'We have to try everything': Vanuatu envoy taking climate fight to ICJ
Tired of pleading for countries to act on climate change, Vanuatu upped the ante -- it asked the world's highest court if governments were legally obligated to do something about it.
The landmark case has given Ralph Regenvanu a front row seat to history.
As Vanuatu's environment minister, he has taken the decades-long climate fight by Pacific nations to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague, hoping to safeguard their islands' survival.
Regenvanu has called the case among the most consequential "in the history of humanity".
A ruling could come as early as next month.
This interview, conducted by AFP on the sidelines of the UN Ocean Conference in Nice, France, has been edited for length and clarity:
Q: Why did Vanuatu go to the ICJ?
A: "We thought it was necessary to take a legal approach to the issue of climate change because we feel that the UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) process, which has been going for 30 years, has not done anywhere near enough.
"We agreed to ramp down greenhouse gas emissions. We've seen the highest levels ever just recently. We've talked about climate finance. We haven't seen that. These pledges that were made in Paris? We've not seen them having any effect.
"And so we wanted to see if we could get international law to actually start to impose some requirements."
Q: Has it worked?
"This request for an advisory opinion from the ICJ has been historic. It was the first request from the United Nations General Assembly for an advisory opinion that was unanimous. No country opposed requesting this.
"It has also mobilised youth. There's this global climate justice movement of youth now, and we have many of them here (in Nice). It's really raised the consciousness and political savvy of youth to engage with these kinds of processes.
"A lot of countries would talk about what they're doing on climate change. But when we got to the court, it became very clear that they weren't prepared to do what they were talking about. So it exposed the hypocrisy of a number of countries as well."
Q: Do you think others will take the legal route?
A: "We're going to have to do a far greater range of things outside these UN processes -- in courts, in each and every fora we can find, to push for real climate action.
"We went to the International Tribunal of the Law of the Sea -- we got an advisory opinion. We're waiting for an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on the same question: the obligations of states to prevent greenhouse gas emissions, and what are they consequences if they don't.
"Along with Fiji and Samoa, we've submitted a resolution to the Rome Statute -- the International Criminal Court -- for a new crime of ecocide to be created. That's in process.
"We will continue to call for the strongest action in all fora including this one, the United Nations Ocean Conference.
"Anything and everything we can -- because what we're doing is not enough."
Q: Why keep going if you're constantly disappointed?
A: "Going to the climate COPs is a very depressing exercise. Last year, for example, Papua New Guinea said we aren't going anymore. I could perfectly understand that.
"The problem is, when we're not at the table, we're on the menu. And so we have to be there, so people see us and realise -- and hopefully have a little bit of conscience -- that there are these people in the world who are going to perish as a result of your actions."
Q: Why is this ocean summit important?
"The ocean has been feeding us. It's been our spiritual home. It's been our highway. It has been the basis of our cultural heritage, our identity. We've been surviving off the ocean for as long as we've existed, which is thousands of years.
"And we see the change, and the change is impacting us. We know that if we don't address climate change, greenhouse gas emissions, and if we don't take serious steps to reverse global warming, but also keep the biodiversity that has always been sustaining us, it threatens our very existence."
np/klm/giv
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
2 hours ago
- Newsweek
Welcome to the Era of Abusive Federalism
Anyone who has taken an introductory American politics class probably remembers the way that America's system of federalism has been divided by scholars into "eras" based on understandings about the balance between state and national power. The most recent, ushered in by the Reagan revolution, is known as "The New Federalism," and purported to return various powers to the states. As President Donald Trump orders the military into Los Angeles to crush what are by all accounts fairly modest and largely peaceful protests and prepares to use the federal government to blackmail and starve out states that refuse to bend the knee to MAGA, I think it's safe to say that Reagan's era is over. Welcome, instead, to the age of "Abusive Federalism." The Constitution's power-sharing scheme was creative but deeply underspecified, leaving the task of figuring out the boundaries of state and federal power to future courts and policymakers. Unlike Ronald Reagan, Trump has no ideological preference for state versus national power. The president, after all, claims proudly that he "solved" the abortion issue by appointing the Supreme Court justices who overturned Roe and gave states jurisdiction over reproductive rights while simultaneously hurling invective at states that defy his whims on other issues, like education and immigration. Donald Trump listens during an announcement about the Golden Dome missile defense shield, in the Oval Office of the White House on May 20, 2025, in Washington, D.C. Donald Trump listens during an announcement about the Golden Dome missile defense shield, in the Oval Office of the White House on May 20, 2025, in Washington, D.C. JIM WATSON/AFP via Getty Images The distinctive ethos of Abusive Federalism is one of vengeance, punishment, and submission. Since the day Trump declared his candidacy in 2015, he has spoken about Democratic-controlled states and cities as if they are hellish, renegade provinces that must be brought to heel by force if necessary. This is a target-rich environment, so to choose but one example, Trump said, "Our whole country will end up being like Detroit if she's your president," in October 2024, referring to Democratic nominee Kamala Harris. Speaking about a city, region, or state like this would once have been career-ending. Under Abusive Federalism it is just another day at the office. During his first term, Trump repeatedly threatened to cut off federal funding to states and cities that maintained "sanctuary" laws that limit the ability of local law enforcement agencies to cooperate with federal agencies like ICE. Those threats are obviously back, this time with the full backing of the executive branch. But Trump's vengeance politics extend well beyond immigration. The president yearns to use his unchecked power to turn funding on and off to states whenever he wants. He has already gotten into an escalatory battle with Maine Governor Janet Mills over the state's policies for trans athletes, threatening to cut off millions of dollars to the state's schools. As is often the case with Trump, he picks a fight, which then disappears out of the news cycle and into a legal battle. But the damage is done. Instead of making and enforcing policy through normal political channels, Abusive Federalism delights in threatening to bankrupt Democratic states by withholding their own tax dollars from them. He has even threatened to use natural disasters as a point of leverage to force states into policy capitulation over routine political disagreements, something that would have seemed unimaginably corrupt and insane even 10 years ago. In January, he threatened to withhold federal aid from California if the state didn't change its water management practices to suit the president's conspiracy-addled preferences. He also demanded completely unrelated changes to the state's voter ID laws. That he may be unable or unwilling to follow through on many of these threats is not really the point. Under Abusive Federalism, the executive branch has become a tool of scorched-earth partisan warfare, and the federal government's relationship to individual states is dependent on the choices that state's voters made in the previous election. Ordinary disagreements are now seen as grounds to capriciously immiserate and ruin lives, and failing that, to intimidate state leaders into capitulation. What's happening in California is a case in point. Unlike when former President Dwight D. Eisenhower federalized the National Guard to enforce desegregation in 1957, neither California Governor Gavin Newsom nor Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass is obstructing federal immigration enforcement, much less ordering the California National Guard to do so as former Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus did in 1957. They are simply refusing to order the kind of unwarranted brute force that Trump seems to desire, and are unwilling to dismantle sanctuary statutes that have never once been deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. We are less than five months into Trump's second term, and despite loss after loss in court, the administration seems determined to stick to Abusive Federalism as both the philosophy and practice of governing. The union was not designed for this kind of naked coercion, and the White House should not be surprised, then, when the blue state targets of Trump's abuse start thinking a little more carefully about their options. David Faris is an associate professor of political science at Roosevelt University and the author of It's Time to Fight Dirty: How Democrats Can Build a Lasting Majority in American Politics. His writing has appeared in Slate, The Week, The Washington Post, The New Republic, Washington Monthly and more. You can find him on Twitter @davidmfaris. The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
New York Post
2 hours ago
- New York Post
Trump admin unveils online portal to US citizenship — for those willing to pay $5M
Foreign nationals with an extra $5 million can now register to be notified about when they can sign up to receive a fast pass to U.S. citizenship, also known as the 'Trump Card.' President Donald Trump shared information about the program on Truth Social Wednesday night. 'FOR FIVE MILLION $DOLLARS, THE TRUMP CARD IS COMING!' the post said. 'Thousands have been calling and asking how they can sign up to ride a beautiful road in gaining access to the Greatest Country and Market anywhere in the World. It's called THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! THE WAITING LIST IS NOW OPEN. To sign up, go to – Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick reposted Trump's social media message, saying in another post, 'The wait is over.' He then shared a link to the Trump Card website for people to get more information. The site shows an image of a gold card with Trump's headshot on it, which says, 'The Trump Card.' It also has his signature on the card and the number 5,000,000. Lutnick was a guest at Axios' streamed event, Building the Future, last month, where he told the company's co-founder, Mike Allen, that the card's website would be up and running in about a week. 3 Foreign nationals with an extra $5 million can now register to be notified when they can sign up to receive a fast pass to U.S. citizenship, also known as the 'Trump Card.' AFP via Getty Images 'The details of that will come soon after, but people can start to register. And all that will come over a matter of the next weeks, not months, weeks,' Lutnick said. He acknowledged that not everyone will be able to afford the Trump Card, but it will be available to those who can afford to help America pay off its debt. 'Why wouldn't they want a plan B that says God forbid something bad happens, you come to the airport in America and the person in immigration says, 'Welcome home.' Right? As opposed to, 'Where the heck am I going if something bad's happening in my country,'' Lutnick continued. He noted that everyone will be vetted for a card, adding those who come in with $5 million for a visa are going to be 'great people who are going to come and bring businesses and opportunity to America. And they're going to pay $5 million.' Lutnick offered one more hypothetical scenario, saying if 200,000 people purchase the card for $5 million, that's $1 trillion. 'Remember, we get 280,000 visas per year now for free, not counting the 20 million people who broke into this country for nothing under Biden,' Lutnick said. 'And, so, I want you to think about that. We give it away for free, and said Donald Trump's gonna bring in a trillion dollars for what purpose? To make America better. And it makes perfect sense to me.' 3 The image shows a gold card with Trump's headshot on it, which says, 'The Trump Card.' It also has his signature on the card and the number 5,000,000. 3 Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick acknowledged that not everyone will be able to afford the Trump Card, but it will be available to those who can afford to help America pay off its debt. REUTERS Trump has previously touted his plan before to attract the world's wealthiest to become U.S. citizens, though it comes at a time when he is both clamping down on illegal migration and as universities are increasingly in the spotlight amid soaring school costs and crippling student loans. In an interview in February with Fox News Chief Political Anchor Bret Baier on 'Special Report,' Lutnick said all candidates will be 'deeply vetted.' 'These are vetted people,' Lutnick told Baier. 'These are going to be great global citizens who are going to bring entrepreneurial spirit, capacity and growth to America. If one of them comes in, think of the jobs they are going to bring with them, the businesses they are going to bring with them. And they are going to pay American taxes as well. So, this is huge money for America.'
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Egypt deports dozens of activists before planned march to Gaza border
Egyptian authorities have detained and deported dozens of pro-Palestinian activists planning to take part in a march intended to break Israel's blockade on Gaza, airport officials and protest organisers have said. Thousands of activists from around the world have been planning to trek to Egypt's Rafah border crossing with the Palestinian territory on Friday as part of the Global March to Gaza, demanding the entry of humanitarian aid into the blockaded territory. But Egyptian officials have been cracking down on international visitors planning to participate in the march, detaining them at Cairo airport and hotels in the Egyptian capital for questioning, and arresting and deporting dozens on Thursday. An Egyptian official told The Associated Press that authorities had deported more than three dozen activists, most of whom held European passports, on arrival at Cairo International Airport in the past two days. The official, who spoke anonymously because he was not authorised to brief the media, said that the deported activists had intended to travel to Northern Sinai 'without obtaining required authorisations'. The Reuters news agency reported that at least 73 foreign nationals had been deported on a flight to Istanbul on Thursday, with 100 more at the airport awaiting Abukeshek, spokesperson for the Global March to Gaza, told the AFP news agency that more than 200 activists had been detained at Cairo airport or questioned at hotels in the city. Among those detained were nationals from the United States, Australia, the Netherlands, France, Spain, Algeria and Morocco. He told AFP that plainclothes officers had gone to Cairo hotels on Wednesday with lists of names, questioning activists, searching their belongings and confiscating their phones in some cases. 'After interrogations, some were arrested and others were released,' he said, adding that some had been deported after being detained at Cairo airport. A group of Greek activists said in a statement that dozens of their contingent had been detained at Cairo airport 'despite having all legal travel documents, having broken no law and followed every legal procedure in entering the country'. The march's organisers said in a statement that they had followed guidelines laid out by the Egyptian government, and indicated they would proceed with the march as planned. 'We look forward to providing any additional information the Egyptian authorities require to ensure the march continues peacefully as planned to the Rafah border,' said the statement. Abukeshek told AFP that the group were still planning to proceed with Friday's march to the Gaza border. The marchers plan to travel by bus to the city of El Arish in the Sinai Peninsula before walking about 50 kilometres (31 miles) to the border with Gaza. They intend to join a convoy of activists that left Tunisia on Monday, travelling overland to support the action. The organisers say they aim to 'create international moral and media pressure' to open the border crossing at Rafah and lift the aid blockade on Gaza, which the United Nations has described as 'the hungriest place on Earth'. Israel imposed a total blockade in March as part of its war on Gaza, in which it has now killed more than 55,000 Palestinians. It allowed for a limited amount of aid to flow last month, but distribution has been plagued with problems, including deadly Israeli violence against aid seekers, and experts say the volumes are far below what is required. The Global March for Gaza is the second attempt by international activists to break the siege on Gaza this month, after the Madleen ship attempted to travel to the Palestinian territory by sea with aid on board. The ship, which had Swedish activist Greta Thunberg, French European Parliament member Rima Hassan, and Al Jazeera Mubasher reporter Omar Faiad on board, was seized by Israeli forces on Monday as it travelled through international has denounced the restrictions on aid entering Gaza, and says that its side of the Rafah border crossing remains open, but that the Palestinian side has been blocked by Israel since the war broke out. Cairo has warned that only those with authorisation will be allowed to travel the planned march route. 'Egypt holds the right to take all necessary measures to preserve its national security, including the regulation of the entry and movement of individuals within its territory, especially in sensitive border areas,' its foreign ministry said in a statement on Wednesday. Israel, whose diplomatic ties with Cairo are a sensitive issue in Egypt, has called on Egyptian authorities to prevent the march from reaching the border. Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz referred to the activists as 'jihadist protesters' on Wednesday, saying their presence at the border 'would endanger the safety of [Israeli] soldiers and will not be allowed'.
