and Lewandowski "are wholly unqualified and a disaster at DHS," and have been "been very effective in driving [President Donald] Trump’s ratings into the ditch."
Ron Filipkowski, editor-in-chief of MeidasTouch, expressed disbelief at how much power Lewandowski had accumulated despite only being a special government employee.
"How the fuck is Corey Lewandowski in any position to fire a Coast Guard pilot?" he asked. "What is his title? What is his job? What is his official position in the US government? If you are Kristi Noem’s boyfriend you get to fire Coast Guard officers?"