Vanuatu island chief 'very impressed' by global climate decision
Vanuatu spearheaded the legal case at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, which found countries have a duty to protect against the "urgent and existential" threat of a warming planet.
"I'm very impressed," George Bumseng, the highest chief of the Pacific archipelago's cyclone-prone island of Ambrym, told AFP in the capital Port Vila.
"We have been waiting for this decision for a long time because we have been victims of this climate change for the past two decades," he said.
The chief recalled that his island was battered by three tropical cyclones in 2023, with twin cyclones Judy and Kevin striking in March of that year, followed by Lola in October.
The storms damaged "a lot of our root crops and forests and our traditional medicines", said Bumseng, who is chairman of the Ambrym council of chiefs.
Global warming "keeps on changing our environment", the chief said.
"We no longer have fig trees. There's coastal erosion continuously. Our tide is also changing," he said.
"Some of the traditional crops are no longer growing like before," he added.
"We're very happy that this International Court of Justice has ruled in favour on this issue."
str/djw/sft/tym
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
Thailand and Cambodia Stepped Back From War, but Their Temple Fight Remains
It took days of cajoling and pressure from the United States, China and Malaysia — and a threat from President Trump — to get Thailand and Cambodia to come together to work out their two nations' deadliest border conflict in decades. That was the easy part. On Tuesday, the Thai and Cambodian militaries agreed to implement a cease-fire. Both sides said that they would not deploy more troops to their contested border, bringing a tenuous peace after rocket launches, airstrikes and shelling that killed dozens and forced more than 300,000 people to flee their homes. But questions remain about how long the lull can last. A key issue that brought the two neighbors to arms is their most intractable dispute: who can lay claim to the centuries-old Hindu temples along the border, dating back to the ancient Khmer Empire. Trust has seldom been in evidence between the two neighbors, and it has in no way been repaired after this latest violence. A personal feud between their de facto leaders has only added to the tensions. On Wednesday and late on Tuesday, the Thai Army continued to accuse the Cambodian forces of starting gunfights. Cambodia rejected the accusations as false, saying that they 'dangerously threaten the fragile trust and dialogue essential for lasting peace.' 'The problem in that area is that almost anything could provoke hostilities,' said Charles A. Ray, who was the U.S. ambassador to Cambodia from 2003 to 2005. 'No one has really gotten the two sides in a rooms, have them sit down and really discuss: 'What do both sides gain by fighting over a temple on a mountain?'' Officials will next meet on Monday, to work out how to maintain a cease-fire, including by having Malaysian observers monitor it. That step is seen as crucial: A plan to introduce Indonesian observers after the last major deadly border clash in 2011 never panned out. Reported sites of attacks and fighting since July 24 Sources: Cambodian and Thai officials, local news reports. Note: Locations where fighting was in dispute between the two nations are not shown. By Agnes Chang, Sun Narin, Kittiphum Sringammuang and Sui-Lee Wee The mood remained resigned and uncertain in evacuation centers in Thailand and Cambodia on Tuesday. In Thailand, the authorities have told more than 180,000 evacuees to stay put just in case. In Surin, Pa Srakaeo, 58, a rice farmer, said that she was not hopeful about returning home soon. 'It's probably 50-50.' For there to be an enduring peace, both countries need to resolve the dispute over how their 500-mile-long border should be demarcated. One major sticking point is Thailand's insistence that all discussions must to be done bilaterally. It has refused to recognize the 1962 ruling by the International Court of Justice that the Preah Vihear temple falls within the sovereignty of Cambodia. It argues that both countries should stick to a 2000 memorandum of understanding that states that both sides agreed to jointly survey and define the areas together. But they have been talking for years with little progress. Notably, they can't even agree on what maps they should use. Cambodia uses a 1:200,000-scale map, which is equivalent to giving someone a small and simple drawing of an area that gives a general layout but is not very precise. This map was drawn by French surveyors when Cambodia was a French colony and was used by the I.C.J. in its 1962 ruling. Thailand uses a 1:50,000-scale map — like the U.S. military — like a much bigger and highly detailed blueprint of a street in which every house and tree can be seen. Thailand says this map reflects the actual terrain. This issue is such an inflammatory one that the Thai government spokesman, Jirayu Houngsub, took pains to reject Thai media reports that Thailand would agree to use Cambodia's 1:200,000-scale map in the cease-fire talks. 'No government or individual would ever sell out their own country,' Mr. Houngsub said. Mr. Ray, the former U.S. ambassador, said he had once suggested to someone in Cambodia that both sides should come up with a joint commission that monitors the comings and goings in these areas, like the Demilitarized Zone, the strip of land that divides the Korean Peninsula. 'It didn't exactly go over big,' he said. 'You have a hard time getting through to them. It's almost an irrationally emotional issue.' Cambodia argues that temples like Preah Vihear, known as Phra Viharn in Thailand, and Prasat Ta Moan Thom, known as Prasat Ta Muen Thom in Thailand, are deeply significant to Cambodian identity as the descendants of the Khmer kings who built them. Thailand sees the Phra Viharn /Preah Vihear temple complex as theirs because it is more easily accessible from the Thai side of the border. More broadly, the temples have been seized on by the country's ultranationalists as 'lost territories,' ceded by Siam to French Indochina during the French colonial era. The border dispute has also been a convenient way for Thai political factions to target each other under the guise of nationalism. 'The problem is, once the conflict started, then nationalism became much more extreme,' said Ou Virak, president of Future Forum, a think tank in Phnom Penh dedicated to public policy issues. 'And then people made out that these zones were worth dying for.'
CNN
19 hours ago
- CNN
The US is sitting out the most consequential climate summit in a decade. It may offer a victory to China
The Trump administration fired the last of the US climate negotiators earlier this month, helping cement America's withdrawal from international climate diplomacy. It may also have handed a huge victory to China. The elimination of the State Department's Office of Global Change — which represents the United States in climate change negotiations between countries — leaves the world's largest historical polluter with no official presence at one of the most consequential climate summits in a decade: COP30, the annual UN climate talks in Belém, Brazil, in November. Without State's climate staff in place, even Capitol Hill lawmakers who usually attend the summits have been unable to get accredited, a source familiar with the process said. COP30 is intended to be a landmark summit, setting the global climate agenda for the next 10 years — an absolutely crucial decade as the world hurtles toward ever more catastrophic levels of warming. The US is 'abandoning its responsibilities in the midst of a planetary emergency,' said Harjeet Singh, a longtime climate advocate, COP negotiations veteran and founding director of Satat Sampada Climate Foundation, a climate justice organization. The US role in climate negotiations has always been marked by contradiction, he told CNN. 'It has championed ambition in rhetoric while expanding domestic fossil fuel extraction.' But its absence creates a 'dangerous vacuum,' he said. One of President Donald Trump's first acts in office was to pull the US out of the Paris climate agreement, which he also did in his first term. The elimination of the State climate office is yet another sign of the administration's hard line rejection of climate action. A State Department spokesperson said 'any relevant related work will be managed in other offices in the Department as appropriate.' They did not directly respond to CNN's question on whether it would send representatives to COP30. Experts fear the US absence may derail climate ambition. Wealthy countries, including those in Europe, may use it as a 'license to backtrack,' said Chiara Martinelli, director of Climate Action Network Europe, a coalition of climate non-profits. Poorer countries may lose faith in the process, she told CNN. But most significantly, it could hand a geopolitical advantage to China, allowing America's most formidable global competitor to position itself as a more reliable and stable global partner, experts told CNN. The State Department spokesperson did not comment on what the US withdrawing from Paris would mean for China. China is building out clean energy at a blistering pace, as the US takes a chainsaw to its wind and solar sectors and makes a hard turn back toward fossil fuels. 'It is likely that China's voice will be heard more loudly (at COP30), as they have identified growth in green technologies as a key pillar of their economic strategy,' said Joeri Rogelj, a climate scientist at Imperial College London. In a statement to CNN, China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs called climate change a 'common challenge faced by mankind.' 'No country can stay out of it, and no country can be immune to it,' the Chinese statement said. The question is whether China will make good on the strong language, and lead by example without its world-power counterpart. All countries have until September to submit new goals to limit climate pollution over the next decade, and China has a history of setting weak targets for itself. Meanwhile, it continues to power plants that run on coal — the most polluting fossil fuel. These goals will provide a road map for climate action between now and 2035, and China, being the world's most-polluting country, will help determine the planet's climate trajectory. China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not answer specific questions about its forthcoming goals, but said the country 'will work with all parties concerned' to 'actively respond to the challenges of climate change, and jointly promote the global green and low-carbon transformation process.' The US has traditionally pushed China to make more ambitious pledges, with varying degrees of success. Climate was the one bright spot in an otherwise strained US-China relationship under the Biden administration. The two nations struck a significant deal nearly two years ago, pledging to ramp up renewables and curb planet-warming gases. 'We were the country that put pressure on them more than any other,' said the source familiar with the process. But it's a very different world now. As COP30 looms, China will not be facing that same pressure. The Biden administration proffered an ambitious US target before leaving office, a cut of 61-66% below 2005 levels by 2035. This would have been tough even under a Democratic administration that favors clean energy. It's vanishingly unlikely under the Trump administration with its 'drill, baby, drill' mantra. That leaves all eyes on China. Its target is by far the most consequential for the climate, experts told CNN. The country has a well-established pattern of under-promising and over-delivering. Its most recent target gave the country until 'around' 2030 to peak its climate pollution. Independent analysis shows it is likely this has already happened, five years ahead of schedule, and pollution is now starting to decline. Biden administration officials had encouraged China to put forward a sharp pollution cut of 30% by 2035. But some experts anticipate a much more tepid target giving China plenty of wiggle room. 'Beijing has been sending signals that those demands are just too high, rather unrealistic and unfair in their view,' said Li Shuo, director of the China climate hub at the Asia Society Policy Institute. 'It is very safe to say there will be a gap. And potentially that gap will be rather significant.' Shuo and colleagues at the Asia Society believe China will put forward a high single-digit or a low double-digit figure for pollution cuts. The number matters, said former US climate envoy Todd Stern. A strong, ambitious goal from China 'would affect numbers all over the world and it would affect the perception of whether COP is making decent progress or not,' he added. Even if its climate pledges lack ambition, China is still leagues ahead of the rest of the world when it comes to clean energy. It is currently building 510 gigawatts of utility-scale solar and wind capacity, according to Global Energy Monitor. This will add to the eye-popping 1,400 gigawatts already online — five times what is operating in the US. The big sticking point is coal, the dirtiest fossil fuel, to which China remains wedded. 'They're building every five years as much coal as remains in the US,' Duke said. That's the paradox of the US withdrawal, Singh said. 'It could advance China's global climate leadership while simultaneously easing the pressure on Beijing to accelerate its difficult transition away from fossil fuels.'
NBC News
19 hours ago
- NBC News
Two Israeli rights groups say their country is committing genocide in Gaza
Two prominent Israeli rights groups on Monday said their country is committing genocide in Gaza, the first time that local Jewish-led organizations have made such accusations against Israel during nearly 22 months of war. The claims by B'Tselem and Physicians for Human Rights-Israel add to an explosive debate over whether Israel's military offensive in Gaza — launched in response to Hamas' deadly Oct. 7, 2023, attack that killed some 1,200 people and took more than 250 hostage — amounts to genocide. The Palestinians, their supporters and international human rights groups make that claim, and the International Court of Justice is hearing a genocide case filed by South Africa against Israel. But in Israel, founded in the wake of the Holocaust, even the government's strongest critics have largely refrained from making such accusations due to the deep sensitivities and strong memories of the Nazi genocide of Europe's Jews. Many in Israel also view the war in Gaza as a justified response to the deadliest attack in the country's history and not an attempt at extermination. Shattering a taboo in Israel The rights groups, while prominent and respected internationally, are considered in Israel to be on the political fringe, and their views are not representative of the vast majority of Israelis. But having the allegation of genocide come from Israeli voices shatters a taboo in a society that has been reticent to criticize Israel's conduct in Gaza. Guy Shalev, director of Physicians for Human Rights-Israel, said the Jewish-Israeli public often dismisses accusations of genocide as antisemitic or biased against Israel. 'Perhaps human rights groups based in Israel ... coming to this conclusion is a way to confront that accusation and get people to acknowledge the reality,' he said. Israel asserts that it is fighting an existential war and abides by international law. It has rejected genocide allegations as antisemitic. It is challenging such allegations at the International Court of Justice, and it has rejected the International Criminal Court's allegations that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant committed war crimes in Gaza. Both face international arrest warrants. Israel's government on Monday said it rejects what it called an 'obscene' and 'politically motivated document.' The Ministry of Foreign Affairs told the AP that the accusation is baseless and only emboldens Hamas. It said Israel only targets Hamas and not civilians. The reports echo international claims The rights groups, in separate reports released jointly, said Israel's policies in Gaza, statements by senior officials about its goals there and the systematic dismantling of the territory's health system contributed to their conclusion of genocide. Their claims echoed those of previous reports from international rights groups like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International. Like other rights groups, B'Tselem and Physicians for Human Rights-Israel have not been allowed into Gaza during the war. Their reports are based on testimonies, documents, eyewitnesses and consultations with legal experts. Hamas' attack on Israel that started the war sparked a shift in the country's policy toward Palestinians in Gaza from 'repression and control to destruction and annihilation,' B'Tselem said. The group has long been outspoken about Israel's treatment of Palestinians. It halted cooperation with the military nearly a decade ago, saying the army's investigations into wrongdoing weren't serious, and it has accused Israel of being an apartheid state. The PHRI report was a detailed, legal-medical analysis focusing on what it called the step-by-step dismantling of Gaza's health and life-sustaining systems including electricity, clean water and access to food. Its report says Israel has committed three of the acts of genocide defined by international law, including 'deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.' The Israeli rights groups said repeated statements by Israeli officials and the military endorsing the total destruction, starvation and permanent displacement of Palestinians in Gaza, combined with policies on the ground, have demonstrated that Israel is intentionally trying to destroy Palestinian society. Gaza's health ministry said on Monday that 147 people, mostly children, have died from malnutrition-related causes. The ministry operates under the Hamas government and is seen by the U.N. as the most reliable source of data on casualties. A 'painful' conclusion The term 'genocide' strikes a chord in Israel, where Israelis grow up learning about the Holocaust and hearing survivors' harrowing stories, while promising it would never happen again. The 1948 Convention of the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide was drawn up in the aftermath of World War II and the murder by Nazi Germany of 6 million Jews. It defines genocide as acts 'committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.' 'As the grandson of a Holocaust survivor, it's very painful for me to be reaching this conclusion,' said Shalev from PHRI. But after growing up in a society where the Holocaust was so important, it demands some kind of responsibility, he said. Until now, Israeli criticism of the war in Gaza has been focused on Netanyahu and whether his wartime decision-making has been politically motivated and delayed the return of hostages — 50 of them still in Gaza. Broader scrutiny of Israel's conduct in Gaza has been limited for multiple reasons. Despite the vast destruction and death in the territory and Israel's growing international isolation, most Israelis have believed for much of the war in its righteousness. And with most Jewish Israelis serving in the army, it's difficult for most people to fathom that their relatives in uniform could be carrying out genocide. Some soldiers, however, have refused to fight in the war. Jeffrey Herf, a historian who has published much on antisemitism, said the allegation of genocide doesn't take into account that there is a war between two parties. He said it ignores Hamas as a military force and Israel's right to defend itself. After groups like B'Tselem in recent years accused Israel of apartheid, more mainstream voices in Israel also picked up the claim, although in less sweeping ways. Israeli historian Tom Segev said he's not sure the new reports and their allegations will have an impact on the public. 'The major thing for Israelis is a question of the hostages, not necessarily the fate of the population in Gaza,' he said. But he said what's happening in Gaza is undermining the ideological and moral justification for the existence of Israel. The rights groups said the international community hasn't done enough to protect Palestinians and are calling on the world, including Israelis who have stayed silent, to speak up. 'We have an obligation to do everything we can to speak the truth about this, to stand by the victims,' said Sarit Michaeli, the international director for B'Tselem.
