
What can governments do to stop extreme heating? – DW – 06/16/2025
Most countries globally have agreed to set their own goals to keep the planet from overheating. The pressure is now on for them to do so.
At Kenya's Lake Turkana wind park, towering turbines line dirt roads as far as the eye can see. And this is just one of the sites that has turned the country into a renewables powerhouse.
From generating approximately half of its electricity using sustainable sources such as geothermal, solar and wind power in 2000, Kenya has now increased that share to 90%. And it doesn't plan to stop there. As part of its new climate goals, the Sub-Saharan nation has pledged to be using 100% renewables by 2035.
It's a show of force and proof of concept for other countries meeting in the German city of Bonn this week to hash out sticking points ahead of the November UN climate summit in Brazil.
Discussions over how countries plan to reduce reliance on the fossil fuels that are heating the planet are not officially on the agenda. But experts say they are the elephant in the room.
What are climate targets and why do they matter?
Domestic climate targets — nationally determined contributions or NDCs, as they are known — are a key part of the international Paris Agreement. Under the accord, the world agreed to keep global temperature rise to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) with efforts to limit it to 1.5 degrees Celsius. Even small temperature increases are connected to more frequent and intense irregular weather events such as storms, flooding, drought and extreme heat.
As part of the accord, the 195 signatories are obliged to submit ambitious non-binding goals every five years. These should outline both how they plan to reduce their carbon emissions and how they will adapt to the impacts of climate change already being felt globally.
"It's also an opportunity for all countries to, in one policy document, combine their own economic and prosperity plans with climate policy in an integrated way that's charting a path forward for a sustainable economy," said Steffen Menzel, program lead for climate diplomacy and geopolitics at climate think tank E3G.
Countries all over the world have adopted solar and wind power in vital steps away from oil, gas and coal, which heat the planet as they are burned Image: NurPhoto/IMAGO
Have countries already stated their aims?
Nations should have filed their most recent climate goals to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in February. But so far, only 22 countries have done so.
Among them are big emitters like the United Kingdom and Japan. The former Biden administration also submitted decarbonization plans for the United States, before President Donald Trump pulled out of Paris Agreement. But many countries are still solidifying their goals according to Jamal Srouji, associate in the Global Climate program at the research nonprofit World Resources Institute.
"They want to make sure that their assumptions make sense and respond to the political realities and priorities of the country," Srouji said.
"Countries are now most concerned about competitiveness, making sure they stay ahead or are part of the new technologies that are really going to be driving economic growth...national energy security, especially what we've seen in recent years, is actually the main driver for why now policymakers still consider the climate as an important agenda because it intersects so well," he told DW.
Countries are limited by financial resources
Nafkote Dabi, climate change policy lead at Oxfam International, said some poorer countries, for example least developed nations like Chad, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Bangladesh, are wary of committing to ambitious goals on monetary grounds.
"They are afraid that they're committing to something, but there's no finance to help them achieve what they have outlined," Dabi said, adding that wealthier countries have a duty to help.
"It's not to put all the blame on rich countries, but it's about historical responsibility, financial capability, technological capability," she said.
At the international climate conference in Azerbaijan last year, industrialized countries agreed to provide $300 billion (€258 billion) in funding for developing nations, promising to mobilize a total of $1.3 trillion, although it is unclear where the money will come from.
Action from the biggest polluters
While experts say climate targets need to come from all nations including low emitters like Kenya, it is action from the biggest states that will make the most difference.
The G20 group of countries, which includes China, Germany, Australia, Russia and the United States, are responsible for around 80% of global emissions overall and Dabi says they are not doing enough to reduce their greenhouse gases.
"Certain groups need to do more to reduce their emissions and that should not fall on the poorest communities because the transformation required is huge," she said.
Still, almost a decade after the inception of the Paris Agreement, experts say that over time the targets have improved.
"I don't want to say things are looking bright at this point in time... but I do think that the mechanisms we agreed to 10 years ago have made a big change globally and also in many jurisdictions around the world," Menzel said.
Under Donald Trump, the US is rolling back climate regulations and betting instead on fossil fuels Image: J. David Ake/AP Photo/icture alliance
Although pledges are non-binding, Srouji says that once a "country goes on the international stage and says, 'here's our plan', if they walk back on it, they are going to be getting a lot of international scrutiny."
Edited by: Tamsin Walker
Can villages help India achieve climate goals?
To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


DW
an hour ago
- DW
Germany's Merz says Israel doing 'dirty work for us' in Iran – DW – 06/17/2025
Skip next section Germany's Merz says Israel 'doing dirty work for all of us' in Iran 06/17/2025 June 17, 2025 Germany's Merz says Israel 'doing dirty work for all of us' in Iran German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has expressed respect for Israel's attack on Iran, calling it a service to Western allies. "This is the dirty work that Israel is doing for all of us," Merz said Tuesday on the sidelines of the G7 summit in Canada in an interview with German broadcaster ZDF. "We are also victims of this regime. This mullah regime has brought death and destruction to the world," he added. "I can only say: the greatest respect for the fact that the Israeli army and the Israeli leadership had the courage to do this." Merz said Israel's attacks on Iran could lead to the downfall of the Islamic Republic's leadership. "I assume that the attacks of the last few days have already weakened the mullah regime considerably and that it is unlikely to return to its former strength, making the future of the country uncertain," Merz said in an interview with Germany's Welt TV at the G7 summit in Canada. Iranian officials have reported 224 deaths, mostly civilians, in attacks that Israel initially said targeted military officials and nuclear scientists. Israel says 24 civilians had been killed in Iranian attacks on its territory. Germany has remained one of Israel's biggest supporters, going so far as to intervene on behalf of Israel in South Africa's accusation of genocide in the International Court of Justice (ICJ).


Int'l Business Times
2 hours ago
- Int'l Business Times
How Much Damage Has Israel Inflicted On Iran's Nuclear Programme?
Israel's strikes on Iran have targeted several of its nuclear facilities as it claims the country is seeking to develop nuclear weapons -- an accusation Tehran denies. Experts told AFP that while the attacks had caused some damage to Iran's nuclear programme, they are unlikely to have delivered a fatal blow. Here is an update on Iran's nuclear sites as of Tuesday. Israel's operation included strikes on Iran's underground uranium enrichment sites at Natanz and Fordow, and on its Isfahan nuclear site, the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said, citing Iranian officials. A key, above-ground component of Iran's Natanz nuclear site has been destroyed, including its power infrastructure, the IAEA reported Monday. The UN watchdog added Tuesday that satellite images indicated possible "direct impacts" on the underground section of the plant, where thousands of centrifuges are operating to enrich uranium. At the underground Fordow enrichment plant, Iran's second uranium enrichment facility, the IAEA said it observed "no damage" following the attacks. At the Isfahan nuclear site, however, "four buildings were damaged" -- the central chemical laboratory, a uranium conversion plant, the Tehran reactor fuel manufacturing plant, and a metal processing facility under construction, the IAEA said. Significant uranium stockpiles are believed to be stored around the Isfahan site. Ali Vaez, the International Crisis Group's Iran project director, told AFP that if Iran managed to transfer significant quantities to "secret facilities," then "the game is lost for Israel". Iran's only nuclear power plant, the Bushehr plant, was not targeted, nor was the Tehran research reactor. While "Israel can damage Iran's nuclear programme... it is unlikely to be able to destroy it," Vaez said, saying that Israel did not have the massively powerful bombs needed "to destroy the fortified, bunkered facilities in Natanz and Fordow". Destroying those would require US military assistance, added Kelsey Davenport, an expert with the Arms Control Association. She also noted that Israel's unprecedented attack would not erase the expertise Iran had built up on nuclear weapons, despite killing nine Iranian nuclear scientists. The IAEA has not detected any increase in radiation levels at the affected sites. "There is very little risk that attacks on Iran's uranium enrichment facilities would result in a harmful radiation release," Davenport said. But an attack on the Bushehr plant could "have a serious impact on health and the environment", she said. After Israel launched its strikes, IAEA chief Rafael Grossi said that nuclear facilities "must never be attacked" and that targeting Iranian sites could have "grave consequences for the people of Iran, the region, and beyond". After the United States under President Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew in 2018 from a landmark deal that sought to curb Tehran's nuclear activities, Iran has gradually retreated from some of its obligations, particularly on uranium enrichment. As of mid-May, the country had an estimated 408.6 kilogrammes (900 pounds) enriched to up to 60 percent -- just a short step from the 90 percent needed for a nuclear warhead. Iran theoretically has enough near-weapons-grade material, if further refined, for about 10 nuclear bombs, according to the definition by the Vienna-based IAEA. Iran is the only non-nuclear-armed state producing uranium to this level of enrichment, according to the UN nuclear watchdog. While the IAEA has been critical of Iran's lack of cooperation with the UN body, it says there are "no credible indications of an ongoing, undeclared structured nuclear programme". Tehran has consistently denied ambitions to develop nuclear warheads. But Davenport warned that the strikes could strengthen factions in Iran advocating for an atomic arsenal. "Israel's strikes set Iran back technically, but politically the strikes are pushing Iran closer to nuclear weapons," she said. A satellite image released by Maxar Technologies showing the Iranian nuclear site of Fordo on June 14, 2025 AFP A satellite image released by Maxar Technologies showing the Iranian nuclear site of Natanz after Israeli strikes AFP A satellite image released by Maxar Technologies showing the Iranian nuclear site in Isfahan after Israeli strikes, on June 14, 2025 AFP A satellite image released by Maxar from June 15, 2025, showing the damage at the Natanz uranium enrichment site AFP


DW
2 hours ago
- DW
Dispute with the Hohenzollerns ends after almost 100 years – DW – 06/17/2025
After years of debate, the state and the Hohenzollerns have reached a mutually beneficial deal over diverse art items, including paintings and furniture. An almost century-long dispute in Germany is coming to an end. The House of Hohenzollern — a German noble family to which the last German Emperor, Wilhelm II, also belonged — had long laid claim to various objects in German museums. They had also demanded millions in compensation for expropriated palaces and inventory. The whole thing went to court — until Georg Friedrich Prince of Prussia, the great-great-grandson of the last German emperor, finally changed the aristocratic house's strategy in 2023. He withdrew the compensation claims and thus cleared the way for out-of-court negotiations. The talks began in late 2024, resulting in the newly-reached agreement. Georg Friedrich Prince of Prussia, great-great-grandson of the last German emperor Image: picture-alliance/dpa/R. Hirschberger Works of art to remain in museums The new German Minister of State for Culture Wolfram Weimer (CDU) and Georg Friedrich Prince of Prussia had announced the breakthrough back in May 2025. The federal government and the states of Berlin and Brandenburg had reached an agreement with the former ruling house of Hohenzollern to set up the non-profit "Hohenzollern Art Foundation" to manage the previously reclaimed art and cultural objects. Now that the supervisory bodies of the Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation and the German Historical Museum have also given their approval, the agreement has been signed and sealed. According to Weimer, the public will be the biggest winner. The collections that include around 3,000 objects will now feature in the German Historical Museum, along with museums run by the Prussian Palaces and Gardens Foundation Berlin-Brandenburg, and the Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation. The new foundation will also manage the inventory — furniture, tableware and paintings — from around 70 palaces, villas and other properties in Berlin and Potsdam that were owned or used by the Hohenzollern family until 1945. There are also objects belonging to the family that were confiscated as early as 1918, after the end of the monarchy. #DailyDrone: Hohenzollern Castle To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video The expropriation of the 'Junkers' At the end of World War II, Soviet troops conquered the former German territories east of the Elbe River and with them the bulk of the Hohenzollern territories. The Soviet Union regarded the "Junkers" — the land-owning nobility — as the class enemy and a pillar of the Nazi system. So in 1945, all noble houses in the Soviet occupation zone were expropriated without compensation. More than four decades later, the Berlin Wall fell and Germany was reunited. From one minute to the next, many former Hohenzollern castles and estates were once again on the Federal Republic's soil. But the German Unification Treaty in 1990 stated that the land reform of 1945 would not be reversed, meaning the Hohenzollerns had to write off their old properties in the east. Some 30 years later, the heirs of the last monarch demanded millions in compensation from the German state and the restitution of cultural assets — in vain. So the matter went to court. A painting of the last German Emperor Wilhelm II, painted by Philip de László in 1911 Image: Ralf Hirschberger/dpa/picture alliance Did the Hohenzollerns 'aid and abet' the Nazis? This question played a central role in the compensation dispute: Had representatives of the House of Hohenzollern colluded with the National Socialists who ruled Germany between 1933 and 1945? Specifically, had the heirs of the last German Emperor, Wilhelm II, who abdicated in 1918, "significantly supported" National Socialism? And what role did the son of the last monarch and former Crown Prince Wilhelm of Prussia play between the world wars? Did he help the Nazis come to power in order to re-establish the monarchy? The so-called "Compensation Act" of 1994, which regulates the compensation of landowners whose property was expropriated in the East in 1945, states that anyone who "significantly aided" Hitler and the Nazis has no right to compensation. In fact, historical documents prove Wilhelm's ties to Hitler, with photos and films showing the former crown prince with the dictator and other Nazi leaders. However, Wilhelm's hopes that the Nazis would crown him the new emperor were never realized and historians continue to debate Wilhelm's role in the Nazi state. What relationship did the House of Hohenzollern have with the Nazi regime? Image: akg-images/picture-alliance Seeking proximity with Hitler In their biographies, two German historians Lothar Machtan ("The Crown Prince and the Nazis") and Stephan Malinowski ("The Hohenzollerns and the Nazis") describe the crown prince as a radical anti-democrat who admired Mussolini and sought proximity to Hitler. His mission was to restore the monarchy. Malinowski and his colleague Peter Brandt concluded that Wilhelm of Prussia's behavior had "considerably aided and abetted" the establishment and consolidation of the National Socialist regime. In fact, the ex-crown prince called for the election of Hitler in the 1932 German presidential election. He later boasted to Hitler that he had procured him two million votes. Wilhelm also publicly demonstrated solidarity with the new elites. "The symbolic capital of the Hohenzollerns was very important for the Nazis in 1932/33, even if the crown prince had his own agenda in the process," said Jacco Pekelder, a historian from Münster, in a television interview." This is where the last German emperor spent his exile — at Doorn House in the Netherlands Image: Daniela Posdnjakova/DW Debate ongoing but settlement reached The editors of the anthology "Die Hohenzollerndebatte" (The Hohenzollern Debate), published in 2021, casted their doubt on these fascist ties. Historian Frank-Lothar Kroll attested to Wilhelm's "rather marginal commitment" to the Nazis. He may have pandered to Hitler, but he did not share his totalitarian ideology. For decades, hordes of lawyers, politicians and historians dealt with the restitution and compensation claims of the descendants of Wilhelm of Prussia. Now a settlement finally seems to have been reached, and the public could benefit the most. This is an updated version of an article originally written in German.