

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.
“Conflict devastates countries and costs countless lives, yet for some it is extraordinarily profitable,” said the executive director of Oxfam International.
While much of the world is holding out hope that the US-Israeli war against Iran may finally be reaching an end amid news of a ceasefire agreement, the billionaire owners of some of the world's largest energy companies may not be so thrilled.
A handful of just 41 energy industry barons in Group of Seven (G7) countries collectively increased their wealth by $23.5 billion since the war was launched in late February, according to a report released by Oxfam International on Monday, as the leaders of the world's largest industrialized economies meet in France this week.
The oil shocks resulting from the war have caused fuel prices to spike dramatically, rippling inflation throughout the global economy and straining the pocketbooks of ordinary people around the world. One April report by the United Nations Development Program projected that, as a result of the conflict, an additional 32 million people would be pushed into poverty by the end of the year.
But between March 1 and May 18, owners of the largest oil and energy companies in Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the US, and the UK were adding $300 million on average per day to their collective wealth, Oxfam found through an analysis of Forbes’ Real-Time Billionaire List.
PRESS RELEASE: G7 energy billionaires pocket $300 million a day since start of unlawful US and Israel war against Iran.
This is equivalent to about $1,000 in the time it takes to blink.
👀https://t.co/UVGHF4a3Tk pic.twitter.com/szSGASCAX8
— Oxfam International Media Team (@newsfromoxfam) June 15, 2026
“Conflict devastates countries and costs countless lives, yet for some it is extraordinarily profitable,” said Oxfam International's executive director Amitabh Behar. “This is a brutal system that redistributes wealth upwards—from workers to shareholders, from the poorest to the richest, from those with the least power to those who already have far too much of it. While families are skipping meals and governments slash life-saving aid, we are witnessing a grotesque billionaire bonanza.”
While their accumulation of wealth cannot solely be attributed to the war, Oxfam noted that the Big Six oil companies—Chevron, Shell, BP, ConocoPhillips, Exxon, and TotalEnergies—are projected to grow their profits this year by 80% above the pre-war forecast, while the average large G7 company in the sample is projected to see just 8% growth.
Global billionaires saw their wealth increase on average by about 0.42% between March and mid-May. During the same period, G7 billionaires in the energy industry grew their riches by 9%, while those in oil and gas specifically became nearly 11% richer.
Oxfam notes that the Iran War has only widened the chasm between the rich and poor that was already gaping, in no small part thanks to nations in the G7.
While billionaire wealth has surged by nearly $10 trillion since 2020, G7 nations, mostly the US under President Donald Trump, have reduced aid to the poorest nations by $48 billion—equivalent to what billionaires in G7 countries accumulated for themselves in just nine days.
Meanwhile, since 2019, the last time France chaired a G7 summit, Oxfam estimated that 44 people per minute have come to be in need of humanitarian aid, based on 2025 data from the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.
.@Oxfam campaigners posing as #G7 leaders stand around a trash can overflowing with discarded files. The labels read: “gender inequality,” “climate,” and “tax the rich” —critical global issues scrubbed from the agenda to secure President Trump’s attendance at the G7 summit.@AP pic.twitter.com/aE7HkMvKFl
— Oxfam International Media Team (@newsfromoxfam) June 15, 2026
Behar said that in order to secure the participation of the US in this week’s summit, French President Emmanuel Macron has chosen to table any discussions that might offend Trump—including the devastating cost of his war in Iran, Israel’s US-backed wars in Gaza and Lebanon, and anything to do with the climate crisis, which Trump has referred to as "a scam."
"Rather than defending collective governance, Macron and his peers are accommodating its destruction. This will have consequences measured in lives," he said.
Oxfam called for the "G6"—all the Group of Seven member countries, excluding the US—to create a comprehensive plan to protect people from the economic turmoil caused by the war and other spiraling global crises.
“The G6 can’t plead powerlessness,” Behar added. “They can cancel debt. They can tax windfall profits and extreme wealth... They can provide poorer countries with aid. Refusing to act simply because Washington will not join them is not diplomacy—it is cowardice. And it will only accelerate the G6’s slide into global irrelevance.”
As Macron launches his "green" charm offensive in Nairobi, Africa must move beyond being a passive host.
In a maneuver dripping with historical irony and geopolitical desperation, French President Emmanuel Macron is set to land in Nairobi on May 11. He will be in Kenya to co-host the “Africa Forward Summit: Africa-France Partnership for Innovation and Growth.” To the uninitiated, the title suggests a progressive leap into a shared future.
However, to those who have watched the sun set on Françafrique in the West, the subtext is clear: Having been unceremoniously evicted from its traditional "stomping grounds" in the Sahel, Paris is pitching its tent in East Africa, hunting for new deals to cover the hemorrhaging fortunes of a dying empire. Ahead of his arrival—incidentally on the Ides of March—three French warships docked at the port of Mombasa, carrying with them over 800 military personnel. They were riding on the wave of newfound defense cooperation between the governments of Kenya and France.
The pact focused on maritime security, intelligence cooperation, peacekeeping, humanitarian assistance, disaster relief, and “any other defense or security-related areas of cooperation defined by mutual agreement between parties.” Through this pact, France now has a new hunting ground in East Africa, complete with boots on the ground, sea, and air. Kenya’s 142,400 square kilometers of Exclusive Economic Zone in the Indian Ocean, reputed for riches in fish, oil and gas, is in for a rude shock.
The irony is almost pathological. For over a century, France treated West Africa as a private warehouse. It did not merely colonize; it plundered, looted, and systematically attempted to dismantle the resilient African civilizations that predated its arrival. Its "assimilation" policy remains the most abhorrent, ignoble of colonial concepts; a cultural and political mis-philosophy designed to supplant African languages, customs, and identities with French surrogates.
Africa must stay circumspect. The convergence of military signalling and corporate presence must worry all countries participating in Nairobi. They must watch out for unequal relationships under new language.
When other colonial powers were loosening—however reluctantly—their grip, France was tightening its hold through a web of lopsided financial and military pacts.
With the rising tide of political "wokeness" across the continent, however, France now finds itself sorely ostracized, and endangered. Yet, rather than offering atonement, the French leadership has chosen to grandstand. The mask slipped definitively earlier this year when Macron, frustrated by the anti-French revolts sweeping through former colonies, dropped the pretense of diplomacy. “I think someone forgot to say thank you,” he remarked, with the chilling entitlement of a landlord demanding gratitude for a house he broke into.
Fast forward five months, and this same "savior" is now knocking on East Africa’s door, hat in hand, seeking a "new partnership built on equal ground."
The sudden pivot is driven by a cold reality: France’s "green" future is powered by African minerals. While the lights of Paris stayed bright on the back of Niger’s uranium, Africa remained in the dark.
But as the Nairobi summit approaches, Africa must move beyond being a passive host. If Macron and his European contemporaries truly seek a partnership of equals, they must meet a set of nonnegotiable demands that protect African interests, specifically within the environment and energy sectors.
First, a mandate for local beneficiation and value addition. Africa will no longer be a mere pit stop for raw material extraction. The Nairobi summit must establish a framework where no critical mineral—lithium, cobalt, or uranium—leaves the continent in its raw state.
Africans must demand that French and European companies invest in local processing plants and refineries. If the "Green Transition" requires African minerals, then the "Green Industrialization" must happen on African soil, creating African jobs and keeping the value chain within our borders.
Second, total reform of the financial architecture and the CFA Franc. For a nation that has enforced financial slavery through the CFA Franc since 1945, Macron’s talk of "financial reform" must be met with skepticism.
Africa must demand the total dismantling of the colonial financial umbilical cord. Africa requires a global financial system that does not penalize African nations with "sovereign risk" premiums that make green energy projects three times more expensive here than in Europe. It must demand the unconditional return of foreign reserves held in Paris and a shift toward independent, African-led monetary policies.
Third, energy sovereignty over "green exportation." France proposes to "decarbonize" Africa, yet many of our nations have barely "carbonized" to begin with. African “partners” must demand energy justice. This means the right to achieve universal electrification. Africa must reject a "Green Deal" that forces Africa to export its renewable energy (like green hydrogen) to Europe while her own hospitals and schools remain off the grid.
African energy needs must be met first; European exports come second.
Fourth, technology transfer, not just licensing. True innovation is not found in buying French software; it is found in owning the source code. The Nairobi summit must secure commitments for the unconditional transfer of green technologies. Africa should not be a "market" for European patents; it must be a co-owner of the intellectual property that will define the 21st century.
Fifth, climate reparations and debt cancellation. Already, France is active in "debt-for-development" swaps. Africa must demand that these are not treated as "gifts" but as partial down payments on a century of ecological and economic debt. Africa should also insist on total cancellation of debts that were accrued through colonial-era structures. Climate finance must be provided as grants, not loans that further burden Africa’s children for a climate crisis they did not create.
Sixth, accountability for multinational conglomerates. Total Energies, Orano, and Eramet—over 60 CEOs from French corporations will be attending—must answer tough questions at the summit. They ought to answer for their extractive interests that have historically disadvantaged the continent. Across Africa, communities have borne the environmental, social, and economic costs of such operations, with countries like Mozambique offering stark reminders of the consequences.
The companies must agree to be held to African environmental standards, not just French ones. Africa should pitch for a legal framework that allows communities to sue French corporations in both African and French courts for environmental degradation and human rights abuses.
There can be no "partnership" where companies operate with impunity in the Global South while preaching "environmental and social governance" values in the North.
Seventh, an end to paternalistic "security" pacts. Finally, Africa demands an end to the "policing" of the continent. True peace and security come from economic dignity, not from the over 60 military interventions France has conducted since 1960 to protect its interests. Africa must demand the closure of foreign military bases that serve extractive interests and a shift toward supporting African-led, autonomous security architectures. If partnership means equality, then reciprocity is simple—every French troop granted access and immunity in Africa should be matched by an African troop with the same rights in France
The "New Scramble" is couched in the language of "climate resilience" and "debt-for-development swaps." But beneath these green platitudes lie a hidden quest: to re-establish unfettered access to Africa’s critical minerals.
Africa must stay circumspect. The convergence of military signalling and corporate presence must worry all countries participating in Nairobi. They must watch out for unequal relationships under new language.
What France and its European partners fail to realize is that the "disinherited" continent has found its voice. Africa is no longer interested in being a marginal chapter in a European story, not even with a thousand summits. If President Macron wants a "thank you," he should start by returning what was stolen from Africa and respecting the sovereignty he so arrogantly claimed to have authored. The era of the "political orchestra" directed from Paris is over. The music has changed, and Africa is finally playing its own tune.
"This blocking attitude is at the heart of the budget crisis and also, as a result, of the current political crisis," said Gabriel Zucman after another French prime minister resigned.
On the heels of France losing yet another prime minister, Politico on Tuesday published an interview in which world-renowned French economist Gabriel Zucman argued that the recently departed leaders should have supported his proposed wealth tax.
Zucman, who leads the EU Tax Observatory and teaches at French and US universities, has advocated for imposing a wealth tax of at least 2% for the ultrarich in France and around the world. However, Sébastien Lecornu, who resigned as prime minister on Monday, after less than a month in office, did not embrace that approach, the economist noted.
Former Prime Minister François Bayrou also didn't support the "Zucman tax." He was in the post when the French National Assembly voted in favor of a 2% minimum tax on wealth exceeding €100 million, or $117 million, in February—and when the Senate ultimately rejected the policy in June. He resigned in early September, after losing a no-confidence vote.
Before both of them, Michel Barnier was prime minister. He resigned last December, also after losing a no-confidence vote. He, too, didn't embrace the tax policy, despite polling that shows, as Zucman put it, "there is a very strong demand among the population for greater tax fairness and better taxation of the ultrarich."
"The executive has so far remained completely deaf to both parliamentary work and popular democratic demands," Zucman told Politico's Giorgio Leali. "They didn't try to have a real dialogue with the opposition on this."
"The very wealthy individuals affected by this measure, and the media outlets they own, have spoken out very vehemently on the subject in an attempt to discourage the government from engaging in any form of reflection or discussion," he added.
On social media, Leali shared a quote from Zucman tying the former prime ministers' attitudes on the tax proposal and broader budget fight to the country's current political crisis—in which "increasingly isolated" President Emmanuel Macron faces pressure from across France's political spectrum to hold a snap parliamentary election or resign.
As Reuters reported Tuesday, "Resignation calls, long confined to the fringes, have entered the mainstream during one of the worst political crises since the 1958 creation of the Fifth Republic, France's current system of government."
Even Édouard Philippe—who, as France 24 noted, was "Macron's longest-serving prime minister from 2017 to 2020"—is urging him to step down, saying that the president must help France "emerge in an orderly and dignified manner from a political crisis that is harming the country."
After the anti-austerity "Block Everything" protests across France on September 10, Mathilde Panot of the leftist party La France Insoumise (LFI) announced that 100 members of Parliament endorsed a motion to impeach Macron.
LFI founder Jean-Luc Mélenchon said Monday that "following the resignation of Sébastien Lecornu, we call for the immediate consideration of the motion tabled by 104 MPs for the impeachment of Emmanuel Macron."
"Emmanuel Macron is responsible for the political chaos," he said, calling out "those in power" for failing to respond to not only the demonstrations on September 10 but also the union mobilizations on September 18 and October 2.
"The president is rejected by public opinion, which desires his departure, and he has lost the support of ALL the parties in his political coalition," Mélenchon added Tuesday. "Why does he remain? A return to coherence for the country requires his departure and a return to the voice of the people."
"We're in a situation of injustice," one protester said. "Workers can no longer feed themselves, students no longer have future prospects."
Echoing demonstrations against French President Emmanuel Macron's pension reforms two years ago, hundreds of thousands of people joined protests across France on Thursday, outraged by the government's proposed austerity measures.
While the CGT trade union—one of several labor groups that pushed for the mass mobilization—put the count at over 1 million, French authorities, whose figures are usually much lower than unions, said more than 500,000 demonstrated nationwide, including 55,000 in Paris.
Thursday's demonstrations followed last week's "Block Everything" protests, which coincided with French Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu's first full day in office. Macron picked Lecornu, his ally and a former defense minister, for the post after François Bayrou lost a no-confidence vote in the National Assembly over the budget plan.
Although "Lecornu quickly scrapped one of the most unpopular proposals—eliminating two public holidays—he has not ruled out the rest," Euronews noted Thursday. "These include an overhaul of unemployment benefits, delinking pensions from inflation, and raising out-of-pocket medical costs."
A protester named Alexandre told Euronews that "right now, we have a government that doesn't listen to us and is even the opposite of what the population needs. A government that robs fellow citizens, and it's important for everyone to mobilise, for the people of France who want to be dignified and who also want to give others their dignity throughout the world."
"We're in a situation of injustice," he added. "Workers can no longer feed themselves, students no longer have future prospects."
Hospital staff, railway workers, students, and teachers were among those who poured into the streets across France—including major actions in cities such as Lyon, Marseille, and Paris—rallying behind the message: "Strikes, Blockades, Macron Get Out!"
The Public Service Ministry said that nearly 11% of France's 2.5 million state employees were on strike. According to Le Monde, "Around 1 in 6 teachers walked out of primary and secondary schools, 9 out of 10 pharmacies were shuttered, and severe disruption occurred on the Paris metro network, where only the three driverless automated lines are working normally."
Protesters want the government to not only kill the proposed austerity measures but also spend more on public services and impose higher taxes on the wealthy. Sophie Binet, the head of the CGT union, said that "the anger is huge, and so is the determination. My message to Mr. Lecornu today is this: It's the streets that must decide the budget."
Multiple elected officials with La France Insoumise (LFI), a party founded by Jean-Luc Mélenchon that is now part of the Nouveau Front Populaire alliance, shared social media posts about them joining the protests.
"The mobilization of youth continues," said Claire Lejeune, an LFI member of the National Assembly, after speaking with secondary school students in Essonne who "no longer want this policy that is wrecking their future."
Citing "the dismantling of public education," "war policy," and "ecological inaction," Lejeune said: "They are absolutely right; in the country, no one wants Lecornu or Macron anymore. I was in support of this peaceful mobilization, alongside the unions and teachers, and faced with a completely disproportionate police setup."
Approximately 80,000 police and gendarmes were deployed for the protests. Early Thursday, LFI's Clémence Guetté, a vice president in the National Assembly, shared footage of officers kicking and shoving a woman.
"Everywhere this morning, the repression strikes and hits without distinction or restraint," she wrote. "The images reaching us are shameful. Here in Marseille. To everyone, be careful. France no longer has a government: Macron is the only one responsible."
After the 1 million estimate began circulating, Guetté called the mass action "immense, everywhere, impressive," and declared: "The people are in the streets! We are going to win."
As Al Jazeera reported: "Across the country, Palestinian flags were visible as some protesters also stood in solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza during Israel's war on the strip. Protesters blocked the Eurolinks arms factory in Marseille, which is believed to supply equipment to Israel, while holding a large banner that read: 'Shut down the genocidal factory.'"
Noting the solidarity with the Palestinian people on Thursday, LFI's Sarah Legrain called for sanctions, an arms embargo, and lifting Israel's blockade of Gaza, where civilians are starving to death.
Later Thursday, Legrain celebrated the massive turnout and pledged that "we will keep the pressure up until Macron leaves!"
"We're fed up with paying, we're working hard, we're barely managing to keep our heads above water and to think that the hole in the deficit would be our fault is unbearable to hear," said one labor representative.
On his first full day in office Wednesday, newly appointed French Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu was greeted with nationwide protests, organized online by the decentralized "Block Everything" movement, with demonstrators condemning the government's austerity measures that they said would likely be continued by the new leader.
Lecornu, the former defense minister and a close ally of President Emmanuel Macron, was hand-picked by the president to succeed outgoing Prime Minister François Bayrou two days after Bayrou lost a confidence vote in the National Assembly over the government's plan to cut the federal budget by over $50 billion.
Bayrou had proposed eliminating two national holidays, freezing pensions for 2026, and cutting billions in health investments to reduce the deficit.
The proposals have intensified anger that's already been brewing over inequality and poverty in France, both of which are on the rise according to the country's statistics bureau.
Research by the EU Tax Observatory has shown that ultrawealthy individuals in France pay an effective income tax rate of about 0.1%; the National Assembly voted in favor of a 2% minimum tax on wealth exceeding €100 million, or $117 million, earlier this year, but the measure was rejected by the Senate.
Eric Challal, a representative of SUD Rail-Paris, one of two unions that joined the protests on Wednesday, told Euronews that the anger "being expressed today is what we've been feeling all summer, fed up and angry since the Bayrou budget plan was announced, asking us to work more."
"We're fed up with paying, we're working hard, we're barely managing to keep our heads above water and to think that the hole in the deficit would be our fault is unbearable to hear," added Challal.
A university student named Thomas told the outlet that "it's time for Macron and politicians to understand we are serious."
"We're angry with the political system and the fact that the ultrarich and corporations are not paying enough taxes," he said.
The protests included demonstrations at train stations such as Gare du Nord in Paris, one of Europe's busiest travel hubs, where several hundred people gathered Wednesday morning and chants of "Step down, Macron" rang out. Police officers, 6,000 of whom have been deployed in Paris alone to quell the unrest, fired tear gas at the protesters, with some travelers caught in the chaotic scene.
Demonstrators set garbage cans on fire and attempted to block highway traffic in eastern Paris, while police clashed with dozens of students who had blocked the entry of a high school in the area.
The decentralized "Block Everything" movement was organized largely on social media and was originally embraced by far-right activists before garnering the support of progressive France Unbowed leader Jean-Luc Mélenchon and left-wing groups including labor unions, which are also planning broader workers' strikes for September 18.
Demands listed in one document that's circulated online include strengthening public services, fighting media consolidation, and taxing the richest corporations, and a survey by the left-wing Jean-Jaurès Foundation found that a majority of people involved with the movement were "educated, highly politicized and angry far-left sympathizers," according to The New York Times.
A recent poll by Ipsos showed that 46% of French people support Block Everything, with strong backing from left-wing voters as well as more than half of far-right National Rally supporters.
Outgoing Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau said Wednesday morning that "law enforcement has the order to not tolerate any violence, any vandalism, any blockage, any occupation of our nation's essential infrastructure." A total of about 80,000 officers were deployed across the country to respond to the demonstrations, and more than 200 people were arrested.
Though Bayrou is no longer in power, Marine Tondelier, the leader of the French Green Party, told the BFMTV news channel on Tuesday that Macron's choice of Lecornu to serve as the new prime minister was a "provocation" that showed a "total lack of respect" for French voters who remain distrustful of Macron's government.
The decision by Prime Minister Donald Tusk came after the Polish military shot down several Russian drones that entered its airspace, marking the first time a NATO member has fired shots in the war between Russia and Ukraine.
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk invoked Article 4 of the North Atlantic Treaty on Wednesday after 19 Russian drones flew into Polish territory late Tuesday night and into the early morning hours.
Speaking to Poland's parliament on Wednesday, Tusk said that it is "the closest we have been to open conflict since World War II," though he still said there was "no reason to believe we're on the brink of war."
The Polish military, along with NATO forces, shot down several of the drones, marking the first time a NATO-aligned country has fired a shot since Russia first invaded Ukraine in 2022.
According to Polish officials, the drones entered the nation's airspace amid a series of airstrikes directed at Western Ukraine. Though some damage to at least one home has been reported due to falling drone debris, there are no immediate reports of casualties, according to the New York Times.
Following what he called a "large-scale provocation" by Russia, Tusk took the significant step of invoking Article 4 of the NATO treaty for just the eighth time since the alliance's founding in 1949.
Short of the more drastic Article 5, which obligates NATO allies to defend one another militarily at a time of attack, Article 4 allows any member to call on the rest of the alliance to consult with them if they feel their territory, independence, or security is threatened.
Russia, for its part, said it had "no intentions to engage any targets on the territory of Poland." However, as German defense minister Boris Pistorius said in a quote to AFP, the drones were "clearly set on this course" and "did not have to fly this route to reach Ukraine."
In comments to The Guardian, Dr. Marion Messmer, senior research fellow at the foreign policy think tank Chatham House, agreed it was "unlikely that this was an accident" and said that Russia was likely "trying to test where NATO's red lines are."
European leaders issued statements of solidarity following the attack.
UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer called it an "egregious and unprecedented violation of Polish and NATO airspace" and pledged to "ramp up the pressure on [Russian President] Putin until there is a just and lasting peace." The UK's secretary of state for defense, John Healey, said he would ask British armed forces "to look at options to bolster NATO's air defense over Poland."
French President Emmanuel Macron called it a "reckless escalation," adding that France will "not compromise on the security of the Allies."
Tusk asserted that "words are not enough" and has requested more material support from Poland's allies, which could point to the risk of further escalation.
While the invocation of Article 4 does not always presage a hot war, Yasraj Sharma writes for Al Jazeera that it "would serve as a political precursor to Article 5 deliberations."
Following the attack, the US ambassador to NATO, Matthew Whitaker, said in a post on X that the United States "will defend every inch of NATO territory," suggesting a possible willingness for the US to become more directly involved in the hostilities after providing over $128 billion in military and other aid to Ukraine since Russia first attacked in 2022.
The US has roughly 10,000 troops stationed in Poland as part of a permanent military presence in the country.
US President Donald Trump, meanwhile, wrote in an uncharacteristically brief post on Truth Social: "What's with Russia violating Poland's airspace with drones? Here we go!"
Trump plans to speak with Poland's president, Karol Nawrocki, on Wednesday, according to Reuters.
The drone attack came shortly after Trump threatened to impose harsher sanctions on Russia following its ramp-up of attacks on Kyiv over the weekend, yet another policy shift by the US president after he appeared interested in cutting a deal favorable to Russian President Vladimir Putin at a summit last month.
In the New York Times, Moscow bureau chief Anton Troianovski writes that with Russia's entry into Polish airspace, along with its more aggressive attacks on Ukraine, "Putin is signaling that he will not compromise on his core demands even as he claims that Russia is still ready to make a deal."
France has now lost its third prime minister in 12 months as political parties from the far-right to the hard-left refuse to back draconian budget proposals as a means of addressing the country’s financial woes.
Europe’s second-largest economy has plunged into political paralysis again, as the French government has been overthrown by yet another no-confidence vote. This time, the no-confidence vote was against Prime Minister François Bayrou and his proposals to reduce the country’s public deficit from a projected 5.4% in 2025 to 4.6% in 2026—and to fall within the European 3% by 2029—with highly unpopular measures that would have included a “freeze” on government spending, over 5.3 billion euros in cuts to local authorities, and 5 billion euros in cuts in the country’s healthcare budget, yet with plans underway to significantly boost defense spending in the next few years. Bayrou’s 2026 budget envisaged in total around 44 billion euros ($51.3 billion) in cuts, tax increases, and even the scrapping of two public holidays, with the latter stirring as much outcry in France as the austerity budget itself.
Essentially, France has now lost its third prime minister in 12 months as political parties from the far-right National Rally (RN) to the hard-left La France Insoumise (France Unbowed) refuse to back draconian budget proposals as a means of addressing the country’s financial woes. The collapse of the Bayrou government was not a surprise, and some of us had even predicted that it would “meet the same fate” as the government that preceded it, namely that of Michel Barnier. Indeed, there is no other country in Europe with continuous anti-neoliberal struggles as France. Opposition to the normalization of the neoliberal socioeconomic reality has been in constant motion since the mid-1990s when President Jacques Chirac launched a direct attack on the foundational principles of the welfare state.
However, since assuming the presidency in 2017, Emmanuel Macron and his various governments (France has a semi-presidential system) have sought to shove neoliberalism down people’s throats at a record-breaking speed. Unsurprisingly enough, in a recent IFOP poll conducted for Le Journal du Dimanche, French President Emmanuel Macron and his now ousted Prime Minister François Bayrou emerged as the most unpopular leadership duo in the history of the Fifth Republic.
On August 25, Bayrou, who wanted to be known as “Mr. Anti-Debt,” stunned even his political allies when he announced that he would call for a vote in the National Assembly for his neoliberal budget proposals to rescue France from its ailing finances. It was a political grenade that no one had expected. Moreover, Bayrou did so even though he was fully aware of the fact that he was not, in all likelihood, going to avoid the collapse of his government. In fact, he seems to have predicted the outcome of the confidence vote on Monday, September 8, when he said on a radio interview just a few days earlier, in a rather philosophical and quintessentially French fashion, that “there are worse disasters in life than the collapse of the government.”
The most obvious reason why Bayrou gambled with a confidence vote on his plans to reduce France’s public deficit is because he had miscalculated all along the concerns of the French people about deficits and debt. He had embarked on a PR campaign to convince the public that the future of France was at stake on account on the nation’s worrying state of financial affairs. He employed distressful images by invoking the Greek debt crisis of the early 2010s as a warning of what might happen to France and spoke with an apparent earnestness of the possibility of a market meltdown if the French government failed to act boldly and quickly. In his speech to the National Assembly ahead of the confidence vote, Bayrou said that France’s excessive debt load is “life-threatening.”
Yet, typical of neoliberal attitudes and self-serving policies, Bayrou failed all along to realize that while the average French citizens were not insensitive to the realities of the country running a budget deficit of 5.8% of GDP and a national debt of 114% of GDP, they found socially unacceptable the neoliberal economic measures proposed for addressing its financial woes. One could say that, from their own point of view, if the organization of the economy along the principles of neoliberal capitalism is the cause of France’s financial woes, then neoliberalism certainly could not be the answer to their solution. Indeed, an IFOP survey conducted in July found that 57% of respondents believed that a plan was needed to reduce the country’s public deficit and national debt, but only 26% found the measures to be “just.”
The French people, from the far-right to the far-left, have made it very clear that they do not consider neoliberal policies as a remedy either to economic problems such as unemployment or to financial situations like public deficits and national debt.
As a matter of fact, both Bayrou and Macron failed to grasp the fact that it is neoliberalism itself that has fueled the surge both of RN and the New Popular Front (NFP), a coalition of left-wing parties that won the largest number of seats in the snap parliamentary election that was held in July 2024, even if the far-right and the hard-left are worlds apart in terms of the overall social and political values that they embrace and advocate.
There is, however, an additional and probably more important reason why Bayrou gambled on a confidence vote over his neoliberal budget proposal even though he knew that the odds of carrying the day were stacked against him. He was hoping that his decision to do so would compel lawmakers in the National Assembly to think twice about toppling his government by reflecting on the impeding consequences stemming from the planned actions of the grassroots protest movement organized around the cry “Block everything” (“Bloquons tout”), scheduled for September 10. The movement’s organizers hope to bring the country to a complete standstill (which, coincidentally, is what the US needs in light of the autocratic actions of President Donald Trump which are turning the country into a third world dictatorship), but the prevailing climate in French politics and society is such these days that even mainstream political parties have offered backing to this nationwide shutdown that will, apparently, take place even with the collapse of the Bayrou government.
Love it or hate it, one must agree that French politics is never boring. More important, the protest movements in the country—starting at least with the French opposition to the Algerian war, later on with the May ’68 events and more recently with the yellow vest protests and now with the new protest movement dubbed “Block everything”--should provide tremendous inspiration to popular struggles against exploitation, oppression, and social injustices everywhere in the world.
What French President Emmanuel Macron’s move might be following the collapse of Bayrou’s government remains to be seen. Nonetheless, it would be politically naive of him to think that a new government will fare better in the future if it insists on pushing neoliberal measures as a solution to the country’s financial woes. For the French people, from the far-right to the far-left, have made it very clear that they do not consider neoliberal policies as a remedy either to economic problems such as unemployment or to financial situations like public deficits and national debt.
Indeed, even the center-right in France, which in recent years has rallied around Emmanuel Macron and his neoliberal vision, has generally been very cautious about the Anglo-American economic model with its attack on government and worship of the market. No doubt, this is why the prevailing sentiment in France is that not only Macron’s governments cannot sustain themselves in the current political climate but that Macron himself is finished and must go.
Haiti’s struggle for restitution is not a historical footnote—it is the next chapter in the global struggle for Black liberation.
As we mark Black August, the struggle that launched the global fight for Black liberation—the Haitian Revolution—remains unfinished. Over 200 years after enslaved Haitians lit the first beacon of Black resistance in August 1791 and set a precedent for abolition by winning their freedom, they are fighting the next chapter in the struggle for Black economic and political liberation—one that could set another precedent, this time for reparative justice.
On August 22, 1791, Haitians revolted against their French enslavers, liberating themselves and forming the world’s first free Black Republic, and the first country to abolish enslavement. The Haitian Revolution was not just a simple victory against one of the world’s most powerful empires. It was a global rupture, proof that Black freedom was possible and European domination was not inevitable. It lit the fire of revolution globally, inspiring enslaved and colonized people worldwide. As Frederick Douglass, one of the 19th century’s leading advocates for Black rights in the United States, said in his speech to the 1893 World’s Fair in Chicago, “[in] striking for their freedom, [Haitians]... struck for the freedom of every black man in the world.”
France and other enslaving countries realized the power of the Haitian Revolution as a herald of global Black liberation and a threat to their supremacy. They sought to punish Haiti for the crime of being Black and free. In 1825, France sent a fleet of 14 warships equipped with 528 canons to Port-au-Prince and demanded that Haiti pay 150 million francs as compensation for the loss of what they considered their “property,” including captive Haitians. In exchange for this payment, France would recognize Haiti’s independence—an independence already paid for by the blood and lives of the Haitians who fought Napoleon’s army and won.
The strength of Haiti’s claim poses just as much of a threat to the global white supremacist order now as the success of Haiti’s revolution did in 1804.
Under threat of attack and re-enslavement, Haitian President Jean-Pierre Boyer and his allies agreed to pay. The ransom—and subsequent extortionate loans by French banks to finance payments—crushed Haiti’s economy, prevented it from investing in its own development, and left it vulnerable to foreign intervention and exploitation that further impoverished and destabilized the country. Many of the conditions used to paint Haiti as a “failed state” today can be traced directly to that original grave injustice.
The Independence Ransom and other measures delayed broader liberation, but the promise of Black freedom and autonomy that Haiti gave the world remained alive. In his speech, Douglass called Haiti “the Black man’s country, now forever”—and Haitians are still fighting for their freedom and inspiring others. These are the struggles we honor during Black August, born in the 1970s in California’s prison system to commemorate the lives and assassinations of revolutionary brothers Jonathan and George Jackson: the Nat Turner rebellion in Virginia in August 1831; the March on Washington on August 28, 1963; and every uprising that has dared to defy enslavement and racial capitalism.
This August, Haiti stands at the heart of another urgent struggle: the fight for restitution for the Independence Ransom. Calls for France to pay restitution have increased in recent years, not just from Haitians but from all around the world. The strength of Haiti’s claim poses just as much of a threat to the global white supremacist order now as the success of Haiti’s revolution did in 1804. In fact, when the United States and its powerful allies realized the power of Haiti’s claim to balance the global economy in 2004, they overthrew Haiti’s democracy rather than risk its claim succeeding.
Haiti’s struggle for restitution is not a historical footnote—it is the next chapter in the global struggle for Black liberation. Restitution would not only address the grave injustice done to Haiti, it would also lay a powerful legal and political foundation for broader reparations. Just as Haitians won their freedom in 1804, they will eventually win restitution for themselves and unlock the door to reparations for all. But that victory will require sustained pressure—on France, the United States, and the banks and companies that facilitated and profited off this economic extraction—not just from Haitians, but from all people who wish to honor the memories of those who paid the ultimate price in the fight for liberation. This means support for restitution, but also for a democratic, sovereign government that will assert the claim and otherwise be accountable to the Haitian people.
This Black August is not just a commemoration, it is a call to action. It is a call to join the 60-plus leading organizations from Haiti, the United States, the Caribbean, France, and beyond that sent a letter to French President Emmanuel Macron demanding restitution and reparations. And it is, above all, a call to remember Haitians’ pivotal role in the global Black struggle for liberation and to recommit ourselves to the unfinished work they started in 1791.
Israel has already summarily rejected the U.K. leader's ultimatum to take "substantive" steps to end the war on Gaza by September, agree to a two-state solution, and reject West Bank annexation.
United Kingdom Prime Minister Keir Starmer was accused of "political grandstanding" after he said Tuesday that his country would recognize Palestinian statehood if Israel did not take ambiguously defined steps to end its war on Gaza—conditions that were promptly dismissed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
"Today, as part of this process towards peace, I can confirm the U.K. will recognize the state of Palestine by the United Nations General Assembly in September, unless the Israeli government takes substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza, agree to a cease-fire, and commit to a long-term sustainable peace, reviving the prospect of a two-state solution," Starmer said during a press conference.
"This includes allowing the U.N. to restart the supply of aid and making clear that there will be no annexations in the West Bank," the prime minister continued, adding that "the terrorists of Hamas... must immediately release all of the hostages, sign up to a cease-fire, disarm, and accept that they will play no part in the government of Gaza."
Member of Scottish Parliament Scott Greer (Scottish Greens-West Scotland) responded to Tuesday's announcement on social media, saying, "Starmer wouldn't threaten to withdraw U.K. recognition of Israel, but he's made recognition of Palestinian statehood conditional on the actions of their genocidal oppressor?"
"Another profoundly unjust act from a Labour government thoroughly complicit in Israel's crimes," Greer added.
British attorney and activist Shola Mos-Shogbamimu asserted that "Keir Starmer knows his time is up and pivots to save his career but it's too late."
"By placing a condition on recognizing Palestine this declaration is performative and disingenuous because before September he can claim Israel has substantively complied with the condition," she added.
Leftist politician and Accountability Archive co-founder Philip Proudfoot argued on social media that "decent" Members of Parliament "need to table a no-confidence motion in Starmer now."
"He has just used the recognition of Palestine as a bargaining chip in exchange for Israel following its BASIC LEGAL OBLIGATIONS," he added. "This is one of the lowest political acts in living memory."
Media critic Sana Saeed said on social media, "Using Palestinian life and future as a bargaining chip and threat to Israel—not a surprise from kid starver Keir Starmer."
Journalist Sangita Myska argued that "rather than threatening the gesture politics of recognizing a Palestinian state (that may never happen)," Starmer should expel Israel's ambassador to the U.K., impose "full trade sanctions" and a "full arms embargo," and end alleged Royal Air Force surveillance flights over Gaza.
Political analyst Bushra Shaikh accused Starmer of "political grandstanding" and "speaking from both sides of his mouth."
Starmer's announcement followed a Monday meeting in Turnberry, Scotland with U.S. President Donald Trump, who signaled that he would not object to U.K. recognition of Palestine.
However, U.S. State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce called Starmer's announcement "a slap in the face for the victims of October 7," a reference to the Hamas-led attack of 2023.
While the United States remains Israel's staunchest supporter and enabler—providing billions of dollars in annual armed aid and diplomatic cover—Trump, Vice President JD Vance, and U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee have all expressed concerns over mounting starvation deaths in Gaza.
On Tuesday, the U.N.-affiliated Integrated Food Security Phase Classification warned that a "worst-case" famine scenario is developing in Gaza, where health officials say at least 147 Palestinians, including at least 88 children, have died from malnutrition since Israel launched its obliteration and siege of the enclave following the October 2023 attack.
Israel—which imposed a "complete siege" on Gaza following that attack—has severely limited the amount of humanitarian aid that can enter the strip. According to U.N. officials, Israel Defense Forces troops have killed more than 1,000 aid-seeking civilians at distribution points run by the U.S.-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. IDF troops have said they were ordered to shoot live bullets and artillery shells at aid seekers.
Netanyahu—who is wanted by the International Criminal Court for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes in Gaza including murder and weaponized starvation—responded to the U.K. prime minister's ultimatum in a social media post stating, "Starmer rewards Hamas' monstrous terrorism and punishes its victims."
"A jihadist state on Israel's border TODAY will threaten Britain TOMORROW," Netanyahu said. "Appeasement towards jihadist terrorists always fails. It will fail you too. It will not happen."
The U.K. played a critical role in the foundation of the modern state of Israel, allowing Jewish colonization of what was then the British Mandate of Palestine under condition that "nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine," who made up more than 90% of the population.
Seeing that Jewish immigrants returning to their ancestral homeland were usurping the indigenous Arabs of Palestine, the British subsequently prohibited further Zionist colonization. This sparked a nearly decadelong wave of terrorism and other attacks against the British occupiers that ultimately resulted in the U.K. abandoning Palestine and the establishment of Israel under the authority of the United Nations—an outcome achieved by the ethnic cleansing of more than 750,000 Palestinian Arabs.
On the topic of annexing the West Bank, earlier this month, all 15 Israeli government ministers representing Netanyahu's Likud party recommended the move, citing support from Trump. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) found last year that Israel's occupation of Palestine, including the West Bank and Gaza, is an illegal form of apartheid.
Last week, French President Emmanuel Macron said his country would announce its formal recognition of Palestinian statehood during September's U.N. General Assembly in New York. France is set to become the first Group of Seven nation to recognize Palestine, which is currently officially acknowledged by approximately 150 of the 193 U.N. member states.
Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz subsequently threatened "severe consequences" for nations that recognize Palestine.
Starmer's announcement came on the same day that the Gaza Health Ministry said that the death toll from Israel's 662-day assault and siege on Gaza—which is the subject of a South Africa-led genocide case at the ICJ—topped 60,000. However, multiple peer-reviewed studies in the prestigious British medical journal The Lancet have concluded that Gaza officials' casualty tallies are likely significant undercounts.
The French president's announcement came as more Palestinian children starved to death in Gaza and the U.S. and Israel quit cease-fire talks with Hamas.
France is set to become the first Group of Seven nation to officially recognize Palestinian statehood, amid worsening deadly starvation in Gaza caused by Israel's 656-day genocidal annihilation and siege of the coastal enclave.
French President Emmanuel Macron said on social media Thursday that he would announce the move at September's United Nations General Assembly in New York.
"The urgency today is to end the war in Gaza and to provide aid to the civilian population," Macron asserted. "Peace is possible. There must be an immediate cease-fire, the release of all hostages, and massive humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza."
"It is also necessary to ensure the demilitarization of Hamas, secure and rebuild Gaza," he added. "Finally, it is essential to build the state of Palestine, ensure its viability, and enable it, by accepting its demilitarization and fully recognizing Israel, to contribute to the security of all in the Middle East. There is no alternative."
Approximately 150 of 193 United Nations member states currently recognize Palestinian statehood. Following a 2024 announcement that Ireland, Norway, and Spain would formally recognize Palestine, then-Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz threatened "severe consequences" for nations who take such a step.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—who is wanted by the International Criminal Court for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes in Gaza—said Thursday that Israel "strongly condemn[s] President Macron's decision."
"Such a move rewards terror and risks creating another Iranian proxy, just as Gaza became," the prime minister added. "A Palestinian state in these conditions would be a launch pad to annihilate Israel—not to live in peace beside it."
However, the Palestinian Authority welcomed the news, with First Vice President Hussein al-Sheikh expressing "thanks and appreciation" to Macron.
"This position reflects France's commitment to international law and its support for the Palestinian people's rights to self-determination," al-Sheikh added.
Macron's announcement came as the Israeli government and Steve Witkoff, U.S. President Donald Trump's Mideast envoy, said they were quitting cease-fire negotiations with Hamas, which is still believed to hold 20 living Israeli and other hostages taken during the October 7, 2023 attack.
Blaming Hamas for the talks' breakdown, Witkoff said that "we will now consider alternative options to bring the hostages home and try to create a more stable environment for the people of Gaza." He did not elaborate upon those "options."
Gaza officials said Thursday that at least 115 Palestinians—including more than 80 children—have starved to death since October 2023. Overall, Israel's assault and siege have left more than 215,000 Palestinians dead, maimed, or missing in Gaza, while forcibly displacing most of the strip's more than 2 million people, often multiple times.
Some observers criticized Macron even as they welcomed Thursday's announcement.
"Why did it take France so long, Mr. Macron?" asked British attorney and activist Shola Mos-Shogbamimu on the social media site X. "Why stand by and watch Israel commit a holocaust for so long?"