SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
global justice now
Despite 'Big Tariff' Threat From Trump, UK Urged to 'Raise, Not Abolish' Tax on Tech Giants
"We need to stop kowtowing to him, stop offering him humiliating and unpopular 'state' visits, and start enacting economic policies that put the interest of people here ahead of Donald Trump," said one campaigner.
Apr 24, 2026
After President Donald Trump threatened to impose a new tariff on the United Kingdom over its Digital Services Tax, the head of a UK economic justice organization on Friday called for standing up to the US leader and even increasing the levy.
The 2% tax on digital companies such as search engines and social media networks that derive value from UK users—which applies to US tech giants such as Apple, Amazon, and Alphabet's Google—has generated significant revenue annually, including £808 million, or over $1 billion, for the 2024-25 financial year.
"We don't like it when they target American companies... whether we like those companies or don't like 'em," Trump—whose inauguration last year featured several ultrarich tech executives—said Thursday. He accused the UK of trying to "make an easy buck" and warned that "they better be careful."
"If they don't drop the tax, we'll probably put a big tariff on the UK," the president continued, suggesting that the tariff would be "more than what they're getting" from the policy targeting Big Tech.
Responding in a Friday statement, Nick Dearden, director of UK-based advocacy group Global Justice Now, said that "Trump's latest threats prove, yet again, that if you give in to a bully, they'll just come back for more."
Just months after striking a bilateral trade deal that notably did not alter the tax on tech companies, Trump and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer signed an artificial intelligence pact last September. The latter, said Dearden, "rolled out the red carpet to Trump's Big Tech barons."
"But this wasn't the end of the story. Rather, the pact has given Trump an ongoing vehicle to bully the British government," the campaigner continued. "It's time to admit that Stramer's strategy towards Trump has been an abject failure. We should raise, not abolish the digital services tax, which has already raised billions of pounds for the British economy."
"Trump won't like this but that's just too bad, we need to stop kowtowing to him, stop offering him humiliating and unpopular 'state' visits, and start enacting economic policies that put the interest of people here ahead of Donald Trump," he argued—as the UK's King Charles III and his wife Camilla, the queen consort, prepare to meet with Trump at the White House on Monday.
Asked about Trump's tech tax threats, a spokesperson for Starmer's office told The Guardian that "our position on that is unchanged... It is a hugely important tax to make sure that those businesses continue to pay their share. So it is a fair and proportionate approach to taxing business activities in the UK."
As the newspaper noted:
The digital services tax is only meant to be an interim measure, and the UK government agreed in 2021 to phase it out, averting the threat of retaliatory tariffs on British products from the US.
The tax was meant to be replaced in 2024 with a new global system after the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) brokered a deal between 140 countries, including the UK, that proposed large multinational companies paying tax in the countries where they do business committed themselves to a minimum 15% corporation tax rate. Implementation has been beset with delays as a number of countries have continued to raise objections over the regime.
Trump's tariff threat comes after he has lashed out at Starmer—and other European officials—in recent weeks over their limited support for his illegal war on Iran. The US leader suggested to the BBC this week that he and the UK prime minister could only "recover" if the Labour leader embraced stricter immigration policies and "opened the North Sea" to the fossil fuel industry.
"I'm here to serve the British people always, to have their interests and to make sure that I make the right decisions for them," Starmer told the British broadcaster. "That is why I took the decision that we would not be dragged into the war in Iran."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump-Starmer AI Deal Slammed for Putting 'Interests of US Tech Bros' Ahead of the Common Good
"Instead of bending over backwards to appease Trump in an attempt to avoid his tariff bullying, it’s time for Starmer to show real leadership and stand up to him," said one campaigner.
Sep 18, 2025
Critics of the artificial intelligence pact signed Thursday by US President Donald Trump and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer warned that the deal sacrifices the climate, data privacy, creators' copyrights, and British sovereignty on the altar of Silicon Valley profits.
Speaking at Chequers—the country estate of UK prime ministers in Buckinghamshire—Trump said that "we're taking the next logical step with a historic agreement on science and technology partnerships, and this will create new government, academic, and private sector cooperation in areas such as AI, which is taking over the world."
Laughing, Trump turned to tech bosses gathered for the event and—singling out Jensen Huang, CEO of chip-maker Nvidia—said: "And I'm looking at you guys. You're taking over the world, Jensen. I don't know what you're doing here. I hope you're right."
Along with Huang—who heads the world's largest publicly traded company—the CEOs of Apple, and ChatGPT creator OpenAI joined Trump on his UK trip.
Starmer said the deal involves more than $200 billion in total US investments and will create 15,000 jobs over the next decade. The prime minister named US companies including Amazon, Blackstone, Boeing, Citigroup, and Microsoft, and UK firms like AstraZeneca, BP, GSK, and Rolls Royce as being part of the deal.
Other companies involved in the agreement include Google and its AI laboratory DeepMind, OpenAI, Oracle, Salesforce, and ScaleAI in the United States and AI Pathfinder, DataVita, NScale, and Sage in Britain.
DeSmog UK deputy director Sam Bright reported Thursday that the investment bank led by Warren Stephens, Trump's ambassador to London, owns hundreds of millions of dollars in shares of tech companies involved in the AI deal, including Google parent company Alphabet, Microsoft, and Nvidia.
Like Amazon, Google, Meta, and Nvidia, Stephens—who is a billionaire—made a seven-figure donation to Trump's inauguration fund.
Prominent critics of the agreement include former UK Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, who is also Meta's former president of global affairs. Speaking Wednesday at a Royal Television Society conference in Cambridge, Clegg said the deal leaves Britain with "sloppy seconds from Silicon Valley" and "is just another version of the United Kingdom holding on to Uncle Sam’s coattails."
Opposition to the tech deal was also widespread Wednesday at a central London protest against Trump's visit organized by the Stop Trump Coalition.
Nick Dearden, director of the campaign group Global Justice Now and a spokesperson for the Stop Trump Coalition, noted in an interview with Wired senior business editor Natasha Bernal that the details of the pact have not been made public.
"We have not seen the text of the deal. We don’t know what we have given away," Dearden said. "We know that some of the tech barons accompanying Trump want us to drop parts of our regulation, want us to drop the digital services tax, want us to make it easier for them to acquire and merge with each other to become even bigger monopolies, so we are worried about that.”
So Trump swept into the UK to be wined and dined by the King.Big Tech bosses came too, bearing pledges of huge UK investments (mostly for data centres).Our govt, desperate for good economic news, is boosting this as a win for the UK.But the *point* of US Big Tech is to monopolise the data.
[image or embed]
— Critical Takes on Corporate Power (@criticaltakes.bsky.social) September 18, 2025 at 5:14 AM
Gobal Justice Now trade campaigner Seema Syeda said in a statement:
This toxic technology pact that favors the interests of US tech bros and rich corporations over ordinary people must be opposed at all costs. It’s a democratic scandal that the public and Parliament have been left in the dark as to its contents to date, but what we do know should ring alarm bells. Instead of bending over backwards to appease Trump in an attempt to avoid his tariff bullying, it’s time for Starmer to show real leadership and stand up to him. We can’t let an egomaniac like Trump hold our rights and democracy hostage.
Clive Teague—who was at the London rally supporting Extinction Rebellion Waverley and Borders in Surrey—told Bernal that he does not oppose AI if it is powered by renewable energy.
"We can’t keep burning fossil fuels to keep feeding into these data centers, because it’ll swamp the requirements for the rest of the world," Teague said.
Global Justice Now also warned that the tech deal could expose National Health Service (NHS) patient data to exploitation, wweaken digital privacy protections, thwart regulation of AI, and limit the government's taxation options.
Also sounding the alarm on the US-UK AI deal are scores of creators and creative groups including Elton John, Paul McCartney, and the Writers' Guild of Great Britain, who decried what they say is the Starmer government's failure to adequately protect copyrighted works from unauthorized use by AI companies.
As the Prime Minister prepares to meet President Trump during the state visit, WGGB has joined over 70 of the UK’s leading creators + creative orgs in signing an open letter demanding the Government explains its failure to protect the rights of UK copyright holderswritersguild.org.uk/creators-ai/
[image or embed]
— Writers' Guild of Great Britain (@writersguildgb.bsky.social) September 16, 2025 at 2:44 AM
"Artificial intelligence companies have ingested millions of copyright works without permission or payment, in total disregard for the UK’s legal protections," they said in an open letter. "The first duty of any government is to protect its citizens—not to promote corporate interests, particularly where they are primarily based abroad."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Trade 'Deal' With UK Ripped as Another 'Con on American Workers'
"At this point the goal of policy seems to be to goose the market for the next few days, with no long-term plan."
May 08, 2025
U.S. President Donald Trump on Thursday unveiled the framework of a trade deal with the United Kingdom that was extremely light on details despite being billed as a "full and comprehensive agreement," leading critics to describe the fanfare surrounding the announcement as a cynical photo op for both sides.
In a statement, U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer touted the deal as "historic" while acknowledging that it is incomplete. Trump insisted the deal is "maxed out," though he told reporters in the Oval Office that "the final details are being written up in the coming weeks."
U.S. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, meanwhile, described the agreement as one "in concept," drawing comparisons to Trump's widely derided statement on the campaign trail that he had a "concept of a plan" on healthcare.
Melinda St. Louis, Global Trade Watch director at Public Citizen, said Thursday that "Trump may have enjoyed having his ego stroked by Starmer and [U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard] Lutnick fawning over him for 'closing' a deal—one that is obviously not actually done—but his con on American workers continues."
"The American and British people need to see whatever text there is or is developed in ongoing talks—and no deal should be approved or go into effect without going through proper on-the-record public comment processes and congressional oversight," said St. Louis. "We need to know, for instance, when they claim to address 'non-tariff barriers,' just what giveaways for Big Tech may be inserted on behalf of Elon Musk and Trump's other tech-bro billionaire buddies, given that he waved around Big Tech's wish list when he announced the tariffs."
"With claims of dozens more 'deals' in progress," St. Louis added, "Congress must act swiftly to demand transparency and accountability in any trade deal before Trump and his team sell off our country for parts behind closed doors."
According to summaries released by the Trump White House and U.K. government, the bilateral trade framework would leave in place the 10% tariff rate that Trump has applied to all imports to the U.S. while providing targeted tariff relief for the British auto, steel, and aluminum industries.
The White House also said, without providing specific details, that the deal would "significantly expand U.S. market access in the U.K., creating a $5 billion opportunity for new exports for U.S. farmers, ranchers, and producers."
The U.K. is the first country to announce an agreement in principle with Trump since he unilaterally imposed tariffs on imports to the U.S. last month, invoking emergency authority. The U.S. ran a trade surplus with the U.K. last year, and experts questioned the extent to which the terms of the agreement broadly outlined Thursday would change the trade dynamic between the two countries.
"At this point the goal of policy seems to be to goose the market for the next few days, with no long-term plan," suggested economist Paul Krugman.
Around the world, stocks rose in response to the U.S.-U.K. announcement.
Nick Dearden, director of the U.K.-based advocacy group Global Justice Now, said that Thursday's events were primarily "about appeasing Trump"—but cautioned that worse could be coming in the near future.
"While there are limited tariff reductions, we remain in a much worse position than we were six months ago," Dearden argued. "What's more, Trump could impose new tariffs at any time because Starmer has proven to him that his threats work: caving in to a bully is not something to be celebrated. Today's press conference also fires the starting gun on a genuinely scary, fuller trade deal, and there are strong indications our rights, standards, and protections will be up for grabs in that larger agreement."
"Unless we stand up to this deal, the British public will pay a very high price for Starmer's friendship with Donald Trump," Dearden added.
In a blog post published ahead of Thursday's announcement, Dearden warned that the new framework could set the stage for a deal that locks the U.K. "into policies that favor the unchecked growth of tech monopolies: deregulated AI, increased corporate access to NHS data, and restrictions on our ability to rein in Silicon Valley giants."
"Worse may be coming unless we stop treating trade negotiations as a matter of royal prerogative," wrote Dearden. "We need a modern, democratic process for international agreements—transparent, accountable, and inclusive. But Starmer has shown that such reform won't be gifted by those in power. It must be demanded."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Batsh*t Crazy' Trump Tariffs Should Be Seen as $7,000 Tax Hike on Workers, Says Economist
Instead of strategically imposing tariffs, Trump has chosen to "give the country the most massive tax increase in its history, possibly exceeding $1 trillion on an annual basis."
Apr 03, 2025
As stocks "nosedived" on Thursday, economists, policymakers, and campaigners around the world continued to warn about the impacts of U.S. President Donald Trump's trade war, which includes a 10% universal tariff for imports and steeper duties—that he claims are "reciprocal"—for dozens of countries, set to take effect over the next week.
"This is how you sabotage the world's economic engine while claiming to supercharge it," wrote Nigel Green, CEO of the international financial consultancy deVere Group. "Trump is blowing up the post-war system that made the U.S. and the world more prosperous, and he's doing it with reckless confidence."
As Bloomberg detailed after the president's "Liberation Day" remarks from the White House Rose Garden:
China's cumulative tariff rate of 54% includes both the 20% duty already charged earlier this year, added to the 34% levy calculated as part of Trump's so-called reciprocal plan, according to people familiar with the matter. The European Union's rate is 20% and Vietnam's is 46%, White House documents showed. Other nations slapped with larger tariffs include Japan with 24%, South Korea with 25%, India with 26%, Cambodia with 49%, and Taiwan with 32%.
In Europe on Thursday, "the regional Stoxx 600 index provisionally ended down around 2.7%," while "the U.K.'s FTSE 100 was down 1.6%, with France's CAC 40 and Germany's DAX posting deeper losses of 3.3% and 3.1%, respectively," according to CNBC.
In the United States, CNBCreported, "the broad market index dropped 4%, putting it on track for its worst day since September 2022. The Dow Jones Industrial Average tumbled 1,200 points, or 3%, while the Nasdaq Composite fell 5%. The slide across equities was broad, with decliners at the New York Stock Exchange outnumbering advancers by 6-to-1."
American exceptionalism.
[image or embed]
— Justin Wolfers ( @justinwolfers.bsky.social) April 3, 2025 at 12:14 PM
However, as Economic Policy Institute (EPI) chief economist Josh Bivens noted last week, "because most households depend overwhelmingly on wages from work as their primary source of income and not returns from wealth-holding, the stock market tells us nothing about these households' economic situations."
And Trump's tariffs are expected to hit U.S. households hard, as the cost of his taxes on imports are passed on to consumers.
"Tariffs can be a legitimate and useful tool in industrial policy for well-defined strategic goals, but broad-based tariffs that significantly raise the average effective tariff rate in the United States are unwise," Bivens and EPI senior economist Adam Hersh stressed in a Thursday statement—which also called out Trump for mischaracterizing one of the think tank's 2022 analyses.
"Further, the second Trump administration's rationale, parameters, and timeline for tariffs have been ever-shifting," Bivens and Hersh continued. "As the original post cited by the administration argues, tariffs should not be a goal unto themselves, but a strategic tool to pair with other efforts to restore American competitiveness in narrowly targeted industrial sectors."
Instead of strategically imposing tariffs, Trump has chosen to "give the country the most massive tax increase in its history, possibly exceeding $1 trillion on an annual basis, which comes to $7,000 per household," warned Center for Economic and Policy Research co-founder and senior economist Dean Baker. "And this tax hike will primarily hit moderate and middle-income families. Trump's taxes go easy on the rich, who spend a smaller share of their income on imported goods."
Baker—like various other economists and journalists—also took aim at Trump's claims that the tariffs are reciprocal, explaining:
Trump's team calculated our trade deficit with each country and divided it by their exports to the United States. Trump decided that this figure was equal to that country's tariff on goods imported from the U.S.
Trump's method of calculating tariffs is comparable to the doctor who assesses your proper weight by dividing your height by your birthday. Any doctor who did this is clearly batshit crazy, and unfortunately so is our president. And apparently none of his economic advisers has the courage and integrity to set him straight or to resign.
However, outside Trump's administration, the intense criticism continued to mount, including from groups focused on combating the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency, which also endangers the global economy.
Andreas Sieber, associate director of policy and Campaigns at 350.org, said Thursday that "Trump's tariffs won't slow the global energy transition—they'll only hurt ordinary people, particularly Americans."
"Despite his claims he 'gets' economic policy, his record tells a different story: Tariffs are tanking U.S. stocks and fueling inflation," Sieber added. "The transition to renewables is unstoppable, with or without him. His latest move does little to impact the booming clean energy market but will isolate the U.S. and drive up costs for American consumers."
Allie Rosenbluth, U.S. campaign manager at Oil Change International, similarly emphasized that "Trump's tariffs will hurt working families first and foremost, raising costs for essentials we depend on and threatening to plunge the U.S. economy into a recession. Though Trump pretends to care about the cost of living for ordinary people, his real loyalties lie with his fossil fuel industry donors."
"If he actually cared about energy affordability, he would stop bullying other countries into buying more U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG), which boosts the fossil fuel industry's profits, but results in increased prices for domestic consumers and pushes us further toward climate catastrophe," she asserted. "The one step countries can take to hit Trump where it hurts most is wean off their dependency on fossil fuels from the United States."
The impact of Trump's new levies won't be limited to working-class people in the United States. Nick Dearden, director of U.K.-based Global Justice Now, pointed out that "Trump has set light to the global economy and unleashed a world of pain, not least on a group of developing countries that will suffer tremendous impoverishment as a result of his punitive tariffs."
"All those affected must come together and stand up to this bully by building a very different international economy that promotes the interests of ordinary people rather than the oligarchs standing behind Trump," he argued. "For all its scraping and crawling, the U.K. got no special treatment here, and the government should learn this lesson fast: They need to stop giving away our rights and protections in a futile effort to appease Donald Trump."
Leaders in the United States are also encouraging resistance to Trump. U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said Wednesday that "this week you will read many confused economists and political pundits who won't understand how the tariffs make economic sense. That's because they don't. They aren't designed as economic policy. The tariffs are simply a new, super dangerous political tool."
Murphy made the case that "the tariffs are DESIGNED to create economic hardship. Why? So that Trump has a straight face rationale for releasing them, business by business or industry by industry. As he adjusts or grants relief, it's a win-win: the economy improves and dissent disappears."
"But as long as we see this clearly, we can stop him. Public mobilization is working. Today, a few Republicans joined Democrats to vote against one set of tariffs," he added, referring to a
resolution that would undo levies on Canadian imports. "The people still have the power."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Genocide Alert!' Israel Slammed for Cutting Off Power to Gaza Water Plant
One expert noted that "this collective punishment of civilians" violates the Geneva Conventions as well as a preliminary injunction from the International Court of Justice.
Mar 10, 2025
Outrage over the Israeli government's decision to cut off electricity to a water treatment plant in the decimated Gaza Strip mounted on Monday.
As Common Dreams reported Sunday, Israeli Energy Minister Eli Cohen said that he "signed an order for the immediate halt of electricity to the Gaza Strip" as part of a policy to use "all of the tools that are at our disposal to ensure the return of all the hostages" taken by Hamas on October 7, 2023.
The Times of Israel noted that the new move by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government "was mainly expected to affect a single desalination plant, the only facility in the strip still running on a power line supplied from Israel."
Responding on social media Monday, the Peace & Justice Project—founded by Jeremy Corbyn, an Independent member of the U.K. Parliament—condemned the cutoff as Israel's "latest act of genocidal collective punishment against the Palestinian people."
"This latest despicable act must be condemned by all governments and Israel must be sanctioned," the group added.
Also speaking out on social media, Francesca Albanese, United Nations special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, declared, "GENOCIDE ALERT!"
"Israel cutting off electricity supplies to Gaza means, among others, no functioning desalination stations, ergo: no clean water," Albanese said. "STILL NO SANCTION/NO ARMS EMBARGO against Israel means, among others, AIDING AND ASSISTING Israel in the commission of one of the most preventable genocides of our history."
Unconscionable, and immoral: Israel stops electricity supply to Gaza to ratchet up pressure on Hamas | The Times of Israel www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_ent...
[image or embed]
— Timothy McBride ( @mcbridetd.bsky.social) March 9, 2025 at 11:53 AM
Izzat al-Rishq, a member of Hamas' political bureau, called the move "a desperate attempt to pressure our people and their resistance through cheap and unacceptable blackmail tactics," according to The Times of Israel.
He tied the decision to Israel halting all humanitarian aid into the Palestinian enclave last week, saying that "we strongly condemn the occupation's decision to cut off electricity to Gaza, after depriving it of food, medicine, and water."
Clean water has been a key issue in Gaza since October 2023. Oxfam said last July that Israel had systematically reduced the water available by 94%, with just 4.74 liters per resident obtainable each day—less than a third of the recommended minimum amount in emergencies.
A Human Rights Watch report from December accuses Israel of "extermination and acts of genocide" in Gaza "by intentionally depriving Palestinian civilians there of adequate access to water, most likely resulting in thousands of deaths."
Netanyahu said that last week's block on aid was done "in full coordination" with U.S. President Donald Trump, who proposed an American takeover of Gaza—a plan that Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said Sunday "is taking shape."
Israel and Hamas reached a fragile three-part cease-fire and hostage-release deal in January. Stage one expired on March 1, and negotiators have not yet agreed to terms for the second phase, but talks are being held in Qatar this week.
"Food cut off, almost all electricity cut off, with the remaining energy now cut off too, in order to cut off water supply. This is a 'cease-fire' Israel-style," said Nick Dearden, director of the U.K.-based group Global Justice Now. "Barbaric collective punishment. Stop all weapons, suspend trade deals, economic sanctions now."
Since we made this statement Israel has announced it is cutting off electricity to Gaza. We say again: the threat of starvation and denial of vital humanitarian aid and services should never be used as a tool of war or a bargaining chip in negotiations. www.quaker.org.uk/news-and-eve...
[image or embed]
— Quakers in Britain ( @quaker.org.uk) March 10, 2025 at 11:51 AM
University of Michigan professor Juan Cole wrote Monday on his website, Informed Comment, that "the Israeli government is cutting Palestinian civilians in Gaza off from staples as a means of pressuring Hamas to release all Israeli hostages with no quid pro quo so that Netanyahu can start bombing again."
"This collective punishment of civilians violates the Geneva Convention[s] and other elements of internationally agreed on laws of war to which Israel is signatory," noted Cole. "It also violates the preliminary injunction of the International Court of Justice, in which Israel also has membership."
Israel faces an ongoing genocide case at the Hague-based court over its deadly blockade and assault of Gaza—assisted by billions of dollars in U.S. weapons. Like his predecessor, Trump's administration is working to send even more arms to Israel.
"Cutting off humanitarian aid to millions of civilians is a war crime. That is exactly what the extremist Netanyahu government is doing now to Palestinians in Gaza," U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said Monday. "I've introduced resolutions to block billions in offensive arms sales to Israel and will demand votes on these bills."
This article has been updated with comment from U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
Keep ReadingShow Less
Starmer Condemned for Pushing 'Cringeworthy' Trade Deal With Lax Tech Regulations
"A tech trade deal with Trump would roll out the red carpet to tech billionaire oligarchy," said one critic.
Feb 27, 2025
Rights campaigners in the United Kingdom on Thursday greeted the news that British Prime Minister Keir Starmer had formally invited U.S. President Donald Trump to the U.K. for a state visit with a call for critics to "take to the streets" as they did during Trump's first term, as advocates condemned Starmer for "cozying up to a dangerous and megalomaniac U.S. president."
"This is the latest embarrassing step in Starmer's attempts to toady to Trump and provide a cloak of respectability to Trumpism," said the Stop Trump Coalition. "The British people reject Trumpism and all those in power who appease Trump. History will not be kind to this club of Trumpism cheerleaders."
Nick Dearden, director of the anti-poverty campaign group Global Justice Now, added that critics plan to "welcome" the U.S. president "in the traditional manner" after Starmer presented Trump with an official invitation from King Charles.
Starmer invited the president during his first meeting at the White House since Trump was elected to serve a second term in November, which came as a bipartisan group of U.S. lawmakers introduced legislation to authorize comprehensive trade talks between the two countries regarding "tariff and nontariff barriers affecting any industry, product, or service sector."
Ahead of the meeting, Starmer told reporters that his message to Trump would be "really simple, that there is no more important relationship for the United Kingdom [than the U.S.], in defense, in security, in trade, in tech, in finance, and so much more."
"We are reforming permitting, getting things built, reducing barriers to investment and growth. And we're open for business, open for investment, and we're determined to help U.S. innovators thrive in the United Kingdom," said Starmer. "So my message is we want to work with you, we want to welcome you to Britain, we want a new partnership, because our history shows that when we work together, great things happen."
The comments were indicative of Starmer's push for cooperation with the U.S. on artificial intelligence and other "advanced technologies," which the new British ambassador to the U.S., Peter Mandelson, has dubbed a plan to "Make Our Economies Great Again," or MEGA.
Dearden called the proposal "cringeworthy" ahead of Starmer's meeting.
"We need to stop this," he said. "A tech trade deal with Trump would roll out the red carpet to tech billionaire oligarchy."
Global Justice Now earlier this month denounced Starmer and Trump for refusing to join 60 international signatories in supporting a declaration backing "inclusive and sustainable" AI at a summit in Paris, with U.S. Vice President JD Vance saying the Trump administration objected to "excessive regulation" of technology and critics suggesting the U.K. Labour government was attempting to curry favor with Trump.
Dearden said last week that any trade negotiations with the U.S. were likely to see Trump "pushing the demands of Big Tech oligarchs who want to avoid tax and regulation in the U.K."
"People in the U.K. don't want to see a wrecking ball taken to our regulations, standards, and public services, especially when we'e talking about new technologies like AI where we're only just beginning to get to grips with the dangers," said Dearden.
The U.K. is pushing to avoid the tariffs Trump has threatened for Canadian, Mexican, and E.U. imports. Trump said earlier this month that he believed differences with the U.K. on trade "can be worked out." He said Thursday that the tariffs targeting Canada and Mexico are set to take effect next week.
Dearden warned last week that with trade talks taking place behind closed doors, "tech titans" will be empowered "to make their demands away from the public gaze."
"Any potential for a Trump trade deal," he said, "must be taken off the table immediately."
Keep ReadingShow Less
37 Groups Demand Foreign Secretary Clarify UK Definition of 'Genocide'
David Lammy's recent comment to Parliament, the coalition said, "at best, has injected a deeply troubling ambiguity in respect of these pivotal issues in light of the mass atrocities perpetrated against civilians in Gaza."
Nov 05, 2024
Fallout over remarks that David Lammy, the U.K.'s secretary of state for foreign, commonwealth, and development affairs, recently made to the House of Commons about the Israeli assault on the Gaza Strip continued on Tuesday with a letter from 37 rights organizations.
"We call on the foreign secretary, as a matter of urgency, to make a statement clarifying the government's understanding of i) genocide in international law; ii) the scope of the U.K.'s international obligations pursuant to the Genocide Convention and Rome Statute; and iii) what steps must be taken to fulfill such obligations," the coalition wrote.
The groups pointed to an exchange between Lammy, of the Labour Party, and Conservative Member of Parliament Nick Timothy on October 28, when the foreign secretary said that the way words like genocide are being used now "undermines the seriousness of that term."
Israel faces a South Africa-led genocide case at the International Court of Justice over its 13-month assault on Gaza, which has killed at least 43,391 Palestinians and wounded another 102,347, according to officials in the Hamas-governed enclave. The ICJ initially ordered Israel to "take all measures within its power" to uphold its obligations under the Genocide Convention in January.
Lammy's response to Timothy last week, "at best, has injected a deeply troubling ambiguity in respect of these pivotal issues in light of the mass atrocities perpetrated against civilians in Gaza," the coalition argued Tuesday. He "chose to undermine international law and answer in opposition to the International Court of Justice."
"If Labour is indeed the party of international law, Foreign Secretary David Lammy must align with, rather than undermine, the courts."
Despite Lammy's suggestion, the Genocide Convention contains no numerical threshold and "is clear that the crime of genocide is not only perpetrated through mass killing," the groups noted, highlighting Israeli attacks on food production, water infrastructure, healthcare facilities, and civilian housing, shelters, and camps.
In northern Gaza, "Palestinian civilians are being killed through starvation and dehydration, disease, deprivation of lifesaving medical intervention, and constant bombardment and targeting by weaponized drones," they wrote. United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres "has warned of the ethnic cleansing of Gaza by Israel while the U.N. Commission of Inquiry has concluded that the Israeli authorities have committed the crime against humanity of extermination of part of the civilian population in Gaza through direct and indirect means."
"These assessments raise the specter of genocide and support the findings of other experts who have long concluded that genocide is taking place," the coalition continued. "This makes it imperative for the foreign secretary to revisit his comments and to clarify the government's understanding of the crime of genocide."
Amichai Stein, a correspondent for state-owned Israeli broadcaster Kan, said on social media Tuesday that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) announced "the division of the northern Gaza Strip into two parts has been completed, and we getting closer to the complete evacuation of the northern part from civilians and terrorists: 'This time there is no intention to allow the residents of the northern Gaza Strip to return to their homes and that humanitarian aid will regularly enter the southern Gaza Strip.'"
In other words, as Drop Site News' Ryan Grim put it, "Israeli media reporting that the IDF is declaring northern Gaza effectively ethnically cleansed, not even a hint of pretense now that it's Election Day" in the United States.
While the U.S. has repeatedly faced global condemnation for arming Israel over the past year, the rights coalition on Tuesday focused on the U.K. government, emphasizing that "to the extent that the ICJ has already ordered provisional measures, the U.K. is on notice that a plausible risk of genocide exists, triggering third-state responsibility."
Signatories to the letter include ActionAid U.K., Christain Aid, Council for Arab-British Understanding, Democracy for the Arab World Now, Gender Action for Peace and Security (GAPS), Global Justice Now, Jewish Network for Palestine, Medical Aid for Palestinians, Quakers in Britain, and War on Want.
GAPS director Eva Tabbasam told Middle East Eye that the language used to describe the war in Gaza "is essential to recognize the suffering of Palestinians and consider all possible actions the U.K. has to contribute to stopping what is a plausible risk of genocide."
"If Labour is indeed the party of international law, Foreign Secretary David Lammy must align with, rather than undermine, the courts," Tabbasam said. "He should have already done so months ago when the court first published this language, but the second best time is right now."
Separately, War on Want on Tuesday published an analysis detailing how "Israel is committing genocide of the Palestinian people" and arguing that "the U.K. government is failing to uphold international law, and is complicit in Israel's crimes, as it continues to export weapons and technology used by Israel against the Palestinian people."
"Palestinians have long struggled for their rights and for justice. During the 1947-8 ethnic cleansing of historic Palestine—the Nakba (Arabic for 'catastrophe')—around 750,000 Palestinians were forced from their homes and lands by armed groups, to live under Israel's system of apartheid," the group noted. "Israel has carried out its ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people, unlawful occupation, apartheid, and blockade of Gaza—the ongoing Nakba—with impunity and has now escalated its actions into genocide."
The London-based organization is also circulating a petition in response to the foreign secretary's remarks from last week, which says in part: "David Lammy is misleading parliament and the U.K. public. He must tell the truth—that this is genocide—and immediately take action to stop the genocide, and the U.K.'s complicity."
Other responses to Lammy's comments have included public criticism from What Is Genocide? author Martin Shaw and dozens of public figures in the Arab British community demanding an apology.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Global Health Advocates Call for Massive Mpox Vaccination Effort
"Every necessary step must be taken to get mpox vaccines to the adults and children who need them now," said an epidemiological coordinator for Doctors Without Borders.
Aug 16, 2024
The international medical charity Doctors Without Borders on Friday appealed to wealthy countries that have stockpiles of mpox vaccines to immediately donate doses to several countries in Africa that have been affected by recent outbreaks, as global officials warned the spread of the disease is now a public health emergency of international concern.
The group, also known by its French name, Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), expressed support for the World Health Organization's (WHO) call for donor countries to help fund a coordinated response to the outbreak, including surveillance, building laboratory capacity, increasing community engagement, and guaranteeing access to treatments, vaccines, and testing.
The current outbreak has been reported mainly in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), where the number of mpox cases this year has surpassed 15,600. More than 530 people have died of the disease this year.
Mpox has been reported in DRC for more than a decade, but with far fewer annual case numbers. More than 100 cases have also been confirmed in the past month in four neighboring countries which have not reported cases of the disease before: Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, and Uganda.
Dr. Jean Kaseya, director-general of the Africa Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, estimated this week that at least 10 million doses of mpox vaccines will be needed to respond to the growing outbreak.
"We need to have vaccines," Kaseya told NPR. "Today, we are just talking about almost 200,000 doses [becoming] available. We need at least 10 million doses. The vaccine is so expensive—we can put it around $100 per dose. There are not so many countries in Africa that can afford the cost of this vaccine."
Without improved access to vaccines, said Justin Eyong, an intersectional epidemiological coordinator for MSF in DRC, "thousands of people—including children under 15 years old who are particularly affected by mpox (representing 56% and 79% of all cases and deaths from mpox in 2024, respectively)—may be left unprotected."
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency have both approved the MVA-BN vaccine for mpox, which can cause a rash that can be painful and initially look like blisters, as well as fever, chills, and other symptoms.
"Mpox, originating in Africa, was neglected there, and later caused a global outbreak in 2022. It is time to act decisively to prevent history from repeating itself."
With the current price of the MVA-BN vaccine placing it out of reach for most low- and middle-income countries where mpox is endemic or is now spreading, MSF called on its manufacturer, Bavarian Nordic, to partner with African companies "for a full and timely tech transfer" that would allow a vaccine to be produced in Africa.
"With the mpox outbreak in DRC continuing to evolve rapidly, the situation is urgent," Eyong said. "Every necessary step must be taken to get mpox vaccines to the adults and children who need them now."
The current outbreak of mpox is being driven by one of the two genetic clades, or groupings, that characterize the disease. Clade II was behind an outbreak that was declared a global health emergency from 2022-23, but the current spread of the virus is being driven by clade I, which causes more severe disease.
Dimie Ogoina, chair of the International Health Regulations Emergency Committee said Wednesday that the upsurge in cases is "an emergency, not only for Africa, but for the entire globe."
"Mpox, originating in Africa, was neglected there, and later caused a global outbreak in 2022," said Ogoina. "It is time to act decisively to prevent history from repeating itself."
Ogoina's comments were echoed by Ayoade Alakija, chair of the Africa Vaccine Delivery Alliance, who told The Guardian that if European countries were experiencing the current outbreak instead of African nations, "mpox would have already been considered a major international health emergency."
The declaration of an emergency "of international concern," said Alakija, "should focus minds and loosen purse strings so that the response recovers from a sluggish start."
Instead of confronting the threat of a potential new outbreak, said Global Justice Now director Nick Dearden, "the British government has spent more time actually stopping a pandemic treaty being agreed because it threatens Big Pharma power."
Policymakers in wealthy countries including the U.K. and the U.S. have objected to provisions in a pandemic treaty proposed by WHO, such as those that call for countries to donate vaccine doses to low-income countries or waive intellectual property laws for vaccines and treatments during a pandemic.
Such objections are "bad for all of us," said Dearden. "If we'd dealt with this internationally years ago, we could have prevented this dangerous new strain."
MSF called on WHO to accelerate its Emergency Use Listing (EUL) Procedure for two mpox vaccines that have been approved internationally, which would encourage manufacturers to increase production and allow agencies including the United Nations Children's Fund to distribute the vaccines.
The stockpiling of vaccines by "rich countries that do not need them," said economist Jayati Ghosh, "is exactly what the world does not need to confront this latest health threat."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Investigation Exposes How Etsy Profits From Israeli Apartheid
"Etsy isn't simply turning a blind eye to stores listed on its site operating in illegal Israeli settlements—it is directly profiting from and even in certain cases, promoting them," said one campaigner.
Aug 07, 2024
Etsy, the popular U.S.-based e-commerce website, is profiting from goods made and sold in Israel's illegal settler colonies in the occupied West Bank, a report published Wednesday revealed.
"Under the radar, Etsy—the popular online platform for selling and buying artisanal and vintage items, with a mission to 'keep commerce human'—has been profiting from businesses with shops in illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory (OPT)," states the briefing, which was published by the Institute for Journalism and Social Change (IJSC), Global Justice Now, and War on Want.
"It's time to bring an end to this shameless corporate profiteering."
"This briefing reveals, for the first time, how Etsy hosts numerous shops that explicitly name as their locations places that are considered illegal Israeli settlements by the [United Nations] and under international law—and as recently confirmed by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), in its ruling in July," the publication continues.
The ICJ's nonbinding advisory opinion affirmed that "the policies and practices of Israel in the OPT amount to apartheid."
Report author Claire Provost said that "Western complicity in Israeli war crimes is so pervasive that even Etsy, the popular platform for 'feel-good' shopping, is connected to businesses in the settlements."
"So far these ties have gone under the radar and unchallenged," added Provost, IJSC's co-founder and co-director. "That, at least, ends now."
Global Justice Now director Nick Dearden said that "Etsy isn't simply turning a blind eye to stores listed on its site operating in illegal Israeli settlements—it is directly profiting from and even in certain cases, promoting them."
"Doing so risks complicity in war crimes—and the reality is, they're not the only company profiting from the human misery inflicted on Palestinians day in, day out," he added. "It's time to bring an end to this shameless corporate profiteering."
Etsy charges listing and transaction fees. It also offers seller advertising for an additional fee. "Star sellers" are highlighted to prospective buyers. At least four star sellers—including one that had over 12,000 sales as of late July—specifically list illegal Israeli settlements as their locations.
The report identifies 14 Etsy stores located in the Ariel settlement, nine in Maale Adumim, and four in Tekoa.
"The full amount of money that has gone to businesses in the settlements, and Etsy in the process, is hard to estimate," the report acknowledges. Etsy "also hosts many more shops that only say they are based in 'Israel,' without specifying particular locations, making it hard or impossible for consumers to tell if they are also in such settlements."
"This trade has a significant Irish connection, too—which will alarm many in that country, where there are growing calls to cut ties with settlement businesses," the publication continues. "Etsy's contracts with these shops in settlements appear to be done through the company's Irish subsidiary, Etsy Ireland U.C., which is headquartered in Dublin."
Amid "Israeli efforts to expand their illegal settlements in the West Bank and increasing settler violence against Palestinians," some "consumers of conscience may have bought unknowingly from Etsy shops in these illegal settlements," the report adds. "Etsy may not have been questioned about these business links before."
"These problems, at least, can end now," the paper states. "We now know that Etsy is another company that is profiting from business relationships with the illegal settlements. By facilitating the sale of products from shops located in these settlements, Etsy could be connected to war crimes—and this could, in turn, be making users of the platform around the world, as well as Ireland (as the location of Etsy's subsidiary contracting with settlement shops), unknowingly involved too."
"These business relationships look like a serious problem for Etsy. But Etsy also has an opportunity to respond to these revelations, and concerns about them," the report argues. "It could act on its ability, as written into its policies, to cut its ties with shops in illegal settlements."
"It could also require that all shops disclose their location (city/town and not just country)," the authors added. "In doing
so, it could show real leadership to many already or potentially loyal users: people who want to make 'feel good,' conscious and more ethical purchases online."
In 2019, the Court of Justice of the European Unionruled that food products made in Israeli settlements must indicate that they originate from a settlement instead of being labeled "Product of Israel."
The following year in the United States, the administration of then-President Donald Trumpordered goods produced in much of the occupied West Bank to be labeled "Made in Israel."
The global Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement has notched a string of successes in its campaign to educate and influence consumers to eschew Israeli settlement products.
Responding to a query from Provost, Etsy said that "we have shared this information internally with the appropriate teams for review."
Keep ReadingShow Less
BP Condemned Over 'Mammoth Profits' as Fossil Fuels Wreak Havoc on the Planet
"The world can no longer afford fossil fuel companies putting short-term profits above people and planet."
Jul 30, 2024
The London-based oil giant BP announced Tuesday that it hauled in $2.8 billion in profit during the second quarter of the year as the world faced the consequences of the fossil fuel industry's business model in the form of record-shattering heat, devastating wildfires, and other weather extremes.
The company's second-quarter profit surpassed analysts' expectations and brought its total profit for the first half of 2024 to $5.5 billion. BP on Tuesday also announced a 10% dividend increase, an expansion of its stock buyback program, and a green light for a new drilling platform in the Gulf of Mexico, even as international scientists say any new fossil fuel production is incompatible with critical warming targets set out by the Paris climate accord.
BP said that once completed, the new floating platform would have the capacity to produce 80,000 barrels of crude oil daily.
Chiara Liguori, Oxfam Great Britain's senior climate justice policy adviser, said in a statement that "the world can no longer afford fossil fuel companies putting short-term profits above people and planet."
"It is inexcusable that BP, one of the world's most polluting and profitable fossil fuel companies, continues to rake in billions of pounds while low-income countries are in urgent need of funds to tackle the devastating impacts of the climate crisis despite doing the least to cause it," said Liguori. "The costs of inaction are already here with deadly heat waves, wildfires, flooding, and drought, but it is people living in poverty who are left paying the highest price."
BP's profit report came weeks after the company, now under the leadership of CEO Murray Auchincloss, announced it would pause new offshore wind projects and put fresh "emphasis on oil and gas amid investor discontent over its energy transition strategy," as Reuters reported last month. The move came over a year after the company rolled back its plan to curtail oil and gas production.
Extreme weather driven by the burning of fossil fuels, meanwhile, continued to wreak havoc across the globe.
"As global temperatures spiked to their highest levels in recorded history [last Monday], ambulances were screaming through the streets of Tokyo, carrying scores of people who had collapsed amid an unrelenting heat wave," wrote The Washington Post's Sarah Kaplan over the weekend. "A monster typhoon was emerging from the scorching waters of the Pacific Ocean, which were several degrees warmer than normal. Thousands of vacationers fled the idyllic mountain town of Jasper, Canada ahead of a fast-moving wall of wildfire flames."
"By the end of the week—which saw the four hottest days ever observed by scientists—dozens had been killed in the raging floodwaters and massive mudslides triggered by Typhoon Gaemi," Kaplan continued. "Half of Jasper was reduced to ash. And about 3.6 billion people around the planet had endured temperatures that would have been exceedingly rare in a world without burning fossil fuels and other human activities, according to an analysis by scientists at the group Climate Central."
Izzie McIntosh, a climate campaigner at the United Kingdom-based advocacy group Global Justice Now, said Tuesday that BP's "mammoth profits" come "at the expense of our climate, communities, and the Global South facing the most brutal impacts of a climate crisis they did not cause."
"Labour has made some promising signals about a move toward green energy—it now needs to throw its weight behind tackling the rampant profiteering of oil and gas companies," McIntosh said of the newly elected U.K. government. "It can do this by introducing a windfall tax and other measures to fund the U.K.'s contribution to a globally just fossil fuel phaseout that works for workers and communities in the U.K. and around the world."
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy