Organizers of the Winter Games made clean energy a priority. Here's how they did it

JENNIFER McDERMOTT

Fri, February 20, 2026 
AP


Song Qiwu, of China, soars through the air during the ski jumping men's large hill individual at the 2026 Winter Olympics, in Predazzo, Italy, Saturday, Feb. 14, 2026. (AP Photo/Kirsty Wigglesworth)(ASSOCIATED PRESS)

Teams from the United States, Canada and Switzerland receive their medals following the women's ice hockey gold medal game at the 2026 Winter Olympics, in Milan, Italy, Thursday, Feb. 19, 2026. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)(ASSOCIATED PRESS)

Olympic fans try curling next to signage for Enel at the fan village, during the 2026 Winter Olympics, in Cortina d'Ampezzo, Italy, Feb. 20, 2026. (AP Photo/ Jennifer McDermott)(ASSOCIATED PRESS)

Great Britain's Adele Nicoll, right, slides down the track during a two women bobsled training session at the 2026 Winter Olympics, in Cortina d'Ampezzo, Italy, Thursday, Feb. 19, 2026. (AP Photo/Alessandra Tarantino)(ASSOCIATED PRESS)

CORTINA D'AMPEZZO, Italy (AP) — It takes an immense amount of energy to power venues and make snow for the Winter Olympics and, for the 2026 Milan Cortina Games, organizers pledged that virtually all of the electricity would be clean.

The organizing committee said that energy use is where they can make the most meaningful impact, since it has been one of the main drivers of planet-warming emissions at major events. And Italy’s largest electricity company, Enel, guaranteed the supply of entirely certified renewable electricity for event venues.

Here's a look at what that means:
To guarantee 100% renewable energy, Enel bought certificates

The organizing committee said in its sustainability report from September that its Games-time electrical energy would be 100% green, fed by certified renewable sources. In rare cases where temporary power generation is required, hydrotreated vegetable oil would be substituted for traditional diesel fuels, it said.

“This is also an opportunity to contribute to a broader shift — showing athletes, spectators and future host cities that cleaner energy solutions are increasingly viable for events of this scale,” the committee said Friday in a statement to The Associated Press. “We hope the steps taken for these Games can support ongoing progress across major events.”

Enel said it is supplying 85 gigawatt-hours of power for the Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games. It bought “guarantee of origin” (GO) certificates on the market from renewable energy plants to cover the entire Games’ energy demand.

GO certificates are a European mechanism created in 2001. Each certificate corresponds to 1 megawatt hour of electricity produced using a certified renewable source.
Certificates are a way to prove your energy is green

These certificates are traded on the power market, in negotiations between companies or through brokers.

Once used, they are canceled to prevent the same megawatt hour from being claimed twice. This system is meant to support the development of renewable sources, by helping companies meet their green energy targets.

Enel told the AP in a statement that its commitment to cleanly lighting up the events “translates the values of sustainability and inclusion inherent in the Games into concrete terms, combining technological innovation and environmental protection.”

While many say GOs are vital to promote Earth's decarbonization, the system has its detractors. Matteo Villa, who leads the data lab at the Italian Institute for International Political Studies, said it is a “great way to promote your event,” but it's not making Italy cleaner or more renewable.

The Games can only be as clean, or as sustainable, as the whole of Italy, Villa added.
Enel says it's producing a lot of clean electricity in Italy

Nearly three-quarters of the electricity Enel produced in Italy in 2025 was carbon-free, according to its preliminary full-year operational data. About 50% came from hydropower, followed by 17% geothermal and less than 10% from wind, solar and other renewables. The remainder was mostly from gas-fired power plants.

Many power plants that use water to produce electricity are in northern Italy, where mountains and rivers make for highly productive facilities. But Italy's national grid is still largely reliant on fossil fuels, according country-specific data from the International Energy Agency.

Enel built new primary substations in Livigno and Arabba, so electricity could be distributed throughout the territory. It also built and upgraded distribution infrastructure in the Livigno, Bormio and Cortina areas, which will benefit residents after the Games end.

Enel has a spot in the fan village in Cortina, where events are livestreamed.
Another challenge: emissions from spectators and athletes traveling

Sustainability has been a major focus for the Games, as both the organizers and the International Olympic Committee seek to model how to cut carbon pollution while running a major event. Researchers say the list of locales that could reliably host a Winter Games will shrink substantially in the coming years.

“Every Games we strive to push innovation in sustainability, reduce the overall impact and the carbon footprint,” Julie Duffus, the IOC’s head of sustainability, told the AP Friday. She highlighted the use of clean power, upgrades to the energy system and the way these Games were designed so that most venues would be existing or temporary.

Matteo Di Castelnuovo, a professor of energy economics at the SDA Bocconi School of Management in Milan, said he expects the Olympics will stay committed to clean energy, and that “the challenge lies somewhere else to make them greener.” The thornier issue for Olympic organizers, and for any business, is figuring out how to reduce the emissions they do not have direct control over, notably those stemming from transportation, he added.

The amount of greenhouse gases estimated to be released into the atmosphere as a result of the Games is similar to the emissions of 4 million average-sized, gasoline-fueled cars driving from Paris to Rome, the organizing committee said in its greenhouse gas management strategy. The largest share of the carbon footprint are activities indirectly related to the Games, such as accommodations and spectator travel. Air travel is a significant contributor because burning jet fuel releases carbon dioxide.

Karl Stoss, who chairs the Games’ Future Host Commission, has said they may need to eventually reduce the number of sports, athletes and spectators who attend.

Many skiers, including Team USA members Lindsey Vonn and Mikaela Shiffrin, expressed concern during the Games about climate change accelerating melt of the world’s glaciers.

___

Associated Press writer Colleen Barry and video journalist Brittany Peterson in Milan contributed to this report.

___

AP Winter Olympics coverage: https://apnews.com/hub/milan-cortina-2026-winter-olympics

___

The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

Officials issue warning as destructive creatures hitch rides into Great  Lakes: 'Thousands and thousands of pounds of these things'

Christine Dulion
Thu, February 19, 2026 
TCD


Photo Credit: iStock

New ballast water standards in the U.S. only apply to newly built Great Lakes vessels and oceangoing ships, leaving existing "lakers" exempt from regulations.


While Canada moves to tighten freighter restrictions across the Great Lakes, a regulatory gap in the United States continues allowing invasive species to hitch rides in ballast water — costing hundreds of millions of dollars each year.

What's happening?

In September 2024, the Environmental Protection Agency finalized new ballast water standards to slow the spread of invasive species, but environmentalists say the rules fall short. They only apply to newly built Great Lakes vessels and oceangoing ships — not to the roughly 63 "lakers" that already operate within the freshwater system, the Chicago Tribune reported.

Considering Canada will require ballast water treatment systems on all ships by 2030, this imbalance is problematic.

Environmental advocates have filed a petition arguing that most of today's ships are getting a "free pass." They asked for the rules to include existing freighters.

"Why exempt ships when we know that there is technology that they can put on that will at least try to reduce the spread of invasive species?" National Wildlife Federation policy director Marc Smith asked the Tribune.

Why are invasive species concerning?

When ships load or unload cargo, they pump millions of gallons of water into ballast tanks for stability. That water often contains microscopic organisms, larvae, and invasive species. When discharged elsewhere, they can establish new infestations.

Invasive species devastate ecosystems by outcompeting native species for food and habitat — disrupting food chains and threatening biodiversity. Zebra and quagga mussels, for example, cause over $500 million in annual damage to the Great Lakes region by clogging pipes and reducing fish populations, per the Tribune.

"These mussels build up huge masses, thousands and thousands of pounds of these things on water intake pipes. They can plug and damage infrastructure," said Greg McClinchey, director of policy and legislative affairs for the Great Lakes Fishery Commission. "It costs huge amounts of money for the cities to keep our water structures working."

What's being done to protect the Great Lakes?

Quick action is imperative to prevent the spread of invasive species, as Canada's response to an infestation in a Manitoba lake proved. Governments have also taken steps to address invasions, including with bipartisan bills to support coordinated responses such as the Save the Great Lakes Fish Act.

Stopping the spread of invasive species from ballast water would make a big difference. In the U.S., research teams are testing systems that use filtration and ultraviolet light to kill organisms before water is discharged. But environmental groups say the region needs a universal standard.

"Why not set the standard and let technology catch up?" Smith said. "We just want all vessels regulated. We want the Great Lakes to be protected."

Canadians kind of hate America now. Our new poll shows just how much.

Nick Taylor-Vaisey and Anna Wiederkehr
Thu, February 19, 2026 
POLITICO

OTTAWA — It's the world's most awkward breakup.

More than a year after U.S. President Donald Trump casually joked about absorbing Canada and repeatedly threatened debilitating tariffs on its goods, many Canadians are convinced their former pals to the south have lost the plot.

New results from The POLITICO Poll suggest a lasting chill has settled over the world's former bosom buddies. Americans are rosy as ever about their northern neighbors, but Canadians don't share the love.

Their message to America: It's not us, it's you.

Canadians don't see Trump's America as merely an annoyance, the survey found. They consider the superpower next door the world's greatest threat to peacetime.

The POLITICO Poll — in partnership with U.K. polling firm Public First — finds Canadians increasingly view the United States as a source of global volatility instead of as a stabilizing ally.

In survey question after survey question, Canadians say the U.S. no longer reflects their values, is more likely to provoke conflict than to prevent it and, as a result, is pushing Canada to consider closer ties with other global powers — including overtures to China that would have seemed unthinkable only a couple of years ago.

Here's the Canada-U.S. schism explained in five charts.


The POLITICO Poll with Public First(Anna Wiederkehr/POLITICO)

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney rose to power on a pledge to defend Canada from Trump. When the realities of a prolonged trade war set in, he promised to reduce Canada's reliance on its nearest neighbor.

Roughly three-quarters of Canadian exports find their way to U.S. customers. Carney has traveled the world in search of new partnerships with the European Union, China and Qatar. A new defense industrial strategy sets targets aimed at building up domestic production and buying overseas kit for the military only when necessary.

Carney put a finer point on his worldview with a headline-making rallying cry in Davos: In a world of great-power rivalry and fewer rules, middle powers need to band together.

The POLITICO Poll shows Carney's approach is popular at home.

Canadians were the most likely — among respondents in Canada, Germany, France and the U.K. — to say the U.S. is not a reliable ally (58 percent).

A slight 42 percent plurality of respondents from Canada go even further, saying the U.S. is no longer an ally of Canada. Only about one in three Canadians, 37 percent, said “The US is still an ally of Canada.”

Other results that reveal the extent of Canada's mistrust:


57 percent of Canadians in the poll said the U.S. cannot be depended on in a crisis.


67 percent say the U.S. "challenges" — as opposed to supports — its allies around the world.


69 percent agree the U.S. tends to create problems for other countries rather than solve them.

POLITICO Poll with Public First(Anna Wiederkehr/POLITICO)

Europeans see the greatest threat to world peace in their own backyard.

Slight majorities in the three European countries in the poll chose Russia, which upended the global order nearly four years ago with its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, as the largest threat: Germany (56 percent), France (55 percent) and the UK (53 percent).

Canadians are likewise worried about what's next door.

Almost half of Canadians point a finger at the U.S. — a 19-point lead over Russia, which took the next largest share (29 percent). A large plurality of Canadians (43 percent) see the U.S. as "mostly a threat" to global stability. Another 34 percent say Americans are "sometimes a force for stability, sometimes a threat."

Conservative voters agree that the U.S. is the top threat to peace — but only 35 percent of them. Another 30 percent picked Russia, followed by 22 percent who said China.


POLITICO Poll with Public First(Anna Wiederkehr/POLITICO)

More than two out of three Canadians believe Trump is actively seeking conflict with other countries.

Liberal voters who powered Carney's stunning victory last year — a rare fourth-consecutive win for the party — overwhelmingly see things that way. Progressive New Democrats are even likelier than the centrist governing party to hold that view.

But even Conservative voters, who broadly support close and enduring ties with Americans, have mixed feelings. A 57 percent majority say the U.S. president is looking around the world for a fight.

And that foreign intervention worries them, too: 47 percent of Canadians say U.S. involvement overseas makes the world less safe.


The POLITICO Poll with Public First(Anna Wiederkehr/POLITICO)

In the middle of the Covid pandemic, Canadians viewed Beijing with deep suspicion.

Chinese authorities had for more years imprisoned two Canadians, Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor, on espionage charges.

Ottawa and Western allies widely viewed the so-called Two Michaels' prolonged detention as retaliation for Canada's arrest of Huawei exec Meng Wanzhou as part of an extradition request from Washington.

In 2021, several months before the Two Michaels were released, a Research Co. survey revealed a low point in Canadians' take on China: only 19 percent held a positive view.

The U.S. president’s torching of the relationship with Canada has flipped public opinion.

Forced to pick, a majority of Canadians (57 percent) now say they'd rather depend on China than Trump’s America.

Asked whether Canada should deliberately move closer to China, 39 percent agreed — with a majority of those respondents (60 percent) directly naming Trump as the reason to build bridges across the Pacific.


The POLITICO Poll with Public First(Anna Wiederkehr/POLITICO)

Any prolonged Canada-U.S. tension feels deeply personal to many border-town residents. The rivers and lakes and straight-line boundaries that divide the two countries were for decades just technicalities.

Ask a Canadian who grew up on the Ontario side of Niagara Falls, and they'll talk about going "over the river" — not across a border — to visit friends and family, go to work or have a night out.

But Canadian visits to the U.S. have dropped significantly since Trump's inauguration. Tourists are taking their money elsewhere. Snowbirds who flock annually to Florida and Arizona have found other sunny options.

A declining state of affairs has frayed countless deeply woven ties.

Still, respondents expressed some optimism about the future.

Forty-one percent of Canadians say Trump represents a lasting change. But nearly half (49 percent) said the relationship between the United States and Canada will recover in a post-Trump era.

A similar proportion of Canadians share that optimism across party lines: Liberal (51 percent), Conservative (50) and NDP (46).

But then there's the solid core of skeptics — 29 percent of the country is convinced there is no going back.

Carney won on an "elbows up" rallying cry that urged Canadians to stand up for themselves. Now they're reckoning with the everyday impact of a lasting cross-border rupture.

The country seems to have settled on a new maxim for now: America if necessary, but not necessarily America.

Take off, EH: This poll reveals just how badly the U.S. has damaged its relationship with Canada

John L. Micek
Thu, February 19, 2026 
MASS. LIVE



Looks like all those “51st state” jokes and tariff threats have taken a toll as the U.S. and Canada have gone through the most awkward break-up in recent geopolitical memory.

Nearly 6 in 10 (58%) of Canadians say they no longer see the United States as a reliable ally after two centuries of cross-border partnership. And a plurality (48%) say we’re a bigger threat to peace than Vladimir Putin’s Russia, according to a new Politico poll published Thursday.

The poll, conducted with London-based Public First, tested the opinions of America’s closest allies. And after more than a year of bellicose rhetoric from Republican President Donald Trump’s White House, the relationship with the nation’s nearest northern neighbor is on shaky ground.

Indeed, 42% of respondents believe the United States is no longer an ally. Barely 1 in 3 (37%) said they consider the U.S. an ally of Canada.

More findings:

A clear majority of Canadians (57%) believe the country can no longer be depended on in a crisis.

More than two-thirds (67%) said the U.S. “challenges” rather than supports its allies around the world, according to the poll.

And nearly 7 in 10 (69%) agreed that the U.S. tended to create problems for other countries rather than solve them.

European respondents to the poll saw Russia as the bigger threat to their security: Germany (56%), France (55%) and the United Kingdom (53%).

The poll of 2,000 Canadians, conducted from Feb. 6 to Feb. 9, comes as officials in Massachusetts have sought to shore up relations with Canadian provincial leaders and to strengthen trade and economic partnerships.

Boston Mayor Michelle Wu, for instance, traveled to Nova Scotia, at a cost of $13,365 to city taxpayers, as she visited with leaders and to procure Boston’s annual Christmas tree.

Last summer, Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey hosted a roundtable with Canadian provincial leaders and northeastern governors at the State House in Boston to talk trade, tariffs and Trump.

Canadians Trash Trump’s America as a Bigger Threat Than Russia

Martha McHardy
Thu, February 19, 2026 

The Daily Beast 


BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI / AFP via Getty Images(BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI)

Donald Trump is now seen as a bigger threat to global peace than even Russia by some of America’s former allies.

A POLITICO Poll conducted Feb. 6–9 with over 2,000 respondents each from Canada, the U.K., France, and Germany, found Canadians are far more likely than Europeans to view the U.S. as a greater threat to global peace than Russia.

Nearly half of Canadians, 48 percent, ranked the United States as the biggest threat to world peace, compared with just 29 percent naming Russia. Sixty-nine percent of Canadian respondents said Trump is actively seeking conflict with other countries with no provocation.

The Daily Beast has contacted the White House for comment.

The survey results come as relations between the U.S. and Canada, historically close allies, have broken down since Trump began his second term.

Trump has floated the idea of annexing the country and making it the 51st U.S. state, and slapped tariffs on Canadian steel, aluminum, and automobiles.

The move sparked trade tensions, which Canada met with its own retaliation. Trump has most recently threatened to block the opening of a $4.6 billion bridge connecting Detroit, Michigan, with Windsor, Ontario, demanding the U.S. be given 50 percent ownership.

It is perhaps no surprise, then, that the poll shows a sharp decline in trust toward Washington, with 58 percent of Canadians saying the U.S. is not a reliable ally—the highest share among respondents in Canada, Germany, France, and the U.K.

Even more striking, 42 percent of Canadians said the U.S. is no longer an ally at all, while only 37 percent insisted the partnership remains intact.

The survey also highlights broader concerns about U.S. actions overseas following Trump’s operation in Venezuela and push to seize Greenland from Denmark, a NATO ally: 43 percent of Canadians see the U.S. as “mostly a threat” to global stability, while another 34 percent say America is “sometimes a force for stability, sometimes a threat.”

President Donald Trump met with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney in the Oval Office of the White House, Oct. 7, 2025, in Washington. / The Washington Post / The Washington Post via Getty Im

Almost half, 47 percent, said U.S. involvement abroad actually makes the world less safe.

In response to the poll, White House spokesperson Davis Ingle told the Daily Beast: “The ultimate poll was November 5, 2024 when nearly 80 million Americans overwhelmingly elected President Trump to deliver on his popular and commonsense agenda.

“The President has already made historic progress not only in America but around the world. It is not surprising that President Trump remains the most dominant figure in American politics.”

Other surveys confirm that the U.S. is increasingly seen as a threat in Canada and beyond.

A Kekst CNC poll conducted earlier this month of 11,099 people across G7 nations found Canadians are now nearly as likely as Chinese respondents to view the U.S. as a danger to their country’s security.

Among all countries surveyed, Canadians showed the largest jump in perceived threat from Washington, from 29 percent in November, to 44 percent this month.

Meanwhile, YouGov European tracker data monitoring attitudes in Britain, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, and Spain from Jan. 9 to 27, showed that perceptions of the U.S. are the worst they have been since YouGov started tracking in 2016.

Despite these deep doubts, the POLITICO poll showed that Canadians remain cautiously optimistic about the post-Trump future.

About 49 percent said they expect U.S.-Canada relations to recover once a new administration takes office, though 29 percent remain convinced the damage is irreversible.

 

China overturns Canadian's death sentence after Carney visit, lawyer says

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney shakes hands with President of China Xi Jinping at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, China on Friday, Jan. 16, 2026. Sean Kilpatrick/Pool via REUTERS

Mon, February 9, 2026
By Laurie Chen

BEIJING, Feb 9 (Reuters) - China's top court has overturned a Canadian man's death sentence on drug charges, his lawyer said on Monday, marking a breakthrough in a case that has strained ​diplomatic relations between Ottawa and Beijing for years.

Robert Schellenberg was arrested in China in 2014 for suspected drug ‌smuggling and convicted in 2018, initially receiving a 15-year prison sentence. He was subsequently condemned to death in a January 2019 retrial - one month ‌after Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou was arrested in Vancouver on a U.S. warrant.

China's Supreme People's Court on Friday ruled against a death sentence passed by the lower court, Beijing-based lawyer Zhang Dongshuo told Reuters. The case will be sent to Liaoning Provincial High People's Court for retrial, he said.

The breakthrough came less than a month after Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney made a ⁠four-day visit to China, where he hailed ‌both countries' improving ties after they had soured under Canada's previous leader Justin Trudeau.

A spokesperson for Canada's foreign ministry told Reuters they were aware of the Supreme Court's decision and would ‍continue providing consular services to Schellenberg and his family, without elaborating on the decision.

"Judging from both countries' official remarks after the Canadian prime minister visited China, the likelihood of the Supreme Court's decision (being related) is very high, according to my experience," said Zhang.

However, he added ​that the possibility of Schellenberg being eventually acquitted was not high, given the severity of the original sentence.

"Chinese ‌judicial organs independently heard the relevant case and issued a judgement in accordance with the law," Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Lin Jian said during a briefing on Monday when asked about Schellenberg's case.

Four Canadian citizens were executed by China last year on drug smuggling charges, Canada said at the time.

Schellenberg's death sentence had been upheld by the Liaoning court in 2021 after an appeal hearing, drawing condemnation from Ottawa at the time.

China had detained two Canadians on spying accusations shortly ⁠after Meng was detained, prompting international accusations of hostage diplomacy. They were ​released in 2021 on the same day the U.S. dropped its extradition ​request for Meng and she returned to China.

Diplomatic ties were further strained after Canada's government imposed tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles in 2024, following similar U.S. curbs.

China retaliated last March with tariffs ‍on more than $2.6 billion of ⁠Canadian farm and food products, such as canola oil and meal, followed by tariffs on canola seed in August.

After Carney's visit, both countries agreed to slash tariffs on EVs and canola in a major reversal of previous ⁠policy.

Analysts say the rapprochement between Canada and China could reshape the political and economic context in which Sino-U.S. rivalry unfolds, although Ottawa is ‌not expected to dramatically pivot away from Washington.

(Reporting by Laurie Chen in Beijing; Additional reporting by Allison ‌Lampert in Montreal and Beijing newsroom; Editing by Lincoln Feast.)

In the Arctic, the major climate threat of black carbon is overshadowed by geopolitical tensions

PETER PRENGAMAN
Mon, February 9, 2026 


FILE - An Icebreaker makes the path for a cargo ship with an iceberg in the background near a port on the Alexandra Land island near Nagurskoye, Russia, May 17, 2021. (AP Photo/Alexander Zemlianichenko, File)(ASSOCIATED PRESS)


REYKJAVIK, Iceland (AP) — As rising global temperatures speed up the melting of sea ice in the Arctic Ocean, it’s set off a boom of ships taking routes that previously were frozen and not traversable.

The increase in marine Arctic traffic, which received increased attention as U.S. President Donald Trump pushed for the United States to take over Greenland, has come with a heavy environmental cost: black carbon, or soot, that spews from ships and makes the ice melt even faster. Several countries are making a case for ships in the Arctic to use cleaner fuels that cause less pollution in meetings this week with international shipping regulators.

Glaciers, snow and ice covered in the soot emitted by ships have less ability to reflect the sun. Instead, the sun’s heat is absorbed, helping to make the Arctic the fastest warming place on Earth. In turn, melting Arctic sea ice can affect weather patterns around the world.

“It ends up in a never-ending cycle of increased warming,” said Sian Prior, lead adviser for the Clean Arctic Alliance, a coalition of nonprofits focused on the Arctic and shipping. “We need to regulate emissions and black carbon, in particular. Both are completely unregulated in the Arctic.”

In December, France, Germany, the Solomon Islands and Denmark proposed that the International Maritime Organization require ships traveling in Arctic waters to use “polar fuels,” which are lighter and emit less carbon pollution than the widely used maritime fuels known as residuals. The proposal includes steps that companies would take to comply and show they are using cleaner fuels and the geographic area it would apply to — all ships traveling north of the 60th parallel. The proposal was expected to be presented this week to the IMO’s Pollution Prevention and Response Committee and possibly another committee in April.

A 2024 ban on using a type of residual known as heavy fuel oil in the Arctic has had only modest impacts so far, partly because of loopholes.

Concerns overshadowed by geopolitics

The push to reduce black carbon, which studies have shown has a warming impact 1,600 times that of carbon dioxide over a 20-year span, is happening at a time of conflicting interests, both internationally and among the countries that have coastlines in the Arctic.

In recent months, Trump's periodic comments about the need to “own” Greenland to bolster U.S. security have raised many issues, from Greenland's sovereignty to the future of the NATO alliance. Pollution and other environmental issues in the Arctic have taken a backseat.

Trump, who has called climate change a “con job,” has also pushed back against global policies aimed at fighting it. Last year, the IMO was expected to adopt new regulations that would have imposed carbon fees on shipping, which supporters said would have pushed companies to use cleaner fuels and electrify fleets where possible. Then Trump intervened, lobbying hard for nations to vote no. The measure was postponed for a year, its prospects at best uncertain. Given that, it’s hard to see the IMO making fast progress on the current proposal to limit black carbon in the Arctic.

Even inside Arctic nations, which are most impacted by black carbon and other shipping pollution, there are internal tensions around such regulations. Iceland is a good example. While the country is a world leader in green technologies such as carbon capture and the use of thermal energies for heating, conservationists say the country has made less progress on regulating pollution in its seas. That is because the fishing industry, one of the country’s most important, holds huge sway.

“The industry is happy with profits, unhappy with the taxes and not engaged in issues like climate or biodiversity,” said Arni Finnsson, board chair of the Iceland Nature Conservation Association.

Finnsson added that the costs of using cleaner fuels or electrifying fleets have also prompted resistance.

“I think the government is waking up, but they still have to wait for the (fishing) industry to say yes,” he said.

The country has not taken a position on the pending polar fuels proposal. In a statement, Iceland's Ministry of Environment, Energy and Climate said the proposal was “positive with regard to its purpose and basic content,” but that further study was needed. The statement added that Iceland supports stronger measures to counter shipping emissions and reduce black carbon.


Arctic ship traffic and black carbon emissions both rise

Soot pollution has increased in the Arctic as cargo ships, fishing boats and even some cruise liners are traveling more in the waters that connect the northernmost parts of Iceland, Greenland, Canada, Russia, Norway, Finland, Sweden and the United States.

Between 2013 and 2023, the number of ships entering waters north of the 60th parallel increased by 37%, according to the Arctic Council, an intergovernmental forum made up of the eight countries with territory in the Arctic. In that same period, the total distance traversed by ships in the Arctic increased 111%.

Black carbon emissions have also increased. In 2019, 2,696 metric tons of black carbon was emitted from ships north of the 60th parallel compared with 3,310 metric tons in 2024, according to a study by Energy and Environmental Research Associates. The study found that fishing boats were the biggest source of black carbon.

It also found that the 2024 ban on heavy fuel oil would only result in a small reduction in black carbon. Waivers and exceptions allow some ships to continue using it until 2029.

Environmental groups and concerned countries see regulating ship fuel as the only way to realistically reduce black carbon. That is because getting nations to agree to limit traffic would likely be impossible. The lure of fishing, resource extraction and shorter shipping distances is too great. Ships can save days on some trips between Asia and Europe by sailing through the Arctic.

Still, the path known as the Northern Sea Route is only traversable a few months of the year, and even then ships must be accompanied by icebreakers. Those dangers, combined with Arctic pollution concerns, have driven some companies to pledge to stay away — at least for now.

“The debate around the Arctic is intensifying, and commercial shipping is part of that discussion,” wrote Søren Toft, CEO of Mediterranean Shipping Company, the world's largest container shipping company, in a LinkedIn post last month. “Our position at MSC is clear. We do not and will not use the Northern Sea Route.”

___

The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.


Scientists 'surprised' by findings from new Arctic study on polar bears: 'People don't see it ... people don't care'

Calvin Coffee
Thu, February 19, 2026 
TCD


Photo Credit: iStock

A new study of polar bears in Norway's Svalbard region found that despite rapid sea ice loss, many bears have improved body condition by shifting their diets to alternative prey.

A new study of polar bears in Norway's Svalbard region has left scientists conflicted. While the bears appeared healthier despite rapid sea ice loss from rising global temperatures, researchers warned that these findings aren't good news.
What's happening?

Research published in Scientific Reports analyzed over two decades of data from nearly 800 adult polar bears in the Barents Sea from 1995 to 2019. The team expected to see worsening body condition as sea ice declined, as the area has lost ice faster than most polar bear habitats, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Instead, they found that after an initial decline in the late 1990s, the body condition of many bears improved from around 2000 onward.

"I was surprised," Jon Aars, the study's lead author and scientist at the Norwegian Polar Institute, told Vox. "I would have predicted that body condition would decline. We see the opposite."

Aars noted that the bears appeared heavier even as ice-free days increased by 100 days a year during the study period.

Scientists believe the bears may be adapting by shifting their diets. They're relying more on alternative prey such as reindeer, walrus carcasses, more seal species, or coming into closer contact with humans — like one encounter caught on video in Svalbard last year — when traditional hunting conditions deteriorate.
Why is this shift concerning?

While the findings complicate the narrative around polar bears and ice loss, researchers stress that the broader trend remains troubling. Polar bears still depend on sea ice to hunt, travel, and reproduce. Other populations across the Arctic, including Canada's Hudson Bay, have seen sharp declines in survival and more underweight bears as ice disappears.

The concern around ice loss extends beyond these bears. Loss of sea ice accelerates ocean warming, disrupts the base of food systems, and threatens coastal communities that rely on stable Arctic seasons and ecosystems. Other Arctic animals, like multiple kinds of seals and whales, struggle to adapt to rapid ice loss, with population shifts harder to detect.

"Many of those are more at risk than polar bears," Aars told Vox. "There are also changes in Svalbard, in the sea, that are much more profound than what we see on land with polar bears. But people don't see it, or people don't care."
What's being done about this?

The study's authors emphasize the importance of continued monitoring across different regions rather than drawing broad conclusions from a single population of polar bears. They warned that Svalbard's bears may only be temporarily resilient in an unbalanced ecosystem and could face sudden declines if alternative prey populations decline.

Ultimately, protecting Arctic ecosystems requires reducing pollution driving global temperature increases and ice sheet loss, safeguarding endangered habitats, and expanding conservation efforts that support a stable future for all.

Giant Trump banner hanging outside DOJ building stirs strong reactions online: ‘Full blown North Korea vibes’

Josh Marcus
Thu, February 19, 2026
THE INDEPENDENT

A huge banner featuring President Trump’s face and the words “Make America Safe Again” was installed on the front of Justice Department headquarters, sparking online outrage and comparisons to authoritarian regimes.


Workers installed a huge banner featuring President Trump’s face and the words “Make America Safe Again” on the front of Justice Department headquarters in Washington on Thursday, provoking online outrage and comparisons between the administration and authoritarian regimes.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a frequent Trump critic, said the gesture was “beyond parity.”

“How many dictatorship-style monuments, building name changes, and fake awards do Americans have to endure?” he wrote on X, echoing another commentator who said the banner had totalitarian “North Korea vibes.”

Since Trump took office, the president and his allies have renamed the Kennedy Center and the U.S. Institute of Peace to include Trump’s name.

Newsom wasn’t the only Democratic lawmaker sounding off on the banner.

Critics of the president were alarmed on Thursday after workers installed a huge banner of Trump on the headquarters of the Department of Justice (AFP via Getty Images)

“Americans believe in the rule of law,” Rep. Ted Lieu of California wrote on X. “MAGA Republicans believe in the rule of Trump. November is coming.”

Others argued the image undermined the Justice Department’s position as an independent institution tasked with impartially applying the law.

“Trump is plastering his face on the building that’s supposed to investigate him,” Rep. Jimmy Gomez, also of California, added on X. “There was once a time when a president couldn’t boss the Attorney General around like his own personal lapdog.”

Some commentators and reporters were also critical of the move.

“Could also be Germany 1930s, Soviet Union 1950s,” The Atlantic’s Tom Nichols wrote on X. “Could be many places, but shouldn't be America.”

Others, like Ken Dilanian, argued the banner was highly ironic given Republicans’ longstanding claims that the Biden administration had politicized the DOJ.

Banners of the president have been put on multiple government agencies since Trump took office (AFP/Getty)

“This is a stunning confirmation of the grim reality, which is that Donald Trump has seized control of the once independent Justice Department and is using it to pursue his political objectives—including trying to punish his perceived enemies,” he wrote on X. “Exactly what his supporters baselessly accused the previous administration of doing.”

Critics of the administration have pointed to federal prosecutions of Trump critics like former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, as well as Democrats who encouraged military members to ignore illegal orders in a video last year, as evidence of this alleged erosion in the separation of powers.


The Trump administration defended the symbol, arguing it was a part of the larger efforts to celebrate the U.S.’s 250th anniversary.

“We are proud at this Department of Justice to celebrate 250 years of our great country and our historic work to make America safe again at President Trump’s direction,” a DOJ spokesperson told The Independent.

Similar banners of the president’s face have previously hung at the Departments of Agriculture and Labor, at a cost of thousands of dollars to taxpayers.

Giant banner of Donald Trump hung at Justice Department headquarters

Hannah Rabinowitz, CNN
Thu, February 19, 2026 


Members of the National Guard walk past a banner of President Donald Trump, hanging on the Department of Justice building in Washington, DC, on Thursday. - Allison Robbert/AP


A large banner of Donald Trump was hung outside of the Justice Department headquarters in Washington, DC, on Thursday, emphasizing the White House’s control over the nation’s top law enforcement branch that once pursued criminal prosecutions against the president.

The image of Trump in shades of blue is a remarkable addition to the storied Robert F. Kennedy Department of Justice Building, which is occupied by a department that traditionally has made painstaking efforts to separate itself from politics.

Since Trump retook office last year, the Justice Department has faced repeated accusations of targeting the president’s perceived enemies on his behalf. Those prosecutions include that of former FBI Director James Comey, New York Attorney General and Letitia James, as well as investigations into Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell and several Democratic representatives who recorded a video urging service members to disobey any illegal orders.

Similar banners of Trump’s face have been draped across other federal departments including the Department of Labor and the Department of Agriculture, each with their own text: “American workers first” and “growing America,” respectively.

The new sign at the Justice Department reads “make America safe again,” the slogan of the Trump administration’s violent crime crackdown.

The Trump Justice Department has repeatedly stated that its investigations under Trump are not political, and said that the department is course-correcting from alleged “weaponization” under the previous administration.

Chief among their examples are the two federal criminal cases brought against Trump by former special Jack Smith for retaining classified documents in his home at Mar-a-Lago and for his alleged role in instigating the 2021 Capitol riot. The classified documents case was dismissed by a judge, and the election interference case was dropped when he won election in November 2020.

“We are proud at this Department of Justice to celebrate 250 years of our great country and our historic work to make America safe again at President Trump’s direction,” a Justice Department spokesperson said.

Trump’s DOJ Bulldog Scolds Prosecutors for Forgetting the President Is Their ‘Chief Client’

Wiktoria Gucia
Thu, February 19, 2026 
DAILY BEAST


SAUL LOEB / AFP via Getty Images

A top Justice Department aide admitted the agency exists to serve one person: President Donald Trump.

During a January meeting with the leaders of 93 U.S. attorneys’ offices, Associate Deputy Attorney General Aakash Singh called President Trump, 79, the federal prosecutors’ “chief client,” three people briefed on the meeting told Bloomberg Law.

The 33-year-old, whose relatively short legal career has included a charge for driving under the influence (DUI), told participants that anyone unwilling to support the administration’s agenda should step aside, the outlet reported.

Aakash Singh, far right, told U.S. Attorney's offices that the president is their

The remarks reportedly startled meeting participants, as they came on the heels of the resignation of six Minnesota federal prosecutors who quit rather than pursue charges against the widow of Renee Good, 37, who was killed by an ICE agent—a development Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz condemned as “the latest sign that President Trump is pushing nonpartisan career professionals out of the Department of Justice and replacing them with his sycophants.”

U.S. attorneys are charged with ensuring “that the laws be faithfully executed,” according to the department’s website.

Yet Singh—described by a colleague as an octopus with 93 tentacles, one for each office— has pushed prosecutors to align their work with the Trump administration’s priorities.

A banner showing President Donald Trump is hung from the Department of Justice, Thursday, Feb. 19, 2026, in Washington, D.C. / Allison Robbert/AP

“You cannot micromanage US attorneys’ offices from Washington—not in the long run—and I’ve never found managing by fear to be very effective in the long run either,” Mark Calloway, a former US attorney in Charlotte, told Bloomberg Law.

Since his promotion to Associate Deputy Attorney General after Trump took office, Singh has allegedly exercised tight control over U.S. attorneys’ offices, often demanding emails with case-specific data—a practice some former career officials have described as bullying.

One email obtained by Bloomberg Law was sent just before Thanksgiving and instructed all 93 federal prosecutors to submit data showing their offices’ compliance with fulfilling Trump-directed crackdowns on immigration, political violence, and other policy priorities.

In another virtual meeting, Singh requested that all U.S. attorneys’ offices identify federal judges perceived to engage in judicial activism, so the information could inform potential impeachment referrals to Congress.

A DOJ spokesperson who confirmed Singh’s meeting request told Fox News Digital that the Trump administration is “facing unprecedented judicial activism from rogue judges who care more about making a name for themselves than acting as impartial arbiters of the law.”

In August, Singh met with federal prosecutors in Washington, D.C., as the Justice Department sought to bring severe charges against people protesting the military and federal police presence in the capital ordered by the president.


According to the New York Times, he advised prosecutors to impanel new grand juries if a sitting grand jury refused to indict in efforts to pursue more serious charges.

Attorney General Pam Bondi has executed Trump's demands. / Alex Wong / Getty Images

“That’s way out of line and completely unlike anything I ever heard at the DOJ,” Ken White, a former federal prosecutor, told The Guardian.

Bloomberg Law reported that Singh’s influence has raised concern primarily among institutionalists in the department—officials who prioritize protecting the Justice Department’s independence and long-standing rules—because it departs from norms that emphasize prosecutorial independence and impartiality.

Since the start of his second term in office, Trump’s influence over the actions of the DOJ has been apparent, with the 79-year-old president posting on social media a private message to Attorney General Pam Bondi, insisting that she prosecute his enemies—a step she ultimately took.

Donald Trump's private message to Pam Bondi he posted on Truth Social in September. / Truth Social

“Normally these political appointees are chosen not only for political reasons, but because they have credentials that are impeccable, with extensive prosecutorial and managerial experience,” former federal prosecutor Mark Rasch told The Guardian, commenting on the unusualness of Singh’s appointment to such a high position despite a DUI charge and relatively limited experience, which includes five years as an assistant U.S. attorney.


“But political fealty seems to be the single qualification now,” he added, referring to the second Trump administration.

Cuba is quickly nearing a point of no return as the U.S. weaponizes its Venezuelan oil supplies

Jordan Blum
Fri, February 20, 2026 


A man walks past graffiti celebrating the late Cuban leader Fidel Castro on a street in Havana on February 16, 2026.(YAMIL LAGE / AFP—Getty Images))

The Trump administration’s embargo on Cuba—effectively cutting off 75% of the communist-ruled island’s crude oil supplies—is quickly pushing the Havana leadership to a point of no return amid escalating fuel shortages and frequent blackouts.

Some six weeks after the U.S. violently ousted Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, and with the U.S. having seized control of that country’s oil production, geopolitical and energy analysts said the next “domino” in Cuba is close to toppling under economic pressure unless a diplomatic resolution is reached.

The evolving situation could include potential conflict with Russia, which is aiming to supply Cuba with oil tanker shipments. While a repeat of the Cuban Missile Crisis 64 years later is highly unlikely, the U.S. could end up seizing Russian tankers, something that has already occurred with ships en route to Venezuela. Such moves would escalate already heightened tensions between the U.S. and Russia, said Skip York, a global energy expert for Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy.

“The fuel situation in Cuba will get pretty dire pretty fast. That’s going to put tremendous pressure on the government because energy—whether it’s oil or electricity—is the lifeblood of any country,” York said.

“And, if the U.S. stays the course, they will board any sanctioned tankers that are heading toward Cuba,” he added.

Not only is Cuba facing dwindling vehicle and jet fuel supplies, but most of Cuba’s electric grid relies on crude oil, too. The island has very limited natural gas and renewable energy assets.

Cuba produces only a little bit of oil domestically, not nearly enough to sustain itself. About 75% of Cuba’s oil imports typically come from Venezuela and Mexico. The U.S. cut off Venezuelan supplies to Cuba at the beginning of this year. And a Trump executive order at the end of January, which threatened tariffs against countries that supply Cuba with petroleum, led to Mexico reluctantly ceasing exports as well. In the meantime, Cuba is leaning on whatever reserve stockpiles it has left.

Cuba says Trump is creating a dangerous precedent of using tariffs to strangle and starve individual nations. Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel accused the Trump administration of acting with a “fascist, criminal, and genocidal nature of a clique that has hijacked the interests of the American people for purely personal ends.”

Russia said the U.S. is trying to “suffocate” Cuba, and said it planned to send more oil supplies to Cuba. But how such plans would play out is not yet clear. In the meantime, Russia has suspended civilian flights to Cuba after evacuating its tourists from there.

The White House has confirmed the embargo remains in effect, and argues that it is holding Cuba accountable for its alleged long support of regional instability and terrorism.

Speaking earlier this week on Air Force One, Trump said, “Cuba is right now a failed nation, and they don’t even have jet fuel to get airplanes to take off. They’re clogging up their runway.”

Trump argued the Cuban leadership “should absolutely make a deal,” not stating what the U.S. is demanding in return.

“We are talking,” Trump added. “In the meantime, there’s an embargo. There’s no oil, there’s no money, there’s no anything.”
What happens next

Forcing political change in Cuba—even if not a full regime change—could mark a strong accomplishment for the Trump administration. Prominent figures in Trump’s inner circle include “Florida hawks” such as Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who is Cuban-American, and White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, said Fernando Ferreira, director of the geopolitical risk service at Rapidan Energy Group.

“It could mark the success of this ‘Donroe Doctrine,’ accomplishing regime change or political change in two U.S. adversaries in the region,” Ferreira said. “Starting with Venezuela, there’s a very clear domino impact. Cuba has been largely dependent on Venezuela for oil supplies and for political cover.

“The lack of fuel supplies into Cuba is having fairly severe impacts,” Ferreira added. “It’s going to have a humanitarian impact in Havana and the rest of Cuba. What I don’t know is how quickly or to what extent it’s going to lead to political change on the island.”

Rubio is taking the lead on such matters with a “pretty long leash,” York said. Rubio is likely to be more “adversarial” with Cuba than typical U.S. diplomats, but it still comes down to Trump being the moderator and dealmaker.

Diaz-Canel is the first non-Castro to lead Cuba in 60 years. A key question is whether he is willing to find a resolution with the U.S. or if he will be perceived as weak for compromising with Trump, York said.

“[Diaz-Canel] might be concerned about his legacy and his physical safety if he’s the weak chain that broke,” York added.

It’s unclear what the U.S. would require in a deal as well. Is leadership change on the table? An opening up of the communist economy? Reducing Cuba’s ties with Russia and China?

What we do know is that Cuba’s leadership has relatively limited options and that the energy crisis could further escalate rapidly.

“Cuba is a pretty opaque part of the Western Hemisphere,” York said. “My guess is over the next few weeks, few months, that curtain is going to get drawn back a little bit, and we’re going to get to see the inner workings of the Cuban government.”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

BIOLOGIAL WARFARE BY ANYOTHER NAME

Trump’s total blockade buries Cuba in rubbish

Lily Shanagher
Fri, February 20, 2026
THE TELEGRAPH



People hold their nose while walking through the rubbish-strewn Havana streets - Ramon Espinosa/AP


Outside a decrepit colonial mansion in Havana where clothes hang from its iron balcony, the hot Cuban sun beats down on an enormous pile of rubbish on the street corner.

People walk by and empty bags onto the growing mound while others pick through the plastic packaging and cardboard boxes, hoping to find something of use. The stench rises as food putrefies in the Caribbean heat.

Like much else in Cuba, the bin collection has ground to a halt in recent weeks as the island spirals into an economic freefall.

In the capital, only 44 of Cuba’s 106 rubbish trucks can operate, following Donald Trump’s ban on oil or money reaching the island’s shores.

After the capture of Nicolas Maduro, the former leader of Venezuela and long-time ally of Havana, the country went from receiving 35,000 barrels of oil a day to none, pushing it into a full-blown crisis.

1902 Cuban crude imports

Not satisfied, Mr Trump is now reportedly considering a naval blockade to bar shipments reaching the island.

He is backed by Marco Rubio, the US secretary of state, who, like most Cuban-Americans, is vehemently opposed to Fidel Castro and his legacy.

Alexei, 72, a retired chemistry teacher who studied in the Soviet Union, told The Telegraph that the blockade is “killing the people at a slow burn”.

With oil reserves and food drying up, blackouts lasting up to 24 hours have shuttered businesses and hospitals.

A vintage car drives past garbage piled up on a street in Havana - YAMIL LAGE / AFP via Getty Images

Public transport has all but ceased, emptying the streets and putting an end to socialising after the 6pm sunsets.




Canadians kind of hate America now. Our new poll shows just how much.
Politico1.5K


Gaza death toll a third higher than previously thought
The Telegraph

The litter has reportedly led to outbreaks of disease, but with no medical equipment or fuel, hospitals have been forced to close. Pharmacies place signs in the windows: no medicine here.

The government has introduced emergency measures, shortening school and working weeks and rationing fuel.

It has banned the refilling of jets for the next month and closed hotels. But with Canada and Russia evacuating tourists and the UK advising against all but essential travel to the island, Cuba now risks losing one of its last economic lifelines.

On Avenida Linea, a straight strip of road cutting through the Vedado district in Havana just a few blocks from the sea, only the petrol station is lit up. Drivers inch towards the glow, queuing for the dwindling fuel reserves.

A woman pushes a broken down car as Cuba continues to suffer from dwindling fuel reserves - Ernesto Mastrascusa/EPA/Shutterstock

One of those is José, a middle-aged man who joined the line in his blue 1980s Lada at 5am. By midday, he was still there. “The waiting isn’t the worst part,” he told The Telegraph. “It’s the uncertainty.”

“Today we’re limited to 20 litres per person and we have to pay in dollars. But tomorrow, when there isn’t any oil left to supply, what’s going to happen?” he asks quietly.

Since Castro toppled the US-backed dictator Fulgencio Batista in 1959, Washington has sought to exact revenge through attacks including the failed Bay of Pigs invasion in 1962 and an embargo that lasted until 2015, when Barack Obama thawed relations.

But when Mr Trump returned to office, he again designated Cuba a state sponsor of terror and reinstated sanctions. Even Cuba’s long-time allies Mexico, Russia and China have offered little more than humanitarian aid shipments and statements of criticism.

The streets are littered with rubbish in Havana following Trump’s intervention - Photo © 2026

Miguel Diaz-Canel, the president, has refused to give in to US pressure. But the obstinacy of the government is building resentment among Cubans suffering their worst crisis since the fall of the Soviet Union, especially young people who say they never benefited from the “fruits” of the revolution.

Mariana, 25, a fifth-year medical student, rode her electric motorbike to classes at the Fajardo Hospital by Revolution Plaza only to discover they had been suspended.

“I don’t care if the United States invades us or does the same thing it did in Venezuela. I want change. If it’s worse, so be it. At least it will be different,” she tells The Telegraph. “My whole life has been the same here; I can’t take it any more. I hope the US comes. I hope we get annexed, anything but this.”


Alexei added: “What they’re doing is killing the people at a slow burn, not the government. Do you think government officials are affected by the apagones [blackouts] or the food shortages?

“They have food; they have generators. The US will only create more hate toward them among Cubans. They won’t succeed in pushing the population to topple the regime this way.”

Bloggers have taken to social media to share the difficulties of daily life in the country. A meal can cost £4 to make. With high inflation and a rapidly devaluing currency, some salaries are £13 a month.

The lack of fuel has driven prices up to as much as $10 (£8) a litre. The few taxis that run at the moment are mainly thanks to drivers who have stockpiled fuel and are running on those reserves, pushing prices higher.

Many people, especially retirees on state pensions, line up outside bodegas with their libretas [ration books] that provide just one bread roll a day. But the wealthy, or those receiving money from family abroad, visit private shops laden with goods at a high price. A carton of eggs can cost 2,800 pesos in a country where the average monthly state salary is 6,900 pesos.

In Nuevo Vedado, a middle-class residential neighbourhood in the capital, a primary school is unable to function without electricity, says its principal, Álvaro, 55. “Without power, classrooms are plunged into darkness, water can’t be pumped and sent to the school’s reservoir, and it becomes impossible to cook for the children in the cafeteria,” he tells The Telegraph.

Locals walk past garbage piled up on a street in Havana - YAMIL LAGE / AFP via Getty Images

William LeoGrande, a professor at American University in Washington, says that “denying a country access to energy in the absence of a state of war, in order to coerce it into concessions by impoverishing the civilian population, can be considered a crime against humanity.”

The United Nations warns Cuba is moving towards humanitarian “collapse”. But experts cast doubt on the efficacy of Washington’s plans beyond mass human suffering.

“Cuba is not Venezuela,” Sebastian Arcos, interim director of the Cuba Research Institute in Florida, told The Telegraph. “This is a fully totalitarian regime entrenched for almost 70 years.”

While Venezuela was a largely self-serving government led by Mr Maduro with a clear chain of command, Cuba operates as a coalition of factions dominated by the Communist Party and military. It is rooted in ideology, rendering the chance of finding another Delcy Rodríguez, Venezuela’s cooperative new president, unlikely within Cuba’s tightly controlled regime.

Tom Long, a professor of International Relations at the University of Warwick, told The Telegraph: “The cynical ploy of the Trump administration is that if you deepen misery enough the people will ultimately rebel.

“But a lot of revolutions don’t necessarily happen at the lowest point, because people are too desperate. A lot of the Cuban population is so focused on surviving day-to-day, they’re not necessarily plotting overthrows – or have the means and wherewithal to launch one.”

Rachel, 30, sums up this resigned fatigue that has become routine: “Luckily I have gas to cook, but many people now have to cook with charcoal. Here, we’re moving backwards.” She pauses. “We have no choice but to breathe and try to keep going.”

NEW POLL: TWICE as Many Americans Think Trump Is ‘Racist’ Than Say He Isn’t Amid White House Protestations

Tommy Christopher
Thu, February 19, 2026 

A new poll shows that 47% of Americans believe President Trump is racist, while only 24% disagree.

By a two-to-one margin, more Americans believe that President Donald Trump is racist than think he is not, even as Trump and his White House protest what they call “false” accusations of racism.

While never far away, the subject of Trump and racism was top of mind when the president issued a denial of racism as he commented on the death of Reverend Jesse Jackson, and that denial was blown up in a White House briefing exchange.

Trump White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt was challenged by CBS News White House correspondent Ed O’Keefe to provide examples of the “false” accusations Trump referred to in his statement.

Leavitt responded with a shocked affect and a claim that “radical Democrats” and members of the media “in this room” have “accused this president falsely of being a racist”:

ED OKEEFE: In his statement about Jesse Jackson, the president said “Despite the fact that I am falsely inconsistently called a racist by the scoundrels and lunatics on the radical left, Democrats all, it was always my pleasure to help Jesse along the way.” Where or when does the president believe he has been falsely called racist?

KAROLINE LEAVITT: You’re kidding, right? I will pull you plethora of examples. He has absolutely been falsely called and smeared as a racist, and I’m happy to provide you those receipts.

In fact, O’Keefe has posted multiple tweets that referenced “racist tweets” from Trump that were also denounced by a “chorus” of Republicans at the time.

Trump also protested his innocence at a Black History event at the White House on Wednesday by citing the defenses of his friend Mike Tyson:

Mike Tyson. Boy, I tell you, Mike has been loyal to me. Whenever they come out, they say, “Trump’s a racist.” You know, it’s like a statement. “Trump’s a racist.” Mike Tyson goes, “He’s not a racist. He’s my friend.” He’s been there from the beginning. Good times and bad. But Mike Tyson’s a great guy, and he was so loyal. Always been loyal.

But according to a new The Economist/YouGov poll taken February 13 – 16, 2026, an overwhelming majority of Americans who have an opinion on the issue disagree with Trump, Leavitt, and Tyson.

Asked if the word “racist” describes Trump, 47 percent agreed it does versus only 24 percent who said it does not, with the remainder responding “no opinion.”

Mike Tyson notwithstanding, among Black voters who expressed an opinion, 90 percent said Trump is racist, versus 10% who said he is not.

But there’s more. The pollster tested a series of descriptors, and it did not go well. By about two to one, Americans do not view Trump as “honest,” but do view him as “corrupt,” “divisive,” “cruel,” and “out of touch.”

Wide pluralities said Trump is not “inspiring” (43 percent to 19 percent) or “intelligent” (39 percent to 31 percent).

More than double — 50 percent to 20 percent — said he’s “dangerous” versus those who say he is not.

There were descriptors that polled well for Trump, including “bold,” “strong,” and by a narrow plurality, “effective.”