Boris Johnson ‘Missing in Action’ Ahead of COP26 Climate Summit, Say Campaigners

Protesters in Parliament Square this morning said the government was failing to show enough leadership in the run-up to the UN summit, due to start in Glasgow in 100 days.

ByXindi Wei
on Jul 23, 2021 

Protesters in Parliament Square. Credit: The Climate Coalition

Climate campaigners have called on the UK government to step up its action ahead of the COP26 UN summit set to take place in Glasgow in November, which they say is in “serious jeopardy”.

A hundred protesters gathered in Parliament Square this morning to mark 100 days before the talks begin, accusing Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak of being “Missing in Action”. They held banners with the phrase “The climate needs you” and giant alarm clocks to emphasise the urgency of tackling climate change.

The action was organised by The Climate Coalition, a group of civil society organisations pushing for greater action on climate change.

Ben Margolis, Interim Director, said: “Time is quickly running down until the UN climate talks arrive in Glasgow in November for the biggest diplomatic event the UK has seen in decades – essential to limiting warming of the Earth to 1.5C or less.

“The Prime Minister has pledged that the UK will show global leadership on climate change. Yet despite this, Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak are most noticeable for being missing in action and failing to deliver real, concrete progress to tackle the nature and climate emergencies.”

Climate groups are increasingly concerned about a lack of action from the government ahead of the summit, the largest of its kind since the historic Paris Agreement was signed in 2015.

The protest comes two weeks before the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is due to publish its Sixth Assessment Report, which will highlight that the window to keep the 1.5C target alive is closing. It will warn of a rise in heatwaves, destruction of 90 percent of global reefs, accelerated sea level rise and stronger hurricanes and typhoons.

Last week, 100 of the world’s poorer countries issued a position paper setting out five key issues which they say are essential for them in the negotiations, including a the delivery of a 2009 promise from richer countries to provide $100bn a year in climate finance support by 2020. They point to a lack of progress seen so far, particularly at the G7 meeting in the UK last month.
‘Far-Off Promises’

Sarah Wiggins, who was present at the protest from Christian charity Tearfund, told DeSmog: “We’ve seen these heat waves in Canada, and the US, but also in places like Pakistan, where people were literally dropping dead from 50-degree heat. And in other countries, they don’t have the facilities. We have to respond to these disasters.

“So there’s a real injustice. We want to see the richer countries like the UK coughing up money on the table and acting with real urgency, because this is about the total emergency.”

Daniel Hale, another campaigner, said: “The action that we take this year is going to be so much easier than the action that we take in 20 years’ time.

“It’s never been more important that we act on climate change. It’s always easier to make promises than to deliver and the way the system works everyone is incentivised to make huge far-off promises in the future.”

G20 representatives have gathered today in Italy for an Energy and Climate ministerial meeting, which will focus on how to ensure sustainable growth and a clean energy transition.

Greenpeace UK’s Executive Director, John Sauven, said: “These pivotal climate talks require bold policies, tough targets and political will from all governments. But, as hosts, it’s up to the UK to drive this forward by setting a prime example for others to follow.

“However, the consistent failure of the UK government to match its rhetoric with required action has put the most important international meeting the world has ever seen in serious jeopardy. Boris Johnson has just 100 days to get his own house in order.”

He said this meant scrapping high-carbon plans, such as the proposed new “Cambo” oilfield in the North Sea and cuts to the aid budget.

A government spokesperson said: “Over the past three decades, the UK has seen the fastest fall in emissions of any G7 country, made tangible progress in boosting renewable energy and green growth, and set some of the world’s most ambitious emissions reduction targets.

“Against this backdrop, the Prime Minister continues to call for greater global ambition and action to tackle climate change ahead of COP26, as he has done through numerous international summits and his engagement with individual world leaders.”

WATCH: Biden leaves conservative reporter speechless after bringing up the GOP's QAnon problem

Tom Boggioni
July 23, 2021


CBS-screenshot

A blunt-talking President Joe Biden shut down a conservative reporter on Thursday night who asked if Democrats are defunding police departments -- firing back with a question about a QAnon claim that left the reporter grasping for an answer.

As Biden walked across the South Lawn, he engaged with Shelby Talcott from the conservative Daily Caller following his town hall event in Cincinnati. The exchange went like this, according to White House transcripts:

"Mr. President, can you clarify what you said about no — that there's no — no one in the Democratic Party is anti-police"' Talcott asked.

"I didn't say that," Biden replied before adding, " I said that that — that is not the Democratic Party's position. I'm the Democratic Party; I am President. So is the Speaker of the House and so is the –- the Majority Leader. We are not defunding the police."

"Okay," she replied before asking, "And are there people who — in the Democratic Party, who want to defund the police?"

"Are there people in the Republican Party who think we're sucking the blood out of kids?" Biden shot back. His response left Talcott fumbling as Biden stared then turned on his heel and walked away.

Biden's comments has since infuriated conservatives -- a sampling of which can be seen below:

 

To understand the American authoritarian mind, look to evangelical Christianity
John Stoehr,

RAW STORY

 The Editorial Board
July 22, 2021

Two female Trump supporters (Screen cap).

Michelle Goldberg is a superlative Times columnist. To my way of thinking, she's a quintessential liberal. I mean that in ways positive and negative. Positive in that she's a warrior for liberty, morality and self-government. Negative in that Goldberg does not, and probably cannot, understand the authoritarian mind, nor its perennial threat to us. Liberals are right to have sympathy for the devil. But there's such a thing as too much.

In her newest column, Goldberg talked about her experience reading Michael Bender's book about the 2020 presidential election, Frankly, We Did Win This Election: The Inside Story of How Trump Lost. Bender, who's a reporter for the Wall Street Journal, recounts not only "White House disarray and Trump's terrifying impulses," Goldberg writes, but "the people who followed Trump from rally to rally like authoritarian Deadheads."

Bender's description of these Trump superfans, who called themselves the "front-row Joes," is sympathetic but not sentimental. Above all, he captures their pre-Trump loneliness. … There are many causes for the overlapping dysfunctions that make contemporary American life feel so dystopian, but loneliness is a big one.

Goldberg suggests strongly that loneliness might be the cause of the current drift in the United States toward authoritarianism. She quotes The Week's Damon Linker, who cites Hannah Arendt: "Lonely people are drawn to totalitarian ideologies." "'The chief characteristic of the mass man is not brutality and backwardness, but his isolation and lack of normal social relationships,' Arendt said in The Origins of Totalitarianism, describing those who gave themselves over to all-encompassing mass movements."

I love Arendt, but she's wrong here. She has things in reverse. I don't know if the chief characteristic of the mass man is brutality and backwardness, but I do know that loneliness is the result of brutality and backwardness. In other words, authoritarianism causes alienation, not the other way around. Democracy does not, and cannot, constitute "normal social relationships" to the authoritarian way of thinking, because democracy, to the authoritarian way of thinking, is a moral perversion of the natural order of things, which is to say, "normal social relationships": God over Man, men over women, black over white, etc. Democracy always runs against the grain of "God's law." The authoritarian is always already alienated—from her nation but mostly from herself.

Goldberg cites the American Enterprise Institute's Daniel Cox, who found a link between loneliness and support for the disgraced former president. The "share of Americans who are more socially disconnected from society is on the rise," Cox said. "And these voters disproportionately support Trump." His survey found that "17 percent of Americans said they had not a single person in their 'core social network.'" He added that these "socially disconnected voters were far more likely to view Trump positively and support his re-election than those with more robust personal networks."
Report Advertisement

Like I said, Michelle Goldberg is a quintessential liberal. She's reading Cox's findings as loneliness causing authoritarianism. It's the reverse, though. How can I be so sure? If loneliness causes authoritarianism, what are potential solutions? Among them would be more social networks, more community, more human bonding, and so on, right?

Guess what? White evangelical Protestants are very social, very communal and very bonded by religion and conviction. God over Man, men over women, black over white, etc.—God's law is the basis for their "normal social relationships." White evangelical Protestants are, moreover, united by their collective authoritarian belief that they have been chosen by God to rule America in God's name for the purpose of hastening the End Times, so that anything is justified as long as it serves Him. Put more plainly, nothing matters but authority and power. There are plenty of lonely people in this world, but making them less lonely isn't going to make many of them less fascist.

How can the authoritarian be alienated from her nation but especially herself while at the same time appear to find connection in communities like white evangelical Protestants? That's a very good question! It gets to the heart of the real problem. The authoritarian mind is taught to never ever ever come to its own conclusions about the world. Truth is whatever Dear Leader says, not what your eyes and ears tell you. This "education" begins before birth and lasts a lifetime. As a consequence, there's no such thing as independent thinking. There's no such thing as freedom of choice. In the collective, there's no such thing as you. As a result, you will always be lonely. Big rallies might seem communal, but they're illusory. You're filling a hole that can't be filled.

Goldberg again cited Hannah Arendt who "described people shaken loose from any definite place in the world as being at once deeply selfish and indifferent to their own well-being: 'Self-centeredness, therefore, went hand in hand with a decisive weakening of the instinct for self-preservation.'" Goldberg said the pandemic did that. It shook people loose from "any definite place in the world." No, it didn't. The covid, the lockdowns, the isolation—these did affect authoritarian minds like they did all other minds. The difference, however, is that the authoritarian mind was already shaken loose from its definite place. And their always already-present anxiety rose to ever more feverish pitches the more democracy prepared to overthrow their fuhrer. We should not ease this mind with sympathy. We should break it with more democracy.

Again, it's the reverse. Being "shaken loose from any definite place in the world" does not necessarily make you "deeply selfish and indifferent to their own well-being." Not if you're already there. If so, already being "deeply selfish and indifferent to their own well-being" is what shakes you loose "from any definite place in the world." Indeed, you aren't selfish so much as selfless in the most literal sense, as in there's no daylight between you and the collective. You have no sense of self-preservation because you never developed a self to preserve. This makes it very easy for authoritarian people to throw their lives away for the leader. And that's what Michael Bender's reporting shows.

"Toward the end of Bender's book, Saundra reappears," writes Goldberg, referring to a Trump supporter mentioned earlier. "She'd just been at the Capitol for the Jan. 6 insurrection and seemed ready for more. 'Tell us where we need to be, and we just drop everything and we go,' she says. 'Nobody cares about if they have to work. Nobody cares about anything.'1 If you give people's life meaning, they'll give you everything." I don't know why we should read this in any way that's not literal. Saundra says she doesn't care about anything, because she doesn't. Sympathy won't change that.

The thing about quintessential liberals like Michelle Goldberg is they don't imagine, probably because they can't imagine, human relationships completely devoid of the principle of political equality between and among individuals. They can't imagine being uncertain of who they are in the absence of authority. When you don't or can't imagine such a life, the authoritarian mind can seem so confounding that you search for some concrete reason for its suicidal behavior. To the liberal, loneliness seems to be rational cause for authoritarianism. The truth, however, is far uglier, scarier and more dangerous to democracy than most people, not just liberals, seem to know. Nothing causes authoritarianism. It has always been here. It always will be here.

THAT OLD TROPE DON'T FLY

No need to fear iPhone spyware for 'people that are not criminals', says CEO of NSO Group

GET A BLACKBERRY

"The people that are not criminals, not the Bin Ladens of the world—there's nothing to be afraid of. They can absolutely trust on the security and privacy of their Google and Apple devices."

STEPHEN WARWICK23 Jul 2021 

Source: Joseph Keller / iMore


What you need to know

The CEO of NSO Group says that people who aren't criminals have nothing to fear from its Pegasus spyware.

It comes after it emerged that the tool was used to target the phones of journalists, activists, and others in various countries.

Shalev Hulio says that people can absolutely trust the security and privacy of Apple and Google devices.


The CEO of the company behind the notorious Pegasus spyware says law-abiding phone users have nothing to be afraid of when it comes to security and privacy.

Shalev Hulio, CEO of NSO Group made the comments in an interview with Forbes following a slew of allegations regarding the company's Pegasus spyware.

Background

Earlier this week we noted:


Pegasus is spyware that's maintained and licensed by a company called NSO Group to nation-states and used by the operatives of those nation-states to extract information from iPhones and Android phones and to track and monitor the people using them. Amnesty International and Forbidden Stories, working with a consortium of over a dozen world news outlets including The Washington Post and The Guardian, released a series of coordinated reports over the weekend, basically accusing NSO of being less than forthright about who exactly is using their Pegasus spyware, and how much it's really being used. In other words, they're handing out cyber guns without really checking cyber IDs or running basic background checks. And maybe not just by the hundreds or thousands, but by the tens of thousands.
Interview

In the interview Hulio denied several of the claims made against NSO Group and Pegasus, for instance, he said the NSO was definitely not involved in attempts to hack the phones of French officials including President Emmanuel Macron. He also reiterated the company's stance, stating it could not be held responsible for the actions of those it licenses its software to:

"We are selling our products to governments. We have no way to monitor what those governments do. . . . But if those governments misuse the system, we have a way to investigate. We will shut them down. We have done it before and will continue to do so. . . . But we cannot be blamed on the misuse that the government did."

Hulio also said that law-abiding phone users have nothing to fear:

As for the average person, they've no need to fear NSO Group, he insists, as his company is only going to flex its technical muscle and break into the Apple and Google phones of serious criminals. "The people that are not criminals, not the Bin Ladens of the world—there's nothing to be afraid of. They can absolutely trust on the security and privacy of their Google and Apple devices."

Hulio said that tools like Pegasus were needed to save lives and "keep the safety of the people."

Hulio also dismissed claims of the existence of a list of 50,000 potential hacking targets obtained by Forbidden Stories, stating the list has nothing to do with NSO, and that the 50,000 number is "insane", claiming it only sells to between 40 and 45 countries who target around 100 people each. He also stated that no one data store of these people existed, and posed another explanation:

He believes the data has come from what's known as a Home Location Register (HLR) lookup. The HLR is essentially a kind of database controlled by telecom companies and shows whether or not a specific mobile number is registered and the phone's rough location. Telecom businesses will query the database for mundane tasks like sending SMS text messages, but could, according to telecoms security company AdaptiveMobile, be used as a starting point for cyberattacks. A surveillance company could recruit an HLR lookup provider—easily findable on the Web—and ask it to continually check whether a target device was registered and able to receive text messages. Previously, NSO hacks have reportedly launched via links sent via text.

He also confirmed that the NSO can cut off customers it thinks are misusing Pegasus. Earlier this week the company fervently stated it could not be held responsible for the actions of its customers, and that the reports were a "planned and well-orchestrated media campaign."

Rare FAA rules change means Blue Origin crew may not get official 'wings'


The New Shepard rocket RSS First Step carries Jeff Bezos and 3 crew members into space on Tuesday in the skies over Texas. Photo courtesy Blue Origin

July 23 (UPI) -- Federal aviation regulators have made a rare change to the requirements for its Commercial Astronaut Wings Program, meaning Blue Origin founder Jeff Bezos may not officially be recognized for his spaceflight this week.

The Federal Aviation Administration changed rules for the program on the same day Bezos, his brother and two others made their historic first commercial spaceflight on Tuesday.

For the first time in 17 years, the FAA updated its Commercial Astronaut Wings Program. Before the change, all that was required to be recognized was to fly to at least an altitude of 50 miles.

The change added a requirement that any commercial flight must also include activities during flight that are "essential to public safety" or contribute to "spaceflight safety."

RELATED New 'rocket men' may show the way for more privatization

In addition, the FAA will permit crew members for such flights and the spacecraft will need to be licensed by the agency.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    
The changes mean that those who flew on Tuesday will not be technically considered astronauts by the government.

Another thing is that Bezos' New Shepherd spacecraft is largely autonomous.

RELATED Jeff Bezos and Blue Origin crew soar into space, land safely

"This is an autonomous vehicle. There's really nothing for a crew member to go do," Blue Origin CEO Bob Smith said, according to Space News.

A little more than a week before the Blue Origin flight, Virgin Galactic CEO and founder Richard Branson flew to space aboard Virgin's SpaceShipTwo. He and three others aboard the flight received their wings as part of the program, as it occurred before the change.

Under the new rules, only the two pilots on that flight would have qualified.\
RELATEDJeff Bezos wants flight to expand 'new frontiers' in space

The FAA, however, says that any commercial astronaut can file an appeal to receive their wings in spite of the new rules. So far, no one aboard the Blue Origin flight has.

"There are no nominations currently before the FAA to review," an agency spokesperson told CNN.

Northern Ireland: 1998 Omagh bombing that killed 29 people could have been prevented, says UK court

By Euronews with AP, AFP • Updated: 23/07/2021 - 

Royal Ulster Constabulary Police officers stand on Market Street at the scene of a car bombing. - Copyright AP Photo / Paul McErlane, FILE 1998


A Northern Ireland court has said that the 1998 Omagh bombing could have been prevented by UK authorities.

Judges have ordered the UK and the Republic of Ireland to open an investigation into the car bombing that killed 29 people.

High Court Justice Mark Horner said the inquiries needed to determine whether a more "proactive" security approach could have thwarted the attack.


Another 220 were injured in the car bombing on 15 August 1998, which took place in a small shopping street in the Northern Irish town of Omagh.

The car bombing at Omagh was carried out by the group calling themselves the Real Irish Republican Army (Real IRA), but no one has been held criminally responsible for the attack.

Victims of the blast included a woman pregnant with twins, and many young people, including two Spanish tourists.

The bombing was the worst single atrocity of the Troubles, a three-decade-long conflict involving Irish republicans, British loyalist paramilitaries, and UK troops.


But judges on Friday found there were "plausible" claims that "there was a real possibility of preventing the Omagh bombing".

"I am satisfied that certain grounds when considered separately or together give rise to plausible allegations that there was a real prospect of preventing the Omagh bombing,'' Horner said at the court in Belfast.

"These grounds involve the consideration of terrorist activity on both sides of the border by prominent dissident terrorist republicans leading up to the Omagh bomb."

The case was brought eight years ago by Michael Gallagher, whose son Aiden was killed in the blast.

Gallagher had challenged the British government's refusal to conduct a public inquiry into the bombing.

He claimed that the bombing could have been prevented if British security agents and police officers from the Royal Ulster Constabulary had combined their intelligence on dissident republic groups.

Two anonymous calls had raised the alarm 40 minutes before the bomb went off, but police claim the location given for the attack was wrong.

Northern Ireland: UK plans to end prosecutions for historical 'Troubles' crimes

The UK had argued that a police ombudsman investigation was the best way to address any outstanding issues in the Omagh attack. Northern Ireland Secretary Brandon Lewis said that the government would wait to review the full decision before deciding how to proceed.

"We recognise [what] the court has set out today ... and that more should be done to investigate this," Lewis said in a statement released after the ruling.

"The UK government will take time to consider the judge's statement and all its recommendations carefully as we wait for the full judgment to be published."

Judges in Belfast did note that they had no authority to compel officials in the Republic of Ireland to conduct their own inquiry, but said that a parallel inquiry across the border would be a "real advantage".

Irish Prime Minister Michael Martin has said that his government would analyse the judgment and do "what is necessary for the citizens of the island of Ireland".

Earlier this month, the UK government presented a controversial plan to end all prosecutions related to the Northern Ireland conflict, denounced by all sides as an "amnesty".

Omagh bombing: Judge fears security failures before 1998 attack
Ruling is a vindication for families campaign to find out the truth behind blast that killed 29 people

The Omagh bombing in 1998 killed 29 people. PA Images via Getty Images

Paul Peachey
Jul 23, 2021

A British judge has called on the UK and Irish governments to hold inquiries into the 1998 Omagh bombing by Irish nationalists after concluding there had been a “real prospect” of preventing an attack that killed 29 people.

Eight years ago, families of the victims challenged the UK government’s refusal to hold a public inquiry after commissioning a report that concluded that key evidence about the bomb plot was either missed or not passed on.

Mr Justice Horner on Friday stopped short of calling for the public inquiry demanded by many of the families into the worst single atrocity of the Northern Ireland conflict, known as the Troubles. But he said the two governments should investigate whether a more proactive security approach could have thwarted the terrorists.

The attack in the Northern Irish town came four months after the Good Friday Peace Agreement was signed that largely brought peace to the island of Ireland after three decades of civil strife.

The Omagh attack was carried out by dissidents opposed to the agreement.

In his long-anticipated judgment delivered at a court in Belfast, Mr Justice Horner said: “I am satisfied that certain grounds when considered separately or together give rise to plausible allegations that there was a real prospect of preventing the Omagh bombing.”

Michael Gallagher, whose son was killed in the blast, launched the review in 2013. The report he and other families commissioned drew on hundreds of pages of emails between David Rupert – an American trucker-turned-informant who infiltrated republican paramilitaries – and his handler from the British security agency MI5.

It is understood the emails provided detail on potential planning, locations and personnel for an attack in the run-up to the blast on August 15, 1998, when a stolen Vauxhall car was packed with 500lb of explosives and detonated in the town centre.

The families say those details were not shared with police on either side of the border before the attack or during the investigation to find out who was responsible.

The families believe the Rupert emails, along with warnings of a dissident operation from an agent for British military intelligence and an anonymous tip-off 11 days before the attack naming three men, should have prompted a security operation in Omagh that could have prevented the attack.

Copies of the emails were obtained by the families, and sections were used in a civil case which saw them win £1.6m ($2.2m) in 2009 against four men found liable for the murders.

Mr Gallagher welcomed the ruling on Friday and said the families’ campaign had been vindicated.

“We knew … that this was a preventable atrocity, but it's one thing for me to say it, it's an entirely different thing for a senior High Court judge to,” he said.


The UK government said it would consider the judgment before announcing its next step.

The Northern Ireland Secretary Brandon Lewis said: “We recognise that today the court has set out that there are 'plausible allegations that there was a real prospect of preventing the Omagh bombing' and that more should be done to investigate this.”

The Irish government said that it would "do what was necessary" following the ruling.

Jason McCue, a lawyer who has campaigned for justice of victims of Irish republican violence but was not involved in the action, said: “The families deserve the truth and justice. Their determined and persistent fight for such should be applauded. Today was another significant step.”

The attack in Omagh was carried out using a massive fertiliser bomb. No one has ever been convicted.

Republican factions had for years had received material and support from the Libyan regime of Muammar Qaddafi, including Semtex that was used in other high-profile attacks.

Nord Stream 2: Ukraine and Poland slam deal to complete controversial gas pipeline

By Euronews with AP • Updated: 22/07/2021 - 

The Russian Nord Stream 2 pipe-laying ship ‘Akademik Tscherski’ moored at the port of Mukran on the island of Ruegen, Germany - Copyright Jens Buettner/AP


Germany and the United States have announced a deal to allow the completion of a controversial Russian gas pipeline to Europe without the imposition of further US sanctions.

The agreement on Nord Stream 2, announced on Wednesday, says Germany and the US commit to countering any future Russian attempt to use the pipeline as a political tool.

The two states also agreed to support Ukraine and Poland, which construe the project as a security threat, by funding alternative energy and development projects.

In a joint statement, the two governments said they were "united in their determination to hold Russia to account for aggression and malign activities by imposing costs via sanctions and other tools" - referring largely to Russian support for separatists in Ukraine.

There are long-held concerns that Nord Stream 2 could give Russia too much power over European gas supplies, or allow gas to be shut off to Russia's adversaries.

But the pipeline is almost completed and has had the staunch support of German Chancellor Angela Merkel throughout the process.

The route of Nord Stream 2 Credit: Euronews

What has Germany signed up to?

The joint statement says that “should Russia attempt to use energy as a weapon, or commit further aggressive acts against Ukraine, Germany will take action at the national level and press for effective measures at the European level, including sanctions".

Germany and the US have both committed to supporting a $1 billion (€850 million) fund for Ukraine to diversify its energy sources, of which Germany will provide an initial $175 million (€148.5 million).

Germany has also guaranteed it will reimburse Ukraine for gas transit fees it will lose from being bypassed by Nord Stream 2 until 2024, with a possible 10-year extension.

It has also committed to continue offering Ukraine support to transition away from coal, including by appointing a new "special envoy" with dedicated funding of $70 million (€595 million).

In a nod to Poland, Germany has also agreed to sign the 'Three Seas Initiative', an EU and US-promoted scheme that aims to boost energy security among countries bordering the Baltic, Black, and Adriatic seas.

The German government, the statement said, will help to contribute up to $1.7 billion (€1.4 billion) of European Union funding to the initiative up until 2027.
Opposition to Nord Stream 2 is still widespread

The US waived sanctions on the Russian companies overseeing Nord Stream 2 in May this year. But the Biden administration still opposes the pipeline in principle.

The deal has already attracted condemnation from Ukraine and Poland. In a joint statement issued on Wednesday night, the countries' two foreign ministers, Dmytro Kuleba and Zbigniew Rau called the deal struck "insufficient".

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was finally given a date to visit the White House on the same day the deal was announced  Efrem Lukatsky/AP

"The decision to build Nord Stream 2 made in 2015 mere months after Russia’s invasion and illegal annexation of Ukrainian territory, created a security, credibility and political crisis in Europe," they said. "Currently, this crisis is significantly deepened by the resignation from attempts to stop the launch of the NS2 gas pipeline.

"Unfortunately, the proposals to cover the resulting security deficit cannot be considered sufficient to limit the threats created by NS2. We call on the United States and Germany to adequately address the security crisis in our region, that Russia is the only beneficiary to. Ukraine and Poland will work together with their and partners to oppose NS2 until solutions are developed."

Nord Stream 2 is a bad idea and a bad deal for Europe, US' Antony Blinken tells Euronews

US waives sanctions on Nord Stream 2 operator

First stage of Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline is complete, says Putin

As the EU tightens regulations on Nord Stream 2, why all the fuss about a new gas pipeline?

US politicians of all stripes also lined up to criticise the move on Wednesday. The top Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Rep. Michael McCaul of Texas, said he had no doubt Russia would still "use the Nord Stream 2 pipeline as a weapon of coercion against Ukraine and transatlantic energy security as soon as it is operational.

"Promises to invest in future Ukrainian energy projects and ambiguous threats of consequences won’t change that reality."

The State Department said its officials are due to visit both Kyiv and Warsaw this week to inform them in person of the deal.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is also now due to visit Biden on August 30. An invitation for “later this summer” had been announced in June, before Biden met Russian President Vladimir Putin in Geneva, but a date was not set until Wednesday.

The Kremlin said on Thursday in a readout of a call between President Vladimir Putin and Merkel that the two "leaders are satisfied with the construction of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline" described as "a strictly commercial venture".

"Ms Merkel told Mr Putin about the discussions on the developments around the pipeline project with US President Joseph Biden in Washington. Vladimir Putin made his own comments on this subject," the Kremlin added.

Baltic Pipe delay to push Poland back into Russia's arms

Copenhagen's decision to withdraw a permit for the Danish section of the Baltic Pipe gas pipeline from Poland to Norway could mean Warsaw remains a buyer of Russian gas. That was not part of the plan.


The Baltic Pipe is crucial to Poland's attempts to free itself of Russian gas dependence

As the United States agrees to back the Russo-German Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline — bypassing Poland and Ukraine — Warsaw's strategic aim of diversifying its energy sources away from Russia is being threatened by delays in another gas pipeline under the Baltic Sea linking the EU member with Norwegian gas fields in the North Sea.

Warsaw is still working out how to handle the recent decision by Denmark's Environment and Food Committee to revoke an environmental permit for the Baltic Pipe project, due to fears over damage to local bat and mice populations. The permit was issued in July 2019 for the 210-kilometer (125-mile) onshore section of the Baltic Pipe gas pipeline that crosses Danish territory.

The pipeline is planned to link Norwegian gas fields with Polish customers from October 2022. The move may represent a setback for Poland's long-term and cross-party plans to shift away from dependence on Russian gas.

The longer and more controversial Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline that would bring Russian gas to Germany — the main reason why Warsaw has pushed so hard to finish the Baltic Pipe project — also struggled to gain permission to be lain in Danish waters.

Observers say the delay could also give Moscow a say in future gas contract negotiations, or be used in talks about the construction of a so-called energy bridge linking any future Russian nuclear energy production to the EU.

"Russia will use the delay as leverage and could seek to push ahead with a project to build a nuclear plant in Kaliningrad and an energy bridge, linked to the EU electricity markets," said Robert Tomaszewski of the Warsaw-based think tank Polityka Insight. "Poland could be urged to join as a way of inducing preferable gas contracts," he told DW.

Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki signed off on the Baltic Pipe Project in 2019
Looking away from Russia

This section of the pipeline is one of five intended to enable the transport of gas from Denmark's west coast to the island of Zealand in the southeast.

The Baltic Pipe project is a joint venture between Polish firm Gaz-System and Danish firm Energinet, and is estimated to cost between €1.6 billion and €2.1 billion ($1.9 billion and $2.5 billion). It includes a 275-km-long Baltic Sea pipeline between Poland and Denmark, and a connection to Norway's Europe II pipeline in the North Sea.

The pipeline has a capacity of 10.2 billion cubic meters (bcm) per year and is planned to be completed by October 2022 — just before Poland's state-controlled oil and gas company PGNiG will see its long-term import contract with Russia's Gazprom expire.

Diversifying its gas supply away from Russia has been Poland's long-stated aim, prompting it to develop LNG (liquefied natural gas) terminals and other interconnections.

At the start of 2018, PGNiG signed agreements with Gaz-System and Energinet for gas transmission services between 2022 and 2037 worth 8.1 billion zloty (€1.8 billion).

Poland has an annual consumption of about 20 bcm of gas, a figure that is growing as the country shifts from coal- to gas-powered power plants. PGNiG bought 9 bcm of Russian gas in 2020.

An icebreaker in the Kara Sea, where the Yamal LNG project is aiming to extract and liquefy gas from the Yuzhno-Tambeyskoye gas field

Polish energy pivots

PGNiG CEO Pawel Majewski stressed that the company is ready to continue buying gas from points east. "If the price is attractive, we can buy gas from that direction," he said.

Piotr Naimski, the government's point man in the energy sector, is politically responsible for the pipeline, and has for years made assurances that gas from Russia will not be needed in Poland after 2022.

Russia, in the meantime, remains open to continue supplying Poland. "Poland is our reliable counterparty with which we cooperate a lot," Elena Burmistrova, the export chief of Russian gas giant Gazprom, said last month.

The delay to the pipeline has caused concern among some observers, including the United States. "We were disturbed to see the stoppage to that [Baltic Pipe] project on environmental grounds," Matthew Boyse, deputy assistant secretary at the US State Department, said during a recent webinar organized by US nonprofit Atlantic Council.

Anna Mikulska from the Center for Energy Studies at Rice University thinks the issue could be resolved sooner rather than later. "The expectation is that the permits will be back on track and there will only be a three-month delay," she told DW, adding that additional costs could likely amount to around €80 million.

But Marian Kaagh, vice president of projects at Energinet, believes the decision by the Danish environment authority may take seven to eight months.

Danish firm Energinet hopes to have full transmission capacity by the end of 2022

Boosting LNG supply

According to S&P Global Platts Analytics, Poland would need other pipelines to operate at full capacity, or would likely be in the market for more Russian gas in the event that the Baltic Pipe project is delayed.

"LNG was already in our forecast model as being well used and the other routes' current firm capacity is not an equal replacement for the Baltic Pipe," it said in a recent report, referring to existing flows from Germany, the Czech Republic and Ukraine.

Katja Yafimava from the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies thinks that any delay in the Baltic Pipe project "would contribute to Polish gas balance tightness post-2022." But this was not the only factor, she told DW. "Even if the pipe were to start as planned, only 2 bcm is understood to have been contracted to flow through it — that is just one-quarter of the booked capacity of 8 bcm."

Another option open for Warsaw would be acceleration of the expansion of Poland's LNG terminal at the northwest Baltic port of Swinoujscie, where current regasification capacity is around 5 bcm per year.

Poland could face a natural gas crunch if the Baltic Pipe does not get completed

Diversified supply mix

But thanks to a diversified natural gas supply infrastructure, Poland will be able to substitute for potentially lost supply from the Baltic Pipe by buying spot, or on a basis of short-term contracts, including from Gazprom.

Anna Mikulska said that those options would be "much more palatable for Poland," because prices would be "much more competitive than those Poland experienced under the Yamal contract." This is a reference to the existing terms for gas purchases from the Yamal pipeline linking Russia and Germany via Poland.

Mikulska argued that the additional infrastructure would give Poland bargaining power and make contracts reflect the realities of a competitive market better than contracts negotiated under Gazprom's position as a dominant supplier.

Russia deploys military to help contain raging Siberian wildfire

By AP • Updated: 23/07/2021 - 

In this June 16, 2021 photo, firefighters work at the scene of forest fire near Andreyevsky village outside Tyumen, western Siberia, Russia. - Copyright AP Photo/Maksim Slutsky, File

Russia's military was on Thursday deployed to held contain raging wildfires in the country's Sakha-Yakutia region.

More than 1.5 million hectares (3.7 million acres) of land have so far been scorched in the Siberian region since the beginning of summer with hundreds of wildfires sparked by record temperatures.

The vast region has had a long spell of extremely hot and dry weather this summer, with temperatures reaching 39 degrees Celsius and setting records for several days.

The fires have shrouded Yakutia's cities, towns and villages in thick smoke, forcing authorities to briefly suspend flights at the regional capital's airport. The defense ministry deployed transport planes and helicopters to help douse the flames.

The Russian Air Force made 18 flights, dropping 36 tons of water on the blazes in the Gorny district.

Fedot Tumusov, a member of the Russian parliament who represents the region, called the blazes “unprecedented” in their scope.

The forests that cover huge areas of Russia make monitoring and quickly spotting new fires a daunting task.

In 2007, a federal network to spot fires from aircraft was disbanded and had its assets turned over to regional authorities. The much-criticised change resulted in the programme's rapid deterioration.

The government later reversed the move and reestablished the federal agency in charge of monitoring forests from the air. However, its resources remain limited, making it hard to survey the massive forests of Siberia and the Far East.

Record heat in northwestern Russia, Siberian wildfire season kicks off early

'We can’t see each other': Fires rage across Siberia amid dryest summer in 150 years

While some wildfires are sparked by lightning, experts estimate that over 70% of them are caused by people, from carelessly discarding cigarettes to abandoned campfires, but there are other causes.

Some wildfires are sparked by authorities in controlled burns to clear the way for new vegetation or to deprive unplanned wildfires of fuel. Observers say such intentional burns often are poorly managed and sometimes trigger bigger blazes instead of containing them.

Observers say such intentional burns often are poorly managed and sometimes trigger bigger blazes instead of containing them.

Farmers also use the same technique to burn grass and small trees on agricultural lands. Such burns regularly get out of control.

Activists and experts say that fires are also often set deliberately to cover up evidence of illegal lumbering or to create new places for timber harvesting under the false pretext of clearing burned areas.

Activists in Siberia and the Far East allege such arson is driven by strong demand for timber in the colossal Chinese market, and they have called for a total ban on timber exports to China.

Officials have acknowledged the problem and pledged to tighten oversight, but Russia's far-flung territory and regulatory loopholes make it hard to halt the illegal activity.

Critics blame the 2007 forest code that gave control over timberlands to regional authorities and businesses, eroding centralised monitoring, fueling corruption and contributing to illegal tree-cutting practices that help spawn fires.

Senior Bosnian official bans denial of Srebrenica genocide under law

By Euronews with AP • Updated: 23/07/2021 - 

A woman visits the memorial cemetery in Potocari near Srebrenica.

 - Copyright AP Photo/Darko Bandic


A senior international official in Bosnia has banned the denial of genocide under the country's criminal law.

The move is an effort to counter attempts by Bosnian Serbs to deny the significance of the 1995 massacre in Srebrenica when more than 8,000 Muslims were murdered by Serb forces.

The massacre was declared a genocide by both the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court for Former Yugoslavia.

But Bosnian Serb officials and authorities in neighbouring Serbia have refused to accept this, insisting that the massacre was a crime but did not constitute genocide.

On Friday, the outgoing head of Bosnia’s Office of the High Representative (OHR), Valentin Inzko, imposed changes to the Balkan country's legislation to prevent denials of genocide.


The amendments also convict people for glorifying war criminals, including by naming streets or public institutions after them. Anyone found guilty under the new law faces a prison sentence of up to five years.

The new law has been welcomed by Bosniak politicians and the relatives of the Srebrenica victims but has been swiftly rejected by Bosnian Serb leader Milorad Dodik.


"Republika Srpska [the Serb entity in Bosnia] rejects this, genocide did not happen, Serbs must never accept this," he told reporters.

Dodik has repeatedly criticised the OHR and the West as biased against Serbs in Bosnia.

Montenegro justice minister ousted over Srebrenica genocide denial

Serbia's Vucic hits back as Montenegro bans Srebrenica genocide denial

The US Embassy in Bosnia said on Friday that "genocide denial and war criminal glorification are unacceptable and undermine the mutual trust."

"We must underscore that the genocide at Srebrenica is not a matter of debate, but of historical fact. It is time to truly turn to a future based on peace and mutual trust."

The OHR acts as the top international body overseeing the implementation of the peace agreement that ended Bosnia’s 1992-95 war.

The office also has the authority to impose decisions or dismiss officials who undermine the post-war ethnic balance and reconciliation efforts between Bosniaks, Bosnia’s Serbs, and Croats.