

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.
"Nepal contributes almost nothing to the factors producing global climate change. Yet, Nepal is currently the recipient of the consequences of climate change produced primarily by the industrial north." (Photo: Kamrul Hassan, Bangladesh Red Crescent)
The recent onslaught of flooding created by a succession of devastating hurricanes in the Caribbean and the U.S. southeast has ever-so-slightly heightened the media and political conversation about the effects of global climate change. While this dialogue is obviously beneficial in waking a skeptical public and political system to the rapid development of climate change impacts, it is not a sufficiently deep analysis of the notion of disaster.
Climate change is the most significant consequence of a global economic system that has developed over the past several hundred years, depending as it does on constant expansion of production and consumption with little concern for the planetary system that sustains us. However, climate change isn't the only human-induced factor that transforms natural events like hurricanes or earthquakes into disasters.
The present structure of the global system is governed by an empire of global capital based on geopolitical inequities and power imbalances that produce varying levels of vulnerability, including those relevant to framing natural events as disasters.
Unless we make a concerted effort to understand the complicated role that the current global system plays in transforming natural events into disasters, we will be unable to equitably manage the catastrophes that climate change is certain to produce. The realization that disasters are the result of natural events exacerbated by climate change is critical, but it also conceals the geopolitical structures that are a significant part of such tragedies. In a sense, these hidden, yet, critical causes are mystified by the concepts of natural disaster and climate change. Even if climate change somehow could be magically reversed, the geopolitical structures that produce different levels of vulnerability would remain.
The Recent Message of Climate Change
In the month between August 20 and September 20 four major hurricanes developed in the warming waters of the Atlantic Ocean, threatening and eventually devastating islands in the Caribbean and states in the southeastern U.S. Destruction was most severe in several of the Leeward Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. states of Texas and Florida.
In addition to category 4 and 5 hurricane wind damage, the storms pummeled the region with unheard of volumes of rain. On August 26, much of the fourth largest city in the U.S. - Houston, Texas - was transformed into a massive lake, inundated by as much as 50 inches of rain from Hurricane Harvey. Harvey released an estimated 33 trillion gallons of rain, enough water to fill a cubed tank with dimensions of 3.1 miles on each side.
Just days later, Hurricane Irma almost brought the same fate to Miami, Florida, veering westward at the last minute, making a devastating journey up the entire western coast of Florida. Irma created record flooding in Jacksonville, Florida and even further north in Charleston, South Carolina and Savannah, Georgia.
While most of the media described these events as natural disasters, a number of sources pointed to human-induced climate change as a major factor in producing the size and ferocity of these storms. In the case of Houston, some sources even partially blamed the uncontrolled development policy of that metropolitan area for the extent of the flooding.
These observations about the role that climate change and urban development play in exacerbating the tragedies of natural events are, of course, headed in the right direction in unraveling the complex ways that natural systems interact with human political and economic systems. But for a more complete picture of this complexity, a different flooding tragedy illustrates this interaction more explicitly.
The South Asian Flood in Nepal
A few weeks before Hurricane Harvey, catastrophic floods that affected around 40 million humans occurred on the other side of the globe. One of the most fragile countries in the world - Nepal - was one of the countries most affected. Western media attention to these floods was brief and shallow. A full analysis of what created the Nepali disaster connects the dots between the geopolitical factors that produce such tragedies.
The mainstream Western news industry systematically described the devastating floods and landslides in Nepal as just another "natural disaster." From television to print news, the tragedy was portrayed as a result of slightly abnormal seasonal monsoon rains which, nevertheless, were part of a natural order. A New York Times article on August 13 concluded that "monsoon rains...create havoc each year." In other words, the floods and accompanying landslides in Nepal that killed more than 150 people, displaced more than 20,000 families, effected 75,000 more families and destroyed tens of thousands of acres of cropland were caused by nothing more than a predictable, perhaps slightly more vengeful, Mother Nature.
While the immediate damage was catastrophic, the long-term effects for a nation already classified by the United Nations as "food insecure" are frightening. Moreover, Nepal is still healing from the devastating earthquakes that shattered the hilly regions of the country in 2015.
However, equally frightening is what these news reports do to conceal and mystify the true causes of this disaster. Monsoon rains are, indeed, natural and relatively predictable events, but they are transformed into disasters by the structures and processes of inequality within and between nations. Thus, disasters are produced by geopolitical structures rather than nature.
As Greg Bankoff and Dorothia Hilhorst document in their 2004 book entitled "Mapping Vulnerability: Disasters, Development and People," there really are no purely "natural disasters." Of course, there are natural events and hazards, but what makes them disasters is their impact on human populations. Moreover, those impacts are mediated by social and economic inequities. The world's most vulnerable populations bear the brunt of such tragedies.
According to a report by the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, between 1999 and 2008 "medium and low development countries" experienced 64% of all disasters globally, but 92% of the deaths and 97% of the populations severely affected by them. This disproportionate impact of so-called natural disasters can only be explained by factors other than nature.
The casual use of the term "natural disaster" conveniently masks the social and economic factors that turn natural events into disasters. In a sense, the phrase is a more contemporary, secular way of simplifying and mystifying causation, supplanting the more traditional and religious "will-of-God" explanation.
In the case of the recent flooding and landslides in Nepal there are three interlocking factors that have transformed the relatively natural event of the monsoon season into the disaster that has had tragic immediate impact and long-term. These are (1) the instability produced by insufficiently financed, designed and constructed infrastructure projects, such as roads, drainage systems and bridges; (2) dams and embankments constructed by the government of India along its 1750 km border with Nepal; and (3) the erratic seasonal changes affected by global climate change.
The negative impacts of road construction and other large-scale "development" projects in steep, mountainous regions of lesser developed nations are well-documented. There are two general reasons for these negative impacts. First, road construction, mining or timbering can destabilize sloped terrain, especially if they are poorly designed or inadequately funded. Slopes are undercut, inadequate disposal of removed rock and dirt creates hazards, and natural drainage systems are dangerously altered.
Yet, in a report published in 2013, the World Bank, a major funding source for development projects around the world, argues that transportation is "...a crucial driver of development, bringing socioeconomic opportunities within the reach of the poor and enabling economies to be competitive and thrive in a globalized world. While there is some truth in this position, there has been inadequate attention to the negative impacts, especially in countries like Nepal where steep and dramatic increases in elevation within relatively short distances increases vulnerability to development projects that significantly transform the natural landscape.
Secondly, construction projects like roads change the settlement patterns of human populations. People and businesses tend to congregate along newly constructed roads that are most often subject to the stability problems mentioned above. This puts larger numbers of people at risk. Roads are often constructed in valleys along major rivers and human settlements expand, creating greater vulnerability to floods.
In addition, over the past decades India has constructed at least 18 dams and embankments along its border with Nepal. These dams are designed by India to control the flow of major rivers and watercourses from Nepal into India. While this may be good for India, it is disastrous for Nepal.
Major rivers in Nepal originate in the high Himalayas, fed by heavy snowfall and glaciers. Monsoon rains obviously add volumes of water during the months of June to September. The dams and embankments in India prevent these major rivers from engaging in their natural flows, instead backing that flow into the lowlands of Nepal.
In a well-known incident in 2008, India closed all 32 gates on the Sharada dam during the monsoon season, causing extensive flooding in the Nepali region behind the dam. Tens of thousands of Nepali people were effected and crop production declined dramatically.
Finally, there is the factor of climate change. Nepal contributes almost nothing to the factors producing global climate change. Yet, Nepal is currently the recipient of the consequences of climate change produced primarily by the industrial north. Weather patterns are increasing erratic. The predictability of the seasonal movement from pre-monsoon to monsoon to post-monsoon and winter months with predictable temperature and rain levels is rapidly giving way to erratic patterns. The effects of climate change in Nepal are variable, but trends toward warmer temperatures producing more violent rain storms are obvious.
When the current tragedies in Nepal are attributed to natural events alone, the underlying geopolitical causes of disasters mentioned above are hidden. If the full causes of disasters are concealed, then solutions will never be found. This is as true for the devastation in Texas as it is for the devastation in Nepal. As climate change accelerates the incidence of disasters in the world, we all need to do a better job of understanding their complex underlying economic and political causes that produce varying levels of vulnerability.
Trump and Musk are on an unconstitutional rampage, aiming for virtually every corner of the federal government. These two right-wing billionaires are targeting nurses, scientists, teachers, daycare providers, judges, veterans, air traffic controllers, and nuclear safety inspectors. No one is safe. The food stamps program, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are next. It’s an unprecedented disaster and a five-alarm fire, but there will be a reckoning. The people did not vote for this. The American people do not want this dystopian hellscape that hides behind claims of “efficiency.” Still, in reality, it is all a giveaway to corporate interests and the libertarian dreams of far-right oligarchs like Musk. Common Dreams is playing a vital role by reporting day and night on this orgy of corruption and greed, as well as what everyday people can do to organize and fight back. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover issues the corporate media never will, but we can only continue with our readers’ support. |
The recent onslaught of flooding created by a succession of devastating hurricanes in the Caribbean and the U.S. southeast has ever-so-slightly heightened the media and political conversation about the effects of global climate change. While this dialogue is obviously beneficial in waking a skeptical public and political system to the rapid development of climate change impacts, it is not a sufficiently deep analysis of the notion of disaster.
Climate change is the most significant consequence of a global economic system that has developed over the past several hundred years, depending as it does on constant expansion of production and consumption with little concern for the planetary system that sustains us. However, climate change isn't the only human-induced factor that transforms natural events like hurricanes or earthquakes into disasters.
The present structure of the global system is governed by an empire of global capital based on geopolitical inequities and power imbalances that produce varying levels of vulnerability, including those relevant to framing natural events as disasters.
Unless we make a concerted effort to understand the complicated role that the current global system plays in transforming natural events into disasters, we will be unable to equitably manage the catastrophes that climate change is certain to produce. The realization that disasters are the result of natural events exacerbated by climate change is critical, but it also conceals the geopolitical structures that are a significant part of such tragedies. In a sense, these hidden, yet, critical causes are mystified by the concepts of natural disaster and climate change. Even if climate change somehow could be magically reversed, the geopolitical structures that produce different levels of vulnerability would remain.
The Recent Message of Climate Change
In the month between August 20 and September 20 four major hurricanes developed in the warming waters of the Atlantic Ocean, threatening and eventually devastating islands in the Caribbean and states in the southeastern U.S. Destruction was most severe in several of the Leeward Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. states of Texas and Florida.
In addition to category 4 and 5 hurricane wind damage, the storms pummeled the region with unheard of volumes of rain. On August 26, much of the fourth largest city in the U.S. - Houston, Texas - was transformed into a massive lake, inundated by as much as 50 inches of rain from Hurricane Harvey. Harvey released an estimated 33 trillion gallons of rain, enough water to fill a cubed tank with dimensions of 3.1 miles on each side.
Just days later, Hurricane Irma almost brought the same fate to Miami, Florida, veering westward at the last minute, making a devastating journey up the entire western coast of Florida. Irma created record flooding in Jacksonville, Florida and even further north in Charleston, South Carolina and Savannah, Georgia.
While most of the media described these events as natural disasters, a number of sources pointed to human-induced climate change as a major factor in producing the size and ferocity of these storms. In the case of Houston, some sources even partially blamed the uncontrolled development policy of that metropolitan area for the extent of the flooding.
These observations about the role that climate change and urban development play in exacerbating the tragedies of natural events are, of course, headed in the right direction in unraveling the complex ways that natural systems interact with human political and economic systems. But for a more complete picture of this complexity, a different flooding tragedy illustrates this interaction more explicitly.
The South Asian Flood in Nepal
A few weeks before Hurricane Harvey, catastrophic floods that affected around 40 million humans occurred on the other side of the globe. One of the most fragile countries in the world - Nepal - was one of the countries most affected. Western media attention to these floods was brief and shallow. A full analysis of what created the Nepali disaster connects the dots between the geopolitical factors that produce such tragedies.
The mainstream Western news industry systematically described the devastating floods and landslides in Nepal as just another "natural disaster." From television to print news, the tragedy was portrayed as a result of slightly abnormal seasonal monsoon rains which, nevertheless, were part of a natural order. A New York Times article on August 13 concluded that "monsoon rains...create havoc each year." In other words, the floods and accompanying landslides in Nepal that killed more than 150 people, displaced more than 20,000 families, effected 75,000 more families and destroyed tens of thousands of acres of cropland were caused by nothing more than a predictable, perhaps slightly more vengeful, Mother Nature.
While the immediate damage was catastrophic, the long-term effects for a nation already classified by the United Nations as "food insecure" are frightening. Moreover, Nepal is still healing from the devastating earthquakes that shattered the hilly regions of the country in 2015.
However, equally frightening is what these news reports do to conceal and mystify the true causes of this disaster. Monsoon rains are, indeed, natural and relatively predictable events, but they are transformed into disasters by the structures and processes of inequality within and between nations. Thus, disasters are produced by geopolitical structures rather than nature.
As Greg Bankoff and Dorothia Hilhorst document in their 2004 book entitled "Mapping Vulnerability: Disasters, Development and People," there really are no purely "natural disasters." Of course, there are natural events and hazards, but what makes them disasters is their impact on human populations. Moreover, those impacts are mediated by social and economic inequities. The world's most vulnerable populations bear the brunt of such tragedies.
According to a report by the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, between 1999 and 2008 "medium and low development countries" experienced 64% of all disasters globally, but 92% of the deaths and 97% of the populations severely affected by them. This disproportionate impact of so-called natural disasters can only be explained by factors other than nature.
The casual use of the term "natural disaster" conveniently masks the social and economic factors that turn natural events into disasters. In a sense, the phrase is a more contemporary, secular way of simplifying and mystifying causation, supplanting the more traditional and religious "will-of-God" explanation.
In the case of the recent flooding and landslides in Nepal there are three interlocking factors that have transformed the relatively natural event of the monsoon season into the disaster that has had tragic immediate impact and long-term. These are (1) the instability produced by insufficiently financed, designed and constructed infrastructure projects, such as roads, drainage systems and bridges; (2) dams and embankments constructed by the government of India along its 1750 km border with Nepal; and (3) the erratic seasonal changes affected by global climate change.
The negative impacts of road construction and other large-scale "development" projects in steep, mountainous regions of lesser developed nations are well-documented. There are two general reasons for these negative impacts. First, road construction, mining or timbering can destabilize sloped terrain, especially if they are poorly designed or inadequately funded. Slopes are undercut, inadequate disposal of removed rock and dirt creates hazards, and natural drainage systems are dangerously altered.
Yet, in a report published in 2013, the World Bank, a major funding source for development projects around the world, argues that transportation is "...a crucial driver of development, bringing socioeconomic opportunities within the reach of the poor and enabling economies to be competitive and thrive in a globalized world. While there is some truth in this position, there has been inadequate attention to the negative impacts, especially in countries like Nepal where steep and dramatic increases in elevation within relatively short distances increases vulnerability to development projects that significantly transform the natural landscape.
Secondly, construction projects like roads change the settlement patterns of human populations. People and businesses tend to congregate along newly constructed roads that are most often subject to the stability problems mentioned above. This puts larger numbers of people at risk. Roads are often constructed in valleys along major rivers and human settlements expand, creating greater vulnerability to floods.
In addition, over the past decades India has constructed at least 18 dams and embankments along its border with Nepal. These dams are designed by India to control the flow of major rivers and watercourses from Nepal into India. While this may be good for India, it is disastrous for Nepal.
Major rivers in Nepal originate in the high Himalayas, fed by heavy snowfall and glaciers. Monsoon rains obviously add volumes of water during the months of June to September. The dams and embankments in India prevent these major rivers from engaging in their natural flows, instead backing that flow into the lowlands of Nepal.
In a well-known incident in 2008, India closed all 32 gates on the Sharada dam during the monsoon season, causing extensive flooding in the Nepali region behind the dam. Tens of thousands of Nepali people were effected and crop production declined dramatically.
Finally, there is the factor of climate change. Nepal contributes almost nothing to the factors producing global climate change. Yet, Nepal is currently the recipient of the consequences of climate change produced primarily by the industrial north. Weather patterns are increasing erratic. The predictability of the seasonal movement from pre-monsoon to monsoon to post-monsoon and winter months with predictable temperature and rain levels is rapidly giving way to erratic patterns. The effects of climate change in Nepal are variable, but trends toward warmer temperatures producing more violent rain storms are obvious.
When the current tragedies in Nepal are attributed to natural events alone, the underlying geopolitical causes of disasters mentioned above are hidden. If the full causes of disasters are concealed, then solutions will never be found. This is as true for the devastation in Texas as it is for the devastation in Nepal. As climate change accelerates the incidence of disasters in the world, we all need to do a better job of understanding their complex underlying economic and political causes that produce varying levels of vulnerability.
The recent onslaught of flooding created by a succession of devastating hurricanes in the Caribbean and the U.S. southeast has ever-so-slightly heightened the media and political conversation about the effects of global climate change. While this dialogue is obviously beneficial in waking a skeptical public and political system to the rapid development of climate change impacts, it is not a sufficiently deep analysis of the notion of disaster.
Climate change is the most significant consequence of a global economic system that has developed over the past several hundred years, depending as it does on constant expansion of production and consumption with little concern for the planetary system that sustains us. However, climate change isn't the only human-induced factor that transforms natural events like hurricanes or earthquakes into disasters.
The present structure of the global system is governed by an empire of global capital based on geopolitical inequities and power imbalances that produce varying levels of vulnerability, including those relevant to framing natural events as disasters.
Unless we make a concerted effort to understand the complicated role that the current global system plays in transforming natural events into disasters, we will be unable to equitably manage the catastrophes that climate change is certain to produce. The realization that disasters are the result of natural events exacerbated by climate change is critical, but it also conceals the geopolitical structures that are a significant part of such tragedies. In a sense, these hidden, yet, critical causes are mystified by the concepts of natural disaster and climate change. Even if climate change somehow could be magically reversed, the geopolitical structures that produce different levels of vulnerability would remain.
The Recent Message of Climate Change
In the month between August 20 and September 20 four major hurricanes developed in the warming waters of the Atlantic Ocean, threatening and eventually devastating islands in the Caribbean and states in the southeastern U.S. Destruction was most severe in several of the Leeward Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. states of Texas and Florida.
In addition to category 4 and 5 hurricane wind damage, the storms pummeled the region with unheard of volumes of rain. On August 26, much of the fourth largest city in the U.S. - Houston, Texas - was transformed into a massive lake, inundated by as much as 50 inches of rain from Hurricane Harvey. Harvey released an estimated 33 trillion gallons of rain, enough water to fill a cubed tank with dimensions of 3.1 miles on each side.
Just days later, Hurricane Irma almost brought the same fate to Miami, Florida, veering westward at the last minute, making a devastating journey up the entire western coast of Florida. Irma created record flooding in Jacksonville, Florida and even further north in Charleston, South Carolina and Savannah, Georgia.
While most of the media described these events as natural disasters, a number of sources pointed to human-induced climate change as a major factor in producing the size and ferocity of these storms. In the case of Houston, some sources even partially blamed the uncontrolled development policy of that metropolitan area for the extent of the flooding.
These observations about the role that climate change and urban development play in exacerbating the tragedies of natural events are, of course, headed in the right direction in unraveling the complex ways that natural systems interact with human political and economic systems. But for a more complete picture of this complexity, a different flooding tragedy illustrates this interaction more explicitly.
The South Asian Flood in Nepal
A few weeks before Hurricane Harvey, catastrophic floods that affected around 40 million humans occurred on the other side of the globe. One of the most fragile countries in the world - Nepal - was one of the countries most affected. Western media attention to these floods was brief and shallow. A full analysis of what created the Nepali disaster connects the dots between the geopolitical factors that produce such tragedies.
The mainstream Western news industry systematically described the devastating floods and landslides in Nepal as just another "natural disaster." From television to print news, the tragedy was portrayed as a result of slightly abnormal seasonal monsoon rains which, nevertheless, were part of a natural order. A New York Times article on August 13 concluded that "monsoon rains...create havoc each year." In other words, the floods and accompanying landslides in Nepal that killed more than 150 people, displaced more than 20,000 families, effected 75,000 more families and destroyed tens of thousands of acres of cropland were caused by nothing more than a predictable, perhaps slightly more vengeful, Mother Nature.
While the immediate damage was catastrophic, the long-term effects for a nation already classified by the United Nations as "food insecure" are frightening. Moreover, Nepal is still healing from the devastating earthquakes that shattered the hilly regions of the country in 2015.
However, equally frightening is what these news reports do to conceal and mystify the true causes of this disaster. Monsoon rains are, indeed, natural and relatively predictable events, but they are transformed into disasters by the structures and processes of inequality within and between nations. Thus, disasters are produced by geopolitical structures rather than nature.
As Greg Bankoff and Dorothia Hilhorst document in their 2004 book entitled "Mapping Vulnerability: Disasters, Development and People," there really are no purely "natural disasters." Of course, there are natural events and hazards, but what makes them disasters is their impact on human populations. Moreover, those impacts are mediated by social and economic inequities. The world's most vulnerable populations bear the brunt of such tragedies.
According to a report by the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, between 1999 and 2008 "medium and low development countries" experienced 64% of all disasters globally, but 92% of the deaths and 97% of the populations severely affected by them. This disproportionate impact of so-called natural disasters can only be explained by factors other than nature.
The casual use of the term "natural disaster" conveniently masks the social and economic factors that turn natural events into disasters. In a sense, the phrase is a more contemporary, secular way of simplifying and mystifying causation, supplanting the more traditional and religious "will-of-God" explanation.
In the case of the recent flooding and landslides in Nepal there are three interlocking factors that have transformed the relatively natural event of the monsoon season into the disaster that has had tragic immediate impact and long-term. These are (1) the instability produced by insufficiently financed, designed and constructed infrastructure projects, such as roads, drainage systems and bridges; (2) dams and embankments constructed by the government of India along its 1750 km border with Nepal; and (3) the erratic seasonal changes affected by global climate change.
The negative impacts of road construction and other large-scale "development" projects in steep, mountainous regions of lesser developed nations are well-documented. There are two general reasons for these negative impacts. First, road construction, mining or timbering can destabilize sloped terrain, especially if they are poorly designed or inadequately funded. Slopes are undercut, inadequate disposal of removed rock and dirt creates hazards, and natural drainage systems are dangerously altered.
Yet, in a report published in 2013, the World Bank, a major funding source for development projects around the world, argues that transportation is "...a crucial driver of development, bringing socioeconomic opportunities within the reach of the poor and enabling economies to be competitive and thrive in a globalized world. While there is some truth in this position, there has been inadequate attention to the negative impacts, especially in countries like Nepal where steep and dramatic increases in elevation within relatively short distances increases vulnerability to development projects that significantly transform the natural landscape.
Secondly, construction projects like roads change the settlement patterns of human populations. People and businesses tend to congregate along newly constructed roads that are most often subject to the stability problems mentioned above. This puts larger numbers of people at risk. Roads are often constructed in valleys along major rivers and human settlements expand, creating greater vulnerability to floods.
In addition, over the past decades India has constructed at least 18 dams and embankments along its border with Nepal. These dams are designed by India to control the flow of major rivers and watercourses from Nepal into India. While this may be good for India, it is disastrous for Nepal.
Major rivers in Nepal originate in the high Himalayas, fed by heavy snowfall and glaciers. Monsoon rains obviously add volumes of water during the months of June to September. The dams and embankments in India prevent these major rivers from engaging in their natural flows, instead backing that flow into the lowlands of Nepal.
In a well-known incident in 2008, India closed all 32 gates on the Sharada dam during the monsoon season, causing extensive flooding in the Nepali region behind the dam. Tens of thousands of Nepali people were effected and crop production declined dramatically.
Finally, there is the factor of climate change. Nepal contributes almost nothing to the factors producing global climate change. Yet, Nepal is currently the recipient of the consequences of climate change produced primarily by the industrial north. Weather patterns are increasing erratic. The predictability of the seasonal movement from pre-monsoon to monsoon to post-monsoon and winter months with predictable temperature and rain levels is rapidly giving way to erratic patterns. The effects of climate change in Nepal are variable, but trends toward warmer temperatures producing more violent rain storms are obvious.
When the current tragedies in Nepal are attributed to natural events alone, the underlying geopolitical causes of disasters mentioned above are hidden. If the full causes of disasters are concealed, then solutions will never be found. This is as true for the devastation in Texas as it is for the devastation in Nepal. As climate change accelerates the incidence of disasters in the world, we all need to do a better job of understanding their complex underlying economic and political causes that produce varying levels of vulnerability.
Attorney General Josh Kaul accused the world's richest person and top Trump adviser of "a blatant attempt to violate" Wisconsin's election bribery law.
Democratic Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul filed a lawsuit Friday seeking to stop Elon Musk—the world's richest person and a senior adviser to President Donald Trump—from handing out $1 million checks to voters this weekend in an apparent blatant violation of bribery law meant to swing next Tuesday's crucial state Supreme Court election.
"Wisconsin law forbids anyone from offering or promising to give anything of value to an elector in order to induce the elector to go to the polls, vote or refrain from voting, or vote for a particular person," the lawsuit notes. "Musk's announcement of his intention to pay $1 million to two Wisconsin electors who attend his event on Sunday night, specifically conditioned on their having voted in the upcoming April 3, 2025, Wisconsin Supreme Court election, is a blatant attempt to violate Wis. Stat. § 12.11. This must not happen."
On Thursday, Musk announced on his X social media site that he will "give a talk" at an undisclosed location in Wisconsin, and that "entrance is limited to those who have signed the petition in opposition to activist judges."
"I will also hand over checks for a million dollars to two people to be spokesmen for the petition," the Tesla and SpaceX CEO and de facto head of the Trump administration's Department of Government Efficiency wrote.
As Common Dreams reported earlier last week, Musk's super political action committee, America PAC, is offering registered Wisconsin voters $100 to sign a petition stating that they reject "the actions of activist judges who impose their own views" and demand "a judiciary that respects its role—interpreting, not legislating."
The cash awards—which critics have decried as bribery—are part of a multimillion dollar effort by Musk and affiliated super PACs to boost Judge Brad Schimel of Waukesha County, the Trump-backed, right-wing state Supreme Court candidate locked in a tight race with Dane County Judge Susan Crawford.
Left-leaning justices are clinging to a 4-3 advantage on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Crawford and Schimel are vying to fill the seat now occupied by Justice Ann Walsh Bradley, a liberal who is not running for another 10-year term. Control of the state's highest court will likely impact a wide range of issues, from abortion to labor rights to voter suppression.
Musk has openly admitted why he's spending millions of dollars on the race: It "will decide how congressional districts are drawn." That's what he said while hosting Schimel and U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) for a discussion on X last weekend.
"In my opinion that's the most important thing, which is a big deal given that the congressional majority is so razor-thin," Musk argued. "It could cause the House to switch to Democrat if that redrawing takes place."
Crawford campaign spokesperson Derrick Honeyman issued a statement Friday calling Musk's planned cash giveaway a "last-minute desperate distraction."
"Wisconsinites don't want a billionaire like Musk telling them who to vote for," Honeyman added, "and on Tuesday, voters should reject Musk's lackey Brad Schimel."
Greenlanders are giving the administration of President Donald Trump—who renewed threats to take the Danish territory—the cold shoulder.
U.S. Vice President JD Vance, Second Lady Usha Vance, and two top Trump administration officials traveled to Greenland on Friday on an itinerary that was markedly curtailed from its original plans due to Greenlanders' frosty reception amid President Donald Trump's ongoing threats to take the Arctic island from NATO ally Denmark—even by armed force if deemed necessary.
Vance visited Pituffik Space Base—a U.S. Space Force installation on the northwestern coast of Greenland about 930 miles (1,500 km) north of the capital, Nuuk—with his wife, National Security Adviser Michael Waltz, and Energy Secretary Chris Wright.
The vice president's wife originally planned on a more interactive and cultural itinerary, including attending a dogsled race. However, Greenland's leftist government said earlier this week that is had "not extended any invitations for any visits, neither private nor official."
Compounding the Trump administration's embarrassment, U.S. representatives reportedly came up empty handed after canvassing door to door in Nuuk in an effort to drum up support for the visit. The administration denies this ever happened.
And so the Trump officials' audience was limited to U.S. troops stationed at Pituffik. After arriving at the base, the vice president told troops in the mess hall he was surprised to find the snow- and ice-covered Arctic island is "cold as shit."
"Nobody told me!" he added.
Vice President JD Vance and Second Lady Usha Vance visited a U.S. Space Force base in Greenland Friday. Vance is expected to receive briefings on Arctic security and address US service members.
Read more: https://t.co/1OIkkT3VnD pic.twitter.com/lbXeObJTgq
— Newsweek (@Newsweek) March 28, 2025
Getting down to more serious business, Vance said: "Our message to Denmark is very simple—you have not done a good job by the people of Greenland. You have under-invested in the people of Greenland and you have under-invested in the security architecture of this incredible, beautiful land mass."
Addressing Arctic geopolitics, Vance argued that "we can't just bury our head in the sand—or in Greenland, bury our head in the snow—and pretend that the Chinese are not interested in this very large land mass. We know that they are."
"The president said we have to have Greenland, and I think that we do have to be more serious about the security of Greenland," Vance continued. "We respect the self-determination of the people of Greenland, but my argument to them is: I think that you'd be a lot better coming under the United States' security umbrella than you have been under Denmark's security umbrella. Because what Denmark's security umbrella has meant is effectively they've passed it all off to brave Americans and hoped that we would pick up the tab."
This follows remarks earlier this week from Vance, who said during a Fox News interview that Denmark, which faithfully sent troops to fight in both Afghanistan and Iraq—43 of whom died, the highest per capita casualty rate of the alliance—is "not being a good ally" to the United States.
Asked by reporters on Friday if the U.S. would ever conquer Greenland by military force, Vance said he didn't think that would be necessary.
However, just a day earlier, Trump—who on Friday posted a video highlighting defense cooperation between the U.S. and Greenland—said his administration will "go as far as we have to go" to acquire the island, which he claimed the United States needs "for national security and international security."
It was far from the first time that Trump—who has also threatened to take over parts or all of countries including Panama and even Canada—vowed to annex Greenland, and other administration officials have repeated the president's threats.
"It's oil and gas. It's our national security. It's critical minerals," Waltz said in January, explaining why Trump wants Greenland.
The U.S. has long been interested in Greenland, and while the close relationship between the United States and Denmark has been mostly mutually beneficial, it has sometimes come at the expense of Greenland's people, environment, and wildlife.
Such was the case when a U.S. Air Force B-52 bomber laden with four thermonuclear warheads crashed into the sea ice of Wolstenholme Fjord in 1968. The accident caused widespread radioactive contamination, and the nuclear fuel components of one of the bombs remain unrecovered to this day.
Elected officials from across Greenland and Denmark's political spectrum expressed alarm over the Trump administration's actions.
Outgoing Greenland Prime Minister Múte Bourup Egede earlier this week
called Vance's trip "highly aggressive" and said that it "can in no way be characterized as a harmless visit."
"Because what is the security advisor doing in Greenland?" Egede asked. "The only purpose is to show a demonstration of power to us, and the signal is not to be misunderstood."
Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke called Vance's remarks on Friday "a bit inappropriate," adding that maybe the Trump administration "should look at yourself in the mirror too."
"When the vice president.. creates an image that the only way Greenland can be protected is by coming under the American umbrella, so you can say that Greenland is already there," Løkke elaborated. "They are part of the common security umbrella that we created together with the Americans after the end of World War II called NATO."
"We have always looked at America like the nice big brother to help you out and now it's like the big brother is bullying you."
Ordinary Greenlanders and Danish residents of the island were not happy about the Trump delegation's visit.
Anders Laursen, who owns a local water taxi company, told NBC News that "we have always looked at America like the nice big brother to help you out and now it's like the big brother is bullying you."
Nuuk resident Marie Olsen said of Vance, "I think he's a big child who wants it all."
In the Danish capital Copenhagen, hundreds of people rallied Friday against the U.S. delegation's visit to Greenland. One protester decried what she called the U.S. administration's "mafia methods."
"I hope American law firms—Paul Weiss and Skadden—are proud of the cowardice they are instilling and inspiring among the legal profession," wrote one former state senator.
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom on Friday became the latest white-shoe law firm to acquiesce to the Trump administration as the White House ramps up attacks on the legal profession. The news prompted a wave of outrage at the law firm, which was accused of being "pathetic."
The firm has agreed to provide at least $100 million in pro bono legal services to the federal government during his administration "and beyond," according to a Truth Social post from U.S. President Donald Trump. Also, the "firm will not engage in illegal" diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) "discrimination and preferences," according to the post, which also noted that the firm proactively reached out to the administration about an agreement.
Speaking at the White House on Friday, Trump called the deal "essentially a settlement," according to Reuters.
"Pathetic when the richest and most powerful lawyers in America won't stand up for the profession that made them rich and powerful," wrote U.S. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) on X on Friday, reacting to earlier reporting that the firm was in discussions with the White House over a deal.
Author and commentator Wajahat Ali wrote that the move was "shameful" on Bluesky on Friday. "Pathetic and selfish," wrote Pod Save America podcast co-host Jon Favreau.
Former New York state Sen. Alessandra Biaggi (D-34) wrote: "I hope American law firms—Paul Weiss and Skadden—are proud of the cowardice they are instilling and inspiring among the legal profession."
The news comes on the heels of news that another top law firm, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, last week brokered a deal with the White House in order to spare the firm from an executive order that suspended security clearances for lawyers and staff.
As part of that deal, the firm will dedicate $40 million in pro bono legal services during Trump's administration "to support the administration's initiatives."
Meanwhile, also last week, Trump issued a memo directing U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi to "seek sanctions" against firms and lawyers that, according to him, "engage in frivolous, unreasonable, and vexatious litigation against the United States."
With the agreement, Skadden Arps has likely avoided joining a list of elite law firms that have been singled out via executive order from Trump, targeting them with various punishments. Three of the firms that have been targeted with an executive order, WilmerHale, Jenner & Block, and Perkins Coie, have sued the Trump administration in response.
Last week, prior to the deal between Skadden Arps and the Trump administration and in response to the deal struck between the White House and Paul Weiss, an associate at Skadden Arps sent an all-staff email saying she would resign if the firm did not do more to stand up to Trump.
"This is not what I saw for my career or for my evening, but Paul Weiss' decision to cave to the Trump administration on DEI, representation, and staffing has forced my hand," she wrote. "We do not have time. It is either now or never, and if it's never, I will not continue to work here."