For the second time in as many months, Israel has raided a civilian ship in international waters to stop it from reaching Gaza to deliver much-needed humanitarian aid. The Handala was sailing toward the besieged Palestinian territory with baby formula, diapers, food and medicine on board when Israeli forces boarded it on Saturday and detained 21 crew and passengers. “Their blockade is, by all international standards, unlawful,” says Palestinian American human rights attorney Huwaida Arraf, who was among the activists on board and was just released from Israeli detention. She calls on the international community to hold Israel accountable and says the Freedom Flotilla Coalition will continue organizing aid ships to break the blockade of Gaza.

“Why is it that we had to be at sea in international waters, in a small boat, going to confront one of the most brutal militaries in the world? It is because … our countries are allowing Israel to deliberately starve Palestinians as part of this genocidal campaign that it has been carrying out,” says Arraf.

This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

Israel continues to detain eight individuals who were captured Monday when Israeli Navy commandos intercepted a Gaza-bound boat carrying humanitarian aid. Four other passengers on the Gaza Freedom Flotilla have been deported, including Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg. We get an update from Sergio Toribio, one of the 12 on board the Madleen, who has just been deported back to his home country of Spain. He describes how Israeli commandos boarded the ship in international waters and held them on the boat for over 24 hours while towing them to Israel. “They kidnapped us,” he says.

This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

Eleven peace activists and one journalist on board the Gaza Freedom Flotilla ship, the Madleen, were detained by Israeli soldiers as their ship carrying vital humanitarian aid for starving Palestinians approached Gaza. The ship was intercepted by Israeli forces in the middle of the night in international waters. Its supplies were seized and communications jammed. The unarmed activists will likely be transported to Israeli detention or “immediately deported,” says Ann Wright, a U.S. military veteran who has participated in four Freedom Flotilla journeys and now serves on the steering committee of the Freedom Flotilla Coalition. She calls on citizens of countries around the world to push for the activists’ release and an end to Israel’s war on Gaza.

This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

Israel’s military attack and boarding of the humanitarian boat Madleen attempting to deliver food and medical aid to the besieged people of Gaza has been condemned by New Zealand Palestinian advocacy groups as a “staggering act of state piracy”.

The vessel was in international waters, carrying aid workers, doctors, journalists, and supplies desperately needed by the 2 million population that Israel has systematically bombed, starved, and displaced.

“This was not a military confrontation. It was the assault of an unarmed civilian aid ship by a state acting with total impunity,” said the group Thyme4Action.

• READ MORE: Madleen Gaza flotilla: Ship, activists being taken to Israel
• Israeli forces intercept Gaza freedom aid boat Madleen – cut communications
• Other Israeli war on Gaza reports

“This is piracy, it is state terror, and it is a genocidal act of war.

Half of the 12 crew and passengers on board are French citizens and the volunteer group includes French-Palestinian European parliamentarian Rima Hassan and Swedish climate crisis activist Greta Thunberg and two journalists.

They all made pre-recorded messages calling for international pressure on their governments against the Israeli state. The messages were posted on the Freedom Flotilla Coalition X page.

The group Thyme4Action said in a media release that a regime engaged in genocide would send sends drones and armed commandos to detain civilians in international waters.

Israel’s ‘total moral collapse’
“We are witnessing the total moral collapse of a state, supported for years by Western governments to act with utter impunity, violate our global legal system, morality and principles.

“No amount of spin or military propaganda can hide the cruelty of deliberately starving a population, targeting children, bombing hospitals and bakeries, and then violently stopping others from bringing aid.”

Thyme4Action said the attack on the Madleen was not a separate incident — “it is part of the same campaign to eliminate Palestinian life, hope, and survival. It is why the International Court of Justice has already ruled that Israel is plausibly committing genocide.”

“This is not complicated,” said the statement.

“Israel has no legal authority in international waters. Under the United Nations Convention
on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), Israel’s boarding of a civilian aid ship beyond its territorial waters is an act of piracy, unlawful kidnapping, forcible abduction and armed
aggression.

Under international humanitarian law, deliberately blocking aid to a population facing
starvation is a war crime.

Under the Genocide Convention, when a state intentionally denies food, water, and
medicine to a population it is bombing and displacing, this constitutes part of a genocidal
campaign.”

NZ silence condemned
The advocacy group condemned the silence of the New Zealand government as being “no longer neutral”.

It demonstrated a shocking lack of respect for international law, for human rights, and for the safety of global humanitarian workers.

“It reflects a broader decay in foreign policy — where selective outrage and Israeli
exceptionalism undermine the credibility of everything New Zealand claims to stand for.”

Thyme4Action called on the New Zealand government to:

• Publicly condemn Israel’s illegal assault on the Madleen and its passengers;
• Demand the immediate release of all aid workers, journalists, and civilians
abducted by Israeli forces;
• Suspend all diplomatic, military, and trade cooperation with Israel until it complies
with international law; and
• Support international accountability mechanisms, including referring Israel’s crimes
to the International Criminal Court and backing enforcement of the ICJ’s provisional
measures on genocide.

“This has to stop. This is not just a crisis in Gaza,” said the statement.

‘Crisis of global morality’
“It is a crisis of global morality, of international law, and of our basic shared humanity.

“We stand with the people of Gaza. We stand with the brave souls aboard the Madleen, and
we demand an end to this madness before the world forgets what it means to be human.

“We need a government that stands for all that is right, not all that is wrong.

“Aid is not terrorism. International waters are not Israel’s territory. And silence in the face of evil is complicity.”

Pro-Palestinian supporters in New Zealand have held protests against the genocide and demanding a ceasefire right across the country at multiple locations for the past 87 weeks.

SOS! the volunteers on ‘Madleen’ have been kidnapped by Israeli forces.
Rima Hassan is a French citizen.
Pressure the foreign ministries and help us keep them safe!

E: alertes.cdc@diplomatie.gouv.fr & courrier.scec@diplomatie.gouv.fr
X : @FranceDiplo_EN & @francediplo &… pic.twitter.com/hypzpbwhV8

— Freedom Flotilla Coalition (@GazaFFlotilla) June 9, 2025

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

In the early hours of May 2, the quiet of night was shattered aboard the Conscience, a civilian vessel anchored in international waters, 17 kilometers off the coast of Malta. Aboard were 18 crew members and passengers, jolted from sleep by the sound of two explosions. Flames and smoke filled the air. The ship had just been struck—by what the crew members say were drone attacks.

The very day of the attack, more passengers from 21 countries were waiting in Malta to be ferried out to join the Conscience. Among those slated to join the ship were world-renowned environmentalist Greta Thunberg, retired U.S. Army Colonel Ann Wright, and longtime CODEPINK activist Tighe Barry.

The Conscience is part of the Freedom Flotilla Coalition, a network of international activists that has been challenging Israel’s maritime blockade of Gaza since 2008.

The group alleges that the attack came from Israel—an allegation bolstered by a CNN investigation. According to CNN, flight-tracking data from ADS-B Exchange showed that an Israeli Air Force C-130 Hercules aircraft departed from Israel early Thursday afternoon and flew at low altitude over eastern Malta for an extended period. While the Hercules did not land, its path brought it in proximity to the area where the Conscience was later attacked. The plane returned to Israel approximately seven hours later. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) declined to comment on the flight data.

The ship suffered significant damage, but fortunately, no one was hurt. That was not the case when the Freedom Flotilla was attacked in 2010. This May 2 attack comes just weeks before the 15th anniversary of the infamous raid on the Mavi Marmara, the Turkish ship that led a previous flotilla to Gaza in 2010. On May 31 of that year, Israeli naval commandos stormed the ship in international waters, killing ten people and injuring dozens. The Mavi Marmara had been carrying over 500 activists and humanitarian supplies. That attack drew condemnation from around the world and calls for an international investigation—calls that Israel dismissed.

One of this year’s flotilla organizers, Ismail Behesti, is the son of a man killed in the 2010 raid. In videos circulating after the recent strike, Behesti is seen walking through the damaged interior of the Conscience, his voice resolute as he condemns what he believes was another Israeli act of aggression against civilians on a humanitarian mission.

“People are asking how Israel can get away with attacking a civilian ship in international waters,” said Tighe Barry, speaking from the port in Malta. “But since October 8, 2024, Israel has shown complete disregard for international law—from bombing civilian neighborhoods to using starvation as a weapon by blocking food from entering Gaza. This is just one more example of its impunity.”

“Where is the outrage?” Barry continued. “The U.S. condemns the Houthis for stopping ships carrying weapons to Israel—and bombs Yemen mercilessly for it. But will they condemn Israel for attacking a peaceful ship on a humanitarian mission to Gaza?”

The Freedom Flotilla Coalition and activist groups such as CODEPINK are calling on governments and international bodies to speak out and take action.

The Conscience was carrying no weapons. It posed no threat. Its only crime was daring to challenge a brutal siege and slaughter that the UN itself has condemned as illegal and inhumane. That’s the real threat Israel fears—not the ship itself, but the global solidarity it represents.

So, will the world speak up about Israel’s latest outrage? Or will this, too, be quietly buried beneath the waves?

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Medea Benjamin.

The following is a statement from Kyle Jones, director of federal affairs at NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council):

“This measure would give the oil industry free rein to pillage our public lands and oceans. Instead of helping the American people and our shared public resources, it would allow the oil, coal and timber industries to pick and choose the areas they want to exploit. And it exposes irreplaceable Alaskan wilderness to destructive oil drilling, industrial roadways and mining.

“Worst of all, it allows fossil fuel companies and other big polluters to buy their way out of meaningful review or public input into their projects. So, that would mean one set of rules for the fossil fuel and logging barons, and another for the rest of us.

“The best thing that can be said about this measure, is that it may be too radical for even this Congress. For the good of Americans and our shared resources, it should be quickly cast aside and forgotten.”

Background

As part of the process of developing the reconciliation bill, the House Natural Resources committee released its draft measure last night. It includes the following provisions:

• mandatory on- and offshore oil and gas lease sales, from Alaska's Arctic Refuge to the Gulf, all while—
• allowing oil companies to select for themselves which of our public lands are leased; and
• rolling back important fiscal reforms that require producers to pay their fair share for drilling in public lands and waters;
• a pay-to-play system to rush environmental reviews and block any oversight, enabling polluters to bypass environmental safeguards with no way to hold them accountable to the public;
• four million acres of new coal leasing on public lands;
• brazen proposals to supplant the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act to further the development of yesterday’s energy sources;
• a destructive mandate to increase logging on Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management lands by at least 25 percent over 2024 levels, while rescinding funding to identify and protect old-growth forests;
• attacks on protected spaces with chilling particularity, enabling large-scale mining in Alaska and mineral extraction just upstream of Minnesota’s Boundary Waters; and
• rescissions of an array of vital funding for projects that create jobs and support rural communities, like forest restoration, National Marine Sanctuary facilities and ecosystem restoration at the National Park Service.

This content originally appeared on Common Dreams and was authored by Newswire Editor.

A human rights agency has called for an investigation into the drone attacks on the Gaza Freedom Flotilla aid ship Conscience with Israel suspected of being responsible.

The Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor said in a statement that the deliberate targeting of a civilian aid ship in international waters was a “flagrant violation” of the United Nations Charter, the Law of the Sea, and the Rome Statute, which prohibits the targeting of humanitarian objects.

It added: “This attack falls within a recurring and documented pattern of force being used to prevent ships from reaching the Gaza Strip, even before they approach its shores.”

• READ MORE: Freedom Flotilla attacked in an apparent Israeli drone attack in international waters
• Kia Ora Gaza page on the Freedom Flotilla

The monitor is calling for an “independent and transparent investigation under Maltese jurisdiction, with the participation of the United Nations”.

It is also demanding “guarantees for safe sea passage for humanitarian aid bound for Gaza”.

“Any failure to act today will only encourage further attacks on humanitarian missions and deepen the catastrophe unfolding in Gaza,” said the monitor.

A spokesperson for the Gaza Freedom Flotilla said the group blamed Israel or one of its allies for the attack, adding it currently did not have proof of this claim.

Israeli TV confirms attack
However, Israel’s channel 12 television reported that Israeli forces were responsible for the attack.

The Freedom Flotilla Coalition (FFC) is a grassroots people-to-people solidarity movement composed of campaigns and initiatives from different parts of the world, working together to end the illegal Israeli blockade of Gaza.

The organisation said its goals included:

• breaking Israel’s more than 17-year illegal and inhumane blockade of the Gaza Strip;
• educating people around the world about the blockade of Gaza;
• condemning and publicising the complicity of other governments and global actors in enabling the blockade; and
• responding to the cry from Palestinians and Palestinian organisations in Gaza for solidarity to break the blockade.

The MV Conscience — with about 30 human rights and aid activists on board — came under direct attack in international waters off the coast of Malta at 00:23 local time.

The Maltese government said everyone on the ship was safe following the attack. Although several New Zealanders have been on board past flotilla ships, none were on board this time.

In May 2010, Israeli security forces attacked six vessels in a Freedom Flotilla mission carrying aid aid bound for Gaza.

Nine of the flotilla passengers were killed during the raid, with 30 wounded — one of whom later died of his wounds.

• More information about the Freedom Flotilla at Kia Ora Gaza.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

A ship carrying humanitarian aid for the Gaza Strip sent out a distress signal overnight after it was bombed by drones in international waters near Malta. The Freedom Flotilla Coalition, the organizer of the voyage, is blaming Israel for the attack, which set the ship on fire, punched a substantial breach in its hull and cut off communication with those aboard. “We are dealing with a brutal attack on an innocent ship,” retired U.S. Army Colonel Ann Wright, who was in Malta waiting to board the flotilla, tells Democracy Now! “While we cannot yet identify the source of the drones, there is no doubt in my mind that there is a history of violence that has been directed toward the flotillas from the state of Israel.”

The climate activist Greta Thunberg was also set to join the flotilla and said in an online video that activists would “continue to do everything in our power to do our part to demand a free Palestine and demand the opening of a humanitarian corridor.”

This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

A Trump executive order signed Thursday says the U.S. must “counter China’s growing influence over seabed mineral resources,” – namely the potato sized nodules that carpet vast areas of the seabed and contain rare earths and minerals such as nickel, cobalt and manganese.

Like Trump’s tariff shock therapy, the deep sea mining policy threatens to upend an established part of the global order. Under the framework of the international law of the sea, nations have sought to fashion a consensus on if and how deep sea minerals should be exploited.

“The United States has a core national security and economic interest in maintaining leadership in deep sea science and technology and seabed mineral resources,” the executive order said.

“The United States faces unprecedented economic and national security challenges in securing reliable supplies of critical minerals independent of foreign adversary control,” it said.

Mining of the nodules from depths of several kilometers has been touted by companies in the nascent industry as a source of minerals needed for green technologies, such as electric vehicles, that would reduce reliance on fossil fuels.

Amid a general retreat by large corporations from commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, deep sea mining companies have more recently emphasized defense uses and security of mineral supply.

Skeptics say the minerals in so-called polymetallic nodules are already abundant on land and warn that mining the seabed could cause irreparable damage to an ocean environment that is still poorly understood by science.

Trump’s executive order said the Commerce Secretary should within two months expedite the process of issuing mineral exploration licenses and commercial exploitation permits in seabed areas beyond American national jurisdiction.

The instruction sets the U.S. against the International Seabed Authority, or ISA, which was established in 1996 to regulate exploitation of mineral endowments in international waters. About 54% of the seabed is under the ISA’s jurisdiction.

The ISA’s secretary-general, Leticia Carvalho, last month said the authority was the “only universally recognized legitimate framework” for regulating mining in international waters.

“Any unilateral action would constitute a violation of international law and directly undermine the fundamental principles of multilateralism, the peaceful use of the oceans and the collective governance framework,” she said in a statement.

The U.S. has not signed the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, which is the enabling treaty for the ISA, and is only an observer at the authority.

Trump’s executive order was in part foreshadowed by Nasdaq-traded The Metals Company’s application last month for U.S. government approval to mine the seabed under its 1980 minerals law.

The Metals Company has been collaborating with the Pacific island nations of Nauru and Tonga to mine areas allocated to them in international waters of the Pacific Ocean.

Nauru in particular has chafed against the ISA’s consensus-based decision making, which means that after nearly three decades it hasn’t agreed rules for the deep sea mining industry.

Other countries, from Norway to the Cook Islands in the South Pacific, are investigating deep sea mining in their own waters, which doesn’t require ISA approval.

Edited by Mike Firn and Taejun Kang.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Stephen Wright for RFA.

South Korean media reports say the structure, which is 50 meters (164 feet) in both height and diameter, is the latest of three Chinese installations in the waters. Beijing has said all the structures are for aquaculture.

“Regarding the proportional measure, we are taking this matter very seriously from the perspective of protecting our maritime territory,” said South Korea’s oceans minister Kang Do-hyung on Monday, adding that the government first has to decide “what kind of facility is necessary at which level.”

“We are strongly protesting to China through diplomatic channels. We view this matter with utmost seriousness, given its importance and our position on protecting our maritime territory,” said Kang.

Kang’s remarks came after media reported that the disputed structure is an old oil rig that was used in the Middle East.

The structure, equipped with a helipad, has “Atlantic Amsterdam” written on its surface, which is the name of an oil rig built by France in 1982, Seoul-based daily Chosun Ilbo reported on Monday.

South Korea and China’s overlapping claims to areas of the Yellow Sea are managed under a provisional measures zone, or PMZ, intended to prevent conflict between the two states.

Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun on Monday reiterated that the structure was for aquaculture.

“The aquaculture facilities set up by a Chinese company in the PMZ do not contravene the agreement between China and the ROK,” said Guo, calling South Korea by its official name, Republic of Korea.

“China has shared relevant information and maintained communication with the ROK through channels such as the dialogue and cooperation mechanism of maritime affairs. We hope the ROK will view this in an objective and reasonable manner,” he said.

A Chinese-South Korean agreement that established the PMZ in 2001 allows fishing vessels from both countries to operate within the zone. It prohibits any activity beyond navigation and fishing.

Despite the agreement, China has reportedly installed several large steel structures, including two in April and May of last year, and another this year, raising concerns in South Korea over potential territorial disputes.

In February, the two countries had a tense maritime standoff as Chinese authorities blocked Seoul’s attempt to investigate Beijing’s steel structure near Ieo Island, off South Korea’s southwest coast.

Analysts say China has employed a deliberately incremental strategy in waters it seeks control over, including the South China Sea – gradually advancing its territorial claims through low-level actions that avoid outright conflict but steadily alter the status quo.

This includes building artificial islands on features such as Cross Reef and Mischief Reef, deploying coast guard and maritime militia vessels near contested areas such as Scarborough Shoal and Second Thomas Shoal, and installing military facilities including runways, missile systems and surveillance radars on reclaimed land.

Edited by Mike Firn and Stephen Wright.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Taejun Kang for RFA.

However, China still dominated in dredging and creating artificial islands, according to U.S. think tank, Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative, or AMTI.

Since June 2024, Vietnam created 641 acres (260 hectares) of new land, bringing the total to just over 3,300 acres (1,335 hectares), nearly three quarters of China’s total. It also built eight new harbors.

Vietnam, China and Taiwan all claim the entire archipelago of more than 100 islands. Parts of the Spratlys are also claimed by Malaysia and the Philippines.

Hanoi finished off landfills on Barque Canada Reef, Discovery Great Reef, Ladd Reef and South Reef last year. Work on Namyit Island and Sand Cay were also part of the military buildup that provided outposts to back up its claims to the island chain.

(AFP)

Last year, Vietnam built an 8,000 foot (244 meter) runway on Barque Canada Reef, allowing most military aircraft to land, triggering protests from China.

It could also build airstrips on Ladd, Pearson and Tennent reefs, according to AMTI, which said Hanoi is likely to add more military features in the months to come. Eight of the 10 newly created features include harbors, allowing its navy to match China’s year-round patrols in the Spratlys.

China already has large runways and military facilities on its “Big Three” islands in the South China Sea – Fiery Cross, Mischief and Subi reefs.

Vietnam has not spoken publicly about its reclamation project other than to say it wanted to protect the reefs and provide typhoon shelters for fishermen.

Edited by Stephen Wright and Taejun Kang.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Mike Firn for RFA.

The spate of incursions follows a February 2024 incident when a Chinese speedboat capsized after evading inspection by Taiwan’s coast guard. Two Chinese men died. The incident raised tensions between Taiwan and China.

Since then, China’s coast guard has mounted what it describes as “law enforcement” operations, but which Taiwan calls “grey zone” activities intended to undermine its control.

Last Thursday, four Chinese coast guard ships encroached into waters south of Kinmen and were driven away, only to return the following day, the Taiwanese coast guard said in a statement Friday. It added that there had been 63 incursions since the February 2024 incident.

A Taiwanese analyst described that as an effort to undermine Taiwanese sovereignty of the islands, which are home to about 200,000 people.

“The deployment of coast guard ships denies the legitimacy of local law enforcement and denies Taiwan’s jurisdiction and sovereignty,” said Lee Chun-yee, an associate researcher at the National Defense Security Research Institute, a think tank under Taiwan’s defense ministry.

“It intends to regard the waters of Taiwan’s outlying islands such as Dongsha and Kinmen as Chinese waters, so it has these jurisdictions. This is coercion against us,” Lee added.

Dongsha, also known as Pratas, refers to a Taiwanese-held atoll southwest of Taiwan.

China has yet to comment publicly on the Taiwanese allegations. Beijing considers Taiwan a breakaway province which it threatens to seize by force if necessary. Self-ruled Taiwan, which has a democratically elected government, views itself as a sovereign state.

Kinmen is an archipelago that lies less than 10 kilometers (6 miles) from China’s Fujian province but more than 180 kilometers (110 miles) from Taiwan’s main island. Its residents have family and history on both sides of the Taiwan Strait, and shuttle regularly by ferry back and forth to the Chinese city of Xiamen.

Taiwan describes as “prohibited waters” the territorial waters around Kinmen that extend about halfway to the Chinese coast, or roughly 4 kilometers (2.5 miles) to the north and northwest. “Restricted waters” extend a little further, about 8 kilometers (5 miles), to the south.

But Chinese officials have said they will not recognize those restrictions. Locals on Kinmen have told RFA that even before the February 2024 incident, Chinese fishing boats were helping themselves to fish that were once the preserve of Kinmen’s fishing community.

Edited by Mat Pennington.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Hsia Hsiao-hua for RFA Mandarin.

Richard Marles, who is also a deputy prime minister, said in an interview on Thursday that three Anzac-class frigates - HMAS Stuart, HMAS Warramunga and HMAS Toowoomba were monitoring the Chinese warships that were about 500 kilometers (310 miles) northwest of Perth.

“From the very moment that this task force came within the vicinity of Australia, in an unprecedented way, we have been surveilling its movements,” Marles said. “We will continue to stay with them so long as they are within the vicinity of Australia.”

The Chinese task group includes the Jiangkai-class frigate Hengyang, the Renhai-class cruiser Zunyi, and the Fuchi-class replenishment vessel Weishanhu.

On Feb. 21, they carried out a live-fire exercise in the Tasman Sea between Australia and New Zealand at very short notice, prompting airlines to divert commercial flights in order to avoid the risk of an accident.

After Canberra expressed concerns, Chinese authorities replied that the warships’ activities “have always been conducted safely, in a standardized and professional manner, and in accordance with relevant international laws and practices.”

(Australian Department of Defence)

RELATED STORIES

Australia protests to China about ‘unsafe’ aircraft maneuver over Paracels

China calls Australia’s DeepSeek ban ‘politicization of technological issues’

Australia, China dispute helicopter incident in Yellow Seaelit

China sending a ‘strategic signal’

Although the Chinese vessels are entitled to freedom of navigation under international law China was sending a message about its ability to project force, analysts said.

“It’s pretty clear that China is using this naval deployment of three ships to send a strategic signal to Australia – and the region – that China will project its naval capabilities further from China’s coast and into the maritime approaches of other states,” said Malcolm Davis, a senior analyst at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, or ASPI.

One of the three vessels is a Type 055 Renhai-class cruiser, which is one of China’s most powerful warships, Davis noted.

“This is designed to assert China’s power and dominance in the Indo-Pacific region, especially at the same time that the U.S. appears to be embracing a more isolationist posture,” the analyst said.

Anne-Marie Brady, professor of political science at the University of Canterbury in New Zealand, emphasized the strategic signaling of the live-fire exercise conducted by the task group in the Tasman Sea.

“China was sending a message to New Zealand and Australia that they could threaten their air and sea links at any time, without warning,” Brady said.

Marles declined to speculate about future activities of the Chinese task group and how long it would remain near Australia but Davis said he believed Chinese forces would appear regularly in the region in response to Australian deployments in waters closer to China.

“China will do this more regularly and won’t be constrained to only nearby maritime areas” Davis said.

“Now that flotilla is circumnavigating Australia, so it’s a message that is directed principally at Australia, to try to intimidate them into ending deployments into the South China Sea.”

New Zealand and Australia “are meeting with other like-minded states, and signing new strategic partnership agreements,” said Brady.

“They’ve also both said they’d increase defense spending,” the New Zealand academic added.

Edited by Mike Firn.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by RFA Staff.

Many Chinese boats are legitimately registered to sail under the Argentine flag and fish in its waters, while and at the same time, a growing number of Chinese fishing vessels are operating illegally under flags of other countries, the group El Círculo de Políticas Ambientales said in a report.

In the past, Chinese boats might sit at the edge of Argentina’s exclusive economic zone and switch off their automatic identification systems to conduct occasional encroachments, said the author of the report, marine conservation expert Milko Schvartzman.

But now they were registering to fly under the Argentine flag, even though owned by Chinese companies, and “slowly take possession of Argentina’s resources,” Schvartzman told Radio Free Asia.

More than a half of Argentina’s squid fishing fleet is believed to be from China, the group said.

“This is a state-sanctioned approach,” said the expert, adding that most of the Chinese fishery companies come under the umbrella of the state-owned China National Fisheries Corporation, or CNFC.

RFA contacted CNFC for comment but did not receive a response by the time of publication.

The group said Chinese boats were also operating illegally in Argentine waters under the flags of other counties in a bid to conceal the extent of China’s involvement in the South Atlantic and avoid sanctions as well as publicity.

RELATED STORIES

North Koreans face forced labor on Chinese fishing vessels: report

China denies injuring ‘illegal’ Vietnamese fishing crew

Philippines says it won’t let China normalize ‘illegal’ ship deployments in EEZ

(Argentine navy via AFP)

Argentine navy monitors illegal fishing

Last weekend, the Argentine navy carried out Operation Mare Nostrum I in its exclusive economic zone, or EEZ, where Buenos Aires has jurisdiction over maritime resources both in waters and on the seabed, according to international law.

The navy deployed two maritime surveillance aircraft, a C-12 Huron and a P3-C Orion, as well as two corvettes to carry out the mission.

The P3-C flew over an area of ​​more than 216,000 square nautical miles (741,000 square kilometers) and detected 380 fishing vessels, it said without elaborating.

“I wouldn’t be surprised if among them, a large number were Chinese,” said Schvartzman, adding that some vessels under Vanuatu and Cameroon flags actually belong to Chinese companies.

“These vessels not only send their catch back to China but are also captained by Chinese personnel,” he said.

Some of China’s fishing boats are engaged in other crimes such as forced labor and unauthorized transshipment, the London-based Environment Justice Foundation recently said.

Depending on the season, there are up to 500 foreign vessels regularly operating in and out Argentina’s EEZ, 65% of them are Chinese, according to Schvartzman.

“The rest are South Korean, Taiwanese and Spanish, and one or two from Russia.”

In order for fishing vessels to travel that far from Chinese shores, conservation groups say that Beijing encourages companies with fuel and other subsidies.

China has the largest fishing fleet in the world with more than 560,000 vessels, according to the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization.

However, Schvartzman said that he hadn’t seen the presence of the so-called Chinese maritime militia – the fleet Beijing uses to protect its interests in the South China and East China seas.

Edited by Mike Firn.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by RFA Staff.

Foreign Affairs Undersecretary Ma. Theresa Lazaro led the Philippine delegation in the 10th Bilateral Consultation Mechanism on the South China Sea, or BCM, which took place on Thursday in the Chinese city of Xiamen.

Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Chen Xiaodong headed the Chinese delegation in the BCM, a series of bilateral talks that were started in 2017 with the aim of lowering tensions between the two countries – rival claimants – over the contested waterway.

The Philippine side expressed “serious concern” about the presence and activities of China Coast Guard (CCG) vessels lately within Manila’s exclusive economic zone, or EEZ, including the 12,000-ton ship, dubbed “The Monster.”

CCG 5901, the world’s largest coast guard ship, had been spotted patrolling the resource-rich Scarborough Shoal area in recent days and waters off the coast of Luzon, the main island in the Philippines.

Manila had already lodged protests and diplomatic complaints about the ship’s intimidating presence in Philippine-claimed waters.

Earlier this week, a Philippine National Security official said China was “pushing us to the wall” as he indicated that Manila was considering pursuing a new lawsuit against Beijing over the South China Sea.

While CCG 5901 had not carried out any dangerous maneuvers so far, Philippine officials said its activities within Manila’s waters were not backed by any international law, according to a statement from the Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs.

“Our position is clear and consistent, but so is our willingness to engage in dialogue. We firmly believe that despite the unresolved challenges and differences, there is genuine space for diplomatic and pragmatic cooperation in dealing with our issues in the South China Sea,” the statement quoted Lazaro as saying at the meeting.

China’s actions were “inconsistent” with the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, or UNCLOS, which both Manila and Beijing had signed, and the recently passed Philippine Maritime Zones Act, according to the Philippine foreign office.

Beijing earlier said that the presence of its ships in Scarborough was “fully justified,” reiterating its jurisdiction over the shoal.

“We call on the Philippines once again to immediately stop all infringement activities, provocations and false accusations, and stop all its actions that jeopardize peace and stability and complicate the situation in the South China Sea,” Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun said on Tuesday.

(Philippine Coast Guard)

Located about 125 nautical miles (232 km) from Luzon island, Scarborough Shoal – known as Bajo de Masinloc in the Philippines – has been under China’s de facto control since 2012.

Beijing’s possession of the shoal forced Manila to file a lawsuit at the world court in The Hague.

Four years later, an international arbitration tribunal ruled in Manila’s favor but Beijing has never acknowledged that decision, insisting on its historical claims over the waterway.

Another flashpoint

At Thursday’s meeting, the two sides also agreed to keep implementing a “provisional understanding” regarding Philippine resupply missions to the BRP Sierra Madre, a decrepit World War II-era military ship stationed in Second Thomas (Ayungin) Shoal, another disputed South China Sea feature.

CCG vessels had been regularly blocking Philippine ships carrying supplies and troops to the shoal. But the two countries arrived at a provisional agreement in July, following a dramatic standoff the previous month between Filipino servicemen and CCG personnel at Second Thomas Shoal, during which a Philippine serviceman lost a finger.

Philippine and Chinese officials, however, have not yet publicly disclosed the official document of the agreement or its details, with both sides making their own claims about the deal’s contents.

RELATED STORIES

Philippines on Chinese incursions: Not ruling out another South China Sea lawsuit

China says ‘monster’ ship’s presence near Scarborough Shoal ‘fully justified’

Philippines says China’s ‘monster’ ship on a mission to intimidate

At the talks on Thursday, both sides acknowledged the deal’s “positive outcomes” and “agreed to continue its implementation to sustain the de-escalation of tensions without prejudice to respective national positions,” Manila’s foreign office said.

Both sides also “agreed to reinvigorate the platform for coast guard cooperation” but no specific details were provided.

In 2016, under then-President Rodrigo Duterte who adopted a pro-Beijing policy, the two nations’ coast guards formed the Joint Coast Guard Committee (JCGC), establishing a hotline between the two maritime law enforcement agencies.

In January 2023, amid increasing tensions in the disputed waters, Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. and Chinese President Xi Jinping agreed to set up a communication line between their foreign ministries.

But a few months later, Manila officials said that China could not be reached in times of high tensions at sea.

BenarNews is an RFA-affiliated online news organization.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Camille Elemia for BenarNews.

Mark Swidan, of Houston, Texas, Kai Li, of Long Island, New York, and John Leung, a permanent resident of Hong Kong, have been reunited with their families for the first time in years in time for Thanksgiving, Nov. 28 this year, ABC News reported.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken said he spoke to Li, Leung and Swidan while they were en route back home.

“I told them how glad I was that they were in good health and that they’ll soon be reunited with their loved ones,” Blinken said via his X account.

While the State Department didn’t reveal more details about the deal, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Mao Ning confirmed that three Chinese citizens had also been returned.

“Three Chinese citizens who were wrongly detained by the United States have returned to their motherland safely,” Mao told a regular news conference in Beijing on Thursday.

“China has always firmly opposed the U.S.’s suppression and persecution of Chinese citizens for political purposes and will, as always, take necessary measures to firmly safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese citizens,” she said.

Accused of spying

Reports named one of the Chinese nationals as Xu Yanjun, an official in the Chinese Ministry of State Security who became the first Chinese spy to be extradited to the United States following his arrest in Belgium in 2018.

A jury found Xu guilty in 2021 of attempting to steal designs for an engine fan from Ohio-based GE Aviation. Department of Justice officials said it was part of an organized effort by Beijing to “modernize” its own economy by stealing U.S. technology.

Another was identified as Ji Chaojun, a former graduate student was sentenced in Chicago to eight years in prison for spying for China in January 2023, according to multiple media reports.

Mao declined to identify the returned Chinese nationals, but said a “fugitive” from Chinese justice had also been returned to the custody of the Chinese authorities, warning that the ruling Communist Party would “continue to pursue fugitives ... to the end.”

Sending a signal?

Yang Haiying, a professor at Japan’s Shizuoka University, said such prisoner exchanges are rare for China, and could be intended to send a signal to the incoming Trump administration.

“Maybe China is trying to test Trump, whether he will want to do various kinds of deals with China in future,” Yang said, describing the swap as a form of “hostage trading.”

RELATED STORIES

US-China tensions weigh on Americans detained in Chinese jails

Too many Americans ‘unjustly’ jailed in China, lawmakers say

Chinese spy gets 20 years in US prison“

If that works, then maybe China and the United States can make bigger deals in future, including trade deals, political deals, and agreements on international issues like the South China Sea,” he said. “I think they are sending that signal.”

Current affairs commentator Guo Min said the swap was undoubtedly in Beijing’s interest at this time.

“China regards some of its people as so-called patriots for propaganda purposes, saying that the Chinese government has made great efforts to protect patriots and successfully returned them to China,” Guo said.

“Everything the Chinese government does is based on political considerations,” he said.

The U.S. State Department on Wednesday downgraded its travel advisory for China from Level 3 (reconsider travel) to Level 2 (exercise extreme caution).

The advisory now warns U.S. citizens of the possibility of “arbitrary enforcement of local laws” in mainland China, Macau and Hong Kong, with the possibility of exit bans in mainland China.

Translated by Luisetta Mudie. Edited by Malcolm Foster.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Qian Lang for RFA Mandarin.

Kara Ravulo was halfway through her university studies when her father became sick, ultimately leading her to defer school to help support her family. After he died, Ravulo’s mother’s wise words encouraged her to go back and complete her studies.

But it was Ravulo’s perseverance and dedication that led her to where she is now.

With the rise of female athletes across Fiji, it has opened a door for not only women athletes to be in the media but also for women journalists reporting on sports media.

• READ MORE: Other reports in the QUT Fiji Project series

Almost every media outlet in Fiji boasts a woman sports journalist.

As the media and content officer at the Fijian Drua, Kara Ravulo is a trailblazer in the Fijian sports and communication sector. When she began her role, Fiji had never had a woman media officer for a male sporting team.

Ravulo, who has a Bachelor of Commerce from the University of the South Pacific, found herself longing for something more, when she saw an advertisement for a position available at the Fiji Sun newspaper.

Ravulo expressed a gracious thanks to God after she was offered a position at the Fiji Sun, where she covered the news and business sectors before the sports editor approached her about becoming a sports journalist.

‘This is what I want’
“They tested me out. The sports editor was like, ‘Do you want to write sports stories?’ and I was like ‘I can try’.”

“Then they put me on sports and when I started doing it and started doing interviews I was like, ‘I think this is what I want to be’.”

After three years as the sports journalist at the Sun, Ravulo saw a new opportunity to level up her skills and applied for a position at the public broadcaster Fijian Broadcasting Corporation (FBC).

She covered the sports news at FBC, but it was here that she learnt new forms of journalism.

Ravulo thanks FBC for introducing her to social media, which she explained is something that all journalists need to be well versed and multi-talented in that area of media.

After the introduction of the Fijian Drua Super Rugby side in 2022, the search for the organisation’s first media and content officer began. Having been at FBC for nearly three years, Ravulo decided to take another leap of faith and apply for the role.

Taking a position within a male-dominated industry is no easy feat, and no one can prepare you for situations such as being the only woman who travels with the Fijian Drua team for the whole season.

Privileged opportunity
Ravulo expressed her gratitude for the organisation and the team for having faith in her to be their media officer, as she believes it is such a privilege.

Being treated as one of their own is great, but it means that she does still have to carry the heavy stuff, Ravulo said while laughing.

“It was challenging at first trying to earn the teams trust but something that we women need to know is that you need to take out that mentality that women cannot do what men can do,” she said.

“When standing at games with other super rugby clubs’ male content officers, I just think to myself, I am the same as all of you.

“And you should have that mentality that I can do what you can do.”

It is not only the team at the Drua organisation that Ravulo has won over, according to former Fiji Times finance editor Monika Singh, now teaching assistant at USP.

“She has the ability to win people over with her infectious smile and friendly demeanour,” Singh said.

“I have known her for some time now and I have never heard anyone complain about her work or her work ethic,” said Singh when reflecting on Ravulo’s character.

Writing wins respect
Ravulo strongly believes that some of the challenges junior journalists are faced with can be overcome through your writing.

“You write the way that people can actually respect you and see that you’re here to mean business, it changes the perspective of how people look at you.”

2024 @fijicare Moment of the Year (men’s) Kemu Valetini’s drop goal in front of Lautoka fans marking a famous (first) victory against the @NSWWaratahs#TosoDrua #PacificAusSports pic.twitter.com/WLYjWGXmKA

— Fijian Drua (@Fijian_Drua) June 17, 2024

Working with the Drua has broadened Ravulo’s horizons not only in relation to the social media and content creation, but also in understanding sponsorships, marketing, and public relations.

As a result, she has opted to go back to university and study a Bachelor of Law to venture into sports law because player welfare, lack of agents and contract negotiations is a gap she has noticed within the Fijian market.

Ruvulo would encourage all women to work within the sports media industry across Fiji.

“Women need to be more out there.”

Paige Schouw is a student journalist from the Queensland University of Technology who travelled to Fiji with the support of the Australian Government’s New Colombo Plan Mobility Programme. Published in partnership with QUT.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

Kara Ravulo was halfway through her university studies when her father became sick, ultimately leading her to defer school to help support her family. After he died, Ravulo’s mother’s wise words encouraged her to go back and complete her studies.

But it was Ravulo’s perseverance and dedication that led her to where she is now.

With the rise of female athletes across Fiji, it has opened a door for not only women athletes to be in the media but also for women journalists reporting on sports media.

• READ MORE: Other reports in the QUT Fiji Project series

Almost every media outlet in Fiji boasts a woman sports journalist.

As the media and content officer at the Fijian Drua, Kara Ravulo is a trailblazer in the Fijian sports and communication sector. When she began her role, Fiji had never had a woman media officer for a male sporting team.

Ravulo, who has a Bachelor of Commerce from the University of the South Pacific, found herself longing for something more, when she saw an advertisement for a position available at the Fiji Sun newspaper.

Ravulo expressed a gracious thanks to God after she was offered a position at the Fiji Sun, where she covered the news and business sectors before the sports editor approached her about becoming a sports journalist.

‘This is what I want’
“They tested me out. The sports editor was like, ‘Do you want to write sports stories?’ and I was like ‘I can try’.”

“Then they put me on sports and when I started doing it and started doing interviews I was like, ‘I think this is what I want to be’.”

After three years as the sports journalist at the Sun, Ravulo saw a new opportunity to level up her skills and applied for a position at the public broadcaster Fijian Broadcasting Corporation (FBC).

She covered the sports news at FBC, but it was here that she learnt new forms of journalism.

Ravulo thanks FBC for introducing her to social media, which she explained is something that all journalists need to be well versed and multi-talented in that area of media.

After the introduction of the Fijian Drua Super Rugby side in 2022, the search for the organisation’s first media and content officer began. Having been at FBC for nearly three years, Ravulo decided to take another leap of faith and apply for the role.

Taking a position within a male-dominated industry is no easy feat, and no one can prepare you for situations such as being the only woman who travels with the Fijian Drua team for the whole season.

Privileged opportunity
Ravulo expressed her gratitude for the organisation and the team for having faith in her to be their media officer, as she believes it is such a privilege.

Being treated as one of their own is great, but it means that she does still have to carry the heavy stuff, Ravulo said while laughing.

“It was challenging at first trying to earn the teams trust but something that we women need to know is that you need to take out that mentality that women cannot do what men can do,” she said.

“When standing at games with other super rugby clubs’ male content officers, I just think to myself, I am the same as all of you.

“And you should have that mentality that I can do what you can do.”

It is not only the team at the Drua organisation that Ravulo has won over, according to former Fiji Times finance editor Monika Singh, now teaching assistant at USP.

“She has the ability to win people over with her infectious smile and friendly demeanour,” Singh said.

“I have known her for some time now and I have never heard anyone complain about her work or her work ethic,” said Singh when reflecting on Ravulo’s character.

Writing wins respect
Ravulo strongly believes that some of the challenges junior journalists are faced with can be overcome through your writing.

“You write the way that people can actually respect you and see that you’re here to mean business, it changes the perspective of how people look at you.”

2024 @fijicare Moment of the Year (men’s) Kemu Valetini’s drop goal in front of Lautoka fans marking a famous (first) victory against the @NSWWaratahs#TosoDrua #PacificAusSports pic.twitter.com/WLYjWGXmKA

— Fijian Drua (@Fijian_Drua) June 17, 2024

Working with the Drua has broadened Ravulo’s horizons not only in relation to the social media and content creation, but also in understanding sponsorships, marketing, and public relations.

As a result, she has opted to go back to university and study a Bachelor of Law to venture into sports law because player welfare, lack of agents and contract negotiations is a gap she has noticed within the Fijian market.

Ruvulo would encourage all women to work within the sports media industry across Fiji.

“Women need to be more out there.”

Paige Schouw is a student journalist from the Queensland University of Technology who travelled to Fiji with the support of the Australian Government’s New Colombo Plan Mobility Programme. Published in partnership with QUT.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

This comes on the back of increased bilateral engagement – think new embassies in Kiribati and Vanuatu – and a reinvigorated QUAD with a focus on resource and burden sharing among the membership of the strategic security partnership (Australia, India, Japan, USA).

The joint declaration from this their tenth meeting, known as PALM10, with its associated action plan sets out what we can expect from Japanese engagement with the Pacific over the next three years. The use of the seven pillars of the 2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent as a structure for future engagement is notable.

The Blue Pacific concept was developed by Pacific nations as a home-grown framing to address their challenges.

Other partners have inserted the term Blue Pacific into announcements and documents. However, this takes the recognition of the Pacific’s own framework to another level. It is particularly significant given that Japan’s former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe coined the term Indo-Pacific, which many in the Pacific islands region have resisted. 

PALM10 sees a move to an “All Japan” approach to working with Pacific partners. Whilst several Japanese agencies are referenced in the outcome documents, the most notable is the prominence of the Japanese Self-Defense Force in future engagement.

Japan’s military impacts in the Pacific islands region are well known and loom large in the regional memory. While the PALM10 action plan references the continuation of activities related to World War II, such as retrieval of remains and clearance of unexploded ordnance, new activities will see the Japanese presence in the region take on a markedly military aspect.

This will add to what is an already crowded environment in which defense diplomacy has been increasing in recent years. However, Japan’s use of this strategy has been relatively limited until now.

The PALM10 action plan refers to increased defense “exchanges” to consist of port calls by Japanese Defense Force aircraft and vessels. This may not be as easy to achieve as Tokyo officials might like. 

At the same time as PALM10 was in session in Tokyo, Vanuatu’s National Security Advisory Board refused a request for a Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force vessel to dock in Port Vila. The reasons for the refusal remain unclear.

Other examples of increased use of the JSDF are the provision of capacity building to Pacific personnel for participation in peace-keeping operations and inclusion of a Self-Defense Unit in disaster relief teams to be deployed to Pacific island countries at their governments’ request.

At the end of the Action Plan are items for “clarification.” Included in the list (of three) for Japan to clarify are two that continue this push for increased defense diplomacy. 

They are: a proposal to accept Pacific cadets into the National Defense Academy of Japan and to use the Japan Pacific Islands Defence Dialogue to foster “mutual understanding and confidence building.” The JPIDD has met twice, most recently earlier this year.

We are now into the Pacific meeting season and in six weeks the 53rd Pacific Islands Forum Leaders Meeting will convene in Nuku’alofa, Tonga. Japan is a longstanding dialogue partner of the forum. 

The ongoing review of regional architecture includes revisions to how dialogue partners are selected and accommodated. What was discussed and agreed at PALM10 will play a role in determining where at the Blue Pacific table Japan will sit. 

Tess Newton Cain has worked as an independent consultant and researcher in the Pacific islands region for more than 25 years. She is a former Lecturer in Law at the University of the South Pacific and an adjunct associate professor at Griffith University, Australia. The views expressed here are her own and do not reflect the position of BenarNews.

BenarNews is an RFA-affiliated online news organization.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Commentary by Tess Newton Cain.

Papua New Guinea will face a grim reality of a ban on its shipping of oil and hydrocarbons in international waters if it continues to ignore the implementation of a domestic waste oil policy that is 28 years overdue.

The Conservation and Environment Protection Authority’s Director for Renewable Brendan Trawen made this stark revelation in response to queries posed by Post-Courier Online.

In the backdrop of investment projects proposed in the resource space, the issue of waste oil and its disposal has incurred hefty fines and reputational damage to the nation, and could seriously impact the shipments of one of the country’s lucrative exports in oil and LNG.

• READ MORE: Waste oil – a timebomb for Papua New Guinea – Matthew Vari

“International partners are most protective of their waterways. Therefore, PNG has already been issued with a warning on implementation of a ban of oil and hydrocarbon shipments, including LNG from PNG through Indonesian water,” he said.

In addition, the issuing of a complete ban on all hydrocarbon exports from Singapore through Indonesian waters to PNG.

“In light of growing international concern about the need for stringent control of transboundary movement of hazardous waste oil, and of the need as far as possible to reduce such movement to a minimum, and the concern about the problem of illegal transboundary traffic in hazardous wastes oil, CEPA is compelled to take immediate steps in accordance with Article 10 of the Basel Convention Framework,” Trawen said.

He indicated CEPA had limited capabilities of PNG State through to manage hazardous wastes and other wastes.

Safeguarding PNG’s international standing
The government of PNG had been “rightfully seeking cooperation with Singaporean authorities since 2020” to safeguard PNG’s international standing with the aim to improve and achieve environmentally sound management of hazardous waste oil.

“Through the NEC Decision No. 12/2021, respective authorities from PNG and Singapore deliberated and facilitated the alternative arrangement to reach an agreement with Hachiko Efficiency Services (HES) towards the establishment of a transit and treatment centre in PNG.

“In due process, HES have the required permits to allow transit of the waste oils in Singapore, Malaysia and South Korea for recycling.”

Minister of Environment, Conservation and Climate Change Simon Kilepa acknowledged that major repercussions were expected to take effect with the potential implementation ban of all hydrocarbons and oil shipments through Indonesian waters.

Political, economic and security risks emerged without doubt owing to GoPNG through CEPA’s negligence in the past resolving Basel Convention’s outstanding matters.

“It is in fact that the framework and policy for the Waste Oil Project exists under the International Basel Convention inclusive of the approved methods of handling and shipping waste oils. What PNG has been lacking is the regulation and this program provides that through,” he said.

“CEPA will progress its waste oil programme by engaging Hachiko Efficiency Services to develop and manage the domestic transit facility.

“This will include the export of waste oil operating under the Basel and Waigani agreements dependent upon the final destination.”

CEPA will proceed with the Hazardous Waste Oil Management Programme immediately to comply with the long outstanding implementation of the Basel Convention requirements on the management of Hazardous waste oil.

A media announcement and publicity would be made with issuance of Express of Interest (EOI) to shippers and local waste companies

A presentation would be made to NEC Cabinet and a NEC decision before the sitting of Parliament.

Matthew Vari is a senior journalist and former editor of the PNG Post-Courier. Republished with permission.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

Roy Vincent Trinidad told reporters on Tuesday that the CCG 5901 has been near Sabina Shoal, known in the Philippines as Escoda Shoal, since July 3.

Manila’s biggest and most modern coast guard ship – the BRP Teresa Magbanua – has been shadowing the movements of the Chinese vessel, he said.

The 2,260-ton Philippine multi-role response vessel, however, is dwarfed by “The Monster” which is five times its size.

At some points, the Chinese ship was only about 500 meters (1,640 feet) from the BRP Teresa Magbanua, according to Trinidad.

While under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, or UNCLOS, foreign vessels can conduct so-called innocent passage and freedom of navigation operations, the spokesperson said, adding: “We are monitoring them because they should not be conducting any maritime research, they should not be doing anything detrimental to the security of the state.”

The Philippine coast guard first spotted “The Monster” anchored near Sabina Shoal last Saturday.

The shoal, claimed by China, the Philippines, Vietnam and Taiwan, is less than 90 nautical miles (167 km) off the coast of Palawan island inside the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone, or EEZ, where Manila has jurisdiction over natural resources.

Philippine coast guard spokesperson Jay Tarriela said at the time that his forces radio challenged the Chinese vessel, warning that it was operating inside the Philippine EEZ but “The Monster” did not respond.

“It’s an intimidation on the part of the China coast guard,” Tarriela said.

The 12,000-ton CCG 5901 is the largest coast guard vessel in the world and is heavily armed.

When asked about the statement, a Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson said the shoal belonged to China.

Lin Jian said that it is part of Chinese Nansha islands, also known as the Spratly islands, not the Philippines’ EEZ. 

“To patrol and conduct law enforcement activities by Chinese military and coast guard vessels in the waters near Xianbin Jiao is within China’s domestic law and international law, including UNCLOS,” Lin said, referring to Sabina Shoal by its Chinese name.

Suspected land reclamation

China lays claim to most of the South China Sea and draws a so-called nine-dash line on its maps to mark its “historic rights.”

An international arbitration tribunal in a case brought by the Philippines in 2016 ruled that China’s claims are unlawful but it has refused to recognize the ruling.

“The Monster” last month conducted a 10-day patrol along the nine-dash line to reinforce it before returning to the Philippines’ EEZ this month.

China has also been sending research vessels, naval vessels and other ships to Sabina Shoal, leading to suspicion that it is attempting to build an artificial island there.

The Philippine coast guard said that crushed corals had been dumped on the shoal – an indication of the early stage of land reclamation.

China’s foreign ministry dismissed the accusation as “groundless and pure rumor.”

Chinese ‘monster’ ship reinforces nine-dash line in South China Sea

China deploys ‘monster’ ship near disputed shoal

Manila accuses Beijing of island building in South China Sea

Manila: Philippines, China agree to ‘de-escalate’ South China Sea tensions

Sabina Shoal is also important to the Philippines as it serves as the meeting point for vessels resupplying troops stationed at the nearby Second Thomas Shoal.

The Philippine and Chinese coast guards have been confronting each other near the shoal, where Manila ran aground an old warship – the BRP Sierra Madre – to exert its control. In an incident on June 17, a Filipino sailor lost a finger during an altercation  between Philippine military and Chinese coast guard personnel there.

Manila and Beijing have since held talks and agreed to “de-escalate tensions” but the situation remains largely unchanged.

In the latest development, the Chinese navy’s Shandong carrier strike group has been spotted passing the northern Philippines on its way to drills in the Pacific. The carrier group includes China’s second aircraft carrier Shandong, cruiser Yan’an, destroyer Guilin and frigate Yuncheng.

Philippine armed forces  spokesperson Francel Margareth Padilla told reporters on Wednesday that the Philippines noted the deployment of the Chinese carrier strike group in the Philippine Sea “with concern.”

“We emphasize the importance of maintaining peace and stability in the region and urge all parties to adhere to international laws and norms,” he said.

Jason Gutierrez in Manila contributed to this report.

Edited by Mike Firn and Taejun Kang.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Staff.

Paul Waters, Conversation oil on cut cotton collage on canvas, 36h x 30w in

Jamie Nami Kim, Ten Women, cut paper on board, 37h x 95w in

How does a collaboration begin?

Paul: It starts with a conversation. It needs to be straightforward, open, honest, and it should allow free exchange between what’s being talked about.

Jamie: I like it when those kinds of conversations aren’t prompted. When it’s spontaneous. It’s the kind of conversation that feels like it’s happening to the people who are in conversation. They are both the recipients and participants of what’s being exchanged.

There’s a real joy that happens in these kinds of exchanges. So, in our case, we marinated for a long while in the free exchange through conversations for about a year before we actually discussed doing any art work together. Our conversations, in retrospect, were a very important part of our collaborative experience.

Paul: Yes and it’s an ongoing conversation. It doesn’t have a beginning and doesn’t seem to have an end. I feel like that’s what happens when you have a longtime collaborator. You say one year; I think it’s actually been going on for longer. There’s a real mystery in that. Our collaboration has been happening in nonlinear time.

What makes a great collaboration?

Paul: I think that one must do their work to be free of their ego. You have to be comfortable with being vulnerable especially if we are talking about creating expressions. You need to tell your personal story, whatever the story is. I think it’s very exciting when you can share your story with somebody who embraces it and understands it clearly. It’s equally exciting when you can listen and embrace someone else’s story.

Jamie: A lot of the time in our culture, we often privilege action over feeling and presence. Two or more people come together because they like to create. The questions will go towards an outcome: What are we going to do? What are we going to make? How? It’s all very action and outcome driven. What happens if we give more time and energy towards staying in a non-outcome driven state? I’m very appreciative that you and I exercise a lot of patience and curiosity to stay in a present and open state. That wasn’t always easy for me to do at times and you helped me a lot to get there.

Paul: You need to seek out the flow and get away from your individual self as much as you can. That’s the experience I had with you.

I let go of immediate concerns and enter into dream time. When I can get into that state, the unexpected and surprising always happens.

Jamie: Yes, it was helpful for me to have a method of getting into that space of dream time. Meditation, breath work, and dream analysis has really helped me access this space. Art-making of course is another way of entering into nonlinear time.

Language is also important. What words do we choose to speak in our mind to get out of our own way? Each person has to do their part in making powerful decisions about how they speak to themselves and to others. The focus needs to be centred on the collective experience and not an individual experience. More ‘us/we’ and less ‘me/I’.

Paul Waters, Warrior Woman, oil on cut cotton collage on canvas, 36h x 30w in

Jamie Nami Kim, New Life, cut paper on paper, 24h x 26w in

Paul: People need to be honest and that’s very hard. There’s a fear we all carry. Everybody wants to be accepted. People place barriers between themselves and other people out of fear and instead of getting closer, they end up further away. Shutting down and creating barriers is an indication that you don’t have enough love with yourself. Love is central in the picture of collaboration.

And it should be fun!

Jamie: Yes! If you start to feel it’s not fun, then you gotta ask yourself what’s going on?

Not feeling joy is a signal that there’s something you need to work out. It doesn’t mean it’s over. It just probably means there’s something that hasn’t been said or something that hasn’t been heard. So conversation is really important throughout the entire process. Open dialogue, open channels both with yourself and the people you are collaborating with.

Paul: Feedback is also very important. Listening and digesting what’s being shared is part of the process of creating. I learned to feel free enough in myself to accept criticism. I cultivated humility by taking time to understand myself and embrace myself. The more you love yourself, the more people will love you. I heard that as a child. Makes a lot of sense.

Humbleness is a part of humility. Humbleness is to embrace sensitivities. Appreciating what’s around you, appreciating the strengths of commitment and respecting others and their emotions.

What do you love about collaboration?

Jamie: Everybody has a story. Collaboration allows us to express our stories by celebrating the humility and humanity behind each story. At the core, our stories are the same.

It’s very exciting to witness each other bringing our own experiences and wisdom into a collaboration. There’s such a deep level of satisfaction and celebration that happens when you collectively make decisions and collectively determine that something is complete.

I love the sparkle that happens when we are in sync—it’s a real “yeah!” feeling that is large and energising and feels so good to share. It’s the feeling that anything is possible when we do it together.

Paul: Collaboration is a wonderful learning experience. More specifically, I think intergenerational relationships are very important because of the exchange of language and interpretation which is not only healthy but also a very large measuring tool. Learning how to talk to different generations has helped me to grow and learn more. I think generational differences create fear and hesitation in people because of those differences. And that’s a bad omen. So for me it’s been a great learning tool to see how you fit into the great and changing cultural dynamics.

Paul Waters and Jamie Nami Kim sketching Twins

Paul Waters and Jamie Nami Kim, Twins, oil on cut cotton collage on canvas, 36h x 48w in

This content originally appeared on The Creative Independent and was authored by Jamie Nami Kim and Paul Waters.

The Chinese coast guard on Wednesday issued Order No. 3, which will take effect  on June 15 and authorizes its personnel to hold foreign nationals for up to 30 days – and as many as 60, in some cases. 

The order’s release took place amid rising bilateral tensions over the waterway and as a Philippine civilian resupply convoy sailed toward Scarborough Shoal, which lies within Manila’s exclusive economic zone, but is also claimed by China.

“This is another illegal action of China,” Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) spokesperson Jay Tarriela said during a press briefing Friday, as he rejected that Beijing’s new policy applied to waters within Manila’s EEZ.

“The mere fact that they claim full sovereignty over our own exclusive economic zone and they are trying to justify their imaginary nine-dash line,” he said, referring to the boundary on Chinese maps that demarcates Beijing’s South China Sea claims.  

According to a Mandarin-language document shared by the Chinese Embassy in Manila to reporters, the order covers “administrative cases that occur in the waters under the jurisdiction” of China. While the document makes no direct mention of the South China Sea, Beijing claims the waterway almost in its entirety.

Under the order, foreign vessels may be seized and a foreign person “may be detained with the approval of the person in charge of the coast guard agency” if they are suspected of illegal entry and exit, assisting others “to illegally enter and exit the country,” and of “endangering national security and interests,” among other activities.

Foreigners may be exempted from detention if they are pregnant or nursing an infant, below 16 years old, and older than 70 years old, among others, according to excerpts from the order that were translated into English.

“Administrative cases that occur in waters under the country’s jurisdiction shall be under the administration of the Coast Guard agency in accordance with the law, and shall be under the jurisdiction of the Coast Guard agency corresponding to the place where the violation was committed,” the order stated.

The new order also prohibits unauthorized conduct of surveying and mapping activities in waters under Beijing’s jurisdiction, and warns that such circumstances are considered grave or serious.

‘Illegal’ action

At the press briefing, Tarriela warned China against repercussions of implementing its new order.

“China will also have to understand the fact that once they implement this law that they are saying now, it’s not just the Philippines that will be affected by this. They have to implement it on waters where Vietnamese, Malaysians, Indonesians, and other Southeast Asians are pressing on the nine-dash line claim of China,” he said. 

“It’s a very big problem for them.”

Aside from the Philippines and China, Vietnam, Brunei, and Malaysia also have overlapping claims to the South China Sea. Taiwan is also a claimant.

On Friday, a lawmaker and a security analyst urged the Philippine government to file a case against China before an international court over the new policy.

“If any country has a right to arrest foreigners, it is the Philippines. China is the one trespassing in our territorial waters and our exclusive economic zone, and now it has the gall to say that they would arrest non-Chinese in our waters,” House Deputy Minority Leader France Castro said in a statement.

“The Philippines should expedite filing a case against China again in the Permanent Court of Arbitration and the United Nations. The international community, especially the [Association of Southeast Asian Nations] should also speak up against China’s blatant disregard of Philippine sovereignty, the 2016 arbitral ruling, and the [United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea],” she also said.

In 2016, the Philippines won a landmark international arbitration case against China that stemmed from a bilateral standoff over Scarborough Shoal, which Beijing has virtually controlled since 2012. 

On Friday, the civilian convoy returned to Luzon island after an advance boat had delivered food and fuel to Filipino fishermen who were fishing near the disputed shoal, organizers said.

“We see the defiance of the Filipino fisherfolk. The main reason why they went to Scarborough Shoal is to fight for their fishing rights, the [sovereign] rights of our country,” Security analyst Chester Cabalza told the ABS-CBN news program “Dateline Philippines” on Friday.

“The mere fact that China has pronounced the new law which they will implement by June means that they’re afraid. There’s fear in China right now because they’ve seen civilians coming to [Scarborough Shoal],” he said.

Geopolitical analyst Don McLain Gill called the new Chinese policy illicit and baseless. 

“China is quite notorious for using lawfare as a means to [establish] its de facto exclusionary policies in the greater South China Sea and the West Philippine Sea in particular,” Gill told BenarNews on Friday.

The West Philippine Sea is how Filipinos refer to South China Sea waters that lie within the Philippine EEZ.

“From its foreign fishing ban to the recent announcement, Beijing tries to illicitly enforce so-called laws in other countries’ EEZ as a show of force. However, this doesn’t change the fact that such enforcements are illegal and clearly against UNCLOS,” Gill said.

The Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs and the National Security Council did not immediately respond to BenarNews requests for comment. 

BenarNews also tried to contact the Chinese Embassy to seek clarification and comment, but was unsuccessful.

Meanwhile on Thursday, as the Filipino civilian convoy was heading back to Luzon, the Philippine Coast Coast Guard said it had detained a Sierra Leone-flagged ship, the MT Hyperline 988, on suspicion of having turned off its  its automatic identification system (AIS), and its seven-member crew.

All seven crew members were Chinese nationals, the PCG said.

BenarNews is an RFA-affiliated news service.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Camille Elemia for BenarNews.

On Thursday afternoon, seven Chinese vessels, including maritime patrol and fisheries ships, entered Kinmen’s restricted waters and conducted a maritime exercise there with three Chinese fishing boats, the Taiwanese coast guard said in a statement.

This group of ships was as close as 4 nautical miles (7.4 km) from Liaoluo Bay on Kinmen island, it said. 

At the same time, another group of four Chinese coast guard ships entered prohibited waters south of Kinmen. 

“Prohibited” and “restricted” waters are the tacit boundaries between Taiwan’s outer islands and China’s mainland that both sides have been adhering to.  

“Prohibited waters” refer to the territorial waters around Kinmen that extend about halfway to the Chinese coast, or roughly 4 km (2.5 miles) to the north and northwest. “Restricted waters” extend a little further, about 8 km (5 miles), to the south.

Taiwan’s coast guard dispatched a total of six vessels to monitor and broadcast warnings to the two groups of Chinese ships. 

The statement added China’s activities “seriously undermined cross-Strait peace, stability and navigation safety, as well as hurt the feelings of people on both sides of the Strait.”

China has yet to respond to the allegation but the armed forces’ China Military Online website on Thursday posted a feature about what it called “regular law enforcement patrols in waters near Kinmen.”

Regular patrols

The 11 Chinese ships reportedly stayed for about 90 minutes in the area before heading back to Xiamen on China’s side. This is the first time the Chinese coast guard has been joined by ships from other Chinese government agencies.

In February, both Taipei and Beijing said they would “enforce the law” in the waters between Kinmen island and China’s mainland after an incident that resulted in the deaths of two Chinese men.

“China has used the death of its two fishermen to effectively erase the prohibited and restricted boundaries around Kinmen,” said Ben Lewis, an independent defense analyst based in Washington who has been tracking Chinese military movements.

“The defense ministry in Beijing has recently said that it ‘normalized’ law enforcement patrols near Kinmen, and this latest incursion is a natural extension of that normalization,” Lewis noted.

Experts say in the run up to the inauguration of Taiwan’s new president, Lai Ching-te, on May 20, there will likely be more such incursions as China has always ramped up military activities ahead of Taiwan’s major political events.

Kinmen is less than 10 km (6.2 miles) from China’s Fujian province coast and the “restricted” and “prohibited” waters serve as a means for Taiwan to ensure safety and security in a very busy waterway, according to Lewis.

Another analyst, Su Tzu-yun, a research fellow at state-run Taiwan’s Institute for National Defense and Security Research, explained that the boundaries around outer islands such as Kinmen and Matsu were originally set by Taiwan as “defensive cordon lines” to safeguard security and regulate maritime traffic and rather than to claim territorial sovereignty.

“The Chinese side deliberately ignored Taiwan’s goodwill and demonstrated unilateralism, which is not conducive to peace in the Taiwan Strait,” Su told RFA.

“We shall remain vigilant but be careful not to overreact,” he said, comparing Taipei’s tactic to that of Finland in dealing with Russia’s invasions of its airspace. “Taiwan should appeal to international law and public opinion for support, which would emphasize that the responsibility rests entirely with China.” 

Edited by Mike Firn and Taejun Kang.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Radio Free Asia.

China Coast Guard (CCG) ships 14608, 14604, 14512 and 14603 sailed into the so-called prohibited waters south of Kinmen island at around 3:30 p.m. on Monday and stayed for more than an hour before being driven away, the coast guard said. 

The previous recent instance of a Chinese vessel trespassing into Kinmen’s prohibited waters – a civilian speedboat – was in February.

Taiwan-controlled Kinmen is less than 10 km (6.2 miles) from China’s Fujian province coast but more than 180 km (112 miles) from Taiwan’s main island.

The boundaries between the outer islands under Taiwan’s control and China’s mainland, called “prohibited waters” and “restricted waters,” were set by Taiwan in 1992 and have been tacitly respected by both sides, despite China never officially recognizing them. 

“Prohibited waters” refer to the territorial waters around Kinmen that extend about halfway to the Chinese coast, or roughly 4 km (2.5 miles) to the north and northwest. “Restricted waters” extend a little further, about 8 km (5 miles), to the south.

The CCG had in recent days “intensively” sent its vessels to “deliberately” sail into the waters near Kinmen, the Taiwanese coast guard said. The Chinese activities seriously affected peace and stability, as well as maritime navigation safety and traffic order in the Taiwan Strait, it said.

New normal

China, which claims Taiwan as its territory, has been stepping up its military exercises and air and sea patrols near the island over the past couple of years. 

“China’s incursions are becoming a norm,” said retired Taiwanese air force general Chang Yen-ting. “There is, unfortunately, no going back.”

“China will keep pushing forward around Taiwan, first Kinmen then Matsu and after that, Dongyin,” the general-turned-military analyst told Radio Free Asia, referring to some strategic outlying islands that Taiwan controls.

Just last week, the CCG announced that since April, its Fujian branch had begun to carry out “regular law enforcement patrols in the waters near Kinmen in accordance with the law.”

According to a CCG map issued with the announcement, the patrols had been conducted outside Kinmen’s prohibited waters.

The latest incursion occurred just two weeks before the inauguration of Taiwan’s new president, Lai Ching-te. His swearing-in ceremony is set for May 20.

Last week, National Security Bureau Director-General Tsai Ming-yen told Taiwan’s legislature that China may intensify military exercises after  the inauguration, adding that his office was closely watching to see whether Beijing will conduct more military exercises to put further pressure on Taiwan.

Taiwanese experts are divided on China’s intentions towards Taiwan’s outlying islands. 

Some think that in the event of hostilities, the outer islands would be targeted before any attack on Taiwan proper due to their proximity to China’s mainland.

Others say China would face a political dilemma should it first launch an assault on Kinmen or Matsu.

“Since it does not occupy Taiwan, it is meaningless to occupy the outer islands,” Su Tzu-yun, a senior analyst at the Institute for National Defense and Security Research, told RFA.

Edited by Mike Firn.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Staff.

In the wake of that incident, Chinese-language media outlets claimed that China ignores Taiwanese boundaries around the island, and that Chinese Coast Guard vessels entered Taiwan’s “prohibited” waters, closer to the island, during Feb. 25 drills.

However, a study of open-source intelligence that tracks ship movements showed that the coast guard vessels in fact mostly avoided crossing into “prohibited” waters, briefly doing so only twice between Feb. 25 and March 7. 

Two zones

Kinmen, which is just 10 kilometers (6 miles) from mainland China, is surrounded by two zones of ocean that Taiwan has barred mainland Chinese vessels from entering. 

The zones are identical on Kinmen’s west and north coast, closer to mainland China, but they are split into two zones on the south and east side: an outer zone called “restricted waters” and an inner zone closer to the island called “prohibited waters.”

The latter line marking is considered a de facto sea border with China.

Riyue Tantian — a subsidiary social media account of China Central Television, or CCTV — posted a video on Weibo on Feb 26, claiming that its live footage shows China Coast Guard vessels entering Taiwan’s prohibited waters around Kinmen during drills conducted the day before.

Parts of both the video and accompanying text were taken from two separate coast guard press releases earlier that day. 

Several Taiwanese news outlets have also made similar claims about the purported intrusion from Chinese vessels, with one political talk show even claiming that China has deployed “paramilitary operations” against Kinmen. 

But the claims are misleading. Below is what AFCL found.

Methodology

To pinpoint Chinese ships’ exact location around Kinmen, AFCL sourced real-time location data for these ships from Marine Traffic – an open-source platform regularly cited by mainstream news outlets such as The New York Times and The Washington Post.

The platform only displays data for ships that broadcast their location using radio signals, which are typically relayed via satellites, also known as an open Automatic Identification System, or AIS.

While it’s common for most ships to emit these signals, there are instances where these signals are deliberately deactivated, often by military ships to maintain operational secrecy. AFCL’s analysis focuses on Chinese vessels whose AIS was recorded by Marine Traffic around Kinmen. 

After taking screenshots of vessel movements, AFCL then manually added lines over screenshots, illustrating the locations of the relevant Chinese ships as well as “restricted” and “prohibited” waters around Kinmen based on official public data from Taiwan. 

What happened on Feb. 25?

Seven Chinese Coast Guard, or CCG, vessels are recorded as patrolling around Kinmen on Feb. 25, according to the Marine Traffic data.

They include two large former military ships (CCG 2202 and CCG 2203) and five normal patrol ships (CCG 14608, CCG 14609, CCG 14513, CCG 14515 and CMS 8027). 

CMS, or China Marine Surveillance, was originally under China’s Ministry of Land and Resources, but later was integrated into the CCG.

Among them, CCG 2202 crossed into Kinmen’s restricted waters a little after 2:00 a.m. while sailing from the southeast towards the southwest.

Marine Traffic uses Coordinated Universal Time (UTC), which is 8 hours behind Taiwan time and 4 hours ahead of Washington time.

At around the same time, CCG 2203 briefly crossed into and made a single pass within the restricted waters alongside the south of Kinmen as the graphic below shows. 

Both ships approached but never crossed into Kinmen’s prohibited waters, coming within less than 4 nautical miles of Kinmen at one point before veering off into open water at around 4:00 a.m. and continuing their patrols throughout the rest of the day at a distance. 

Four of the five other Chinese vessels on patrol near Kinmen on Feb. 25 only entered the island’s restricted waters briefly.

CMS 8027, however, entered Kinmen’s prohibited waters a little before 1:00 a.m. on Feb. 25, the sole Chinese vessel that AFCL observed to have done so that day. 

Huang Chung-ting, an associate research fellow at the Taiwanese military think tank Institute for National Defense and Security Research, said while the intrusion of CMS patrol ships into Kinmen’s prohibited waters is certainly a provocation towards Taiwan, it is not as strong a challenge as sending former navy vessels such as CCG 2202 and CCG 2203 into these waters. 

Compared to regular law enforcement vessels such as CCG 2202 and 2203, the surveillance ships [such as a CMS] have the nature of general administrative purpose only, he explained. 

In contrast, the CCG is still now a branch of China’s armed forces directed by the country’s Central Military Commission, which has led U.S. officials to previously state that they may treat the CCG as a part of the Chinese Navy, Huang added.

Huang said activities of CCG ships are likely to be concentrated in Kinmen’s south because the separate borders of the restricted and prohibited waters in that area allow China to perform more calculated escalatory naval movements compared to the northwest and west of the island, where the overlapping restricted and prohibited water limit such provocations. 

After Feb. 25

While China did launch “regular” patrols in the waters near Kinmen following Feb. 25, six of the vessels checked in this article (2202, 2203, 14608, 14609, 14513, and 14515) only crossed slightly over into Kinmen’s restricted waters or sailed a short distance away from it.

Marine Traffic data show that CCG 2202 sailed into Kinmen’s restricted waters again on Feb. 27. In the following week, the ship repeated a similar daily patrol straddling Kinmen’s restricted waters while gradually shifting the main course of its daily routes farther and farther towards the open sea southeast of the island.

CCG 2203’s course mirrored CCG 2202 during the same timeframe, entering Kinmen’s restricted waters on Feb. 27 while gradually shifting the main course of its daily patrols further away from Kinmen to the southeast.

While CMS 8027 sailed through Kinmen’s prohibited waters again on both Feb. 26 and 27, there was overall very little change in the trajectory of CCG vessels on duty near Kinmen between Feb. 25 and March 7. 

‘Talk tough and tread carefully’

Huang from the Institute for National Defense and Security Research told AFCL that he does not believe that the situation represents a “reversal” of the long-term status quo surrounding Kinmen, pointing to China’s decision to avoid sending multiple CCG vessels deep into Kinmen’s prohibited waters as evidence. 

Huang pointed out that the specific language used in official CCG statements regarding maritime disputes with the Philippines in the South China Sea and with Japan over the Diaoyu Islands highlights a nuanced difference in China’s strategy towards Kinmen. 

For instance, the CCG emphasizes that it is conducting patrols within “the range of China’s jurisdictional waters” in the South China Sea, but its statement concerning Kinmen only mentions the “waters around the island,” a sign of the Chinese government’s often used “talk tough and tread carefully” approach towards Taiwan, according to Huang. 

The variance in terminology and tone suggests that China adopts distinct diplomatic and tactical approaches in its maritime interactions with different neighbors, reflecting tailored strategies based on the unique geopolitical contexts of each dispute.

Translated by Shen Ke. Edited by Taejun Kang and Malcolm Foster.

Asia Fact Check Lab (AFCL) was established to counter disinformation in today’s complex media environment. We publish fact-checks, media-watches and in-depth reports that aim to sharpen and deepen our readers’ understanding of current affairs and public issues. If you like our content, you can also follow us on Facebook, Instagram and X.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Alan Lu for Asia Fact Check Lab.

Gen. Romeo Brawner Jr. said he was on the Unaizah Mae 1, one of three Philippine boats allegedly blasted by Chinese water cannon and piercing sounds during a resupply mission to the BRP Sierra Madre, a Philippine military outpost at Second Thomas (Ayungin) Shoal in the South China Sea.

“It was rammed. The Chinese coast guard were shadowing us from the start, and they got as close as 500 meters, 200 meters, then 100 meters,” Brawner told DZBB, a Tagalog-language radio station, on Monday.

“When dawn broke, we clearly saw that the Chinese militia [ship] tried to cut our path. Their maneuver was very dangerous.”

Also on Monday, Philippine officials presented images and videos of the incident.

“This is a serious escalation on the part of the agents of the People’s Republic of China,” Jonathan Malaya, spokesman for the National Security Council spokesman, said during a news conference.

In Beijing, meanwhile, a spokeswoman for China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs told reporters that a Philippine boat had traveled “headlong” into a Chinese ship.

Brawner said he slept aboard the Unaizah Mae 1 and oversaw “legitimate radio challenges” to Chinese boats in the area, adding that two China Coast Guard ships and three Chinese maritime militia ships were following the small Philippine boat. About 40 Chinese ships in all were stationed in the waters in and around Ayungin Shoal, he said.

“They started shadowing us on Saturday and it continued at 4 a.m. the following day, and until we – the Unaizah Mae – reached BRP Sierra Madre at 8 a.m.,” he said.

Brawner said he was “very angry” about the harassment of the resupply mission.

“The Chinese were not told that I was aboard Unaizah Mae 1, so maybe that’s why it happened and they did not change tactics,” Brawner said during the radio interview.

“While their aggressive actions have increased, our directive to our troops is to practice maximum tolerance. That’s why we were just trying to evade them.”

The latest incident forced government officials to order a civilian “Christmas convoy” that had been set up to deliver holiday supplies to troops and fishermen in disputed waters to return to shore, according to ATIN ITO, the group organizing the effort.

The BRP Sierra Madre is a rusted World War II-era navy ship that Manila grounded deliberately to mark its territorial claim at Ayungin Shoal, a reef in the contested Spratly Islands that lies within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone.

Manila also accused the Chinese coast guard of firing water cannon and painful sound blasts against boats that were ferrying supplies to Filipino fishermen near Scarborough Shoal, another disputed area, over the weekend.

Dueling protests

On Monday, Manila’s foreign affairs department said it had filed a formal protest to Beijing and summoned China’s envoy, while the Chinese foreign ministry spokeswoman, Mao Ning, announced that Beijing had lodged its own protest over the incident.

“[A] Philippine vessel went headlong towards Ren’ai Jiao’s lagoon and dangerously rammed a CCG ship on the scene,” Mao Ning said, using an acronym for the China Coast Guard. “This gravely violated China’s sovereignty and jeopardized the safety of the Chinese ships and personnel.”

Ren’ai Jiao is the Chinese name for Second Thomas Shoal.

“The root cause is that the Philippines has broken its promise and refused to tow away the illegally grounded warship at the reef and attempted to reinforce it on a large scale in an attempt to permanently occupy Ren’ai Jiao,” she said.

In response to the tensions in the waterway over the weekend, the United States, the European Union and Japan all issued statements condemning what they described as “dangerous actions” by the Chinese ships.

When a reporter asked her about a U.S. statement calling on China to stop “dangerous and destabilizing” actions in the South China Sea, Mao Ning said her nation would take the necessary steps to ensure territorial sovereignty.

“[T]he U.S. has been fanning disputes, misrepresenting facts, stoking confrontation and undermining regional peace and stability,” she said during the foreign ministry’s daily news briefing in Beijing.

BenarNews is an RFA-affiliated news service.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Jeoffrey Maitem and Jojo Riñoza for BenarNews.

Photograph Source: Fronteira – CC BY-SA 4.0

No one does a stadium show like Roger Waters. The music, of course, is resplendent, but so too are the soundscape, the images, the giant sheep and pig, the lasers, the films, the energy of the fans who—despite the language differences—sing along… “Did you exchange a walk-on part in the war for a lead role in a cage?” It is a riot of emotions. The quiet calm of Santiago is broken by familiar sounds and necessary feelings: yes, we are here; yes, we exist; yes, we must resist.

Santiago is a city blistered by social inequality. For two nights, Roger Waters played at the Estadio Monumental in Macul, a commune of Santiago that is more middle-class than the rest of the city although still not immune from the sharp divides that produced the massive social unrest of 2019. Then Roger sang a version of Víctor Jara’s El derecho de vivir en paz, with new lyrics for the new moment:

I can hear the Cacerolazo
I can smell you, Piñera
All fucking rats smell the same.

The Cacerolazo is the banging of pots, a social protest that resounded from Buenos Aires (2001) to Santiago (2011 and then again from 2019 to 2022). There is a good reason to walk on the streets and bang pots every day given the permanent condition of austerity reproduced by people like Chile’s former president Sebastían Piñera, one more of the “fucking rats” that make life hell. There is the austerity, the demise of social welfare and decent work, and the rise of poverty and social despair. Then there are the sharpened contradictions, the anger that sometimes gives rise to hope in madmen (Argentina’s incoming president Javier Milei is one of them) and at other moments, it gives rise to disorganized and organized forms of dissent.

A sheep flies over the tens of thousands of people in the stadium. It is the physical cognate of the song that flies off the stage, a paean to the atomization of people in society by this State of Permanent Austerity and of the necessity of resistance.

Through quiet reflection, and great dedication
Master the art of karate
Lo, we shall rise up,
And then we’ll make the bugger’s eyes water

Why not? Why not rise up? Sure, run like hell, run as fast as you can from the forces of repression that want to manage the contradictions of austerity. But then—as Roger does, as that sound of the hammer battering down your door quietens—take off the shirt that says, “run like hell” and put on one that says, “Resist.” The guitars tear through the night, the lasers flash to infinity, and the desire increases to rip off one’s fear of the State of Permanent Austerity and to rush into protest. But the images are chosen carefully. This is not a call for action without strategy. “Master the art of karate,” sings Roger. Like the karateka, dedicated study is needed, and the battlefield must certainly be approached with care to “make the bugger’s eyes water” and to do that with careful strategy.

The hammer’s sound is both that of the march of the police—in Chile the hated Carabineros—and the banging of the tools of the people, including the pots and pans. The stadium is engulfed by the madness of the electric guitar (particularly when Dave Kilminster has his eyes closed and his fingers aflame), heartbeats symphonized drawing people into Roger’s bar, a bottle of mezcal on the piano, Roger with his arms in the air, the night sky clear and hopeful because not far away is the dawn.

Universal Human Rights

About five kilometers from the Estadio Monumental is the Estadio Nacional, where Víctor Jara was assassinated by the coup regime of Augusto Pinochet 50 years ago. A few days before Roger’s show in Santiago, Victor’s wife, Joan Jara died, but their daughter Amanda was there to listen to Roger recognize the assassination of Víctor Jara and to Inti-Illimani open the show with a tribute to Víctor, including singing a full-throated version of El derecho, itself a tribute to Ho Chi Minh and the Vietnamese fighters.

Donde revientan la flor
Con genocidio y napalm
(Where they burst the flower
With genocide and napalm)

Jorge Coulón from Inti-Illimani belted out those lines with a kufiyah around his neck. Roger, with his acoustic guitar and kufiyah and with the haunting voice of Shanay Johnson alongside him, sings, lay down Jerusalem, lay your burden down.

If I had been god
I would not have chosen anyone
I would have laid an even hand
On all my children everyone
Would have been content
To forgo Ramadan and Lent
Time better spent
In the company of friends
Breaking bread and mending nets.

“Stop the Genocide” in white letters against a red background appears on the screens above the band’s head.

Roger was born in England in 1943 to a communist mother, Mary Duncan Whyte (1913-2009). His father—Second Lieutenant Eric Fletcher Waters, also a communist—was killed in Italy in 1944 (immortalized in my favorite song, The Gunner’s Dream from Final Cut, 1983). Five years later, the United Nations crafted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. That text is the foundation of Roger’s beliefs (“I don’t know when I first read it,” Roger tells me after the show, but he refers to it often, including in his shows). The fierce defense of human rights governs Roger, his anti-war sentiment shaped by the loss of his father. It is this universal faith that drives Roger’s politics.

“Are there paranoids in the stadium?” Roger asks. We are paranoid not because we are clinically ill, but because there is an enormous gulf between what we know to be true and what the powers that be tell us is supposed to be true. Roger Waters stands for human rights, including the rights of the Palestinians. We know that to be true because that is what he says, and he acts according to that belief. But the powers that be say that what Roger says is not true and that in fact, he is antisemitic. A consequence of the powers that be is that they tried to cancel his show in Frankfurt and—weirdly—all the hotel owners in Argentina refused to allow him—but not his band—a room in their establishments (he had to stay at a friend’s house in Uruguay). When Katie Halper and I asked him about this attack on him, Roger responded:

My platform is simple: it is [the] implementation of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights for all our brothers and sisters in the world including those between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. My support of universal human rights is universal. It is not antisemitism, which is odious and racist and which, like all forms of racism, I condemn unreservedly.

Roger says this over and over again, and yet, over and over again the powers that be malign Roger. “I will not be canceled,” Roger said in Birmingham at a concert. And why should he be? The attempt to cancel critics of Israel had some impact in recent years, but no longer carries weight: the atrocities of Israel against the Palestinians in Gaza have produced new generations of people who see the hideousness of the Occupation and refuse to bow down before the powers that be. “We need more than a pause” in the bombing of Gaza, Roger said from the stage in Santiago, “but a ceasefire that lasts forever,” the soundtrack to that sentiment produced by the saxophone of Seamus Blake and the lap steel of Jon Carin.

The show opens with Pink—the lead figure from The Wall (1982)—in a wheelchair, comfortably numb. In the second half, Roger is in the wheelchair in a straitjacket, thrown in there by orderlies of the powers that be. Is this the life we really want? It better not be. I’ll see you on the dark side of the moon.

Roger Waters’s This is Not a Drill tour moves on to Lima, Peru (November 29), San José, Costa Rica (December 2), Bogotá, Colombia (December 5), and ends in Quito, Ecuador (December 9).

This article was produced by Globetrotter.

The post Are There Any Paranoids in the Stadium Tonight? Two Nights in Santiago With Roger Waters appeared first on CounterPunch.org.

This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Vijay Prashad.

Analysts said Beijing was raising the stakes to goad Manila in their bilateral dispute over the Spratly Islands by bringing in one of its naval ships during the encounter near Thitu island in the South China Sea.

“These dangerous offensive maneuvers by China’s [People’s Liberation Army Navy] not only risk collision but also directly endanger the lives of maritime personnel from both sides,” Gen. Romeo Brawner Jr, chief of the Philippine armed forces, said in a statement on Sunday. 

“The [Armed Forces of the Philippines] remains committed to ensuring the safety of its personnel during missions and asserts that it will continue to adhere to the rules-based international order.”

The standoff occurred on Friday near Manila-occupied Thitu, an island in the Spratlys, said Lt. Col. Enrico Gil Ileto, public affairs chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), adding that the Chinese ship came as close as 80 yards (73.1 meters) to the Filipino ship.

The standoff was believed to be the first one between a Chinese and a Philippine navy ship in recent years. In recent months, there have been many more tense encounters between coast guard ships of the two claimant countries. 

The Philippine ship was en route to Commodore Reef, located within Manila’s exclusive economic zone, as part of a resupply mission when the standoff took place, according to the Philippine military.

The Chinese warship appeared to be a Type 056 corvette of the People’s Liberation Army Navy, designed mainly for patrol and escort missions.

“Zhongye Dao is China’s territory. The Philippines has illegally occupied Zhongye Dao, which seriously violates China’s sovereignty. The Chinese warship’s navigation and patrol in waters of Zhongye Dao is lawful and legitimate,” Mao Ning, a spokeswoman at China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said during a regular press conference on Monday, referring to Thitu by its Chinese name.

xxx

Apart from China and the Philippines, other countries with overlapping claims in the South China Sea are Vietnam, Brunei, and Malaysia. Taiwan is also a claimant.

In 2016, a U.N. arbitration court ruled in favor of the Philippines, saying that China’s historical claims to the sea region as delineated then in Chinese maps by a nine-dash line (now a 10-dash line) were invalid. But Beijing rejected the ruling and has since insisted that it has jurisdiction over all areas within that boundary.

Manila had brought Beijing to the court in 2012 after accusing its naval ships of blocking the Philippines’ access to Scarborough Shoal, which has remained under China’s administrative control ever since.

Thitu Island, near which the alleged “shadowing” took place, has been under the Philippines’ occupation since the 1970s, but China, Vietnam, and Taiwan have also placed their claims over the 37-acre island. 

Upping ‘the ante’

The deployment of a military ship means Beijing is raising the stakes in the territorial dispute, Collin Koh, a senior fellow at the Institute of Defense and Strategic Studies in Singapore, told BenarNews.

“In the current context of rising tensions over the past several months, putting the navy on the front together with the coast guard and maritime militia would represent Beijing trying to up the ante,” he said.

The heightened tension also comes at a time when Manila continues to broaden and deepen its security ties with the U.S. and other Western allies.

“Beijing sees such developments as critical for its narrowly driven regional ambitions,” Don Mclain Gill, a Manila-based geopolitical analyst who teaches at De La Salle University, told BenarNews. “The ramping up of Chinese provocations is a sign of this anxiety in Beijing.”

Last week, China conducted a multiple-day naval exercise in the South China Sea as the Philippines held major drills with the United States and other allied nations.

“China is now trying to navigate how far it can go to provoke the Philippines and alter the security dynamics of the region without triggering a shooting war,” Gill added.

BenarNews is an RFA affiliated online news organization.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Camille Elemia for BenarNews.

"We need an all-out mobilization of our government and society to stop [the climate crisis] right now," said the group.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul called the rainstorm that caused the flash flooding a "life-threatening rainfall event" and noted that there have been reports of some school buildings flooding, prompting administrators to move children to higher floors or close the buildings.

"No children are in danger as far as we know," said Hochul, adding that many New York City children use public transportation to get home from school. "We want to make sure we get the subways, the trains, our communication system, our transportation system working."

According to Richard Davis, president of Local 100 of the Transport Workers Union, some bus passengers on Friday were forced to stand on their seats as drivers navigated through high flood waters that seeped into buses.

Maintenance workers were using pumps to remove water from subway stations, and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority announced "extremely limited subway service," with many lines suspended or rerouted.

New York City Councilmember Chi Ossé criticized Mayor Eric Adams for failing to address the public until the crisis was well underway and said the flooding shows the city is "severely underprepared for the climate crisis."

Earlier this month Adams announced a new initiative aimed at mobilizing business owners to comply with Local Law 97, which will take effect in 2024 and would reduce carbon emissions from buildings.

According toGothamist, "environmental experts say the new plan will weaken the law's enforcement powers by giving qualified building owners an extra three years to meet carbon reduction deadlines."

Jean Su, energy justice director at the Center for Biological Diversity, took aim at the offshore drilling plan proposed by President Joe Biden on Friday over the objections of scientists and climate advocates. The five-year plan includes three new offshore gas leases in the Gulf of Mexico despite Biden's campaign promise to end offshore gas and oil drilling.

"We are in the climate emergency," said Su. "Yet the president is continuing to drill for oil and gas. He has to stop to give us a chance at a livable planet."

Earlier this month, noted Su, some of the same streets that were inundated with rainwater on Friday had been filled with tens of thousands of people demanding that Biden declare a climate emergency and take decisive action to speed the transition toward renewable energy.

"A week ago, we were hitting the streets of New York for Climate Week NYC," said grassroots group Rising Tide North America. "We shut down Citibank's headquarters and blockaded the New York Federal Reserve."

"[The New York Police Department] arrested lots of our friends," the group added. "Maybe they should have been arresting those bankers and bureaucrats who are responsible for this disaster."

This content originally appeared on Common Dreams and was authored by Newswire Editor.

A total of 13 vessels were traveling down the river when one of the larger boats overturned in a rough area near Mingin township on Tuesday, the residents said. It was loaded with goods and civilians and was being towed by a tugboat.

Many of those on board were university students heading to their school in Sagaing’s largest city, Monywa. Also on the boat were military junta departmental staff, family members of the pro-junta Pyu Saw Htee militia and some junta soldiers who were providing security for the vessel, local residents said. 

The sinking happened between Shea and Pan Set villages in a risky area called Shae Nat Taung slope, according to a Mingin township resident who refused to be named due to security reasons.

“It’s where the water is really rough, with a big rocky horn,” the resident told RFA. “The boat hit it and sank immediately.”

Six people are known to have survived; many passengers were below deck when the boat sank, the resident said. Local media reported on Wednesday that about 20 survivors were rescued and 10 bodies had been collected.

Rescue operations were halted on Wednesday because of the river’s strong current. The boat was submerged in deep water, the resident said. 

Recovery preparations

Locals and defense forces said that most of the villages on both sides of the river are controlled by Pyu Saw Htee militia. The military shouldn’t have any security issues if it conducts a recovery operation, a local defense group leader said.

“Most of the people who were onboard the sunken vessel were those dealing with the military from Pyu villages along this waterway,” the leader said.” It depends on their willingness. It’s not a very difficult thing to do. But it doesn’t seem like they will do it.”

The remaining 12 vessels continued to travel downstream on Wednesday morning. Some junta soldiers were stationed near the site, according to another local resident who also refused to be named for security reasons.

“I can’t say exactly how many died and survived at the moment,” the second resident said. “We local people don’t dare to go near there.”

RFA contacted Tin Than Win, the junta’s minister of natural resources and Sagaing region spokesman, to ask about rescue operations. But he refused to talk, saying that he was in a meeting.

The military’s media team told reporters on Wednesday that one of the vessels that had left the town of Hkamti sank in a whirlpool near Mingin township, and they were still investigating details of the incident.

Local residents told RFA that another warship and an empty boat were already moving downriver toward the accident site. The two vessels arrived at the town of Kalewa in Mingin township on Wednesday and seemed to be preparing to recover the sunken vessel, the residents said. 

In October 2016, a passenger boat traveling downriver from Homalin to Monywa sank near Kani township's Mi Kyaung Twin village, adjacent to Mingin township, killing at least 70 people, according to local residents.

Translated by Myo Min Aung. Edited by Matt Reed and Malcolm Foster.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Burmese.

The coast guard’s announcement came after the Philippine military accused the Chinese militia of massive destruction, particularly in the seabed of Rozul Reef and Escoda Shoal, features within the country’s internationally recognized exclusive economic zone (EEZ).  

Divers had carried out “underwater surveys” of the seabed, said Commodore Jay Tarriela, the coast guard spokesman for the West Philippine Sea, Manila’s name for parts of the South China Sea within its jurisdiction.

“The results of these surveys showed that the marine ecosystem in the subject WPS features appeared lifeless, with minimal to no signs of life,” Tarriela said in a statement.

He said there was“visible discoloration” of the seabed that indicated “deliberate activities” meant to modify the natural topography of the terrain.

“The presence of crushed corals strongly suggests a potential act of dumping, possibly involving the same dead corals that were previously processed and cleaned before being returned to the seabed,” Tarriela said. 

Both reefs are near the island of Palawan, the Philippines southwestern island fronting the disputed sea.

Monitoring between Aug. 9 and Sept. 11 showed an “average presence” of about 33 Chinese maritime militia ships near the two features, Tarriela said.

The swarming activities of the Chinese militia fleet and their alleged destructive fishing practices “may have directly caused the degradation and destruction of the marine environment in the WPS features,” he said. 

The South China Sea is home to about 177,000 square miles of biodiverse coral reefs, environmentalists said. There are an estimated 571 different species of coral and 3,794 different species of fish in its waters.

By comparison, there are roughly 600 known types of coral and 1,500 different species of fish in the Great Barrier Reef off of the East Coast of Australia. 

China, which has the world’s largest fishing fleet, claims most of the South China Sea. Six other Asian governments – Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam – have territorial claims or maritime boundaries that overlap with China’s claims.

The Chinese Embassy in Manila did not immediately respond to requests for comment from BenarNews, an RFA-affiliated news outlet. The foreign ministry spokeswoman in Beijing did not discuss the issue on Monday, according to a transcript of her news conference.

On Saturday, Vice Adm. Alberto Carlos, the Philippine military’s western command chief, told reporters that coral reefs in Rozul Reef have been thoroughly harvested by Chinese militia ships. 

“We noticed coral harvesting in their swarming areas. After they departed, we pinpointed the location and dispatched divers for an underwater survey. They observed that no corals remained – everything was damaged, with debris scattered,” Carlos said. 

“There’s nothing left in the area,” he said, adding divers claimed the coral harvest occurred recently, although the Philippine Coast Guard did not release pictures of the undamaged seabed.

He said Philippine authorities had successfully driven away the Chinese militia in early July, but the militia returned the following month because it was nearly impossible to patrol the coastal area regularly.

“We’d like to maintain [patrol] 100%, 365 days a year. But because of the weather, limited resources … our troops have to go back to port to refuel, to take some rest,” he said.

DFA, senators speak out

On Monday, the Department of Foreign Affairs said the Philippines consistently “raised the alarm over ecologically harmful activities” in the EEZ.

“We, therefore, call on everyone concerned to act responsibly and cease all activities that can damage our precious marine environment. The well-being of millions of people who depend on the South China Sea for their livelihood is at stake,” it said in a statement.

Two senators, Jinggoy Ejercito Estrada and Francis Tolentino, an ally of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., issued statements speaking out against the damage.

“Preserving the marine environment and coral reefs in Rozul Reef and Escoda Shoal is not only a responsibility but a moral duty that we owe to future generations,” Estrada said.

Tolentino, meanwhile, said he is crafting the Philippine Maritime Zone Law that he envisions would be the country’s legal basis for territorial disputes.

“If we file a claim, damages, it should be in a tribunal recognized by UNCLOS, United Nations,” he said, referring to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which governs uses of oceans and their resources.

Bobby Roldan, who represents the fishermen’s group Pamalakaya, urged Marcos to order a wider damage assessment of the area. 

“There is a need to identify if the swarmed area was subjected to coral harvesting, clam hunting, or any military activities that destroyed its vast coral reefs,” Roldan said.

“We urge the Marcos administration to take this matter urgently by tapping marine scientists and other experts to extensively assess the damage and its possible long-term implications to the local fishery production.

Jeoffrey Maitem, Jojo Riñoza and Gerard Carreon in Manila contributed to this report.

BenarNews is an RFA-affiliated news outlet.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by BenarNews staff.

The downpour felled trees, caused mudslides, and closed roads. East of Los Angeles, in San Bernardino, police ordered evacuations in several communities. More than 35,000 Californians are out of power as of Monday, and several school districts canceled classes to assess the damage of the storm. Major sporting events including a Major League Soccer match and several Major League Baseball games over the weekend were also rescheduled.

The storm made landfall as the rest of the country was grappling with other climate-fueled disasters. Devastating wildfires in Lahaina, a historic town in Maui, Hawai’i, killed more than 110 people and caused billions in damage. Across the country, dangerous heat conditions persisted, with the National Weather Service warning that a heat dome will “consume” the Plains and Mississippi Valley into the South this week. Two major fires burning in Spokane, Washington, have also torched a combined 20,000 acres, leading officials to order the evacuation of the nearby town of Medical Lake. On the East Coast, meteorologists are tracking two storms brewing in the Atlantic.

Hilary strengthened in a hurry last week. On Thursday, the National Weather Service reported that it was a Category 3 hurricane with wind speeds of 120 miles per hour, and by Friday, it had strengthened into a powerful Category 4 storm. The center warned that Hilary would bring “life-threatening and potentially catastrophic flooding” over the weekend. The forecasts triggered California’s first-ever tropical storm warning. But as the hurricane crossed cooler waters off the coast of southern California, it lost its strength and was downgraded to a tropical storm.

Still, Tropical Storm Hilary “really did produce all-time, record-breaking summer rainfall across most of the region,” said Daniel Swain, a climate scientist at the University of California, Los Angeles. “In terms of the incredible frenetic pace of global extremes we’re seeing this summer, that is only going to get worse as the climate continues to warm.”

Tropical storms and hurricanes rarely make landfall in California. That’s because powerful storms need warm waters to gather moisture and energy, and the eastern Pacific Ocean is generally much cooler than the western Pacific or the Gulf of Mexico — typically as much as 9 degrees Fahrenheit. 

This year, however, after record heat in July, the waters in the Pacific are not as cold. In fact, temperatures off the coast of Cabo San Lucas, Mexico are about the same as the waters around Key West, Florida, which helped Hilary intensify rapidly before reaching California waters. 

El Niño, a weather pattern that also leads to warmer Pacific temperatures, appears to have played a role in Hilary’s formation. The climate phenomenon affects a hurricane’s wind shear, a term used to describe the change in wind speed at a given height. If a hurricane has high wind shear, it will dissipate quickly. El Niño creates the conditions in the Pacific for low wind shear, which aids in the formation of stable hurricanes. 

The weather pattern “tends to decrease vertical wind shear in the eastern Pacific off the coast of California and so allows more hurricanes to develop,” said Ned Kleiner, an atmospheric scientist at the risk assessment firm Verisk. “And so we’ve seen a series of hurricanes in the eastern Pacific, including Hurricane Dora, which is partially responsible for the really damaging winds which fueled the wildfires in Maui.”  

While the exact role that climate change played in Tropical Storm Hilary’s formation is not yet fully known, Kleiner said climate scientists are confident that rising temperatures are leading to the formation of more intense hurricanes. After all, oceans have absorbed 90 percent of the heat trapped in the atmosphere by greenhouse gases. As hurricanes pass over these warmer waters, they pick up more moisture, which leads to more intense rainfall. Research also shows that hurricanes are stalling more often, giving them more time to drop rain over an area. Forward motion speeds of Atlantic hurricanes have decreased 17 percent compared to previous decades. 

The science for hurricanes in the eastern Pacific is less clear. Since few storms develop off the West Coast in the first place, scientists have less data to work with. “There are certainly theories that there will be more intense landfalling storms on the West Coast, but it’s just a very difficult thing to be confident in because it’s so rare,” said Kleiner. 

Hilary is likely to bring more rainfall and flooding as it makes its way across Nevada on Monday. The storm is expected to bring between 1 to 3 inches of rainfall in Idaho and Oregon through Tuesday morning.

“Across the Southwestern United States, the ongoing and historic amount of rainfall is expected to cause life-threatening flash, urban, and arroyo flooding including landslides, mudslides, and debris flows today,” the National Hurricane Center warned on Monday.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline A tropical storm in California? Warmer waters and El Niño made it possible. on Aug 21, 2023.

This content originally appeared on Grist and was authored by Naveena Sadasivam.

In response, the Chinese government reiterated its demand that the Philippines remove the BRP Sierra Madre, a rusty World War II-era naval ship that Manila deliberately ran aground in the Ayungin Shoal (Second Thomas Shoal) in 1999 to serve as a military outpost in those contested waters.

A convoy of Philippine ships was on a mission Saturday to deliver food, water, fuel and other supplies to troops stationed aboard the BRP Sierra Madre when the incident occurred near the shoal.

While meeting with the Chinese envoy on Monday morning, Manila conveyed “the strong protest of the Philippine government to the blocking and water cannon operation by the Chinese Coast Guard and Chinese maritime militia vessels against Philippine indigenous boats,” Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs spokeswoman Ma. Teresa Daza told reporters.

The Philippine convoy was “conducting [a] regular rotation and resupply” mission to Ayungin Shoal, she said.

The Philippine government also expressed disappointment that it was not able to reach China’s foreign ministry through a hotline established between the countries earlier this year to improve communication during incidents related to the South China Sea, she said.

The incident, which lasted more than an hour, was the latest in a growing number of perceived aggressive actions by China in the South China Sea, an important maritime trade route subject to overlapping territorial claims from China, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei, Vietnam and Taiwan.

China asserts sovereignty over most of the sea and has for years militarized artificial islands while deploying coast guard boats, navy ships and a state-backed maritime militia around disputed areas.

Daza said Ayungin Shoal was well within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone, as recognized in a 2016 ruling by an international arbitration court.

China’s dangerous maneuvers breached international maritime law by restricting the Philippine ships’ navigational path, thereby increasing the risk of collision, she said.

The foreign ministry “firmly asked” China to “direct its vessels to stop their illegal actions against Philippine vessels, and to stop interfering in legitimate Philippine government activities while complying with relevant international laws,” according to Daza.

In Beijing, the foreign ministry claimed the shoal, which it calls Ren’ai Jiao, had always belonged to China. 

“In 1999, the Philippines sent a military vessel and deliberately ran it aground at Ren’ai Jiao, attempting to change the status quo of Ren’ai Jiao illegally. China immediately made serious démarches to the Philippines, demanding the removal of the vessel,” a ministry spokesman said Monday.  

“The Philippines promised several times to tow it away, but has yet to act. Not only that, the Philippines sought to overhaul and reinforce the military vessel in order to permanently occupy Ren’ai Jiao.”

As for Saturday’s confrontation at sea, “such actions violated China’s sovereignty and the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea,” the spokesman said. “The China Coast Guard vessels stopped them in accordance with law and warned them off through appropriate law enforcement measures. Their maneuvers were professional, restrained and beyond reproach.” 

‘Dangerous and unlawful’

Meanwhile, the Philippines’ ambassador to China delivered a diplomatic protest in Beijing on Monday morning.

The Philippines since 2020 has sent 445 diplomatic protests to China relating to occupation or harassment in the South China Sea, Daza said. A total of 35 have been sent since Jan. 1.

On Monday, Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. called a command meeting with the coast guard and military to discuss the fresh incident.  

“We continue to assert our sovereignty, we continue to assert our territorial rights in the face of all these challenges,” Marcos told reporters on the sidelines of a Philippine Army event.

Jonathan Malaya, spokesman for a Philippine task force on the South China Sea, characterized the Chinese action on Saturday near Ayungin Shoal as “aggressive, dangerous and unlawful.”  

At one point, he said, one of the six China Coast Guard ships came within 20 yards (18.3 meters) as it blocked the path of a Philippine boat, officials said.

“The Chinese Coast Guard and Chinese militia vessels have no right whatsoever to place a blockade or impede, or otherwise control, the movement of the Philippine Coast Guard in Ayungin Shoal or anywhere else in the West Philippine Sea, especially when they are undertaking a mission to resupply our troops stationed there,” Malaya told a press briefing.

While one Philippine supply boat was blocked, another was able to break through and successfully delivered some of the supplies, Malaya said.

Only weeks earlier, the Philippine Coast Guard had accused its Chinese counterpart of dangerous maneuvers that, the Filipino side alleged, could have caused a collision during a similar resupply mission. 

Two China Coast Guard ships intercepted Philippine patrol boats and “exhibited aggressive tactics” and at one point, the Chinese ship came to just 50 yards of a Philippine ship.

Camille Elemia in Manila contributed to this report by BenarNews, an RFA-affiliated news service.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By BenarNews Staff.

The guidelines to accelerate negotiations on a code of conduct for the South China Sea represent a “milestone,” the Indonesian foreign minister said after diplomats from both sides adopted them at a meeting in Jakarta. 

No details were released, although the Associated Press news agency cited an unnamed Southeast Asian diplomat as saying that both sides agreed to conclude a pact before autumn 2026. 

The Jakarta meeting was attended by all foreign ministers of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) barring Myanmar, and Wang Yi, who heads the ruling Chinese Communist Party’s foreign affairs commission, the Indonesian Foreign Ministry said.

Indonesia’s top diplomat, Retno Marsudi, who co-chaired the meeting with Wang, said the agreement showed their commitment to maintaining peace and stability in the region.

“These achievements should continue to build a positive momentum to strengthen a partnership that advances the paradigm of inclusivity and openness, respects international law including UNCLOS 1982, and promotes a culture of dialogue and collaboration,” Retno said in a statement, referring to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

Retno also welcomed the completion of the second reading of the draft code of conduct this year, after the completion of the first reading in 2019.

China “should be a trusted partner of ASEAN” in nurturing an open and inclusive regional architecture, she said. 

“Only in this way can we achieve win-win cooperation for the sake of peace, stability, and shared prosperity in the Indo-Pacific,” Retno added.

Wang, meanwhile, said Beijing supported ASEAN’s central role in the region, according to China’s Xinhua news agency.

China stands ready to continue to play a constructive role in its early conclusion, Xinhua quoted Wang as saying. 

China and ASEAN have been negotiating a code of conduct for the South China Sea since 2002, but progress has been slow amid disputes over the scope and legal status of the document.

China claims almost all of the strategic waterway, which is also contested by Taiwan and ASEAN members Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam. And stability in Southeast Asia has been threatened lately with alleged incursions by Chinese vessels in the exclusive economic zones of the Philippines and Malaysia in the South China Sea.

Indonesia does not have any territorial disputes with China, but it has repeatedly lodged protests against Chinese fishing boats and coast guard vessels entering its EEZ near the Natuna Islands.

In 2016, the Philippines won a landmark international ruling at the Permanent Court of Arbitration, which threw out China’s expansive claims in the South China Sea. Beijing, however, has ignored the verdict and carried on with its military expansionism in the strategic waterway, including building artificial islands.

The South China Sea has also become a theater for big-power rivalry, as the United States, which has vital interests in the region, has accused China of militarizing the area and undermining freedom of navigation.

For its part, Beijing calls Washington’s moves in the region interference and insists it has historical rights to the sea’s resources.

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken is scheduled to meet with his ASEAN counterparts at a conference in Jakarta on Friday. 

‘Potential positive impact’

The guidelines agreed to by ASEAN members and China could be in the nature of technical agreements on how the preventive principles in the code can be implemented, said Vinsensio Dugis, the head of the ASEAN Studies Center at Airlangga University in Surabaya.

“If this is the case, this should be welcomed, because it reflects the intention of the parties that claim part or all of the South China Sea territory to reach an agreement on the implementation of the code of conduct,” he told BenarNews.

Additionally, one of the sticking points in the negotiation revolved around the involvement of countries outside China and ASEAN in the implementation of the code of conduct, Vinsensio said. 

“China does not want any involvement of other countries, while some ASEAN countries see the need for countries such as the U.S. to also be involved in the process. I think this has been a major obstacle to implementing the principles in the code of conduct,” he said.

Still, the agreement between ASEAN and China brings potential positive impact to Southeast Asia and the Asia-Pacific region. 

“This means that there is a possibility of stability in the region, which is very important for peace and development,” he said.

On trade, China has been an important partner for ASEAN in promoting economic growth and fighting the COVID-19 pandemic, Indonesia’s Retno said.

Their bilateral trade reached U.S. $975 billion last year, making China ASEAN’s largest trading partner, while China was also the fourth largest source of foreign investment in ASEAN with $13.8 billion, Retno said.

A day earlier, China’s Wang urged ASEAN to speed up negotiations on an upgraded free trade agreement that would boost economic ties and post-COVID-19 pandemic recovery.

“China and ASEAN should jointly safeguard the global free trading system, uphold the ASEAN centrality, and jointly maintain regional peace and development,” Wang said after talks with Singapore Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan on Wednesday.

China and ASEAN have been operating a free trade area since 2010, which covers trade in goods, services and investment. It is the largest free trade area in terms of population and third largest in terms of nominal GDP. 

The two sides launched negotiations on an upgraded version of the free trade agreement in 2016, aiming to further liberalize and facilitate trade and investment. 

Wang said both sides should speed up the talks on the so-called FTA 3.0 to “inject new impetus into regional development.”

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Tria Dianti for BenarNews.

China has no standing to prohibit any activities in the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone (EEZ), critics said as they responded on Thursday to comments by President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. to reporters about planning ahead of the May-August Chinese ban to give fishermen an alternative source of income.

Beijing “has no right whatsoever to impose a fishing ban” in waters within the Philippines’ EEZ, said Antonio Carpio, a former Philippine Supreme Court justice and South China Sea expert.

That’s because in 2016, the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague ruled in favor of the Philippines when it threw out China’s expansive claims in the waterway, he said. This was particularly true of the West Philippine Sea, the waters of the South China Sea within Manila’s EEZ.

China has been unilaterally imposing a fishing moratorium from May to August every year, claiming this promotes sustainable fishing.

But the Philippines has in past years protested against this, saying the practice violates its sovereignty. Some areas covered by the fishing ban are in Philippine waters.

“We cannot recognize China’s fishing ban in any part of our EEZ because that will … recognize China’s nine-dash line, which is the basis for China’s fishing ban,” Carpio told BenarNews, an RFA-affiliated news outlet, in a message on Thursday.

The nine-dash line is a boundary used by Beijing on its maps to demarcate its territorial claims in the sea.

“The Arbitral Award states that China’s nine-dash line cannot serve as a basis to claim waters or resources in the South China Sea,” Carpio said.

During his comments on Tuesday, Marcos made no reference to the validity of the ban or otherwise. 

“When there is a fishing ban, we coordinate with them so we do not get surprised that there’s suddenly a fishing ban. So we can have some time to plan,” Marcos said, according to transcripts released Thursday.

“When they say there is going to be a fishing ban in two months’ time, then let’s plan: What will the fishers do? Let us give them another livelihood or another source of income.”

Marcos said he had raised the issue of Filipino fishers’ rights during his meeting with President Xi Jinping when he visited China in January.

“I really prioritized the issue of fisheries when we met. I said, let us not talk about the territory because we will not be able to decide now,” Marcos said.

“Let us prioritize the fisheries because these people are not at fault, why punish them? So we are making some progress in that regard.”

‘China has no moral ascendancy’

The activist fisherfolk group Pamalakaya is completely unconvinced by this argument of the Marcos administration, which it believes “should … reject Beijing’s annual unilateral ban.”

“There should be no room for any compromise, not even a coordination in regards to fishing activities in our territorial waters,” Pamalakaya said in a statement on Thursday.

“No amount of alternative source of income could equate the fishing livelihood of Filipinos in the resource-rich West Philippine Sea, and its significant contribution to our local food security.”

Additionally, Pamalakaya trashed Beijing’s claim about sustainable fishing.

“We remind President Marcos Jr. that China has no moral ascendancy, not especially a legal right, to impose a fishing ban on the pretext of marine conservation,” the group said.

“Because it is the one destroying our marine biodiversity and ecosystem through massive reclamation, illegal poaching, and industrial fishing expeditions.”

Marine scientists meanwhile have expressed alarm over the destruction of coral reefs in the South China Sea that are critical for the environment and preventing a collapse in fish stocks, which sustain the livelihoods of tens of millions of people.

Some of the South China Sea reefs are “gone forever” due to the creation of military bases atop them, John McManus, a professor of marine biology at the University of Miami in Florida, told Radio Free Asia in October 2020.

The majority of such construction has been by China, which dredged up Fiery Cross Reef, Subi Reef, Mischief Reef, Woody Island, and some other islets between 2014 and 2017, to make way for artificial islands that now host its military.

BenarNews is an RFA-affiliated news outlet.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Jojo Riñoza for BenarNews.

The Indonesian military announced Wednesday a change of location for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations exercise, scheduled for Sept. 18-25. The non-combat drills were originally planned to take place in the North Natuna Sea, which lies within Indonesia’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ) but parts of which China claims. 

Indonesia is this year’s holder of the rotating ASEAN chairmanship.

The new ASEAN exercise locations “include Batam [near Singapore] and the waters of South Natuna that are part of Indonesia’s archipelagic sea lane,” military spokesman Col. Suhendro Oktosatrio said. He was referring to designated areas where foreign ships are allowed passage while transiting through those waters innocently.

These new locations were chosen because they were suitable for non-combat drills such as joint maritime patrols, medical evacuation and disaster relief, said another Indonesian military official, Rear Adm. Julius Widjojono.

“Priority is given to areas that are prone to [natural] disasters,” he said. 

Indonesia renamed the southern reaches of the South China Sea the North Natuna Sea in 2017, to emphasize its sovereignty over those waters, which encompass natural gas fields. 

Indonesia does not have any territorial disputes with China, but it has repeatedly lodged protests against Chinese fishing boats and coast guard vessels entering its EEZ near the Natuna Islands.

China has claimed “traditional rights” over fishing resources in the area. China claims nearly the entire South China Sea, including waters within the exclusive economic zones of Taiwan and ASEAN member-states Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam. 

In 2016, a U.N. arbitration court ruled that China’s nine-dash line, a boundary used by Beijing on Chinese maps to illustrate its claim, was invalid. But Beijing has rejected the ruling and insisted it has jurisdiction over all areas within the dashed line.

Chinese officials said back then that the nine dashes were “for security and order at sea.”

China has built artificial islands and military installations on some reefs and shoals in the South China Sea, raising concerns among other claimants and the United States.

The United States has regularly conducted “freedom of navigation” operations in the South China Sea to challenge China’s claims and has urged ASEAN countries to stand up to Beijing’s assertiveness. 

Indonesia’s military commander Adm. Yudo Margono, who proposed the ASEAN drill during a meeting of the bloc’s defense forces chiefs in Bali earlier this month, said the joint drills would enhance regional stability and “boost our countries’ economy.”

‘Afraid of clashing’

But Cambodia and Myanmar, two ASEAN members with strong ties to China, did not take part in an initial planning conference for the exercise on Monday, according to military spokesman Suhendro. It was not clear whether they would join the drills.

The Indonesian military said it sent official invitations for the planning meeting to the Cambodian and Burmese defense attachés in Jakarta but got no response.

Myanmar, which has been wracked by violence since the military ousted an elected government in 2021, is persona non grata at major ASEAN meetings.

Cambodia’s defense ministry said earlier this month it had not decided on participation in the ASEAN joint exercise, saying that it was still waiting for more information from Indonesia, according to media reports in that country.

Arie Afriansyah, an expert in international sea law at the University of Indonesia, said there could be many reasons for the change of the locations, such as safety and security considerations.

“Maybe they are afraid of clashing with other countries. If it is conducted in South Natuna, Indonesia has full control in that area,” Arie told BenarNews.

“It would be a shame if fear of China is the reason, because this exercise is a way for ASEAN countries to show their unity on the North Natuna and South China Sea issue, which Malaysia, Vietnam and the Philippines also support,” he said.

The joint ASEAN drill is planned as an effort to maintain regional stability, Khairul Fahmi, a military and security observer from the Institute for Security and Strategic Studies, told BenarNews.

“The message will not come across well if some ASEAN countries are not on board,” he said.

BenarNews is an RFA-affiliated news organization.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Tria Dianti for BenarNews.

Palau, one of a handful of Pacific nations to recognize Taiwan rather than Beijing and an ally of the United States, has reported four unwanted incursions into its remote waters by Chinese research vessels since 2018. 

“Clearly they [China] do not respect the rules-based order,” Palau’s President Surangel Whipps Jr. said on Tuesday. Whipps said his government will send a diplomatic note to China’s embassy to the Federated States of Micronesia.

The research vessel, Haiyang Dizhi Liuhao, entered Palau’s exclusive economic zone without providing any notification on the afternoon of May 24, according to Palau’s National Security Coordinator Jennifer Anson. 

“It slowed to about 1-2 knots as it passed over Palau’s fiber optic cable. It continued with questionable maneuvers, passing about 45 nautical miles from Kayangel [Palau's northernmost state and islands]. Attempts by the Joint Operation Center to contact the vessel via VHF radio were unsuccessful,” Anson said.

Palau’s dozens of islands, between the Philippines and Guam, have a combined land area of about 189 square miles – 2.5 times the size of Washington D.C. – and an exclusive economic zone spanning some 238,000 square miles of ocean. 

Under international law, nations have rights to economic exploitation of a 200 nautical mile zone around their land borders. The seas beyond a 12 nautical mile territorial zone are international waters so foreign vessels can pass through them. However unnotified research vessel activity in the exclusive economic zone could be perceived as an economic or security threat.

Due to bad weather, Palau’s maritime security force couldn’t deploy its patrol boat or aircraft to intercept the Chinese vessel, according to the government. On Monday, the China-flagged ship appeared to be heading toward Micronesia.

China’s embassy in Micronesia did not immediately respond to an emailed request for comment. 

Island nations in the vast Pacific Ocean have become the focus of increased rivalry between China and the U.S.

Growing Chinese influence.

Beijing’s influence in the region has increased over several decades through a combination of trade, infrastructure and aid as it seeks to isolate Taiwan diplomatically, gain allies in international institutions and advance its economic and security interests.

The U.S. has recently sought to reinforce its close relationships with Palau, Micronesia and the Marshall islands in the militarily strategic northwestern Pacific. It provides economic assistance to the three countries and has rights to military control of their territories under compacts of free association. 

Palau, home to about 20,000 people, earlier this month signed an agreement for increased economic assistance from Washington. The U.S. military also plans to install over-the-horizon radar in Palau by 2026, adding to its early-warning capabilities for the western Pacific as China’s military strength increases.

The previous incursion by a Chinese vessel into Palau’s waters was in July 2022 when the Yuan Wang 5 passed within 90 nautical waters of Palau’s southwestern islands. 

Yuan Wang 5, which bristles with surveillance technology, has been described by China’s state media as mainly undertaking “maritime tracking, monitoring and communication tasks concerning rockets, satellites, spaceships and China's space station.”

Another research vessel, Da Yang Hao, stayed in Palau’s exclusive economic zone for seven days in December 2021. 

“Conducting research without authorization and carrying out questionable activities within Palau’s waters threatens security and disregards sovereignty and rules-based order,” Anson said.

BenarNews is an RFA-affiliated news service.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By L.N. Reklai for BenarNews.

After more than 20 years of work to correct this, the Environmental Protection Agency announced on Wednesday a proposal to finally extend the protections guaranteed by the Clean Water Act to tribal waters that never had them. If implemented in September, the plan would set standards for 76,000 miles of rivers and streams and 1.9 million acres of lakes, reservoirs, and other surface water. 

“Today’s proposal is a monumental step forward in our work with Tribal governments to ensure precious water resources are protected,” EPA Administrator Michael Regan said in a statement. The new standards will, he said, safeguard “waters that are essential to thriving communities, vibrant ecosystems, and sustainable economic growth.”

Federal water quality standards are outlined under the Clean Water Act, a landmark environmental law that, among other things, establishes quality standards for the rivers, lakes, and other bodies of water where people fish and swim. But 50 years after its enactment, most reservations do not have these fundamental protections. Part of the problem has to do with resources: it takes time, money, and expertise to design and implement standards, which can vary significantly depending on location and water uses. 

“Each tribe is unique, most not having the programs or funding to ensure the baseline [standard] is met,” Russell Hepfer, the vice chairman of the Lower Elwha Tribal Community in Port Angeles, Washington, said in a statement. “Moving forward, EPA should consult with and support tribes with funding for implementation and enforcement.”

The EPA’s proposed rule culminates a quarter century’s work. Beginning in 1998, the agency sought tribes’ input on the possibility of extending federal quality standards to all tribal waters, but withdrew a proposal pending additional review several years later. In 2015, the agency renewed its efforts and sought input from tribal leaders.

Throughout this process, tribal governments generally supported the implementation of a baseline water quality standard, but several worried that such a move would infringe on their sovereignty. Some told the agency that any rule should accommodate tribe-specific interests, such as sustenance fishing and cultural uses of water bodies. 

The EPA’s proposal will not apply to the 47 tribes that, like states, already have their own water protection programs that meet federal standards. In its proposal, the agency noted that more tribes are showing interest in implementing their own programs, but getting them approved takes time. At the current pace, the agency noted, it could take more than a decade. The proposed rule offers interim relief for those tribal citizens until their leaders can implement their own standards. These protections are especially important in places like rural Alaska, where some native communities rely heavily on subsistence fishing.   

“We recognize that the national baseline water quality standards is one important step in ensuring the gap is closed for impaired waters to be protected, while providing the opportunity for Tribes to gain status toward establishing their own water quality standards,” said Gerald Wagner, the chair of the National Tribal Caucus.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The EPA finally extends federal protection to all tribal waters on May 5, 2023.

This content originally appeared on Grist and was authored by Lylla Younes.

A German court on Monday ruled that the city of Frankfurt cannot cancel an upcoming Roger Waters concert amid accusations of antisemitism stemming from the Pink Floyd co-founder's outspoken criticism of Israeli apartheid and other crimes against Palestinians.

Deutsche Wellereports an administrative court in Frankfurt ruled that concert organizer Messe Frankfurt, the state of Hesse, and the city are obliged "to make it possible for Waters to stage the concert"—part of the 79-year-old English rocker's "This Is Not a Drill!" tour—on May 29 as contractually agreed. The city and state had ordered Mess Frankfurt to cancel the show, calling Waters one of the "world's most influential antisemites."

"Politicians don't have the right to intimidate artists and their fans by banning performances," Waters said before the case. "I am fighting for all of our human rights, including the right to free speech."

"I want to state for the record and once and for all that I am not and never have been antisemitic and nothing that anyone can say or publish will alter that," Waters wrote last month. "My well-publicized views relate entirely to the policies and actions of the Israeli government and not with the peoples of Israel."

While Josef Schuster, president of the Central Council of Jews in Germany, said he was "baffled" by the court's ruling, Waters' supporters hailed what human rights defender Steven Donziger called "a win for artistic freedom."

Palestinian rights activist Sarah Wilkinson said the decision represents "an epic fail for the Israel lobby."

In suing to stop the Frankfurt concert, state and city officials cited the artist's support for the nonviolent Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement for Palestinian human rights—many of whose prominent members are Jewish—as well as his display of a pig-shaped balloon marked with a Star of David during his shows and his comparisons of Israel with apartheid-era South Africa as justification for canceling the performance.

Senior South African officials have condemned Israeli apartheid, which is being acknowledged by a growing number of human rights groups around the world, including in Israel.

While the court found that it may be in "especially poor taste" to let Waters perform at the Frankfurt Festhalle—where 3,000 Jews were imprisoned before being shipped off to concentration camps during the Holocaust—the tribunal said the concert would "not be injurious to the human dignity of those people."

The court also said that although Waters' concerts feature "symbolism manifestly based on that of the National Socialist regime," the shows can be "viewed as a work of art" that "did not glorify or relativize the crimes of the Nazis or identify with Nazi racist ideology."

This content originally appeared on Common Dreams and was authored by Brett Wilkins.

Reutersreports U.S. District Court Judge Daniel Hovland—an appointee of former President George W. Bush—issued a preliminary injunction against the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule after 24 states sued the Biden administration.

"This ruling readily bows to the forces in this country that have been trying for years to gut the Clean Water Act, throwing science under the bus and disregarding water safeguards for downstream communities and tribes," Janette Brimmer, an attorney for the green legal advocacy group Earthjustice who is defending the WOTUS rule on behalf of four Indigenous tribes, said in a statement.

"We will not give in to these forces; we will double down and fight along with our partners to ensure the law and science prevail and the will of the vast majority of citizens for clean water is carried out," Brimmer added.

Last month, Texas and Idaho were granted a separate injunction against the rule by U.S. District Court Judge Jeffrey Brown, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump.

According toProgressive Farmer, Hovland's ruling means that the WOTUS rule—which establishes protections for wetlands and seasonal streams—is now on hold in 24 more states: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

States shaded in red will be affected by a federal judge's temporary injunction against the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule. (Image: Earthjustice)

In 2020, the Trump administration rolled back WOTUS, which originated during the tenure of former President Barack Obama. The Biden administration revived the rule and last December it was finalized by the EPA.

Earlier this month, President Joe Biden vetoed legislation passed by Republicans and corporate Democrats in Congress that would have eviscerated the administration's ability to enforce WOTUS.

Hovland stopped short of issuing the nationwide injunction against WOTUS sought by the American Farm Bureau Federation and other agriculture industry interest groups. Still, Big Ag and Republican politicians in affected states overwhelmingly welcomed the injunction against what they say is a major act of government overreach.

Indigenous leaders, however, slammed Wednesday's ruling.

"Clean water is essential to tribal citizens' spiritual, physical, mental well-being, and survival."

"Clean water is essential to tribal citizens' spiritual, physical, mental well-being, and survival" Gary Harrison, traditional chief of the Chickaloon Native Village in Alaska, said in a statement. "Removing vital clean water safeguards will harm wetlands and streams that sustain tribal citizens, including myself."

G. Anne Richardson, chief of the Rappahannock tribe in Virginia, said that "the court's order threatens to strip vital protections from the network of waters that have been the lifeblood of the Rappahannock Tribe since time immemorial."

"Without the Clean Water Act," she added, "projects that would destroy important wetlands and streams could get rammed through without any opportunity for the tribe to object."

This content originally appeared on Common Dreams and was authored by Brett Wilkins.

Survey data published Wednesday shows that the U.S. electorate's approval of President Joe Biden's handling of the climate crisis has declined since October.

Voters' approval fell even further after they were made aware of the incongruence between Biden's 2020 campaign trail vow to end oil and gas leasing on public lands and his administration's March 13 move to rubber-stamp ConocoPhillips' massive Willow drilling project on federally controlled territory in the Alaskan Arctic.

The decline in support has been most pronounced among Democrats, Independents, and voters under 50, according to polling conducted by Data for Progress and Fossil Free Media.

From October 21-25 and then again from March 17-21, researchers asked respondents if they approved or disapproved of how the Biden administration has addressed climate change and the environment before mentioning any specific policy or decision.

Five months ago, 82% of Democrats, 37% of Independents, and 10% of Republicans gave Biden a thumbs up on this issue. Just over a week ago, approval had decreased among Democrats and Independents, with 69% and 30% of such voters expressing support for the president's climate performance. Meanwhile, Republican support for Biden's environmental policies increased to 17% during this time period.

The drop in support was even steeper among younger voters. In October, 37% of voters 40-49, 51% of voters 30-39, and 48% of voters 18-29 said they approved of the Biden administration's handling of climate change and the environment. Those percentages have decreased across all three age groups, with just 35% of voters 40-49, 45% of voters 30-39, and 35% of voters 18-29 giving the president a passing grade on the issue earlier this month.

"If the move to approve Willow was intended to win the favor of Independents concerned about high energy prices, this research suggests it may not have landed as intended."

Notably, the aforementioned decline in support for Biden's climate performance since October among Democrats (13% drop), Independents (7% drop), and voters aged 18-29 (13% drop) doesn't take into account the president's Willow betrayal. Data for Progress and Fossil Free Media first tested for approval before introducing respondents to the president's campaign promises and news of his administration's decision to greenlight the largest oil drilling endeavor on public land in U.S. history.

Although awareness of the Willow project has increased since October when 71% of voters said they hadn't heard, seen, or read anything at all about the climate-wrecking venture, 52% of voters were still completely unaware of it when surveyed from March 17-21.

After measuring baseline support, pollsters reminded voters of Biden's campaign pledge to ban new fossil fuel leasing on public lands and informed them about his administration's recent approval of the Willow project, which seeks to extract more than 600 million barrels of crude from Alaska's North Slope over the next 30 years. Then, pollsters retested their original question.

Once this contrast was made explicit, public approval of Biden's climate performance plummeted. Net approval measured in March fell by 33 points among Democrats and 12 points among Independents. It's worth noting that in October, Biden enjoyed a net climate approval rating of 68 points among Democrats.

Young voters' disappointment was also palpable, with net approval measured in March falling by 1 point among voters 18-29, 16 points among voters 30-39, and 5 points among voters 40-49.

It's unclear why the Biden administration refused to use its authority to halt a fossil fuel project capable of spewing about 280 million metric tons of heat-trapping carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere on the same day United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres warned that the planet is reaching a "point of no return." Environmental advocacy groups have responded with lawsuits.

Biden may be enjoying higher approval ratings on environmental issues if he had blocked Conoco's drilling proposal. According to Data for Progress and Fossil Free Media, voters remain supportive of the president's original campaign promises on climate.

Researchers also asked respondents whether the federal government should prioritize the production of renewable energy or fossil energy on public lands.

By a 21-point margin, voters said they want new energy developments on public lands to be green, such as wind and solar farms—not planet-heating oil and gas drilling sites.

"This research shows that voters strongly support transitioning to clean energy projects instead of building fossil fuel projects on public lands," wrote Anika Dandekar, a senior analyst at Data for Progress.

The recent approval of the Willow project "not only undermines Biden's campaign promise to transition to a fully clean power sector by no later than 2035, but also may explain why Democrats, Independents, and voters under 50 increasingly disapprove of the Biden administration's handling of climate change and the environment," she noted.

"Younger generations, most likely to be impacted by the further degradation of the environment, are paying attention," Dandekar continued. "Furthermore, if the move to approve Willow was intended to win the favor of Independents concerned about high energy prices, this research suggests it may not have landed as intended."

"If the Biden administration wants to maintain support from these important demographics," she added, "it will need to continue taking bold actions to curb emissions and keep its promises."

Notably, the White House is facing fresh criticism on Wednesday over its decision to plow ahead with Lease Sale 259, one of the largest offshore auctions in U.S. history. Earlier this month, several green groups filed a lawsuit to challenge the sale, which offered more than 73 million acres of the Gulf of Mexico to the highest-bidding oil and gas drillers.

"President Biden's decision to once again sacrifice an enormous portion of the Gulf of Mexico for oil and gas drilling is unconscionable," Nicole Ghio, senior fossil fuels program manager at Friends of the Earth, said in a statement. "Reviving lease sales and greenlighting massive fossil fuel projects demonstrates the administration cares more about Big Oil profits than frontline communities and endangered species."

"Reviving lease sales and greenlighting massive fossil fuel projects demonstrates the administration cares more about Big Oil profits than frontline communities and endangered species."

"We will continue pushing Biden to take his long-held climate promises seriously and stop locking us into decades of dirty energy," said Ghio.

A 2021 lawsuit filed by many of the same groups led a federal judge to vacate Lease Sale 257, the nation's largest-ever offshore auction wherein more than 80 million acres of the Gulf of Mexico were offered to the fossil fuel industry.

Despite Biden's campaign pledge to curtail new fossil fuel projects on public lands and waters, his administration has approved more permits for oil and gas drilling on public lands in its first two years than the Trump administration did in 2017 and 2018.

Two weeks ago, a trio of groups filed a 30-day notice of their intent to sue the Biden administration for refusing to respond to a petition to wind down fossil fuel extraction on public lands and waters.

Signed by a coalition of more than 360 progressive advocacy organizations, the January 2022 petition submitted to Biden and Interior Secretary Deb Haaland provides a blueprint to reduce federal oil and gas production by 98% by 2035 using long-dormant provisions of the Mineral Leasing Act, Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, and the National Emergencies Act.

Research published after the petition was filed shows that wealthy countries must end oil and gas production entirely by 2034 to give the world a 50% chance of limiting global warming to 1.5°C—beyond which the climate emergency's impacts will grow increasingly deadly, particularly for the world's poor who have done the least to cause the crisis.

After the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released its latest assessment report last week, Guterres demanded "a quantum leap in climate action," including a prohibition on approving and financing new coal, oil, and gas projects as well as a phaseout of existing fossil fuel production.

This content originally appeared on Common Dreams and was authored by Kenny Stancil.

As House Republicans prepare to vote on H.R. 1 this week, environmental advocates warned Monday that the sprawling package of fossil fuel-friendly legislation would worsen the climate emergency and biodiversity destruction while saddling U.S. households with higher energy bills.

H.R. 1, misleadingly titled the "Lower Energy Costs Act" and dubbed the "Polluters Over People Act" by opponents, consists of 15 separate bills and a pair of resolutions. As GOP lawmakers made clear at a legislative hearing held last month and through recent amendments, they're seeking to dismantle a wide range of regulations to boost fossil fuel production and exports despite scientists' unequivocal warnings about the need to prohibit new coal, oil, and gas projects to avert the worst effects of the climate crisis.

Environment America explained Monday that if approved, the sweeping proposal introduced earlier this month by Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) would, among other things:

• Expand oil and gas drilling on public lands and in the ocean;
• Speed the construction of polluting projects, including gas pipelines, while limiting the ability of the public, private landowners, and states to weigh in;
• Expand mining without requiring companies to clean up or compensate communities for toxic mining waste;
• Exempt many sources of pollution, including petroleum refineries, from some Clean Air Act and hazardous waste requirements;
• Undo bipartisan reforms to the Toxic Substances Control Act;
• Lower the rates companies must pay for extraction on public lands and allow non-competitive lease sales; and
• Repeal programs that cut energy waste, including the Methane Emissions Reduction Program and rebates for energy-efficient and electric home appliances.

"This bill leads America in so many wrong directions at once, it's making me dizzy," said Lisa Frank, executive director of Environment America's Washington, D.C. legislative office.

"Instead of protecting the great American outdoors, it gives our public lands away to oil, mining, and gas companies," Frank pointed out. "Instead of cleaning up toxic pollution, it guarantees more drilling and more spilling, on land and in our oceans. And instead of slowing climate change or helping Americans save energy, it increases our dependence on dirty, expensive fuels."

"It's 2023. We have so many better options available to us, from the sun shining down on our roofs to the wind blowing off our shores and across our plains," she added. "Congress should reject this outdated and unnecessary push to sacrifice our lands, waters, and health in the name of energy production."

"Given how unpopular its provisions are, it's not surprising H.R. 1's authors also seek to limit public input and legal challenges to wrongheaded energy projects."

Included in the package is a resolution "expressing the sense of Congress that the federal government should not impose any restrictions on the export of crude oil or other petroleum products" and a bill that would "repeal all restrictions on the import and export of natural gas."

Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.)—chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Energy, Climate, and Grid Security—argued last month that such measures are necessary because President Joe Biden and Democrats on the panel "have advocated for reinstating the crude oil export ban" that was originally enacted in 1975 and rescinded by congressional Republicans and then-President Barack Obama in 2015.

Last year, the Biden administration suggested—but never followed through on—resurrecting the federal ban on crude exports, a move that progressive advocacy groups urged the White House to make to bring down U.S. fuel prices.

While Duncan insisted that "lifting the export ban... has lowered prices," research demonstrates that precisely the opposite has occurred.

Since 2015, oil and gas production in the Permian Basin has surged while domestic consumption has remained steady, triggering a huge build-out of pipelines and other infrastructure that has turned the U.S. into the world's top exporter of fracked gas—intensifying planet-heating emissions, harming vulnerable Gulf Coast communities already overburdened by pollution, and exacerbating pain at the pump.

Matt Casale of the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) said Monday that H.R. 1 "hands taxpayers the bill for expanded fossil fuel extraction and toxic waste clean-up, takes resources away from global warming solutions, and limits Americans' freedom to save energy in their own homes."

"Given how unpopular its provisions are, it's not surprising H.R. 1's authors also seek to limit public input and legal challenges to wrongheaded energy projects," said Casale, who directs PIRG's environmental campaigns.

"Our over-reliance on fossil fuels continues to hold us all over a barrel," he continued. "This bill looks for short-term fixes by doubling down on the energy sources of the past but contains more hidden costs that we can count, including more energy waste, more pollution, and a more dangerous future for our kids and grandkids. To protect ourselves now and in the future, we need to think beyond short-term solutions and take steps to end our fossil fuel dependence once and for all."

"To protect ourselves now and in the future, we need to think beyond short-term solutions and take steps to end our fossil fuel dependence once and for all."

Much to the chagrin of voters who put him in office, Biden has not been an enemy of the fossil fuel industry. His administration approved more permits for oil and gas drilling on public lands in its first two years than the Trump administration did in 2017 and 2018. Just two weeks ago, the White House ignored the scientists it claims to respect and rubber-stamped ConocoPhillips' massive Willow oil project.

Nevertheless, H.R. 1 even includes a resolution expressing disapproval of Biden's 2021 decision to revoke the presidential permit for the Keystone XL pipeline―part of the GOP's push to blame what they deride as "rush-to-green energy policies" for skyrocketing gas prices, a narrative that obscures Big Oil's profiteering amid Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

Meanwhile, as the GOP's deficit hawks threaten to withhold their support for raising the nation's debt limit unless Biden agrees to devastating social spending cuts, the Congressional Budget Office found that H.R. 1 would increase the federal deficit by $2.4 billion from 2023 to 2033.

Given that Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has described H.R. 1 as "dead-on-arrival," it's unlikely the legislation will reach Biden's desk. If it does, however, Biden vowed Monday to veto it.

The GOP's energy package would replace "pro-consumer policies with a thinly veiled license to pollute," the White House said in a statement. "It would raise costs for American families by repealing household energy rebates and rolling back historic investments to increase access to cost-lowering clean energy technologies. Instead of protecting American consumers, it would pad oil and gas company profits—already at record levels—and undercut our public health and environment."

"H.R. 1," the White House added, "would take us backward."

This content originally appeared on Common Dreams and was authored by Kenny Stancil.

Environment America explained Monday that if approved, the sweeping proposal introduced earlier this month by Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) would, among other things:

• Expand oil and gas drilling on public lands and in the ocean;
• Speed the construction of polluting projects, including gas pipelines, while limiting the ability of the public, private landowners, and states to weigh in;
• Expand mining without requiring companies to clean up or compensate communities for toxic mining waste;
• Exempt many sources of pollution, including petroleum refineries, from some Clean Air Act and hazardous waste requirements;
• Undo bipartisan reforms to the Toxic Substances Control Act;
• Lower the rates companies must pay for extraction on public lands and allow non-competitive lease sales; and
• Repeal programs that cut energy waste, including the Methane Emissions Reduction Program and rebates for energy-efficient and electric home appliances.

"This bill leads America in so many wrong directions at once, it's making me dizzy," said Lisa Frank, executive director of Environment America's Washington, D.C. legislative office.

"Instead of protecting the great American outdoors, it gives our public lands away to oil, mining, and gas companies," Frank pointed out. "Instead of cleaning up toxic pollution, it guarantees more drilling and more spilling, on land and in our oceans. And instead of slowing climate change or helping Americans save energy, it increases our dependence on dirty, expensive fuels."

"It's 2023. We have so many better options available to us, from the sun shining down on our roofs to the wind blowing off our shores and across our plains," she added. "Congress should reject this outdated and unnecessary push to sacrifice our lands, waters, and health in the name of energy production."

"Given how unpopular its provisions are, it's not surprising H.R. 1's authors also seek to limit public input and legal challenges to wrongheaded energy projects."

Included in the package is a resolution "expressing the sense of Congress that the federal government should not impose any restrictions on the export of crude oil or other petroleum products" and a bill that would "repeal all restrictions on the import and export of natural gas."

Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.)—chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Energy, Climate, and Grid Security—argued last month that such measures are necessary because President Joe Biden and Democrats on the panel "have advocated for reinstating the crude oil export ban" that was originally enacted in 1975 and rescinded by congressional Republicans and then-President Barack Obama in 2015.

Last year, the Biden administration suggested—but never followed through on—resurrecting the federal ban on crude exports, a move that progressive advocacy groups urged the White House to make to bring down U.S. fuel prices.

While Duncan insisted that "lifting the export ban... has lowered prices," research demonstrates that precisely the opposite has occurred.

Since 2015, oil and gas production in the Permian Basin has surged while domestic consumption has remained steady, triggering a huge build-out of pipelines and other infrastructure that has turned the U.S. into the world's top exporter of fracked gas—intensifying planet-heating emissions, harming vulnerable Gulf Coast communities already overburdened by pollution, and exacerbating pain at the pump.

Matt Casale of the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) said Monday that H.R. 1 "hands taxpayers the bill for expanded fossil fuel extraction and toxic waste clean-up, takes resources away from global warming solutions, and limits Americans' freedom to save energy in their own homes."

"Given how unpopular its provisions are, it's not surprising H.R. 1's authors also seek to limit public input and legal challenges to wrongheaded energy projects," said Casale, who directs PIRG's environmental campaigns.

"Our over-reliance on fossil fuels continues to hold us all over a barrel," he continued. "This bill looks for short-term fixes by doubling down on the energy sources of the past but contains more hidden costs that we can count, including more energy waste, more pollution, and a more dangerous future for our kids and grandkids. To protect ourselves now and in the future, we need to think beyond short-term solutions and take steps to end our fossil fuel dependence once and for all."

"To protect ourselves now and in the future, we need to think beyond short-term solutions and take steps to end our fossil fuel dependence once and for all."

Much to the chagrin of voters who put him in office, Biden has not been an enemy of the fossil fuel industry. His administration approved more permits for oil and gas drilling on public lands in its first two years than the Trump administration did in 2017 and 2018. Just two weeks ago, the White House ignored the scientists it claims to respect and rubber-stamped ConocoPhillips' massive Willow oil project.

Nevertheless, H.R. 1 even includes a resolution expressing disapproval of Biden's 2021 decision to revoke the presidential permit for the Keystone XL pipeline―part of the GOP's push to blame what they deride as "rush-to-green energy policies" for skyrocketing gas prices, a narrative that obscures Big Oil's profiteering amid Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

Meanwhile, as the GOP's deficit hawks threaten to withhold their support for raising the nation's debt limit unless Biden agrees to devastating social spending cuts, the Congressional Budget Office found that H.R. 1 would increase the federal deficit by $2.4 billion from 2023 to 2033.

Given that Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has described H.R. 1 as "dead-on-arrival," it's unlikely the legislation will reach Biden's desk. If it does, however, Biden vowed Monday to veto it.

The GOP's energy package would replace "pro-consumer policies with a thinly veiled license to pollute," the White House said in a statement. "It would raise costs for American families by repealing household energy rebates and rolling back historic investments to increase access to cost-lowering clean energy technologies. Instead of protecting American consumers, it would pad oil and gas company profits—already at record levels—and undercut our public health and environment."

"H.R. 1," the White House added, "would take us backward."

This content originally appeared on Common Dreams and was authored by Newswire Editor.

The data, based on the ships’ automatic identification system (AIS) signals, shows that the China Coast Guard ship, CCG5205, and Vietnam’s Kiem Ngu 278 came “crazy close” to one another at around 7 a.m. on Sunday local time (midnight UTC), said a researcher based in California.

As of Monday afternoon (local time), the CCG5205 was operating in Malaysia’s exclusive economic zone after it left Vietnam waters where the Kiem Ngu 278 had been pursuing the considerably larger Chinese ship since March 24, tracking data showed.

At one point the two ships were less than 10 meters (32.8 feet) apart, according to Ray Powell, the Project Myoushu (South China Sea) lead at Stanford University, who first spotted the incident at sea.

“The Vietnamese ship was pretty bold given the difference in size – the Chinese ship is twice the size of the Vietnamese ship,” Powell said.

“It must have been a very tense engagement.”

The incident occurred some 50 nautical miles (92.6 kilometers) south of Vanguard Bank, a known South China Sea flashpoint between Vietnam and China.

About 90 minutes later, the Chinese ship left Vietnam’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ) where it had been since Friday evening.

An EEZ gives a state exclusive access to the natural resources in the waters and in the seabed.

Last month, the same China Coast Guard ship was accused of approaching about 150 yards (137 meters) from a Philippine Coast Guard ship and pointing a laser at the crew, causing temporary blindness to them.

On Feb. 6, the Philippine Coast Guard said that the Chinese ship had “directed a military-grade laser light” twice at the BRP Malapascua, which was on its way to deliver food and supplies to the troops stationed at the Second Thomas Shoal in the South China Sea.

Manila lodged a diplomatic protest and the U.S. State Department issued a statement supporting “our Philippine allies.”

Beijing rejected the allegation, saying the Philippine ship had “intruded into the waters” off the Spratly Islands “without Chinese permission” and the Chinese coast guard ship had “acted in a professional and restrained way.”

‘Too close for comfort’

In the Sunday encounter, Marine Traffic’s past track showed the Chinese CCG5205 and the Vietnamese Kiem Ngu 278 were so close that they could have collided.

“Ten meters between ships is really too close for comfort,” said Collin Koh, a Singapore-based regional maritime analyst.

“Depending on the sea state, the risk of collision is fairly high,” Koh told Radio Free Asia (RFA).

A retired Vietnamese Navy senior officer, who spoke to RFA on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the topic, said the two ships must have narrowly escaped a collision because they were sailing in opposite directions and at a very slow speed.

“If they were heading to the same direction a collision would have not been avoidable as the distance is too close and too dangerous,” he said.

Chinese ships had deliberately rammed Vietnamese patrol ships in the past, he added, but not in recent years.

The CCG5205 left Sanya, in Hainan island, for the current mission on March 11 and entered Vietnam’s EEZ the first time on March 12.

It then moved to the overlapping area between claimant states in the South China Sea and Malaysia’s EEZ before entering Vietnam’s EEZ again on March 21 for a couple hours and for the third time on March 24 when the Kiem Ngu 278 chased it.

The Kiem Ngu 278, officially named Vietnamese Fisheries Resources Surveillance ship KN-278, is homeported in Vung Tau, south of Ho Chi Minh City.

It left base on March 13 and had been following the Chinese vessel closely since.

In July 2021, the Kiem Ngu 278 was following another Chinese coast guard ship, the CCG5202, which Vietnam accused of harassing its gas-exploration activities.

Six parties hold claims to parts of the South China Sea and its natural resources but China’s claim is the biggest and Beijing has been trying to hinder other countries’ oil and gas activities in the waters inside its self-claimed nine-dash line.

A 2,600-ton Chinese survey vessel, the Haiyang Dizhi Si Hao, had lingered inside Vietnam’s EEZ from March 9 until March 25, when it switched off its AIS, according to data from Marine Traffic. 

Its whereabouts are currently unknown.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Staff.

More than a decade ago, the United Nations declared that access to clean water and sanitation is a human right, underpinning all other goals for equality, health, and economic prosperity. The United States did not sign on. Today, on World Water Day, global leaders are gathering in New York to discuss progress towards this goal. It's the first time the UN Water Conference is being held in the U.S. and time for our nation to embrace the moral imperative: Water is a human right.

People tend to think of clean water and sanitation access as issues for countries with the lowest GDPs. Yet, more than 2 million U.S. residents live without safe running water or a working toilet. Millions more experience water shutoffs because of unaffordable water and sewer bills, and climate change threatens reliable access to clean water for many more communities. The water access gap also costs our national economy more than $8 billion a year.

But the toll is human. From Detroit to California's Central Valley, people are sick and dying when we fail to prioritize access to clean water, public health, and safety. This dire situation led a UN expert investigator to visit these two hot spots for U.S. water challenges: water shutoffs, unaffordable bills, and contaminated water supplies.

From Detroit to California's Central Valley, people are sick and dying when we fail to prioritize access to clean water, public health, and safety.

In Michigan, the rate of water and sewer prices have increased by more than 400% for the poorest households since 1986, rising faster than wages and the cost of all other utility services. This steep rise led to widespread shutoffs, hurting people's ability to care for themselves and their families. After decades of predatory and racist shutoff practices, Detroit was actually one of the first utilities to stop shutting off water during the pandemic. But the moratorium on water shutoffs in the city ended in January, and now the community is pushing for inclusive affordability programs that keep people in their homes with their water running.

In California's Central Valley, groundwater pollution and overuse have left many communities with dry wells or water that is unsafe to drink. This forces low-income families to pay for their water twice: once for tap water they cannot drink and second for expensive trucked-in or bottled water so they can cook and bathe. Ten years ago, California recognized the human right to water, and is working to connect more communities to safe water supplies, but still has work to do on affordability as well as contamination.

Climate change is exacerbating economic inequalities and stressing water systems. Every year, extreme weather causes flooding, burst pipes, sewage spills, and other crises that force people out of their homes and put families on boil notices for months. The cost of building climate-resilient infrastructure or recovering from disaster only makes it harder for families to afford water, a deadly combination for low-income and communities of color in this country.

Fortunately, billions of dollars from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and Inflation Reduction Act are flowing to communities right now to fund safe and climate-resilient water systems. This is a great first step, but U.S. leaders must ensure these funds reach the communities that need them most, and then continue investing in our water and wastewater systems while keeping water affordable for all.

Water isn't a commodity to be sold to only those that can pay. It's a basic right our government must provide to all residents.

On World Water Day, policy makers have a job to do. We can make progress right now by getting water infrastructure dollars to places with the most pressing water injustices, like Detroit and the Central Valley, and funding water bill assistance for lower-income families. In the long run, we need to follow the leadership of local communities, sustain investment in our water systems, end water shutoff, and make a national commitment to water affordability.

Only then can we say water is a human right in the United States.

This content originally appeared on Common Dreams and was authored by Monica Lewis-Patrick.

Powell "has a dual mandate," said Warren. "Yes, he is responsible for dealing with inflation, but he is also responsible for employment. And what Chair Powell is trying to do, and he has said fairly explicitly, is that they are trying to, in effect, slow down the economy so that, this is by the Fed's own estimate, two million people will lose their jobs. And I believe that is not what the chair of the Federal Reserve should be doing."

Since the Covid-19 pandemic and Russia's invasion of Ukraine disrupted international supply chains—rendered fragile by decades of neoliberal globalization—powerful corporations in highly consolidated industries have taken advantage of these and other crises such as the bird flu outbreak to justify profit-boosting price hikes that far outpace the increased costs of doing business.

"Raising interest rates doesn't do anything to solve" a cost-of-living crisis driven primarily by "price gouging, supply chain kinks, [and] the war in Ukraine," Warren said Sunday. "All it does is put millions of people out of work."

"Jay Powell... has had two jobs. One is to deal with monetary policy, one is to deal with regulation. He has failed at both."

Powell, an ex-investment banker, was first appointed by then-President Donald Trump in 2018 and reappointed by Biden in 2021. Warren noted that she opposed Powell's nomination in both cases "because of his views on regulation and what he was already doing to weaken regulation."

"But I think he's failing in both jobs, both as the oversight and manager of these big banks, which is his job, and also what he's doing with inflation," said Warren.

Asked by Todd if Biden should fire Powell, Warren said: "My views on Jay Powell are well-known at this point. He has had two jobs. One is to deal with monetary policy, one is to deal with regulation. He has failed at both."

"Would you advise President Biden to replace him?" Todd inquired.

"I don't think he should be Chairman of the Federal Reserve," the Massachusetts Democrat responded. "I have said it as publicly as I know how to say it. I've said it to everyone."

Meanwhile, in a Saturday letter, Warren asked Richard Delmar, Tyler Smith, and Mark Bialek—respectively the deputy inspector general of the Treasury Department, acting inspector general of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and inspector general of the Fed's board of governors—to "immediately open a thorough, independent investigation of the causes of the bank management and regulatory and supervisory problems that resulted in this month's failure of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) and Signature Bank (Signature) and deliver preliminary results within 30 days."

Until the Treasury Department, the Fed, and the FDIC "intervened to guarantee billions of dollars of deposits," the second- and third-biggest bank failures in U.S. history "threatened economic contagion and severe damage to the banking and financial systems," Warren noted. "The bank's executives, who took unnecessary risks or failed to hedge against entirely foreseeable threats, must be held accountable for these failures."

"But this mismanagement was allowed to occur because of a series of failures by lawmakers and regulators," Warren continued.

In 2018, several Democrats joined Republicans in approving Sen. Mike Crapo's (R-Idaho) Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act, which weakened the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act passed in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis. Crapo's deregulatory measure, signed into law by Trump, loosened federal oversight of banks with between $50 billion and $250 billion in assets—a category that includes SVB and Signature.

"As officials sought to develop a plan responding to SVB's failure, Chair Powell muzzled regulators from any public mention of the regulatory failures that occurred under his watch."

Moreover, the Fed under Powell's leadership "initiated key regulatory rollbacks," Warren wrote Saturday, echoing criticisms that she and financial industry watchdogs voiced earlier in the week. "And the banks' supervisors—particularly the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, which oversaw SVB—missed or ignored key signals about their impending failure."

It is "critical that your investigation be completely independent and free of influence from the bank executives or regulators that were responsible for action that led to these bank failures," Warren stressed. "I am particularly concerned that you avoid any interference from Fed Chair Jerome Powell, who bears direct responsibility for—and has a long record of failure involving—regulatory and supervisory matters involving these two banks."

"I have already asked Chair Powell to recuse himself from the Fed's internal investigation of this matter, but he has not yet responded to this request," wrote Warren. The progressive lawmaker said "this silence is troubling" in light of recent reporting that "as officials sought to develop a plan responding to SVB's failure, Chair Powell muzzled regulators from any public mention of the regulatory failures that occurred under his watch."

"Bank regulators and Congress must move quickly to close the gaps that allowed these bank failures to happen, and your investigation will provide us important insight as we take steps to do so," added Warren, who has introduced legislation to repeal a vital provision of the Trump-era bank deregulation law enacted five years ago with bipartisan support.

In appearances on three Sunday morning talk shows, Warren doubled down on her demands for an independent investigation into recent bank failures, stronger financial regulations, and punishing those responsible.

After lawmakers from both parties helped Trump fulfill his campaign promise to weaken federal oversight of the banking system, Powell "took a flamethrower to the regulations, saying, 'I'm doing this because Congress let me do it,'" Warren toldABC's "This Week" co-anchor Jonathan Karl. "And what happened was exactly what we should have predicted, and that is the banks, these big, multi-billion-dollar banks, loaded up on risk; they boosted their short-term profits; they gave themselves huge bonuses and big salaries; and they exploded their banks."

"When you explode a bank, you ought to be banned from banking forever."

"When you explode a bank, you ought to be banned from banking forever," said Warren, who acknowledged that criminal charges could be coming. "The Department of Justice has opened an investigation. I think that's appropriate for them to do. We'll see where the facts take them. But we've got to take a close look at this."

Not only did former SVB chief executive officer Greg Becker, who lobbied aggressively for the 2018 bank deregulation law, sell millions of dollars of shares as recently as late last month, but until federal regulators took control of the failed bank on March 10, he was on the board of directors at the San Francisco Fed—the institution responsible for overseeing SVB.

On Saturday, Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont announced that he plans to introduce legislation "to end this conflict of interest by banning big bank CEOs from serving on Fed boards."

"We've got to say overall that we can't keep repeating this approach of weakening the regulation over the banks, then stepping in when these giant banks get into trouble," Warren said Sunday, arguing for stronger federal oversight to prevent the need for bailouts.

This content originally appeared on Common Dreams and was authored by Newswire Editor.

Nuclear-armed submarines are not welcome in Fiji waters.

Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka said this as he stressed he did not support any nuclear development that went against the Rarotonga Treaty and the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons which Fiji is a signatory to.

“So people should not be worried about an escalation of nuclear weapons,” he said.

• READ MORE: As Australia signs up for nuclear subs, NZ faces hard decisions over the AUKUS alliance

However, he confirmed that Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese had informed him during his visit this week that global superpower United States, Australia and the United Kingdom were working on a AUKUS agreement to build a nuclear powered submarine.

“They are building a nuclear-powered submarine and it’s a AUKUS programme between Australia, UK and the US and it will not affect the Rarotonga Treaty nor the Non Proliferation (of Nuclear Weapons) Treaty,” he said.

“These ones will not be armed with nuclear weapons.”

He said a number of treaties ensured that non-nuclear power producing nations were not allowed to produce warheads.

Non-Proliferation Treaty
“The Non-Proliferation Treaty is on nuclear arms,” he said.

“It was on the Strategic Arms Limitation talks series and had series one, two and three and it’s about the non-proliferation or non-growth of a number of nuclear warheads.

“Also the Lateral Proliferation which states that those that do not have nuclear capabilities, particularly warheads, should not develop them, but it does happen.”

He added that Fiji could benefit from the treaty through employment.

Australia, United Kingdom and the United States signed the AUKUS pact in 2021 and as part of the deal, Australia will acquire three Virginia-class nuclear-powered submarines from the US.

Australia also plans to begin building a new fleet of nuclear-powered subs under a 30-year programme which could cost up to A$368 billion (F$546 billion).

The deal could see the nuclear-powered subs in operation around Australian waters from as early as 2027.

In a media briefing in Beijing on Tuesday, China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin accused AUKUS partners of breaking international rules on the spread of nuclear weapons.

Repeka Nasiko is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

A 2,600-ton Chinese survey vessel, the Haiyang Dizhi Si Hao, had lingered inside Hanoi’s EEZ as well, signaling “a possible operation” there, the South China Sea Chronicle Initiative also reported. 

According to the SCSCI, the number of Chinese vessels in the economic zone increased measurably in the first two weeks of March, almost tripling the number observed at the end of February. An EEZ gives a state exclusive access to natural resources in the waters and in the seabed.

The data was collected using automatic identification system (AIS) signals transmitted by the ships.

“The Chinese vessels have also been operating deep inside Vietnam’s EEZ, up to just 60 nautical miles (111km) from the Quang Ngai coast,” Van Pham, SCSCI’s manager, told Radio Free Asia, referring to a province in central Vietnam.

The fishing and militia vessels often are accompanied by the China Coast Guard.

Chinese survey vessel

Meanwhile on Wednesday, the Chinese research and survey ship, also known as the Haiyang Dizhi 4, spent hours in Vietnamese-controlled waters before entering an area of overlapping claims in the South China Sea. 

Vietnam, Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and China all claim parts of the strategic waterway, but the area claimed by Beijing is by far the largest. 

China and neighboring countries have been at loggerheads over Beijing’s oil and gas exploration in the sea.

According to the ship tracker Marine Traffic, the Haiyang Dizhi 4 was in Vietnam’s EEZ for more than 17 hours on March 15.

“It looks like the ship was conducting an operation here,” the SCSCI alleged.

The Vietnamese Foreign Ministry was not immediately available for comment.

Hanoi has repeatedly complained about the activities of Chinese survey vessels in its EEZ, calling them “a violation of Vietnam’s sovereignty.”

In 2019, a protest broke out in front of the Chinese embassy in Hanoi over the Haiyang Dizhi 8, a survey ship which had operated for months in Vietnam-controlled waters.

The next year, the same ship was involved in a month-long standoff with a Malaysian oil exploration vessel.

The biggest confrontation to date between Vietnam and China over oil and gas exploration in the South China Sea was in 2014, when China moved a drilling platform – the Hai Yang Shi You 981 – into Vietnamese waters.

The incident involved dozens of law enforcement ships from both sides and led to anti-China protests in Vietnam. 

In the end, China withdrew the oil rig after two and a half months.

Gray zone operations

China has been conducting so-called “gray zone” operations, with nontraditional forces such as maritime militia being used to achieve security and economic objectives.

Another claimant in the South China Sea, the Philippines, recently accused Chinese maritime militia ships of swarming inside its EEZ. 

In the latest development, China’s maritime militia ships off the Philippines-controlled Thitu island were scattering after swarming there earlier this month, according to Ray Powell, Project Myoushu (South China Sea) lead at Stanford University in California.

On March 4, the Philippine Coast Guard said over 40 suspected Chinese maritime militia vessels were spotted within 4.5 to 8 nautical miles off the shores of the island, which is known in the Philippines as Pag-asa.

“By periodically dispersing its forces, China’s militia fleet seems intent on making it more difficult for Philippine law enforcement agencies to track and document its swarm tactics,” Powell told RFA.

China’s maritime militia is mostly organized by the country’s large fishing companies.

Research by Andrew Erickson and Conor Kennedy in 2016 found that the only estimate of the size of the Chinese maritime militia was from a source published in 1978, which put the number of personnel at 750,000 on approximately 140,000 vessels. This number has likely grown substantially since.

In its 2010 Defense White Paper, China stated that it had eight million militia members nationwide, including maritime militia.

Edited by Imran Vittachi.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Staff.

Photograph Source: GabeMc –CC BY-SA 3.0

After a highly acclaimed run in North America, Roger Waters will take his “This Is Not a Drill” tour across Europe. The long journey includes shows in Germany, with the final concert in the country originally planned to take place in Frankfurt on May 28. On February 24, however, Frankfurt’s city council and the Hessian state government announced the cancellation of the Frankfurt concert, for “persistent anti-Israel behavior,” and called Waters an antisemite.

The cancellation of Waters’s concert is a threat to free speech and artistic freedom. It is designed to silence legitimate criticism of Israel’s government emanating from the world human rights community and within Israel itself. Waters’s music has captivated the world for more than five decades. Over that time, he has also become a respected human rights advocate. In response to the decision by Frankfurt’s city council, artists and human rights leaders, including Peter Gabriel, Julie Christie, Noam Chomsky, Susan Sarandon, Alia Shawkat, and Glenn Greenwald, have signed a petition calling on the German government to uncancel the concert.

In a more civilized world, Frankfurt would be giving him an award for his courage, not trying to silence him with state censorship.

To be clear, the position of Waters regarding the disparate treatment by the Israeli government of Jews and Palestinians—with numerous legal policies and laws that favor Jews over Palestinians—is well within the mainstream of the international human rights community.

A range of prominent human rights groups, including Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, as well as United Nations agencies and experts such as the UN special rapporteur, argue that Israel’s policy has created an “apartheid” state within Israel through its occupation of the Palestinian territories. Indeed, in 2021, the respected Israeli human rights group B’Tselem issued a strong statement calling the Israeli government “a regime of Jewish supremacy from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea” and concluding, “This is apartheid.” The statements Waters has made about Israel are entirely in line with these criticisms from these respected organizations and institutions.

The conflation of criticism of Israel and antisemitism is dangerous and perpetuates the common antisemitic perspective that all Jews monolithically support Israel. Because antisemitism is a real issue, its weaponization and distortion to stifle legitimate criticism of Israel is reckless, and undermines the fight against antisemitism.

The Frankfurt City Council’s statement offered no evidence for its claim except that Waters has “repeatedly called for a cultural boycott of Israel and drew comparisons to the apartheid regime in South Africa.” The statement about the “cultural boycott of Israel” is a reference to Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS), the Palestinian-led movement launched in 2005 that has since gained significant support across the globe.

We reached out to Waters for his response to the campaign against him, and he told us: “My platform is simple: it is implementation of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights for all our brothers and sisters in the world including those between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. My support of universal human rights is universal. It is not antisemitism, which is odious and racist and which, like all forms of racism, I condemn unreservedly.”

The official equation of criticism of Israeli policy with antisemitism is problematic, but it is not new in contemporary Germany. In May 2019, the German Parliament passed a nonbinding resolution that associated BDS with antisemitism. This resolution followed a series of attacks on organizations, including numerous Jewish groups (such as the Germany-based group Jewish Voice for Just Peace in the Middle East) whose advocacy on behalf of Palestinians was, at the same moment, being classified by the Israeli government as antisemitic.

In response to this targeting of critics of Israel’s government over its mistreatment of Palestinians, more than 90 Jewish scholars and intellectuals signed an open letter in defense of Jewish Voice for Just Peace in the Middle East. The last line of that letter called upon “the members of German civil society to fight antisemitism relentlessly while maintaining a clear distinction between criticism of the state of Israel, harsh as it may be, and antisemitism, and to preserve free speech for those who reject Israeli repression against the Palestinian people and insist that it comes to an end.”

In its attack on Waters, the Frankfurt City Council mimicked the current thinking followed by the extremist Israeli government in its weaponization of antisemitism to try to undermine critics of its official narrative.

The attack on Waters by the Frankfurt City Council is part of a disturbing pattern in contemporary Germany. The Berlin-based Jewish photographer Adam Broomberg, who is well-known for his work on the cruelty and irrationality of violence, found himself being targeted by the city of Hamburg’s antisemitism commissioner, Stefan Hensel.

Hensel has used his social media and various newspapers to attack anyone who supports the BDS movement as being “antisemitic.” His campaign against Broomberg raised the ire of the photographer, who was born in South Africa and who has an intimate and very personal understanding of apartheid. Broomberg told the art magazine Hyperallergic that he was confounded by this attack: “For a commissioner of antisemitism, for his first and most vehement and powerful attack to be on a Jew and to put a Jew’s life and profession at risk, is totally ironic. … I just buried my mother who knew the Holocaust and I come back and I’m accused of being a hateful antisemite advocating for terrorism against Jews. I couldn’t be more Jewish,” he said. “It’s affected me profoundly.”

In early March 2023, Hensel posted a photograph of Roger Waters on Instagram in the film version of his 2010-2013 concert tour “The Wall.” Alongside the picture, Hensel wrote: “The motto should be: ‘Roger Waters is not welcome in Hamburg.’” Adam Broomberg responded on Twitter that Hensel’s image of Waters appearing in character as a fascist villain was taken out of context from an “undeniably anti-war film by Waters and [Sean] Evans called ‘The Wall’ to depict him as a Nazi in an attempt to cancel his concert.”

This distortion, Broomberg wrote, is an example of “German propaganda.”

In July 2022, South Africa’s Foreign Minister Naledi Pandor while addressing a meeting of the Palestinian Heads of Mission in Africa said that “The Palestinian narrative evokes experiences of South Africa’s own history of racial segregation and oppression.” Reflecting on the findings of human rights reports and UN documents, Pandor said: “These reports are significant in raising global awareness of the conditions that Palestinians are subjected to, and they provide credence and support to an overwhelming body of factual evidence, all pointing to the fact that the State of Israel is committing crimes of apartheid and persecution against Palestinians.”

Nothing that prominent international artists like Waters or Broomberg have said would be alien to the content of these reports or different from what Naledi Pandor said at that meeting in Pretoria. Indeed, everything she said mirrors the library of UN resolutions demonstrating the illegality of the Israeli occupation of Palestine and the apartheid conditions being faced by Palestinians inside Israel and its territories. The attack by the Frankfurt City Council on Waters is not actually an effort to call out antisemitism; it is, rather, an attack on the human rights of Palestinians.

This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Vijay Prashad - Katie Halper.

After a highly acclaimed run in North America, Roger Waters will take his “This Is Not a Drill” tour across Europe. The long journey includes shows in Germany, with the final concert in the country originally planned to take place in Frankfurt on May 28. On February 24, however, Frankfurt’s city council and the Hessian state government announced the cancellation of the Frankfurt concert, for “persistent anti-Israel behavior,” and called Waters an antisemite.

The cancellation of Waters’s concert is a threat to free speech and artistic freedom. It is designed to silence legitimate criticism of Israel’s government emanating from the world human rights community and within Israel itself. Waters’s music has captivated the world for more than five decades. Over that time, he has also become a respected human rights advocate. In response to the decision by Frankfurt’s city council, artists and human rights leaders, including Peter Gabriel, Julie Christie, Noam Chomsky, Susan Sarandon, Alia Shawkat, and Glenn Greenwald, have signed a petition calling on the German government to uncancel the concert.

In a more civilized world, Frankfurt would be giving him an award for his courage, not trying to silence him with state censorship.

To be clear, the position of Waters regarding the disparate treatment by the Israeli government of Jews and Palestinians—with numerous legal policies and laws that favor Jews over Palestinians—is well within the mainstream of the international human rights community.

"My support of universal human rights is universal. It is not antisemitism, which is odious and racist and which, like all forms of racism, I condemn unreservedly.” —Roger Waters

A range of prominent human rights groups, including Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, as well as United Nations agencies and experts such as the UN special rapporteur, argue that Israel’s policy has created an “apartheid” state within Israel through its occupation of the Palestinian territories. Indeed, in 2021, the respected Israeli human rights group B’Tselem issued a strong statementcalling the Israeli government “a regime of Jewish supremacy from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea” and concluding, “This is apartheid.” The statements Waters has made about Israel are entirely in line with these criticisms from these respected organizations and institutions.

The conflation of criticism of Israel and antisemitism is dangerous and perpetuates the common antisemitic perspective that all Jews monolithically support Israel. Because antisemitism is a real issue, its weaponization and distortion to stifle legitimate criticism of Israel is reckless, and undermines the fight against antisemitism.

The Frankfurt City Council’s statement offered no evidence for its claim except that Waters has “repeatedly called for a cultural boycott of Israel and drew comparisons to the apartheid regime in South Africa.” The statement about the “cultural boycott of Israel” is a reference to Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS), the Palestinian-led movement launched in 2005 that has since gained significant support across the globe.

We reached out to Waters for his response to the campaign against him, and he told us: “My platform is simple: it is implementation of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights for all our brothers and sisters in the world including those between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. My support of universal human rights is universal. It is not antisemitism, which is odious and racist and which, like all forms of racism, I condemn unreservedly.”

The official equation of criticism of Israeli policy with antisemitism is problematic, but it is not new in contemporary Germany. In May 2019, the German Parliament passed a nonbinding resolution that associated BDS with antisemitism. This resolution followed a series of attacks on organizations, including numerous Jewish groups (such as the Germany-based group Jewish Voice for Just Peace in the Middle East) whose advocacy on behalf of Palestinians was, at the same moment, being classified by the Israeli government as antisemitic.

In response to this targeting of critics of Israel’s government over its mistreatment of Palestinians, more than 90 Jewish scholars and intellectuals signed an open letter in defense of Jewish Voice for Just Peace in the Middle East. The last line of that letter called upon “the members of German civil society to fight antisemitism relentlessly while maintaining a clear distinction between criticism of the state of Israel, harsh as it may be, and antisemitism, and to preserve free speech for those who reject Israeli repression against the Palestinian people and insist that it comes to an end.”

In its attack on Waters, the Frankfurt City Council mimicked the current thinking followed by the extremist Israeli government in its weaponization of antisemitism to try to undermine critics of its official narrative.

The attack on Waters by the Frankfurt City Council is part of a disturbing pattern in contemporary Germany. The Berlin-based Jewish photographer Adam Broomberg, who is well-known for his work on the cruelty and irrationality of violence, found himself being targeted by the city of Hamburg’s antisemitism commissioner, Stefan Hensel.

In its attack on Waters, the Frankfurt City Council mimicked the current thinking followed by the extremist Israeli government in its weaponization of antisemitism to try to undermine critics of its official narrative.

Hensel has used his social media and various newspapers to attack anyone who supports the BDS movement as being “antisemitic.” His campaign against Broomberg raised the ire of the photographer, who was born in South Africa and who has an intimate and very personal understanding of apartheid. Broomberg told the art magazine Hyperallergic that he was confounded by this attack: “For a commissioner of antisemitism, for his first and most vehement and powerful attack to be on a Jew and to put a Jew’s life and profession at risk, is totally ironic. … I just buried my mother who knew the Holocaust and I come back and I’m accused of being a hateful antisemite advocating for terrorism against Jews. I couldn’t be more Jewish,” he said. “It’s affected me profoundly.”

In early March 2023, Hensel posted a photograph of Roger Waters on Instagram in the film version of his 2010-2013 concert tour “The Wall.” Alongside the picture, Hensel wrote: “The motto should be: ‘Roger Waters is not welcome in Hamburg.’” Adam Broomberg respondedon Twitter that Hensel’s image of Waters appearing in character as a fascist villain was taken out of context from an “undeniably anti-war film by Waters and [Sean] Evans called ‘The Wall’ to depict him as a Nazi in an attempt to cancel his concert.”

This distortion, Broomberg wrote, is an example of “German propaganda.”

In July 2022, South Africa’s Foreign Minister Naledi Pandor while addressing a meeting of the Palestinian Heads of Mission in Africa said that “The Palestinian narrative evokes experiences of South Africa’s own history of racial segregation and oppression.” Reflecting on the findings of human rights reports and UN documents, Pandor said: “These reports are significant in raising global awareness of the conditions that Palestinians are subjected to, and they provide credence and support to an overwhelming body of factual evidence, all pointing to the fact that the State of Israel is committing crimes of apartheid and persecution against Palestinians.”

Nothing that prominent international artists like Waters or Broomberg have said would be alien to the content of these reports or different from what Naledi Pandor said at that meeting in Pretoria. Indeed, everything she said mirrors the library of UN resolutions demonstrating the illegality of the Israeli occupation of Palestine and the apartheid conditions being faced by Palestinians inside Israel and its territories. The attack by the Frankfurt City Council on Waters is not actually an effort to call out antisemitism; it is, rather, an attack on the human rights of Palestinians.

This content originally appeared on Common Dreams and was authored by Vijay Prashad.

Seven groups on Monday filed a legal challenge to the U.S. Interior Department's Lease Sale 259, which would offer 73.3 million acres of public waters in the Gulf of Mexico to the highest-bidding oil and gas drillers.

Earthjustice, the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Sierra Club, Healthy Gulf, Bayou City Waterkeeper, and Friends of the Earth filed the lawsuit in federal court in the District of Columbia. The complaint asks the court to "vacate or enjoin any leases issued or actions taken pursuant to the unlawful [sale] unless and until defendants comply with the law."

President Joe Biden's administration "previously canceled this and other sales, citing delays and 'conflicting court rulings,'" the groups explained in a joint statement. But then right-wing Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia—the top congressional recipient of fossil fuel industry cash during the 2022 election cycle and a long-time coal profiteer—made his support for Biden's landmark climate legislation, the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), contingent on the inclusion of oil and gas leasing provisions.

Congressional Democrats, with zero votes to spare in the Senate amid unified Republican opposition, passed a Manchin-approved version of the IRA last August. Lease Sale 259, one of the largest offshore auctions in U.S. history, is now scheduled for March 28, less than a month before the 13th anniversary of the Deepwater Horizon BP disaster.

The groups acknowledged that the IRA directs the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) to hold the lease sale. However, they stressed, "it does not require such a vast area to be auctioned to industry, nor does it exempt the sale from any existing laws, including the National Environmental Policy Act."

"Holding this offshore oil lease sale without careful environmental review is both unlawful and morally reprehensible."

"Lease Sale 259 would offer up all unleased areas in the western and central Gulf of Mexico, which could lock in a massive drilling operation to extract more than 1 billion barrels of oil and 4.4 trillion cubic feet of natural gas over the next 50 years," the groups warned.

Such a move would fly in the face of the Biden administration's purported commitment to slashing planet-heating pollution and speeding up the adoption of renewables, critics argued.

"This administration has pledged to oversee a historic transition to clean energy, but actions speak louder than words," said Earthjustice attorney George Torgun. "We don't need a billion new barrels of crude oil threatening people and ecosystems in the Gulf."

Hallie Templeton, legal director of Friends of the Earth, said, "Yet again we find ourselves in the courtroom with the Biden administration over another unlawful and disastrous oil and gas lease sale in the Gulf of Mexico."

Last year, a federal judge blocked Lease Sale 257, the nation's largest-ever offshore lease sale wherein more than 80 million acres of the Gulf of Mexico were put on the auction block.

“With each carbon bomb he drops, the president's pledge to end oil and gas drilling feels long forgotten," said Templeton. "BOEM should be proceeding with the utmost caution and ensuring that its oil and gas decisions comply with federal laws, not adding to our climate crisis."

According to the complaint, BOEM's approval of Lease Sale 259 "was based on insufficient and arbitrary environmental analyses" in violation of the National Environmental Policy Act and the Administrative Procedure Act.

The agency's final supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) "failed to take the required 'hard look' at the significant impacts of this massive lease sale," the suit alleges.

Specifically, the complaint says, BOEM "did not rationally evaluate the impacts of greenhouse gas emissions, relying instead on problematic modeling and assumptions to conclude that this massive lease sale will result in only 'slightly higher domestic emissions' than not leasing at all, and further failed to consider the impacts of such fossil fuel development on climate goals and commitments."

In addition, BOEM "arbitrarily dismissed the impacts of onshore oil and gas infrastructure—refineries, petrochemical plants, and other industrial sources that process fossil fuels and related products from Lease Sale 259—on Gulf communities," according to the suit. The groups also accuse the agency of ignoring "the latest air quality data" and presenting "an incomplete and misleading picture of oil spill impacts and risks based on flawed modeling that failed to properly consider reasonably foreseeable accidents."

Moreover, the complaint continues, BOEM "failed to properly disclose and consider the significant harm from ship strikes, pollution, and oil spills on endangered species such as the Rice's whale" and five of the world's seven species of sea turtles. The agency claimed that such impacts would be "negligible," even as experts fear the Rice's whale population has dropped below 50.

Finally, the suit accuses BOEM of failing "to consider reasonable scaled-back alternatives to its proposed action," and refusing "to adequately respond to plaintiffs' comments on the draft SEIS, offering only boilerplate responses and failing to grapple with and respond to substantive technical and legal critiques."

"The Biden administration needs to end new extraction, phase out drilling, and start taking its commitment to climate action seriously."

Athan Manuel, director of the Sierra Club's Lands Protection Program, said that "selling off more of our lands and waters to the fossil fuel industry is the last thing we should do at a time when we need to be rapidly transitioning away from oil and gas to meet our nation's climate goals and create a livable planet for all."

"Offshore drilling devastates millions of acres of nature, contributes to an increasing number of climate disasters, and creates a quarter of our greenhouse gas emissions," said Manuel. "While the IRA represents a historic step forward in achieving our nation's climate goals, we cannot let the bad provisions of the bill, including oil and gas leasing, undercut what we stand to gain."

Kristen Schlemmer, legal director for Bayou City Waterkeeper, echoed Manuel, noting that vulnerable residents of the Gulf Coast are already reeling from petrochemical pollution, sea-level rise, coastal erosion, and intensified storms.

"We're at a point where we should be moving away from fossil fuels, not enabling an astounding amount of drilling for more than a generation to come," said Schlemmer. "For communities along the Houston Ship Channel, which are predominantly Black, brown, and lower-income, Lease Sale 259 creates an especially toxic combination of risks."

"More drilling means more facilities in their backyards," she added. "This will compound already elevated rates of cancer and heart and lung diseases, while also increasing risks during major storms."

In the words of Kristen Monsell, oceans legal director at CBD, "Holding this offshore oil lease sale without careful environmental review is both unlawful and morally reprehensible."

"More oil drilling in the Gulf is too big a risk for the communities and wildlife living there, and too harmful to the climate," said Monsell. "The Biden administration needs to end new extraction, phase out drilling, and start taking its commitment to climate action seriously."

This content originally appeared on Common Dreams and was authored by Kenny Stancil.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

Iwi leaders in Aotearoa New Zealand have accused opposition parties National and ACT of “fanning the flames of racism”, urging the prime minister to be brave and not walk away from partnership on Three Waters.

With Waitangi events and festivities gearing up for the holiday weekend, Prime Minister Chris Hipkins attended the Iwi Chairs Forum yesterday.

He emerged from the closed-doors meeting saying they had asked the government to continue to work with Māori “to advance the issues that we’ve been working on previously”.

• READ MORE: Other Waitangi Day reports
• Other NZ politics reports

Iwi leaders had also, it seemed, laid down a wero [challenge].

“I have also heard their concern that they don’t want to see ethnicity, race, being used as a way of dividing New Zealanders and I was able to absolutely reiterate my government’s commitment to ensuring that we continue to work together to avoid that happening,” Hipkins said.

“Where there is uncertainty, where there is a lack of clarity, that can lead to fear. Politicians who use that fear or exploit that fear in order to try and gain political advantage need to really reflect on their own actions. That’s something my government will never do.”

He was not afraid to get into specifics, either.

“They don’t want the concept of co-governance to be used to stoke fear, and nor do we,” he said.

“I think it’s been misunderstood and those who seek to use misunderstanding around it for political advantage need to reflect on their own behaviour.

“People can form their own judgments about that but I certainly think the opposition — National and ACT have, as they’ve done in the past — they’ve used uncertainty to try and stoke fear.”

The devastating flooding in Auckland this week may have changed some minds about the need for change in management of drinking, waste and stormwater — something Hipkins will be looking to capitalise on.

“I think that we have to accept that as a result of climate change we’re going to see more extreme weather events, and stormwater — which is an integral part of the Three Waters system — is going to continue to come under more pressure,” he said.

The iwi leaders were not shy about it either, with Tukoroirangi Morgan telling reporters they wanted co-governance or a similar partnership retained in the Three Waters legislation.

“The challenge we’ve put to the prime minister today is will he succumb to the attack dogs of the National party and ACT as they fan the flames of racism and anti-Māori sentiments, and throw us under the bus for the sake of keeping alive Three Waters?”

Morgan, it must be noted, has been appointed chair of the entity set to oversee Auckland and Northland’s water.

“There is nothing mysterious about Three Waters — it’s all about pipes under the ground. Our view is as it has always been: we stand here at Waitangi, the cradle of the Treaty of Waitangi, and here is the embodiment of partnership,” he said.

“What we seek from this government is an ongoing commitment that partnership will amplified and affirmed through Three Waters, [it is an] opportunity for the Crown and Māori to work together in a meaningful and significant way.”

Jamie Tuuta, an iwi leader from Taranaki, also warned against allowing Māori to become a political football this election.

“One of the key messages we want to give to the prime minister and other ministers is that they need to stand up, they need to step up,” he said.

“It’s unacceptable — because again, the racist and biased attacks on Māori in 2023 are unacceptable.”

A Pou Tikanga of the forum, constitutional law expert Professor Margaret Mutu, said it was essential race rhetoric was removed from electoral debate.

“There’s a need to understand and address racism in this country and over recent times it’s got a lot more urgent,” Professor Mutu said.

“We need to make sure that work doesn’t slow down, particularly as the extreme attacks coming in are very, very hurtful. We want to try and stop that hurt.”

Te Arawa’s Monty Morrison said the meeting went “very well, it was very open.”

Ngāti Kuri’s Harry Burkhardt said they “were clear about our message, and I think Chris received that well”.

Luxon, Seymour respond
Co-governance was a topic National’s leader Christopher Luxon chose to address when he visited Rātana last week. His speech accused the government of failing to make its position on the matter clear, and allowing it to become a “divisive and immature” conversation.

National had been invited to meet with the Iwi Chairs Forum but declined. In a written statement after the kōrero at Waitangi today, Luxon said the party had been clear about its position.

“We support co-management between government and Māori for natural resources in the context of Treaty settlements. We do not support co-governance of public services or separate bureaucratic systems for Māori and non-Māori,” he said.

“Labour has progressed a divisive agenda and continually failed to set out its views clearly. It is disappointing to see the new Prime Minister try to shut down the discussion rather than clearly setting out Labour’s plans for the public to judge.”

Luxon has previously raised as examples National does not support:

• The Māori Health Authority, which sets strategy for overcoming racial health gaps and commissions kaupapa Māori health services
• The Three Waters legislation allowing equal representation between council and iwi appointees on a strategic oversight group which appoints the management board of the four entities set to take over management of water services

ACT leader David Seymour — who has Ngāpuhi roots — has been even more stridently critical of these, arguing they are race-based approaches which only further divide.

“If the prime minister thinks that ACT is making co-goverment divisive, wait till he hears what Labour’s been up to,” he said.

“Their modus operandi is to divide public affairs between two groups of people based on race — that is divisive and it’s unsurprising that opposition parties are raising concerns.”

He bristled at being labelled an “attack dog” by Morgan.

“Again, it’s a shame. The Iwi Chairs Forum were an organisation we’ve enjoyed good relationships with.

“That kind of language, calling people dogs, well it doesn’t exactly sound like they’re coming to the table to make the situation any better, now, does it.”

Three Waters changes yet to be decided
Since taking over as Prime Minister from Jacinda Ardern, Hipkins has promised his government will focus more on the “bread-and-butter” issues, targeting cost-of-living pressures and cutting back some of the government’s work programme.

Media speculation has highlighted the unpopularity of the government’s RNZ-TVNZ merger and the Three Waters projects, and therefore likely on the chopping block.

Hipkins signalled announcements within weeks about the slimmed-down work programme, but when pressed about Three Waters early this week spoke about the need to change the status quo — statements he repeated today.

“We’ve been doing so many different things, actually we probably haven’t created the space to make sure people understand what we’re doing and why we’re doing it and that is absolutely, I think, a lesson for us over the last five years and it’s something we have all reflected on and you’ll see some change in that regard.

“I haven’t said a lot in terms of ruling things in and out, but one thing I will rule out is no reform . . .  we can’t continue with the status quo — it is not delivering New Zealanders the water services they need and that they deserve.

“If we leave it just with the status quo, one thing it will deliver is significantly higher rates for households, and I’m not willing to just stand back and say ‘that’s a council problem to deal with’.”

He has, to date, refused to outline what any of the changes to the project might be — saying those decisions are yet to be made by the full Cabinet — but speculation has centred on the co-governance aspect.

“I think everybody acknowledges that what we’re doing now or around the way we manage our water infrastructure in New Zealand is not sustainable, and it has left us with a pretty disgraceful legacy, frankly, of that core infrastructure being run down.”

Taranaki iwi leader Jamie Tuuta said whatever changes came, they expected the same level of engagement and partnership.

“By and large what we ask is that we are respected and that [Hipkins] and his ministers engage openly with us in the event that there are any changes.”

With an election in October, Morgan and the other leaders present at today’s forum are clear: they want bold leadership and partnership, and however this year’s election plays out — they will still be there.

“This is a ongoing journey for us,” Morgan said. “Absolutely, we would want a very clear and unfettered response and commitment from this government that they’re not going to walk away, nor are they going to throw us under the bus for their own political means.

“Iwi will be at this side of the table come the election, we’ll deal with whoever the government is. What is clear in this situation is we are enduring, iwi will remain as the Treaty partner.

“Whether we deal with Hipkins after the election or the National Party, we will see, but all we say is that we want an equitable share in the major decisions that affect our people – that’s our bottom-line expectation.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Iwi leaders warn Hipkins not to bow on Three Waters co-governance https://t.co/upsPqJEbMm

— RNZ News (@rnz_news) February 3, 2023

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

The encounter at sea occurred on Jan. 9 when the crew of KEN-KEN fishing boat reported that a Chinese ship with bow number 5204 and a smaller boat drove them away from waters near Ayungin Shoal (Second Thomas Shoal), according to the Philippine Coast Guard. 

“Ayungin Shoal is part of the exclusive economic zone and continental shelf of the Philippines. The Philippines is entitled to exercise sovereign rights and jurisdiction in the area, without any intervention from another country,” the Department of Foreign Affairs said in a statement Tuesday. 

“Filipino fishermen are free to exercise their rights and take whatever they are due under Philippine and international law, particularly the 1982 UNCLOS and the final and binding 2016 Arbitral Award,” it said, referring to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

The Philippine foreign office said it was waiting for the local law enforcement agencies’ official reports on the alleged incident.

“The reports will serve as a basis for diplomatic action on the incident,” the department said.

“The department vigilantly monitors any developments in the West Philippine Sea, especially following the discussions between President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. and Chinese President Xi Jinping during the former’s state visit to China,” it said, using the Filipino name for areas within its EEZ in the South China Sea. 

The Chinese Embassy in Manila did not immediately respond to RFA-affiliate BenarNews requests for comment. 

The shoal, about 174 nautical miles from Puerto Princesa, a port city in the western Philippines’ Palawan province, is one of the nine areas occupied by Filipino forces in the disputed waters. The Philippines maintains a small contingent of Marines housed aboard the BRP Sierra Madre, a dilapidated World War-II era ship that was deliberately run aground in the 1990s. 

Marcos said that his state visit to China in early January had already yielded a positive outcome through the two nations using an agreed-to hotline to focus on sea tensions.

“So we have immediately used that thing, that mechanism that I talked about where I said we can immediately contact the Chinese government, and hopefully our counterparts on the other side can bring it to President Xi’s attention – this problem – and we have done that,” Marcos told a select group of broadcasters Monday, according to transcripts released Tuesday. 

“But it does not preclude us from continuing to make protests and continuing to send note verbales concerning this,” he said, referring to diplomatic notes without elaborating. 

The Marcos administration has insisted repeatedly that issues in the South China Sea do not define relations with China. On Tuesday, Tourism Secretary Christina Frasco joined Huang Xilian, the Chinese ambassador to the Philippines, in greeting one of the first plane loads of Chinese tourists to arrive in Manila in three years.

Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Artemio Abu confirmed that the Filipino fishermen “were being shadowed” and that the Philippine side responded by intensifying its assets near Ayungin. 

He said his agency had sent “raw footage” of the incident to the Department of Foreign Affairs.

“We give confidence to our Filipino fishermen that they are taken care of and protected. We assure our Filipino fishermen that they are protected and secured through our constant presence,” Abu said in a television interview.

The commandant said coast guard leaders would raise concerns with their counterparts from China during “high-level talks,” but he did not disclose the date. 

“We really need to coordinate well with the national leadership. It has to be communicated down to the frontlines,” Abu said. 

The incident was the first alleged case of Chinese harassment of a Philippine fishing boat reported in 2023. Last year, the Philippines carried out at least 10 resupply missions to the Sierra Madre without any incidents, apart from reports of the Chinese Coast Guard issuing verbal challenges. 

In March 2014, a boat carrying supplies and Filipino journalists to Ayungin evaded a Chinese Coast Guard blockade during a two-hour standoff. 

BenarNews is an RFA-affiliated news service

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Aie Balagtas See for BenarNews.

More than 300 environmental and Indigenous rights groups said Wednesday that the Biden administration must take a number of concrete actions to protect the nation's public lands and waters from fossil fuel industry exploitation and bring U.S. policy into line with climate science—and the president's own campaign pledges.

In a letter to U.S. Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland, the climate coalition noted that President Joe Biden "made a bold promise to ban new oil and gas leasing on public lands and waters, and within days of taking office issued his Executive Order on Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad."

"However, since then, the Biden administration and Interior's leadership has fallen short Interior issued new permits to drill at a rate faster than the Trump administration during Biden's first year in office," the letter continues. "The Bureau of Land Management and Bureau of Ocean Energy Management pushed forward with new oil and gas lease sales, including a sale in the Gulf of Mexico that was vacated by a federal court for a faulty environmental review. And Interior's final report on the leasing program failed to take into account climate impacts from extraction on public lands and waters."

The groups also pointed to the Biden administration's recent decision to go ahead with a major oil and gas lease sale off Alaska's coast, ignoring warnings that the auction would imperil marine life, pollute coastal communities, and contribute to the nation's rising carbon emissions.

"The climate science is clear: Several analyses show that climate pollution from the world's already-producing fossil fuel fields, if fully developed, will overshoot the targets in the Paris Climate Agreement and push warming past 1.5 degrees Celsius," the letter states. "Avoiding such warming requires ending new investment in fossil fuel projects and phasing out production to keep as much as 40% of already-developed fields in the ground."

In a press release, the coalition outlines nine steps the Biden administration can and must take to manage "public lands and waters in a manner consistent with climate science":

1. Phase out oil and gas production on public lands and waters to near zero by 2035.
2. Defend and strengthen the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
3. Establish guardrails on the leasing program to protect the climate, public lands, oceans, and communities.
4. Issue a five-year plan with no new leases.
5. Stop authorizing new exploration, development, and drilling permits in the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska until there is a proper analysis of climate damage.
6. Stop issuing new permits to drill on public lands until there is a proper analysis of climate damage and a climate screen
7. Manage public lands for climate solutions.
8. Halt climate-destroying projects in the Arctic (ex: Willow, Peregrine).
9. Protect climate and communities from near-term offshore lease sales (ex: Cook Inlet, Gulf of Mexico).

"Indigenous and frontline communities continue to bear the brunt of the climate crisis, and we are calling for the administration to end fossil fuel expansion and implement a just transition," Lake continued. "There is simply no time to lose and our public lands need to be a part of the solution."

Recent research estimates that fossil fuel extraction on public lands and waters has accounted for nearly a quarter of all U.S. greenhouse gas pollution since 2005, making the end of such development critical to efforts to bring the country's emissions into line with its domestic and international commitments.

"More drilling and more fracking is just a recipe for more climate disaster," Jeremy Nichols, climate and energy program director for WildEarth Guardians, said in a statement Wednesday. "For our future, President Biden needs to get real, start keeping oil and gas in the ground, and truly drive meaningful action to save our climate."

This content originally appeared on Common Dreams and was authored by Jake Johnson.

Today, more than 300 community groups sent a letter to the Interior Department outlining nine concrete steps it has authority to take to bring public lands and waters management in line with climate science and the president’s own climate promises.

The letter comes on the heels of a recent lease sale in Alaska’s Cook Inlet, the first held by the Interior Department since passage of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which reinstated several oil and gas lease sales. The administration is currently weighing whether to approve more oil and gas projects, such as Willow and Peregrine in the Arctic. Additional lease sales both onshore and offshore are slated for later this year, including two in the Gulf of Mexico in September.

Although President Biden initially pledged to ban oil and gas leasing on public lands and waters, he issued drilling permits at a rate faster than Trump during his first year in office. He then went on to hold new oil and gas lease sales on public lands and waters, including Lease Sale 257 in the Gulf of Mexico, the largest in U.S. history, which was later vacated after a lawsuit filed by environmental groups.

Groups call on Interior to take the following actions:

1. Phase out oil and gas production on public lands and waters to near zero by 2035
2. Defend and strengthen the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
3. Establish guardrails on the leasing program to protect the climate, public lands, oceans and communities
4. Issue a five-year plan with no new leases
5. Stop authorizing new exploration, development and drilling permits in the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska until there is a proper analysis of climate damage
6. Stop issuing new permits to drill on public lands until there is a proper analysis of climate damage and a climate screen
7. Manage public lands for climate solutions
8. Halt climate-destroying projects in the Arctic (ex: Willow, Peregrine)
9. Protect climate and communities from near-term offshore lease sales (ex: Cook Inlet, Gulf of Mexico).

Quotes from groups:

“As the dire impacts of climate disruption escalate, President Biden must keep his campaign promise to end oil and gas leasing on public lands,” said Osprey Orielle Lake, Women’s Earth and Climate Action Network (WECAN) Executive Director. “Indigenous and frontline communities continue to bear the brunt of the climate crisis, and we are calling for the administration to end fossil fuel expansion and implement a Just Transition. There is simply no time to lose and our public lands need to be a part of the solution.”

“As cities across our nation and across the globe are experiencing the adverse and worsening effects of climate change and sea rise, our leaders have the opportunity to make the right decision in our best interest,” said Sonia Ahkivgak, Social Outreach Coordinator for Sovereign Iñupiat for a Living Arctic. “Continuing to extract fossil fuels will only dig us a deeper grave and make it harder for our future generations to right our wrongs. For the sake of the climate, our economy, nature, and humanity, stop all fossil fuel extractions and declare a climate emergency.”

“President Biden ran a campaign promising to deal with the climate crisis and ensure public lands were protected from further oil and gas development,” said Joanie Steinhaus, Gulf Program Director for Turtle Island Restoration Network. “Biden needs to stand up for frontline and Indigenous communities that have for decades bore the brunt of the pollution and health concerns from this industry.”

“After two years of failed promises, it’s time for President Biden to finally live up to his promise to protect the planet and communities from further climate catastrophe,” said Nicole Ghio, Senior Fossil Fuels Program Manager at Friends of the Earth. “Nearly a quarter of U.S. climate emissions come from fossil fuel extraction on public lands. If Biden wants to salvage his reputation as a climate leader, he must use his authority to manage public lands and waters according to climate science, not oil industry profits.”

“While as a candidate Joe Biden campaigned on the promise to end oil and gas leasing on public lands, the Department of the Interior continues to hold lease sales at the expense of frontline communities, ecosystems, and our climate,” said Dan Ritzman, Lands Water Wildlife Director at the Sierra Club. “We urge the administration to phase out dirty drilling, allow our lands to be part of the climate solution, and ensure the next generation can inherit a habitable planet.”

“The climate crisis demands action commensurate with the magnitude and urgency of the problem, and the Biden administration continues to think we can drill our way to a solution,” said Kyle Tisdel, Climate & Energy Program director at the Western Environmental Law Center. “Not only is this approach detached from reality, it continues to sacrifice frontline and Tribal communities that have already endured generations of exploitation from the extraction of federal oil and gas resources. It’s time to stand up to the oil barons and usher in a just transition to a clean energy future.”

“A climate where public lands and waters are clear from fossil fuel pollution is a climate where all children can prosper and thrive,” said Beth Shipp, executive director of Mothers Out Front. “This must remain at the forefront of the Biden Administration’s priorities and it’s vital these steps phase out oil and gas production and protect public lands are taken to protect children’s future.”

“More drilling and more fracking is just a recipe for more climate disaster,” said Jeremy Nichols, climate and energy program director for WildEarth Guardians. “For our future, President Biden needs to get real, start keeping oil and gas in the ground, and truly drive meaningful action to save our climate.”

“Biden’s aggressive pro-drilling policies are a disastrous failure of climate leadership and make a mockery of his campaign promises,” said Taylor McKinnon with the Center for Biological Diversity. “Climate science demands immediate executive action phasing out federal oil, gas, and coal production. Biden’s grandchildren are depending on him to walk his talk.”

“By re-starting aggressive oil and gas leasing of our public lands and waters, the Biden administration has chosen to put at additional risk the overburdened Colorado River water supply system, which supports 1 in 10 Americans, seven states, two nations, and thirty Native American tribes,” said Marc Yaggi, CEO of Waterkeeper Alliance. “Continued fossil fuel extraction, and the inevitable impacts to our climate, rivers, and communities, directly contradict U.S. climate pledges and push us in the wrong direction.”

“Big Oil has made enormous profits from drilling on public lands and waters. All taxpayers have received in return is continued damage to the climate, and with no meaningful relief from high gasoline prices. Meanwhile, fossil fuel giants are actively pushing up home heating costs by building huge pipelines and export terminals to export methane gas from the U.S. and sell it abroad,” said Lisa Gilbert, executive vice president of Public Citizen. “The Interior Department has the power to rein in Big Oil’s harmful exploitation of lands and waters owned by the American people. It must act quickly to protect the planet and not fossil fuel corporation profits.”

This content originally appeared on Common Dreams and was authored by Newswire Editor.

"Imagine a car accident with many injured and ambulances forced to take them to hospitals in another region. At some point there will be no more ambulances available."

Under the new rules, migrants must also declare while aboard a rescue ship whether they wish to apply for asylum, and if so, in which European Union country.

Captains of civilian vessels found in violation of the rules face fines of up to €50,000 ($53,500) and confiscation and impoundment of their ships.

"With the new rules imposed by the Italian government on NGO vessels, we will be forced to leave relief areas in the Mediterranean Sea unguarded, with an inevitable increase in the number of dead," Doctors Without Borders Italy said in a statement. "Imagine a car accident with many injured and ambulances forced to take them to hospitals in another region. At some point there will be no more ambulances available."

"In recent years we have tried to fill the void left by the absence of a state aid system," the group noted, "but if they make the task more difficult, if not impossible, who is going to save lives?"

The NGO continued:

The captains and crews of the ships will be faced with an ethical dilemma, between the duty to provide rescue according to the law of the sea, and that of respecting the rules by heading to port after having carried out the first rescue. And to think that, until 2017, when our help was considered precious and there was a tested rescue mechanism, it was often the [Italian] Coast Guard who asked us to stay at sea one more day to cover an area and make up for their lack of means.

Oliver Kulikowski, spokesperson for the Berlin-based rescue group Sea-Watch, said in a statement that "the Italian government's new decree is a call to let people drown."

"Forcing ships into port violates the duty to rescue should there be more people in distress at sea," he added. " We will also resist this attempt to criminalize civil sea rescue and deprive people on the move of their rights."

"The politically motivated allocation of distant ports endangers the health of rescued people and is intended to keep rescue ships out of the Mediterranean for as long as possible."

Sea-Watch medical coordinator Hendrike Förster asserted that "the politically motivated allocation of distant ports endangers the health of rescued people and is intended to keep rescue ships out of the Mediterranean for as long as possible."

"The Italian government thereby makes itself directly responsible for health consequences on board the rescue ships," Förster added.

Since being elected three months ago on a xenophobic, anti-migrant platform, Meloni and her government have cracked down on rescue ship activity, claiming humanitarian groups are boosting, if not working with, human traffickers.

Within 48 hours of entering office, Interior Minister Matteo Piantedosi issued a directive prohibiting two rescue ships, Humanity 1 and Ocean Viking from entering Italian ports. Humanity 1 was allowed to dock in Catania, Sicily in November.

After being denied permission to disembark in Italy, Ocean Viking, which is run by the group SOS Méditerranée, sailed for France, where, amid a diplomatic row between the two countries, more than 200 migrants were allowed to come ashore after weeks at sea.

Ocean Viking has returned to Italy with another 113 rescued migrants aboard and is being forced to travel 900 nautical miles around the "boot" of Italy to Ravenna on the Adriatic coast in the country's northeast.

The Italian Interior Ministry says around 102,000 asylum-seekers have disembarked in Italy this year, an increase from about 66,500 in 2021. In 2016, the figure was 181,000. Migrants, who often undertake the perilous voyage from North Africa in inflatable dinghies or rickety wooden fishing boats, are fleeing wars and other armed conflicts, the climate emergency, hunger, and economic privation in their home countries.

According to the International Office on Migration (IOM), more than 2,000 migrants died attempting to cross the Mediterranean Sea this year. Since record-keeping began in 2014, IOM says that over 25,000 migrants have gone missing while crossing the sea.

Migrant rescue organizations have been the target of Italian government surveillance and infiltration for years. Following an undercover sting operation based at least partly on the conspiracy theory that rescue groups are funded by "globalist elites" in league with Libyan traffickers, four members of the German NGO Jugend Rettet were arrested and are on trial in Sicily for aiding and abetting illegal immigration. The activists—who deny the charges—face up to 20 years in prison if convicted.

Twenty-one people in total—including the crews of the Jugend Rettet's Iuventa rescue ship and members of groups including Sea-Watch, Save the Children, and Doctors Without Borders—stand charged with colluding with human traffickers to bring migrants into Italy in 2016 and 2017.

Jugend Rettet saysIuventa's crew rescued 2,000 people in the summer of 2016 alone.

"Instead of sea rescuers being charged for saving lives, Italian and European politicians should be charged with crimes against humanity," a lawyer for the defendants toldOpen Democracy last year. "It is really the world upside down, and we will make it right."

This content originally appeared on Common Dreams and was authored by Newswire Editor.

The ships started entering the region late last week when Tokyo announced its new security strategy to deal with threats from China.

The latest encroachment was on Monday when a Chinese Navy survey ship sailed through Japan’s territorial waters near the island of Yakushima. 

This is the ninth time since November a Chinese naval vessel has entered Japan’s waters, the Japanese Defense Ministry said.

“These Chinese naval activities are of national security concern,” it said.

The ministry’s Joint Staff Office said in a press release on Sunday that a Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) Navy flotilla consisting of the aircraft carrier Liaoning and at least four large warships was operating in the waters approximately 260 kilometers (162 miles) southwest of the Daito Islands in Okinawa Prefecture.

Daito is an archipelago of three islands located in the Philippine Sea, part of Japan’s Ryukyu Island chain.

The flotilla has been in the area for several days. A previous release by the Japanese Joint Staff Office on Friday said the Liaoning, two Type 055 large destroyers, one Type 052D destroyer, one Type 054A frigate and one Type 901 comprehensive replenishment ship had sailed from the East China Sea through the Miyako Strait into the West Pacific.

On Friday Japan announced a set of new strategies – the National Security Strategy, the National Defense Strategy and the Defense Force Preparedness Plan – in which China was named an unprecedented "strategic challenge."

Tokyo also unveiled its largest defense buildup since World War II, including a budget of ¥43 trillion (U.S.$315 billion), to acquire counter-attack capabilities over the next five years.

The new strategies, deemed by observers and analysts to be a major shift from Japan’s pacifist doctrine that has been at the core of Japan’s international policies for 70 years, “represent a major turning point for the post-war defense policy,” according to Japan’s Ministry of Defense.

The ministry said amid “the most severe and complex security environment since the end of WWII, it is necessary to face the severe reality and engage in fundamental reinforcement of defense capabilities to protect the lives and peaceful livelihood of Japanese nationals.”

Island chain breaking

“China continues its unilateral changes to the status quo by force … in the East China Sea and South China Sea,” it stated in the new National Defense Strategy.

The strategy paper said China had been intensifying its activities around Japan, in the East China Sea, the Sea of Japan, and the West Pacific, “extending beyond the so-called First Island Chain.”

The First Island Chain is a chain of main archipelagos surrounding the East Asian continental mainland, including Japan and Taiwan.

Last week, prior to the announcement of Japan’s new strategies, China had already dispatched a group of warships led by the 10,000-ton Type 055 large destroyer Lhasa to conduct exercises near Japan from Tuesday to Wednesday.

Chinese media said the PLA Navy vessels “sailed beyond the first island chain” to send a signal “amid Japan’s recent militaristic moves.”

Two Type 055 large destroyers - Anshan and Wuxi – also escorted the aircraft carrier Liaoning in its island chain-breaking sail to the West Pacific on Friday, the day Beijing accused Tokyo of breaking away from its defense-only postwar principle and planning to equip itself with first attack-capable missiles “to hit China.”

“Beijing will increase its military activities east of Japan and around the Senkaku Islands,” said defense analyst Carl Schuster, referring to islands also claimed by China, which calls them Diaoyu.

Schuster, who is a retired U.S. Navy captain and former director of operations at the U.S. Pacific Command's Joint Intelligence Center, told RFA that those activities are in line with China’s military trajectories.

“Certainly, Beijing will escalate its anti-Japan rhetoric and repeat a lot of its commentary on Japan's WWII militarism and atrocities,” he said.

“Beijing will also create problems for Japanese companies inside China but stop short of anything that might cause those companies to move their factories elsewhere,” the analyst said, adding that there may be “cyber-attacks on Japan's defense industries and financial system” in the future.

Edited by Mike Firn

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Staff.

In early August, Rogers was featured on a 90-minute CNN special where he publicly criticized the US government’s role in the Russia-Ukrainian war. Waters explained that the war hinged on “the action and reaction of NATO pushing right up to the Russian border, which they promised they wouldn’t do when [Mikhail] Gorbachev negotiated the withdrawal of the USSR from the whole of Eastern Europe.” The musician went on to say that Russia had a right to Crimea because the people living on the peninsula were mostly Russian.

Shortly after making these statements, the musician was blacklisted by the Ukrainian government and criticized by its allies in US corporate media.

As Armstrong reported, the Kiev-based Myrotvorets website has labeled Waters an “Enemy of Ukraine.” The website claims Waters is spreading “anti-Ukrainian propaganda,” as well as collaborating in plans to legitimize Russia’s annexation of Crimea, which would challenge Ukraine’s territorial integrity.

Waters is not the only person listed on Myrotvorets. Currently, the database includes thousands of journalists, activists, and anyone else who is declared an “Enemy of Ukraine.” Additionally, those who are listed on the site have had their home addresses, personal phone numbers, and banking information leaked online. Some people featured on the list have been harassed, threatened, assaulted, or killed as a result of the doxing. Those who have been killed are identified with the word “liquidated” (ЛИКВИДИРОВАН in Ukrainian) over their profile photo on the Myrotvorets website.

Daria Dugina, a Russian journalist, was killed in a car bomb attack on August 20, 2022, not long after a red stamp appeared across her database profile. It is believed that she was targeted because her father, the philosopher Alexander Dugin, was believed to have been a strong influence on Russian President Vladimir Putin. The Russian government maintains that Dugina was murdered by a Ukrainian nationalist. Dugina is not the only person on the list to have been killed. In 2015, journalist Oles Buzina and a deputy in the Ukrainian parliament, Oleg Kalashnikov, were killed only days after their information was leaked on the Myrotvorets website.

In 2016 more than 4,500 journalists and media agents were stationed to report in the Donbass territory. Investigators claim that Myrotvorets employees hacked into the Ministry of State Security of the Donetsk People’s Republic’s database and stole the phone numbers, email addresses and home addresses of foreign journalists stationed in the Donbass territory. The Myrotvorets organization accused the journalists of “collaborating with terrorists” because they were reporting on the war from non-Ukrainian held territories.

As of October, 2022, no major US corporate news outlets have covered the story, but Armstrong’s piece was picked up by several independent sites, including Monthly Review Online, The Grayzone, and Covert Action Magazine.

Source: Deborah L. Armstrong, “Roger Waters Added to Ukrainian Hitlist,” Medium, August 22, 2022.

Student Researcher: Reagan Haynie (Loyola Marymount University)

Faculty Advisor: Mickey Huff (Diablo Valley College)

The post Roger Waters Declared “Enemy of Ukraine” on Myrotvorets Website appeared first on Project Censored.

This content originally appeared on Project Censored and was authored by Vins.

The Chinese Ministry of Defense said in a brief statement that the two countries “conducted routine joint aerial strategic patrol in the air space over the waters of the Sea of Japan, the East China Sea and the west Pacific Ocean,” on Wednesday.

Russia’s Ministry of Defense meanwhile disclosed that several Russian Tu-95MS strategic bombers accompanied by Su-30SM and Su-35S fighter jets, and Chinese H-6K strategic bombers flew over the Sea of Japan and the East China Sea during an eight-hour mission.

Tu-95MS is a new variant of the Russian Air Force’s Tupolev Tu-95 strategic bomber and missile platform. It is capable of carrying modern Russian-made long-range and stealth cruise missiles.

Russia said the two countries’ warplanes did not violate the airspace of any foreign states. 

South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff issued a statement Wednesday saying its military scrambled jets after eight planes entered the Korea Air Defense Identification Zone (Kadiz). It said they included two Chinese H-6 bombers and Russian Tu-95s and Su-35s which later reentered the zone but did not violate South Korean airspace.

The joint patrol was the second such operation this year and the fifth since the two air forces began their joint aerial activities in July 2019. 

In the course of the joint patrol Russian aircraft also landed in China and Chinese bombers landed in Russia in the first aircraft exchange between the two air forces.

“These joint aerial patrols serve mainly as a symbolic act designed to send a message of Sino-Russian strategic unity to the U.S. and its Northeast Asian allies - Japan and South Korea,” said Artyom Lukin, Deputy Director for Research at the School of Regional and International Studies at Russia's Far Eastern Federal University.

“Despite remaining largely a symbolic exercise, joint patrols do show an incremental increase in the level of interoperability between the two air forces,” Lukin told RFA.

Mutual trust

Chinese media said the patrol and the exchange “demonstrate further growth in high-level military cooperation and mutual trust between China and Russia” as they both face challenges from the West, especially the U.S.

The U.S. Defense Department released its 2022 National Defense Strategy in October, identifying China as “the overall pacing challenge” and Russia as “an acute threat” to the United States.

In September China sent more than 2,000 troops, 300 vehicles of various types, 21 fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters, and three ships to take part in the Vostok-2022 wargame in Russia.

It was the first time the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) sent all three of its forces, the infantry, navy and air force, to participate in a single exercise in a foreign land.

Russia’s President Vladimir Putin and Chinese leader Xi Jinping held a summit in February, in which they praised the bilateral partnership as having "no limits" and "no forbidden areas of cooperation."

The Russia-initiated war in Ukraine has pushed the two countries even closer and Beijing has so far refused to condemn the Russian invasion.

In turn, Russia has backed China’s protests over the visit to Taiwan by U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi in August, calling it “provocative.”

China retaliated at the time by holding a large-scale military exercise around Taiwan.

Military alliance?

The U.S.’s main ally in East Asia, Japan, has also expressed concern about growing Russia-China ties as both Beijing and Moscow increase military activities near Japan.

On Aug. 24 Tokyo released its defense white paper, titled ‘Defense of Japan 2022’, in which it said that in recent years, “China and Russia have deepened their military cooperation.”

The two countries have conducted “long-distance joint flights from the East China Sea to the Sea of Japan and the Pacific Ocean every year since 2019,” the paper said. 

On Tuesday, one day before the joint aerial patrol with Russia, Chinese Type 054A frigate Huanggang (577) and Type 956EM destroyer Taizhou (138) transited Tsushima Strait northbound from the East China Sea to the Sea of Japan, according to the Japanese Defense Ministry’s Joint Staff Office.

The coincidence in timing “hinted at joint aerial and naval operations by China and Russia,” said Artyom Lukin from the Russian Far Eastern Federal University.

In his opinion, questions remain over how far Moscow and Beijing are planning to take their military cooperation in terms of scale, integration, and geographic scope. 

“Given the current trends, it can’t be ruled out that by the late 2020s or early 2030s the Pacific will see the emergence of a de facto, or perhaps even de jure, Sino-Russian military alliance,” the analyst said.

Currently China and Russia do not have a formal military alliance.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Staff.

The post The Waters are Running Red in Africa’s Great Lakes Region appeared first on CounterPunch.org.

This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Vijay Prashad.

While ostensibly about improving Aotearoa New Zealand’s water infrastructure, the government’s proposed Three Waters reforms have instead become a lightning rod for political division and distrust.

Critics cite concerns about local democracy, de facto privatisation and co-governance with Māori as reasons to oppose the Water Services Entities Bill currently before Parliament.

With the mayors of Auckland and Christchurch now proposing an alternative plan, the reforms may be far from a done deal.

• READ MORE: The UK’s water industry is broken – here’s how to fix it
• 11,000 litres of water to make one litre of milk? New questions about the freshwater impact of NZ dairy farming
• If we want to improve NZ’s freshwater quality, first we need to improve the quality of our democracy

But behind the debate lies an undeniable truth: clean water is a necessity of life. In fact, 20 years ago this month the United Nations Committee on Economic Social and Cultural Rights first affirmed that water is a human right.

The anniversary is a timely reminder of what Aotearoa’s proposed water reforms are essentially about.

Covering drinking water, wastewater and stormwater (hence the “three waters” label), the reforms would have a wider remit than the human right to water. They fold in environmental and cultural considerations alongside public health concerns.

But the human right to water, as well as lessons learned from implementing that right, have important implications for the Three Waters debate, not least around water quality and affordability.

An alternate three waters plan has been proposed by the mayors of Auckland and Christchurch, with control and ownership remaining with local councils, and the type and degree of iwi involvement decided locally.https://t.co/prVSbJuuSL

— RNZ (@radionz) October 31, 2022

A fragile right
By acknowledging it to be a human right in 2002, the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights argued water is indispensable for leading a dignified life and essential for other human rights.

Since then, the human right to water has been repeatedly declared, including by the UN General Assembly and the European Union. This right is included in the constitutions and laws of numerous countries.

Despite this, 1 billion people still lack access to safe drinking water, and six out of ten people live with inadequate sanitation. More than 2 billion people live in areas of water scarcity, likely to become an even bigger issue due to climate change.

The human right to water covers five essential factors:

• access to enough water for drinking, personal sanitation, washing clothes, preparing food, personal and household hygiene
• water that is clean and won’t cause harm
• the look and smell of water should be acceptable
• water sources should be within easy reach and accessible without danger
• the cost should be low enough to ensure everyone can buy enough water to meet their needs.

Access and affordability
Internationally, there is evidence that the adoption of a human right to water has made a difference. In South Africa, where access to sufficient water is a constitutional right, the courts have repeatedly referred to the human right to water when determining government obligations around water services.

In 2014, the first European Citizens’ Initiative pushed the European Union to exclude water supply and water resources management from the rules governing the European internal market. This means EU citizens have a stronger voice in water governance decisions.

In 2016, Slovenia became the first EU country to make access to drinkable water a fundamental right in its constitution.

New Zealand’s Three Waters reforms are not unrelated to these basic issues of safety, accessibility and affordability. They aim to address significant problems with the country’s existing water services model, including ageing infrastructure, historical under-investment, the need for climate change resilience, and rising consumer demand.

These all require a serious programme of water service transformation — one the government believes is beyond what local councils (which currently administer most water assets) will be able to deliver.

The projected cost is estimated at between NZ$120 billion and $185 billion (on top of currently planned investment), rolled out over the next 30 years.

Three Waters debates need to be based on fact – Ardernhttps://t.co/mNtkdKTjpw pic.twitter.com/NxvlJgtpeR

— 1News (@1NewsNZ) July 20, 2022

Ambition and equity
One way or another, the work has to be done. Last year elevated lead levels were found in the water in east Otago. Ageing infrastructure and increasing demand are likely to increase the risk of similar incidents unless expensive upgrades are undertaken.

Without reform, the government argues, the huge cost of those upgrades will be unevenly spread across households, with a substantially higher burden on rural consumers.

To be affordable and equitable for everyone, therefore, the Three Waters plan involves creating four publicly owned, multi-regional entities. These will benefit from greater scale, expertise, operational efficiencies and financial flexibility compared to local councils.

But because councils could still contract out water services for 35 years, concerns have been raised about the potential for creeping privatisation.

Indeed, similar concerns, including failed attempts to privatise water services in other countries, were a significant catalyst for asserting the human right to water more than two decades ago.

While international acknowledgment of water as a human right doesn’t automatically create binding obligations on New Zealand’s government, it can still inform the Three Waters debate.

Over the past 20 years, many of the benefits of this right have accrued from its ability to focus attention on securing high-quality and sustainable water services for everyone. That remains an essential ambition for New Zealand in 2022 and beyond.

Dr Nathan Cooper is associate professor of law, University of Waikato. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

The post Environmental Racism is Poisoning America’s Waters appeared first on CounterPunch.org.

This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Natalia Marques.

The study found that when winters are warmer, rain is more common, causing melt and subsequent runoff of soil packed with nutrients and chemicals. Researchers also found that at warmer winter temperatures, microbial activity occurs in the soil, prompting more nitrogen to develop and get into groundwater. Increased rain-on-snow events could increase nitrogen and phosphorus levels across 40 percent of the contiguous U.S.

“The idea of winter nutrient pollution is new, because it’s a relatively recent impact of climate change with the potential to cause significant problems for people and the environment,”  said Carol Adair, a University of Vermont researcher and co-author of the report, in a statement. “We are clearly seeing much larger amounts of cloudy water and sediment traveling through U.S. watersheds in winter.”

In the past, these chemicals have been locked in frozen soils during wintertime, waiting to thaw in the spring. Now, regions from the Mountain West to the Upper Midwest are seeing their winters rapidly disappear. 

Nutrient pollution causes rapid increases in toxic algae blooms that drive up water bills and cleanup costs across the Great Lakes region, a place known for its agricultural land use and bitter winters. These blooms, in addition to being greenhouse gas emitters, are also killing life inside lakes and rivers, as phosphorus and nitrogen create hypoxic spots in water where oxygen is little to none. These areas, also known as “dead zones,” have been the cause of mass fish death across the country. This year, a large bloom threatening the San Francisco Bay is returning, with water experts saying these chemicals are at the root of one of the nations most nutrient-rich water bodies.

Researchers found that, in 2019, the snow-packed Mississippi River and its watersheds flooded after large-scale rain, causing a wave of nutrients and sediment to flow in the Gulf of Mexico contributing to one of the gulf’s largest fish and other aquatic life die-offs. The mass deaths disrupted aquatic food webs and caused harsh economic conditions for fisheries that rely on commercial quantities of shrimp and fish. 

Researchers of this first-of-its-kind study noted that precise data on how much nutrient pollution has occurred in the past when snowy states have large melts or thawing winters is not available, but point to a need to increase watershed and water quality research. 

Meteorologists forecast that winter will be warmer than usual this year, with a mild start to central and Midwest winters and end-of-the-year temperatures expected to be about 3 degrees Fahrenheit above normal across much of the country’s center. 

Aimee Classen is a University of Michigan researcher and study co-author. “If we care about our water quality, we can no longer ignore how climate change impacts winter precipitation,” she said.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Study: Warming winters will thaw frozen manure, further polluting U.S. waters on Oct 7, 2022.

This content originally appeared on Grist and was authored by John McCracken.

At issue are not only the underground aquifers that supply drinking water for much of the island of Oahu, but also answerability by the military that has long had a contentious presence in Hawaii. 

“I think it’s incredibly important that there is accountability and that accountability begins with the Navy assuming responsibility for the actions and the situations they’ve created,” said Trisha Kehaulani Watson, the vice president of ‘Āina Momona, a Hawaiian social and environmental justice organization. 

The wastewater leak and the fine are just the latest in a series of water crises on Oahu that have been attributed to the U.S. military presence in Hawaii. 

Last November, hundreds of members of the military and their families living on a joint operations base near Honolulu were sickened after a Navy-run underground fuel storage facility leaked petroleum into the source of their drinking water. After the incident was made public, Hawaii’s health department issued an emergency order requiring the Navy to immediately stop its operations at Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage, the fuel storage facility. On November 28, the Navy shut down the well at Red Hill that provided base members with water. 

On Oahu, aquifers are often in such close proximity to military installations that any contamination from a leak poses a public health risk to hundreds of thousands of residents. In a January hearing into the Red Hill incident, Hawaii’s Board of Water Supply found that the Navy’s fuel storage facility posed “an imminent peril to human health and the environment, that it places Oahu’s sole-source aquifer at significant risk of further contamination, and that immediate action is necessary to protect our critical drinking water resources.”

In February, residents of Kailua Bay, north of Honolulu, were advised to avoid the namesake waters after a leak from a US Marine Corps wastewater treatment facility released water contaminated with unsafe levels of fecal bacteria into the bay. In March, the Defense Department announced that it would permanently close and defuel the Red Hill facility. 

During a visit to Hawaii last weekend, Lloyd Austin, the US Secretary of Defense, toured the Red Hill facility and reiterated in a tweet that its permanent closure was “the right thing to do.” But Austin’s visit was criticized by some local military families as well as representatives from O‘ahu Water Protectors, a local environmental justice organization, who argued that they have not been included in a federal task force on the safe defueling of the Red Hill facility.    

The Red Hill incident galvanized a broader cross-section of Hawaiians who in the past had not always seen eye-to-eye on environmental issues, according to activists. “I think the fact that you now have an alliance between local people and environmentalists and native Hawaiians and military families, that’s been a monumental shift,” said Kehaulani Watson of ‘Āina Momona.

“Red Hill immediately connected people to the issue in a way through our shared sense of vulnerability,” said Kyle Kajihiro, a lecturer and Native Hawaiian rights activist at the University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa. Kajihiro believes that the level of attention by locals towards the recent wastewater leaks into Pearl Harbor, itself a source of strong emotional ties, was strengthened by the impact of Red Hill. “I think it helped to wake up a latent understanding of the military’s environmental and social impacts that often get pushed to the back because people have other things on their mind,” he said. 

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Hawaii to US Navy: Quit polluting our waters on Oct 6, 2022.

This content originally appeared on Grist and was authored by Brett Marsh.

State-run national military channel CCTV-7 reported on Monday that during last weekend’s Mid-Autumn Festival holiday, soldiers stationed on Mischief Reef, an artificial island that China has occupied since 1994, “successfully” warned away an unidentified foreign fishing boat from surrounding waters.

In 2016, an international tribunal in the Hague ruled that Mischief Reef, located 250 kilometers east of Palawan Island of the Philippines, is a low-tide elevation and therefore cannot have a 12-mile territorial sea, invalidating China’s sovereignty claim over it.

It also lies within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and has been a traditional fishing ground for Filipino fishermen for decades.

An EEZ is an area of the sea in which a sovereign state has exclusive rights regarding the exploration and use of marine resources.

The CCTV clip showed armed soldiers, assisted by radars and warships, reacting to a sighting of a fishing boat of “unknown nationality” and using loudspeakers to chase it away.

Troops also conducted regular training with sea and air targets in order to bolster combat readiness, the report said.

Mischief Reef, also claimed by the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam, is one of China’s first reclaimed and fortified islands and also the biggest. It boasts a large harbor, a military base with missile systems and a 3,000-meter (1.9 mile) runway.  

In March, U.S. Indo-Pacific commander Adm. John C. Aquilino said that the construction of missile arsenals, aircraft hangars, radar systems and other military facilities at Mischief Reef, Subi Reef and Fiery Cross "appeared to have been completed."

"They threaten all nations who operate in the vicinity and all the international sea and airspace,” he added.

Harassing Indonesian fishermen

The CCTV report also mentioned other China-occupied islands within the Spratly archipelago including the Johnson South, Fiery Cross, Subi, Cuarteron, Gaven and Hughes reefs, where it said “soldiers and officers stay on guard night and day” to protect China’s sovereignty.

All the features were deemed rocks and China’s sweeping maritime claims illegal by the 2016 Hague tribunal but Beijing has always refused to accept the ruling.

Six parties claim parts of the South China Sea but China’s claims are the most expansive. 

Not only restricting access of fishermen from other countries to their old fishing grounds, Chinese Coast Guard and law enforcement ships have also been accused of harassing their fishing vessels.

Indonesian media reported that on Saturday, a Chinese Coast Guard ship was caught “roaming inside Indonesia’s EEZ” and harassing much smaller Indonesian fishing boats in the North Natuna Sea.

Locals also said Chinese fishing vessels had been operating illegally in the sea over the past two years. Some of them even came as close as 30 nautical miles (55.6 kilometers) from Pulau Laut which is the outermost island in the Natuna archipelago.  

Manila’s diplomatic protests

For their part, Filipino fishermen have been complaining about Chinese activities near Scarborough Shoal, another fishing ground in the Philippines’ EEZ.

“Given the increase of both demand and scarcity, it would be prudent to assume that long-term access to what remains of fishing stocks in the South China Sea would be among the key priorities for Beijing,” said Thomas Daniel, a senior fellow at Malaysia's Institute of Strategic and International Studies (ISIS). 

“It has been long-standing practice for state affiliated vessels from China, mainly the Coast Guard and its constituent agencies, and its maritime militia, to harass and deter what it sees as illegal fishing in its EEZs,” Daniel said.

“While Vietnam and the Philippines bore much of the early brunt, incidents are now increasingly observed in the southern reaches of the South China Sea, affecting Malaysian and Indonesian fishermen,” the analyst said.

Since President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. took office in June, the Philippine government has lodged 48 diplomatic protests against Beijing over the aggressive behavior of Chinese ships in the South China Sea, which it calls the West Philippine Sea.

Foreign Affairs Assistant Secretary Maria Angela Ponce told a hearing at the Philippine Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee last Thursday that “the protests covered the illegal presence of foreign fishing and maritime militia vessels, illegal fishing, harassment of fishermen and enforcement agencies, and unauthorized marine scientific research,” according to Philippine media.

Senator Imee Marcos, head of the committee, was quoted as saying that diplomatic protests have not been effective so far and the government needed to come up with a more effective strategy to counter China’s increasing presence in the South China Sea.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Staff.

The post How Drought and Growth Threaten the Waters of the Northern Rockies appeared first on CounterPunch.org.

This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Mike Bader.

On Wednesday, Sen. Francis Tolentino announced he had filed Senate Bill 405, a proposed piece of legislation that aims to “institutionalize” the use of “ the West Philippine Sea” as the official name of territories claimed by the Philippines in waters that China and other neighbors also contest.

The air space, seabed, and subsoil on the western side of the Philippine archipelago would be renamed “to reinforce the Philippines’ claim to the disputed territories found on the western side of the archipelago,” according to an excerpt from SB405.

Maria Teresita Daza, spokeswoman for the Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs, said Tolentino’s bill was consistent with a 2016 international arbitration court’s ruling that sided with Manila.

“The West Philippine Sea was already actually defined in 2012 through Administrative Order 29,” Daza told a press briefing on Thursday.

“Nevertheless, the department recognizes what the process of legislation can do in terms of clarity and institution building. And we look forward to supporting the process, should we be invited to do so,” she said.

Tolentino’s bill covers waters around, within, and adjacent to the Kalayaan Island Group and Scarborough Shoal, as well as the Luzon Sea, or waters also known as the Luzon Strait between the northern Philippine island of Luzon and Taiwan.

The Philippine senator said that the proposed legislation came about in response to the “archipelagic doctrine” embodied in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

Under it, the Philippines is granted a territorial sea of up to 12 nautical miles, a contiguous zone of up to 24 nautical miles, and an exclusive economic zone of up to 200 nautical miles where the West Philippine Sea is located.

The bill also directs government offices to use the name in all communications, messages, and public documents, and “to popularize the use of such [a] name with the general public, both domestically and internationally.”

Six years ago, the Philippines won an arbitral award against Beijing before the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague. The landmark ruling nullified China’s expansive claims to the sea region, including in waters that reach neighbors’ shores.

Manila had filed the case in 2012, when the Chinese occupied areas near Scarborough Shoal, a triangular chain of rocks and reefs that Filipinos consider a traditional fishing ground.

Brunei, China, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam all claim parts of the sea. China, for its part, draws a nine-dash line to delineate its claim of “historical rights” to almost 90 percent of the waterway. The line also overlaps with the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of another nation – Indonesia.

And while the name “South China Sea” has gained near universal acceptance in usage, countries that have claims to the disputed waters have their own different names for it. Vietnam calls the maritime region “the East Sea,” and, to Beijing, it is plainly known as “the South Sea.”

In 2017, Indonesia renamed a resource-rich northern region around its Natuna Islands, which lie off the southern end of the South China Sea, as the North Natuna Sea. The waters near the Natunas have seen some tense standoffs in recent years between Indonesian ships and ships from China and other nations, including Chinese coast guard vessels.

Jakarta’s decision to change the name of the sea region north of the islands was spurred by the arbitration court’s ruling in Manila’s favor the year before that nullified China’s historical claim to the entire South China Sea through the nine-dash line, Arif Havas Oegroseno, then the deputy of maritime sovereignty at the Ministry of Maritime Affairs, told reporters at the time.

Since the arbitration court ruled for Manila in 2016, Beijing has refused to budge from the area around Scarborough Shoal. On Thursday, officials at the Chinese Embassy in Manila did not immediately respond to BenarNews efforts seeking comment on the Philippine bill.

The proposed formal name change is a far cry from the policy on the disputed waters implemented by former President Rodrigo Duterte, who did not seek to enforce the ruling when he took office in 2016, but instead pursued warmer ties with Beijing.

During his six-year term, Duterte, who left office on June 30, also pulled the Philippines away from the United States, the Philippines’ longtime ally and China’s main rival, until later in his term when he declared that the arbitration award was “beyond compromise.” 

The U.S. government, meanwhile, has insisted on the doctrine of freedom of navigation and has sailed its navy ships into the contested waters.

Duterte’s successor, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., in his first “state of the nation” address to Congress last month, declared he would not preside over any process that would give away “even one square inch of territory” to foreign rivals.

Marcos’ newly appointed military chief, Lt. Gen. Bartolome Vicente Bacarro, told his generals and other military officials during his first command conference on Wednesday that the armed forces supported President Marcos’ pronouncement.

“We only do what is required of us to do and what is important is we are able to perform our mandate to protect (the state and) our people,” Col. Medel Aguilar, a spokesman for the military, told reporters. 

BenarNews is an RFA-affiliated online news service.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Luis Liwanag and Basilio Sepe for BenarNews.

More than 80% of goods move by sea. Space on ships is tight and the cost to transport a container has soared. Now, following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, prices are rising for almost everything we consume.

This content originally appeared on UN News and was authored by UNCTAD.

This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by CounterPunch Editors.

Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian described the ship’s action as “an exercise of the right of innocent passage pursuant to UNCLOS [United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea].” 

“The Chinese passage was safe and standard, and consistent with international law and international practice. We hope relevant parties can view it in an objective and rational manner,” he said in response to a reporter’s question during the ministry’s daily press briefing on Tuesday.

China and the Philippines are signatories to UNCLOS, an international treaty that provides a comprehensive legal framework for all activities and uses of the world’s seas and oceans. 

On Monday in Manila, the Department of Foreign Affairs said it had summoned Chinese Ambassador Huang Xilian to meet with Acting Undersecretary Theresa Lazaro over China’s alleged maritime action in southwestern waters of the Philippine archipelago. 

An “electronic reconnaissance ship” of the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) had entered Philippine waters without permission from Jan. 29 to Feb. 1, the department said in a statement. 

The department did not say why it waited six weeks to confront the Chinese ambassador about the incident. 

The Dongdiao-class PLAN ship communicated that it was “exercising innocent passage” when the Philippine Navy challenged it in Sulu Sea waters, the department said. The ship reached the Cuyo Islands in the Palawan region of the central Philippines. 

“Its movements, however, did not follow a track that can be considered continuous and expeditious, lingering in the Sulu Sea for three days,” the DFA said, adding that the ship did not immediately leave despite being warned off by the Philippine Navy.  

The department said Manila recognizes the right of any ship to pursue innocent passage through its waters in accordance with UNCLOS. However, the action of the Chinese ship “did not constitute innocent passage and violated Philippines sovereignty.”

China claims nearly all of the South China Sea as its own, but five other Asian governments – Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam – have territorial claims. While Indonesia does not regard itself as a party to the South China Sea dispute, Beijing claims historic rights to parts of the sea overlapping Indonesia’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ).  

Manila has filed a series of complaints about Beijing’s presence within its territory beginning about 12 months ago and summoned Ambassador Huang after about 220 Chinese ships were spotted in March 2021 around Whitsun Reef in the Spratly Islands.

 BenarNews is an RFA-affiliated online news service.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Camille Elemia for BenarNews.

The post The “Forever Compound” PFAS Found in Arctic Waters appeared first on Project Censored.

This content originally appeared on Project Censored and was authored by Vins.