SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
");background-position:center;background-size:19px 19px;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-color:var(--button-bg-color);padding:0;width:var(--form-elem-height);height:var(--form-elem-height);font-size:0;}:is(.js-newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter_bar.newsletter-wrapper) .widget__body:has(.response:not(:empty)) :is(.widget__headline, .widget__subheadline, #mc_embed_signup .mc-field-group, #mc_embed_signup input[type="submit"]){display:none;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) #mce-responses:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-row:1 / -1;grid-column:1 / -1;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget__body > .snark-line:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-column:1 / -1;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) :is(.newsletter-campaign:has(.response:not(:empty)), .newsletter-and-social:has(.response:not(:empty))){width:100%;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col{display:flex;flex-wrap:wrap;justify-content:center;align-items:center;gap:8px 20px;margin:0 auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .text-element{display:flex;color:var(--shares-color);margin:0 !important;font-weight:400 !important;font-size:16px !important;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .whitebar_social{display:flex;gap:12px;width:auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col a{margin:0;background-color:#0000;padding:0;width:32px;height:32px;}.newsletter-wrapper .social_icon:after{display:none;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget article:before, .newsletter-wrapper .widget article:after{display:none;}#sFollow_Block_0_0_1_0_0_0_1{margin:0;}.donation_banner{position:relative;background:#000;}.donation_banner .posts-custom *, .donation_banner .posts-custom :after, .donation_banner .posts-custom :before{margin:0;}.donation_banner .posts-custom .widget{position:absolute;inset:0;}.donation_banner__wrapper{position:relative;z-index:2;pointer-events:none;}.donation_banner .donate_btn{position:relative;z-index:2;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_0{color:#fff;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_1{font-weight:normal;}.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper.sidebar{background:linear-gradient(91deg, #005dc7 28%, #1d63b2 65%, #0353ae 85%);}
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.
"The world has spoken—it's time for the U.S. to listen and lift the blockade."
The United Nations General Assembly on Wednesday once again overwhelmingly urged the U.S. government to end its decadeslong blockade on Cuba, with just the United States and Israel voting against the measure and Moldova abstaining.
The UNGA's other 187 members present voted to adopt the nonbinding resolution on "the necessity of ending the economic, commercial, and financial embargo imposed by the United States" against the Caribbean island.
This is the 32nd straight year that the U.N. body has approved a resolution against the embargo that began in 1962.
"The U.S. and Israel stand isolated as the only two votes against," Democratic Socialists of America's International Committee said after the Wednesday vote. "The world has spoken—it's time for the U.S. to listen and lift the blockade."
Though a few other nations have
opposed the resolution over the years, Michael Galant of Progressive International and the Center for Economic and Policy Research noted that this vote was "two genocidaires v. the world."
Israel faces a genocide case at the International Court of Justice for its yearlong assault of the Gaza Strip, which has killed at least 43,163 Palestinians and injured another 101,510, according to local officials in the Hamas-governed enclave. The U.S. Congress and Biden administration have given Israel billions of dollars in weapons and opposed U.N. cease-fire resolutions.
CodePink's Medea Benjamin responded to the Wednesday vote with a video shared on social media, saying that Israel "loves blockades, because it's doing its own blockade of Gaza," and "is dependent on the United States to carry out its genocide."
"Now this is not just some idle vote," she said of the approved resolution. "This blockade that the U.S. maintains is a form of economic warfare. It's no exaggeration to say that now, when there is an economic crisis in Cuba, the U.S. blockade, which keeps Cuba from using the financial markets, from having normal trade with countries all over the world, is actually leading to deaths, leading to people going hungry, leading to people lacking food and medicine that are essential for their lives."
"And that's why the United States must be condemned for this ongoing horrific, inhumane, and illegal blockade," Benjamin added.
Cuba's representative delivered similar remarks to the UNGA on Wednesday. As
Reutersreported:
Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez said in a speech before the assembly that what is often referred to as the U.S. trade embargo is a "blockade" because the web of laws and regulations complicate financial transactions and the acquisition of goods and services not just from the United States but internationally.
"The blockade against Cuba is an economic, financial, and trade war which qualifies as genocide," said Rodriguez, charging the U.S. policies were deliberately aimed at promoting suffering among the Cuban people to force change in the government.
Some international observers praised the countries who did condemn the blockade. Middle East expert Assal Rad declared, "This is the real international community."
Manolo De Los Santos, a founder of the People's Forum and a researcher at Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research, said that "this overwhelming consensus is in contrast with the indifference of the United States, which continues to deny any responsibility for sanctions while tightening its stranglehold on Cuba."
Earlier this month, the People's Forum published a letter in The New York Times to U.S. President Joe Biden, warning that he has "exactly 90 days to reverse" former Republican President Donald Trump's "brutal policy on Cuba."
Biden was vice president a decade ago when then-President Barack Obama "opened a hopeful new chapter in U.S.-Cuba relations by taking the first steps toward normalization," the letter details. "People in both countries were optimistic that Cuba and the United States could become neighbors rather than Cold War enemies. However, Trump dismantled that policy, imposing pain and suffering on the Cuban people."
"Removing the state sponsors of terrorism designation would allow Cuba to engage in financial transactions and restore its electrical grid, as well as address shortages of food and medicine to alleviate the immense hardship faced by the Cuban people, who have endured over 62 years of economic strife under the embargo," the letter adds. "It's time to act. Let Cuba live!"
Biden faced similar pressure in August, when hundreds of legal experts and groups called on him "to comply with existing international law by ending the use of broad unilateral coercive measures" particularly in "cases such as Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Syria, and Venezuela."
The U.N. vote comes as early voting is underway for the November 5 election in which Trump is facing Biden's vice president, Kamala Harris.
Neither campaign provided details on each candidate's position when contacted by Reuters earlier this week, though Morgan Finkelstein, national security spokesperson for Harris, said that the Democrat "stands with the people of Cuba as they fight for their rights after decades of repression and economic suffering at the hands of the communist regime" and "will stand up to all authoritarians—including the very leaders that Trump has praised and embraced."
The public rebuke of the Israeli prime minister, said one observer, "demonstrates the international community's rejection of genocide."
A large number of diplomats and other officials walked out of the United Nations General Assembly in New York City on Friday as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu prepared to defend his nation's slaughter of more than 41,000 people in the Gaza Strip during the past year and over 700 in Lebanon this week.
Journalists and critics of the "global pariah" shared photos and videos of people filing out of the hall before Netanyahu's address—which came just a day after 25 anti-genocide protesters were arrested for blocking his motorcade in Manhattan.
While there was some audience applause from the sparsely populated room on Friday, Al Jazeera Arabic's Rami Ayari explained that "the people you hear cheering the PM during the speech are in the gallery who he brought for that purpose."
Council on American-Islamic Relations national executive director Nihad Awad said in a statement that "as the far-right, openly racist Israeli government continues its genocide in Gaza and expands its campaign of state terrorism to civilians in Lebanon, this mass walkout during war criminal Benjamin Netanyahu's U.N. speech demonstrates the international community's rejection of genocide."
Awad added that U.S. President Joe Biden "should take note of our government's growing isolation on the international stage, change his policy, and support human rights and international law, without an exception for the Palestinian people."
Since Israeli forces launched their assault on Gaza in retaliation for the Hamas-led October 7 attack, the United States government has stood by Israel, sending billions of dollars in weapons and opposing U.N. resolutions, while claiming to be pushing for a cease-fire. Addressing the General Assembly earlier this week, Biden called for "security for Israel, and Gaza free of Hamas' grip."
In response to diplomats' Friday walkout, Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, said that "the impunity Biden has offered Israel has been used by Netanyahu to make Israel an international pariah. Neither good for the U.S. nor for Israel."
Parsi also highlighted a clip of Slovenian Prime Minister Robert Golob's speech to the U.N., in which he urged Netanyahu to "stop this war now!"
Netanyahu began his Friday address by taking aim at the world leaders who throughtout the week have condemned the recent escalation against Hezbollah in Lebanon as well as the past year of Israeli forces bombing and starving Palestinians in Gaza.
"I didn't intend to come here this year. My country is at war fighting for its life," Netanyahu said. "But, after I heard the lies and slanders leveled at my country by many of the speakers standing at this podium, I decided to come here and set the record straight."
Armed with more of his infamous maps of the Middle East, the right-wing leader went on to claim that "Israel seeks peace," while also pledging to wage war on Hamas-governed Gaza until "total victory" and telling "the tyrants of Tehran" that "if you strike us, we will strike you."
Noting that Netanyahu also spoke of "savage enemies who seek to destroy our common civilization," James Zogby, co-founder and president of the Arab American Institute, said: "Words spoken by the man who has been charged with genocide and crimes against humanity. This is a disgrace. Abusing the General Assembly platform to lie and incite."
Israel faces a South Africa-led genocide case at the International Court of Justice, and the International Criminal Court prosecutor has sought arrest warrants for Netanyahu, Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and three Hamas leaders—one of whom Israel recently assassinated in Iran. Israel also claims to have killed a second Hamas leader, which the group has denied.
Will politicians seize this narrowing window of opportunity to do what is both daunting and necessary for safeguarding the future of people around the world especially our children?
This week, New York City is hosting the United Nations General Assembly meetings and the annual Climate Week events. With the continued trend of extreme climate-fueled disasters around the world—including deadly and damaging heatwaves, floods, fires, and storms—the urgency of solutions for the climate crisis couldn’t be clearer.
What we hear from world leaders this week will give us an indication of their seriousness in helping to secure an ambitious outcome at the annual U.N. climate talks, COP29, in Baku, Azerbaijan in November. Civil society groups will also be at Climate Week to demand action and remind world leaders of their responsibilities. And business leaders will have the opportunity to show whether they truly want to be part of the solution—or are just engaged in greenwashing while seeking short-term profits from carbon-intensive activities.
Here are three key international climate priorities that I will be paying close attention to this year.
The latest data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the E.U.’s Copernicus climate service show that the 2024 January-August period is the hottest ever by far, putting this year well on track to be the warmest ever on record. Meanwhile, the global emissions trajectory is dangerously off track from where it needs to be to meet global climate goals, with heat-trapping emissions continuing to rise.
When countries signed on to the 2015 Paris agreement, they made initial voluntary commitments (the so-called Nationally Determined Contributions or NDCs) to reduce their heat-trapping emissions, and agreed to revisit them every five years to reflect the “highest possible ambition.” (see Articles 4.2 and 4.3 of the Paris agreement). By February 2025, the next round of NDCs is due and it’s clear that all countries—especially richer nations like the United States—will need to step up significantly if we are to have any chance of meeting the goals of the Paris agreement.
In its last NDC, back in 2021, the U.S. committed to cutting its emissions 50-52% below 2005 levels by 2030. A range of state and federal policies—including the Inflation Reduction Act—currently puts it on track to cut emissions about 32-43% below 2005 levels by 2030. That means we’ll need to quickly add additional clean energy policies and policies to phase out fossil fuelsjust to meet our 2030 goals.
To meet global climate goals, all nations must increase their emissions reduction commitments and enact the enabling policies to meet them—especially richer nations and major emitting countries.
For the next round of NDCs, the U.S. should commit to cutting its heat-trapping emissions at least 70% below 2005 levels by 2035, a level that UCS modeling shows is possible, but that will require political will and significant new policies to achieve. In this context, the potential increase in energy demand to meet the emerging needs of AI data centers is worrisome and threatens to erode progress unless proactive measures are taken to manage possible impacts on the energy system in line with the pace of the clean energy transition. The next U.S. NDC should also be explicit about commitments to phase out fossil fuels in a fast and fair way and set ambitious sectoral targets for a clean energy transition, while addressing the need to invest in climate resilience as well.
A comprehensive suite of policies is needed to deliver on our NDC goals. For the decade ahead and beyond, we’ve got to think boldly and deploy policies and investments that help cut overall energy demand and enable a thriving lower-carbon economy and healthier lifestyles—including through better land use planning and development; more public transit; and more livable, walkable neighborhoods.
To meet global climate goals, all nations must increase their emissions reduction commitments and enact the enabling policies to meet them—especially richer nations and major emitting countries. In addition to the U.S., that includes the E.U. countries, Canada, Australia, Japan, Russia, China, and India. But we’re not going to get anywhere if each nation tries to dodge its responsibilities and points at the inaction of others. Rather, fostering cooperation and a shared commitment to increased ambition are the needs of the hour as we confront this collective action problem.
This year, at COP29, nations will also have to agree on the quantum of international climate finance that richer nations will provide post-2025 to help lower-income nations cut their heat-trapping emissions and adapt to climate change. These outcomes are being determined through multi-year negotiations on the “New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) on Climate Finance” leading up to COP29, which is being billed as the climate finance COP.
Climate action will require considerable resources that low-income nations are unlikely to be able to marshal on their own. Furthermore, countries that have contributed the least to climate-warming emissions are now facing a disproportionate brunt of climate impacts stemming from the failure of richer nations to cut their outsize emissions. Article 2.1(c) of the Paris agreement calls for “Making finance flows consistent with a pathway toward low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development.” The latest IPCC report also underscores how crucial this finance is to meet climate goals.
Back in 2009, richer nations committed to a goal of providing $100 billion a year in climate finance by 2020, a goal that was reaffirmed in Paris in 2015. That goal was finally met in 2022, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
The U.S. and other richer nations should agree to collectively marshaling climate finance on the order of $1 trillion per year, starting in 2025.
The NCQG negotiations are aimed at delivering the next tranche of finance commitments. This time around, it’s clear that much more finance is necessary to meet the moment: funding to dramatically accelerate the clean energy transition and fossil fuel phaseout in lower-income nations, funding to help them adapt to the relentless impacts of climate change, and funding to help address extreme climate loss and damage. Failing to provide this finance not only risks the world’s ability to cut emissions sharply and quickly, it is also imposing an increasingly unjust toll on the least developed nations. A recent report from the World Meteorological Organization shows that, “On average, African countries are losing 2-5%of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and many are diverting up to 9% of their budgets responding to climate extremes.”
The U.S. and other richer nations should agree to collectively marshaling climate finance on the order of $1 trillion per year, starting in 2025. And additional countries in a position to do so should also step up to contribute funding on a voluntary basis. Most of this funding should be grant-based or grant-equivalent to avoid trapping low-income nations in a worsening spiral of indebtedness as is the case currently. Innovative sources of funding—such as pollution taxes and wealth taxes—should be part of the discussion. Reforming international multilateral lending architecture to be fairer and more aligned with climate and sustainable development objectives is also critical.
U.S. contributions to international climate finance have repeatedly fallen short of what’s necessary. Congress, too, must step up since it holds the power of the purse. The United States must also help lead the ongoing negotiations at the OECD to restrict export credit support for all unabated fossil fuel projects, as it committed to do at COP26 in Glasgow, and as we have called for in a recent joint letter to U.S. Treasury Secretary Yellen and U.S. Export-Import Bank Chair Lewis.
Fossil fuel interests are a perennial threat to climate progress, at home and abroad. Their presence at the annual climate talks has been increasing alarmingly. Unfortunately, at COP29 in Baku we are likely to see them out in full force again, trying to undermine and dilute global climate agreements. The crucial question is: Will policymakers stand up to that pressure from polluters and deliver what people need?
Last year at COP28, nations were finally able reach an agreement calling for a phase down of fossil fuels—the first time the root cause of climate change was addressed in a global climate agreement. The follow-through has been pretty mixed globally thus far. The U.S., for example, is still enabling surging levels of production of oil and gas. We need domestic policies that explicitly ensure that fossil fuels are being phased down, alongside ramping up renewable energy and energy efficiency.
Litigation efforts to hold fossil fuel companies accountable for damage caused by their products and for deceiving consumers and investors are gaining ground in domestic and international courts. These additional avenues to secure climate progress are likely to increase in importance, especially if policymakers’ efforts to curtail heat-trapping emissions and stand up to the fossil fuel lobby continue to fall short.
Around the world, wars and extreme disasters are exacting a punishing toll on people and require urgent action from political leaders to seek solutions that bring peace and safety. The climate crisis, too, requires urgent attention. These intersecting crises must be dealt with at the same time and should not be cynically traded off against each other in competing for political attention or funding.
This year has been extraordinarily volatile politically, with “change” elections around the world inserting uncertainty in the future direction of climate policy. One thing we cannot lose sight of is that the measure of climate ambition is not set by politics but by what science shows is necessary to help limit the worst impacts of climate change. Ambition should also encompass justice, to help ensure that the climate outcomes we strive to secure meet the needs of those with the fewest resources on the frontlines of a crisis that is not of their making. Equally, the necessary phaseout of fossil fuels must be accompanied by just transition policies and investments for affected communities.
Here in the United States, regardless of the forthcoming election outcomes, we know the climate crisis is set to worsen and that without robust action, people and our economy will suffer as a result. That’s why we must push for policy solutions that increase the pace and magnitude of cuts in U.S. heat-trapping emissions, ramp up investments in climate resilience, and significantly increase our commitments toward international climate finance.
This will likely be the hottest year to date, and maybe one of the coolest in the years to come. Will politicians seize this narrowing window of opportunity to do what is both daunting and necessary for safeguarding the future of people around the world especially our children? Right now, the signs are not encouraging. We must demand much more of our leaders.