

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.
On Wednesday, the World Trade Organization (WTO) ruled against India in a case brought by the U.S. government regarding its national solar energy program, sparking outrage from labor and environmental advocates.
As India's power demands grow, the government plans to produce 100,000 megawatts of energy from solar cells and modules. It has also included incentives for domestic manufacturers to use locally developed equipment.
According to Indian news outlets, the WTO ruled that India had discriminated against American manufacturers by providing such incentives, which violates global trade rules, and struck down those policies--siding with the U.S. government in a case that the Sierra Club said demonstrates the environmentally and economically destructive power of pro-corporate deals like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).
"Today, we have more evidence of how free trade rules threaten the clean energy economy and undermine action to tackle the climate crisis," said Ilana Solomon, director of the Sierra Club's Responsible Trade Program, said Thursday. "The U.S. should be applauding India's efforts to scale up solar energy--not turning to the WTO to strike the program down."
According to Indian media outlet Livemint, the U.S. government
has resorted to similar measures, specifying local content requirements and offering a range of subsidies for promoting its renewable energy sector at the federal, state, regional and local levels.
India spoke repeatedly against the US at WTO's committee on subsidies and countervailing measures, stating that American subsidy schemes relating to local or domestic content requirements for its solar companies are inconsistent with its global trade obligations.
In addition, Livemint reports, the ruling "goes against the spirit of an agreement signed early this year.... [in which] the two sides agreed to promote clean energy and expand solar energy initiatives."
Regardless, Solomon said, the WTO "needs to get out of the business of hampering climate action in countries around the globe. The outdated trade rules on the books now and under negotiation in trade pacts, including the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, encourage trade in fossil fuels and discourage countries from currently in place clean energy capacity.",,
"These rules simply do not reflect the urgency of solving the climate crisis and stand in the way of clean energy growth," Solomon said.
The Indian government will appeal the decision to the WTO's highest court, the appellate body. It is the second time that the WTO has ruled against India in a case with the U.S., which first brought legal action against the country's food security program in 2014.
The WTO ruled on that case in June, when it decided that the Indian ban on certain foods from the U.S. was "inconsistent with the global norms."
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
On Wednesday, the World Trade Organization (WTO) ruled against India in a case brought by the U.S. government regarding its national solar energy program, sparking outrage from labor and environmental advocates.
As India's power demands grow, the government plans to produce 100,000 megawatts of energy from solar cells and modules. It has also included incentives for domestic manufacturers to use locally developed equipment.
According to Indian news outlets, the WTO ruled that India had discriminated against American manufacturers by providing such incentives, which violates global trade rules, and struck down those policies--siding with the U.S. government in a case that the Sierra Club said demonstrates the environmentally and economically destructive power of pro-corporate deals like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).
"Today, we have more evidence of how free trade rules threaten the clean energy economy and undermine action to tackle the climate crisis," said Ilana Solomon, director of the Sierra Club's Responsible Trade Program, said Thursday. "The U.S. should be applauding India's efforts to scale up solar energy--not turning to the WTO to strike the program down."
According to Indian media outlet Livemint, the U.S. government
has resorted to similar measures, specifying local content requirements and offering a range of subsidies for promoting its renewable energy sector at the federal, state, regional and local levels.
India spoke repeatedly against the US at WTO's committee on subsidies and countervailing measures, stating that American subsidy schemes relating to local or domestic content requirements for its solar companies are inconsistent with its global trade obligations.
In addition, Livemint reports, the ruling "goes against the spirit of an agreement signed early this year.... [in which] the two sides agreed to promote clean energy and expand solar energy initiatives."
Regardless, Solomon said, the WTO "needs to get out of the business of hampering climate action in countries around the globe. The outdated trade rules on the books now and under negotiation in trade pacts, including the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, encourage trade in fossil fuels and discourage countries from currently in place clean energy capacity.",,
"These rules simply do not reflect the urgency of solving the climate crisis and stand in the way of clean energy growth," Solomon said.
The Indian government will appeal the decision to the WTO's highest court, the appellate body. It is the second time that the WTO has ruled against India in a case with the U.S., which first brought legal action against the country's food security program in 2014.
The WTO ruled on that case in June, when it decided that the Indian ban on certain foods from the U.S. was "inconsistent with the global norms."
On Wednesday, the World Trade Organization (WTO) ruled against India in a case brought by the U.S. government regarding its national solar energy program, sparking outrage from labor and environmental advocates.
As India's power demands grow, the government plans to produce 100,000 megawatts of energy from solar cells and modules. It has also included incentives for domestic manufacturers to use locally developed equipment.
According to Indian news outlets, the WTO ruled that India had discriminated against American manufacturers by providing such incentives, which violates global trade rules, and struck down those policies--siding with the U.S. government in a case that the Sierra Club said demonstrates the environmentally and economically destructive power of pro-corporate deals like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).
"Today, we have more evidence of how free trade rules threaten the clean energy economy and undermine action to tackle the climate crisis," said Ilana Solomon, director of the Sierra Club's Responsible Trade Program, said Thursday. "The U.S. should be applauding India's efforts to scale up solar energy--not turning to the WTO to strike the program down."
According to Indian media outlet Livemint, the U.S. government
has resorted to similar measures, specifying local content requirements and offering a range of subsidies for promoting its renewable energy sector at the federal, state, regional and local levels.
India spoke repeatedly against the US at WTO's committee on subsidies and countervailing measures, stating that American subsidy schemes relating to local or domestic content requirements for its solar companies are inconsistent with its global trade obligations.
In addition, Livemint reports, the ruling "goes against the spirit of an agreement signed early this year.... [in which] the two sides agreed to promote clean energy and expand solar energy initiatives."
Regardless, Solomon said, the WTO "needs to get out of the business of hampering climate action in countries around the globe. The outdated trade rules on the books now and under negotiation in trade pacts, including the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, encourage trade in fossil fuels and discourage countries from currently in place clean energy capacity.",,
"These rules simply do not reflect the urgency of solving the climate crisis and stand in the way of clean energy growth," Solomon said.
The Indian government will appeal the decision to the WTO's highest court, the appellate body. It is the second time that the WTO has ruled against India in a case with the U.S., which first brought legal action against the country's food security program in 2014.
The WTO ruled on that case in June, when it decided that the Indian ban on certain foods from the U.S. was "inconsistent with the global norms."