News Feeds

File:  ltr to Congress, 76 scientists 2012.pdfResource Type: Letters

File:  ltr to Congress, 76 scientists 2012.pdfResource Type: Letters

The Trump administration has completely changed wildland firefighting on national public lands, an approach that is being put to the test as the Western U.S. is facing the worst fire season in years. A collaborative investigation by six publications across the West details the policy changes pushed through by the Trump administration, and the costly impacts those changes are having on the ground.

One of the most significant shifts is a return to a “full suppression” policy in which any fires, even those that are not human-caused, must be put out by 10:00 am the morning after they are discovered. The U.S. Forest Service originally adopted this policy nearly a century ago, but eventually abandoned it since it artificially suppressed naturally-occurring low-intensity fires that forests need, leaving behind unnatural amounts of vegetation that fuels catastrophic wildfires. The Trump administration also announced the creation of a new U.S. Wildland Fire Service, intended to consolidate firefighting crews and streamline communication.

But across the West, fire experts have expressed concern with the combination of major policy changes and significant staffing and funding cuts, especially as communities develop further into high fire-risk areas amid an ongoing drought. Seven people have already died fighting wildfires this year, with several weeks still remaining in the fire season.

Nevada sues Trump admin over Colorado River cuts

Nevada Governor Joe Lombardo announced that his state is challenging the Trump administration’s Colorado River two-year operating plan in court. Nevada’s lawsuit argues that the plan unfairly demands drastic cuts by Lower Basin states without imposing similar cuts on Upper Basin states, and asks the district court to block the plan.

Quick hits Trump admin plans to relax travel rules on national forests

Outdoor Life

Trump’s land grab is the latest chapter of Indigenous cultural genocide

Current Affairs

Trump’s border wall construction threatens rock art as old as the pyramids

Public Domain

Trump admin has spent billions boosting gas exports, spurring more fracking

Inside Climate News

Locals concerned as Trump admin fast-tracks public process for Wyoming rare earth mine

WyoFile

Planned copper mine in southern Arizona draws lawsuit over rare owls

Arizona Daily Star | Courthouse News Service

Canadian uranium firm says lack of outreach in northern New Mexico a ‘mistake’

Source New Mexico

Firefighters sound alarm as US faces critical staffing shortage: ‘We don’t have enough people’

Grist

Quote of the day

The Travel Management Rule is why dirt-bikers and snowmobilers can share national forest lands with hikers and backcountry skiers without conflict. It’s why our national forests provide habitat to support thriving wildlife populations. It is built on local decision-making, with a designation process that ensures that no user group gets steamrolled and all our national forest values are protected.”

—Hilary Eisen, Wild Montana, Outdoor Life

 

Picture This

@devilstowernps
We get a lot of questions asking about what it’s like up top. No, there’s not a massive hole in the middle, it’s actually pretty flat! It is said to be as big as a football field. You can even find small animals and snakes up there. Snakes are great climbers and are often found scaling the Tower, crawling through the cracks. Hawks, Falcons and other birds sometimes drop off their prey on top of the Tower too!
NPS Text/Lohma G. NPS Archives Photo. Featured image: A fuels reduction project on the Tahoe National Forest, U.S. Forest Service

The post How the Trump admin has upended wildland firefighting appeared first on Center for Western Priorities.

Multiple global supply shocks have made the strongest case yet for reducing dependencies by phasing out fossil fuels. But on clean energy too, Europe has grown dependent on China, the uncontested global leader. As trade tensions with Beijing intensify, Greens in particular face a difficult balancing act: How to boost the green transition without repeating past mistakes? And can they reconcile realpolitik with human rights?

When the European Union committed to cutting emissions by at least 50 per cent by 2030 and reaching carbon neutrality by 2050, it opened up an uncomfortable question: could it hit those targets without leaning too heavily on China, its trading partner with whom relations are increasingly tense, but who now stands as the undisputed global leader in global green tech?

Today China makes up more than 80 per cent of global solar panel manufacturing capacity, but it has also established control over the supply of materials for panels: Beijing holds 70 per cent of the global supply of graphite and rare earth elements, as well as a near-monopoly on the processing of critical minerals. By contrast, the EU is almost entirely reliant on imports for critical materials.

However, recent events, such as the intensification by Beijing last year of restrictions on rare earth exports as part of a trade war initiated by the US, exposed the risks borne by an over-reliance on China in these sectors. And despite being the global leader in renewable energies, China remains the world’s largest polluter, responsible for 30 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions.

Europe is now walking a thin line between trying to reduce its dependence on China in sensitive sectors while striving to meet its climate and energy transition targets. This challenge cuts across the political spectrum, but it poses a particular test for European Greens, given their commitment to ambitious climate policies and an efficient green transition. So how do Greens approach China? How do they perceive Beijing’s role when it comes to Europe’s green transition? And are they even aligned?

Common threads

Green foreign policy remains a spectrum of ideas rather than a clearly defined approach to the world’s varied issues. When the Heinrich-Böll Foundation attempted to map the foreign policies of green parties worldwide in 2022, it found common threads. Parties displayed a strong commitment to a values-based foreign policy with elements of interventionism, and emphasised the promotion of democracy, human rights, and feminism. Yet behind these lay differences on peace and security that reflect regional histories and sensibilities.

Although Greens found common ground with the left on Palestine, they often diverge on China.

Much like wider foreign policy, Green party approaches to China share broad characteristics that impact how they mobilise on human rights violations there.

“Human rights have always been a pillar [of Green foreign policy],” says Reinhard Bütikofer, a retired German Green politician who was a leading voice on China in the European Parliament (EP) between 2009 and 2024. “I recall that many Greens were appalled by the Tiananmen massacre. And the German Greens took an active role after that in upholding the arms embargo [to China]. When our coalition partner SPD [Social Democrat Party of Germany] in Berlin proposed that we should lift the arms embargo, we blocked it.”

Over the last decade, Greens have denounced the internment of ethnic minority Uyghur in political “re-education camps” in Xinjiang, and in 2019 pushed for the first resolution in the EP condemning it. The German Greens’ mobilisation on this issue resulted in their denial of entry to China.

Besides human rights, the fast adoption of renewable energy resources is a key concern. As Green MEPs fight to prevent the watering down of the Green Deal, its implementation comes with a problem: overreliance on China. Chinese imports to support Europe’s green transition have emerged as a hot potato for European Green parties.

Buy European?

Solar panels are a particular sore point. In 2023, Beijing controlled 98 per cent of global production of solar wafers – the semiconductor material critical to photovoltaic (PV) solar cells. This quasi-monopoly places a stranglehold on the rest of the global solar supply chain. Although approaches vary slightly on how Europe should shun China’s affordable solar panels while keeping the green transition going, Greens are generally wary of a new dependency on China.

“The current position of the Greens/EFA Group is that limiting purchases from China and buying more expensive European green technologies is an investment into the future,” said Markéta Gregorová, a Czech MEP elected with the Pirates who sits in the Greens/EFA Group and serves as co-chair of the EU delegation to the People’s Republic of China.

Beyond the economic logic, Chinese-made solar panel inverters – the devices that convert the current generated by solar panels to usable electricity – represent a documented cyber threat, which some Greens are particularly aware of. “As a negotiator for the revision of the EU Cybersecurity Act, I wake up at night thinking about the inverters in solar panels from China,” adds Gregorová. The worry is that through rogue communication devices recently found in Chinese-made solar inverters, Beijing could remotely access (and switch off) the solar grid. Exploiting this could destabilise national power grids. Indeed, Beijing’s hold on the kill switch was already flagged last year by intelligence agencies as dangerous.

On national stages, the issue is linked to political debates about energy sovereignty that have been reignited by external shocks. The risks of depending on Russian fossil fuels became apparent during Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and more recently the crisis in the Strait of Hormuz is exposing more vulnerabilities in our energy supply. Samuel Cogolati, the former co-president of Ecolo, the francophone Green party in Belgium, calls for an energy transition “coherent” with the lessons from these external shocks.

“We have to hold the same line when we speak about China – I don’t think it would be in the interest of the Europeans to let supply chains concentrate in China. A very pragmatic discourse and a strategic vision [for how to restart industry] in Europe must belong to the ecologists, if we want to stay credible.”

Building consensus

In the European Parliament, trade tensions between Beijing and Brussels have stolen the limelight from issues such as human rights and the green transition. Gregorová admits that the Greens “need to speak realpolitik too, because if we [the EU] are weakened by the trade war, we can’t help anyone else.”

Yet the Greens/EFA continue to hold on to their founding commitments. “I think that we are still probably the most credible voice with regards to human rights,” said Chiara Miglioli, policy advisor to the Greens/EFA on international trade and China since 2012. When she accompanied the EP’s China delegation to Beijing in May, “everybody had the expectation that [the Greens] would raise the human rights issue. And indeed we did.”

But when it comes to playing a leadership role on China policy, it seems the Greens’ heyday is over. Past policy is embodied in the figure of Bütikofer, who in 2021 led the Greens in requesting and negotiating the EP vote to freeze the Comprehensive Agreement on Investment (CAI), a deal that supporters hoped would further open China’s internal market to EU companies. Discussions on the CAI were promptly halted in March 2021 after Beijing sanctioned five MEPs in retaliation for European sanctions against four Chinese officials believed to be linked to human rights violations in Xinjiang.

Bütikofer, the former chair of the EP’s Delegation for Relations with the People’s Republic of China (D-CN), is largely thought of as the founder of the European Greens’ China policy. “Still nowadays, many of our current positions on China have been very much shaped by him,” adds Miglioli, who advised Bütikofer on several China-related legislation and resolutions

Part of his legacy was to make Greens think of themselves as consensus builders. Bütikofer explains that building a wide majority consensus on China in the EP was his main goal. “My understanding has been that foreign policy is a realm that the member states jealously protect against European institutions. So the European Parliament could only play a role if it would stand together.”

In line with that way of thinking, today the Greens support the hard line of the Commission on China, and, says Gregorová, “are glad [it] has finally awoken to the security issues which Greens have been pointing out for a long time.” The European Parliament is now quite consensual when it votes on China, so the Greens’ role is not about forming winning majorities. “We raise the ambition of any compromise,” says Miglioli. “We have always been the ones pushing for the most ambitious option, to make sure that there are no loopholes. I believe we have succeeded.”

But a unified European China policy is still lacking. This year, the European Parliament has organised official visits to China. For Gregorová, “[they] have started going to China as kittens that have just fallen out of the basket. It has been very uncoordinated. We need to project more unity as China takes notice.”

However, merely focusing on building consensus might hinder the development of a stronger Green political line on China. Other parties have been less shy on that front. For instance, the current chair of the D-CN, German Renew Europe MEP Engin Eroglu, promotes the EU’s deregulation agenda and advocates for further deregulation measures to make European companies more competitive as a way to reduce imbalances with China. Facing such arguments, the Greens could take a clearer and stronger opposing stance, according to Miglioli. The policy advisor argues that “[Eroglu’s] focus on deregulation is a simplification and the wrong recipe because it is impossible to compete with China on production costs.”

She sees an opportunity for Greens to strengthen their voice. “Greens as a whole are not prioritising China enough as an economic issue. An anti-capitalist angle, critical of multinationals, corporate power, and vocal on labour rights and labour standards, could be an interesting idea to pursue.” She adds that “big multinationals have benefited from access to the huge Chinese market and they have really pursued profit maximisation by delocalising production to China. And now we have these huge dependencies.”

Principles versus pragmatism

However, the dependencies described by Miglioli also make it harder for Greens to build coalitions to support their policies. Nowhere is this more evident than in Germany, where Greens went from opposition to government in 2021.

Bündnis 90/Die Grünen’s Annalena Baerbock served as foreign minister until 2025. Critical of the German foreign policy consensus, Baerbock called Xi Jinping a dictator, openly criticised China’s territorial claims in the South China Sea for having no legal basis, and condemned its cooperation with Russia. In an attempt to break away from Merkel’s “quiet diplomacy”, Die Grünen tried to bring a new China strategy, defining China as “partner, competitor, and rival” while emphasising the “systemic rivalry” aspect. This sat uncomfortably with their senior coalition partner, the Social Democrats, who have traditionally been more appeasing towards both China and Russia in the name of economic pragmatism. It also upset German industry, which had grown increasingly reliant on China for exports.

These constraints pushed the Greens to evolve and water down some of their initial policy ambitions in an effort to win over Germany’s powerful industrial sector. Back in 2021, a German automotive start-up CEO described this change to the Financial Times as “a transition from a hardline environmental party to ‘a party of the bourgeoisie’.” Still, in 2024, the German Greens favoured the adoption of EU tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles.

Now back in the opposition, Die Grünen continues to actively bring attention to China-related issues in the Bundestag. Based on Bundestag records, the party has been among the most vocal in presenting China-sceptic questions to the government this year. The Greens have scrutinised Chinese investment in Germany’s critical infrastructure and European car manufacturing, imports of Russian and Belarusian wood through China, and cybersecurity.

Left and right approaches

Greens can serve as an alternative leftist voice on China, pointing out the incoherences of leftist figures who uncritically marry anti-imperialism with a pro-Beijing stance.

“We were not trying to have a left approach to China; we wanted to have the correct approach to China”, said Bütikofer when asked if he perceived the Green position as part of a wider left-wing approach to China policy. Being Green doesn’t mean going left in Germany and Central and Eastern Europe. The German Greens are closer to the liberal centre, and the Austrian Greens even formed a coalition government with the conservative People’s Party (ÖVP) in 2020.

Meanwhile, western and southern European Green parties tend to lean more towards the left. When it comes to their foreign policy, this translates into different levels of alignment with left-wing parties, whose foreign policy is often defined by a commitment to anti-imperialism and defiance of US hegemony. And although Greens found common ground with the left on Palestine, they often diverge on China.

This is particularly striking in France, where Les Écologistes prove that a Green party can be both anchored in the Left and maintain a coherent critical stance on China. Under the leadership of Marine Tondelier, the party established a clear distinction between their position and that of the radical-left La France Insoumise (LFI).

Following LFI leader Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s call for the development of “privileged relations” between Paris and Beijing, and his downplaying of human rights violations and Beijing’s threats against Taiwan, Tondelier signed a steadfast response on her blog titled “Moving beyond the fascination for China.”

“When will we learn, us the people of the left, that anti-imperialist criticism cannot compromise itself by promoting autocracies?” asks Tondelier. “How can the Left be persuasive beyond our activist circles if we are incapable of maintaining a minimum level of consistency regarding our values?”

The post sketches out a progressive approach to China, re-affirming strong positions on human rights and democratic values, and defending a pragmatic and united policy of European engagement with Beijing. This involves cooperating with China on “segments of mutual interest”, including on the energy transition, and rejecting a simple alignment with “Washington’s crusade” against Beijing. However, the French MP is clear that the “industrialisation and electrification of Europe should be driven by European companies”, and that Chinese investment should be “limited, controlled, and contingent upon sustainable concessions” on technology transfers. Breaking with an economically liberal approach, Tondelier urges investments and planning to support a green transition.

The French case shows that Greens can serve as an alternative leftist voice on China, pointing out the incoherences of leftist figures who uncritically marry anti-imperialism with a pro-Beijing stance.

Security policy: Where Greens diverge

Security and defence remain a point of serious divergence between European Green parties. The parties, members, and voters are torn between radical pacifism and realpolitik. This translates into differences in China policy.

It seems that Green parties closer to both the geographical and political centre of Europe tend to have a more realist approach to the issue, putting emphasis on security. For the Central and Eastern European parties, this probably relates to their closer historical experience with Russia and ongoing security threats from Moscow.

In recent years, China’s impact on European security has become more palpable. Beijing maintains an official neutrality on the war in Ukraine, yet has increased its support for Russia’s war effort despite Western sanctions. Beijing continues to provide large volumes of dual-use technologies (goods, software or materials that have both civilian and military applications) vital to Russia’s military-industrial base. Further instances of transnational repression and spying operations have made Beijing a tangible security concern.

Green parties do notice and respond. The Czech Green MP Gabriela Svárovská asserts that a combined focus on “human rights, values, security, and competitiveness” is what distinguishes her party’s China policy. The Finnish ​​Vihreät’s 2025 Foreign and Security Policy Program mentions China eight times, noting its interests in the Arctic, its growing influence in Central Asia, and its threats to Taiwan.

Governing or opposing

Yet many European Green Parties still don’t have a clear China policy.

The British Greens, who made historic electoral gains under the leadership of Zack Polanski, have so far given little thought to their China approach beyond human rights concerns. Their 2024 foreign policy paper made no mention of China. Yet Chinese state threat activities on UK soil – including recognised risks of espionage, spying, and shadow policing operations, as well as cyber attacks – increasingly came under the public eye during former Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s administration. As the latter also attempted to reset diplomatic relations with the PRC, this seems like a missed opportunity for the Greens.

A similar thing can be said of the Danish Socialistisk Folkeparti (Green Left1), who have been part of the government coalition since June 2026. While they criticised the former government’s involvement with China in 2021 and later voiced criticism of China’s support for Russia, in recent years they have gone relatively silent. Denmark is seen as one of the more China-friendly countries in the EU and signed a strategic climate partnership with Beijing in 2023. We have yet to see how the Greens will deal with dependencies on China once they are in the governing seat. (We approached both Danish and UK Greens to elaborate on their positions on China, but did not receive a response.)

By contrast, the Hungarian Green Party LMP used to be quite vocal about the country’s ties with China, as Viktor Orbán made Budapest Beijing’s closest EU ally, as well as the Union’s top recipient of Chinese foreign direct investment. Home to numerous projects linked to China’s Belt and Road Initiative, including in critical infrastructure, Orbán’s Hungary openly opposed the European “derisking strategy” aimed at reducing critical vulnerabilities and dependencies. Not only did the former prime minister dismiss EU tariffs on Chinese electric vehicle (EV) imports as an “economic cold war”, he also undermined them by welcoming Chinese industrial giants to establish EV battery factories in the country.

Before it was dissolved following its failure to meet the electoral threshold in the 2024 local elections, LMP accused Orbán’s Fidesz government of “offering Hungary on a platter to Chinese investors”, compromising “the country’s natural assets, environmental treasures, and dwindling human resources”, and voiced concern about CEE becoming “an industrial backyard and dumping ground for Western countries and China”.

Opposing the government’s China policy has been crucial to the Serbian Green-left Front (Zeleno-levi Front), born from grassroots anti-corruption protests and established in its current form during the 2023 protests in Serbia. “As an opposition party, we are not trying to criticise China as much as we are trying to criticise our regime’s ties to China,” says the party’s international secretary Marko Vujačić.

In the Serbian context, Green China criticism stems not from trade imbalances, but mainly from the negative environmental impact of Chinese investment in copper and gold mining and the exploitative working conditions of workers in Chinese factories.

“Although the party does not have a clear constructive China policy, it exercises a clear line of caution towards China,” adds Vujačić, while confirming that the party has also avoided alliance with, or admiration for, the Chinese Communist Party, which is often the case with Serbian left-wing movements. “While Green parties in Serbia have historically been co-opted by the regime, the Zeleno-levi front is an exception,” said Petr Čermák, an analyst at the Association for International Affairs.

A new approach

The former dominant approach to China in Europe, led by global free trade devotees, has been “naive, depoliticised and solely centred around profit,” Tondelier wrote in her blog. As China’s activities and influence in Europe raise more political, social, environmental and security concerns, a new approach is emerging, and Green parties could seize the momentum to voice a bolder political position rooted in Green principles.

One Nation's Pauline Hanson has been picked to open one of Australia's biggest farm shows next month, drawing criticism that she will shift attention from agriculture to "political controversy."

The post Old Henty farm show ploughs on despite worry Hanson’s opening act will steer debate into climate-denying rut appeared first on Renew Economy.

Soaring commodity prices have bolstered the profits of Australia's largest oil and gas producer, as it walks away from some of its emissions investment targets.

The post Australia’s biggest oil and gas company abandons clean energy plans after cashing in on global fuel crisis appeared first on Renew Economy.

State regulator suspends another company from participating in energy upgrades subsidy after it was allegedly caught out submitting doctored photos and falsified customer details.

The post Fake photos, fraudulent claims: Regulator suspends another company from energy upgrades scheme appeared first on Renew Economy.

The fight may not be over yet as woman leading the campaign against the Marinus-linked project looks next to the Supreme Court.

The post Network to charge ahead after winning latest legal wrangle over contested Marinus project appeared first on Renew Economy.

New guide launched guide to help farmers and regional businesses assess power and electric options in face of rising bills, soaring diesel prices and supply issues.

The post From pumps to power systems: Guide launched to help farmers go electric and assess renewable and storage appeared first on Renew Economy.

Replacing fuel imports with renewable power could save Pacific countries millions of dollars if they can secure enough investment to make the switch.

The post Ditching diesel for renewables could save Pacific nations nearly $1 billion a year, study finds appeared first on Renew Economy.

Angus Taylor releases pro-gas policy, just as a new report highlights the soaring carbon prices needed to keep in line with climate targets.

The post Angus Taylor steps on the gas, but how does that sit with emissions targets and carbon costs? appeared first on Renew Economy.

New CIS tender launched for another 1.8 gigawatts of new wind and solar, but in a state where the government utility is happy to write contracts to help replace coal.

The post Bowen launches new wind and solar tender in state happy to write contracts to help replace coal appeared first on Renew Economy.

Western Australia’s renewables bring wholesale electricity prices down, batteries carry that impact onto peaks, but more gas sends prices up. So why is the WA government planning to build more gas?

The post Batteries are quickly turning gas into a costly “sometimes fuel” for electricity. So why build more? appeared first on Renew Economy.

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) has denied entry to Hossam el-Hamalway, a prominent Egyptian journalist who is scheduled to deliver two lectures at Simon...

The post Federal government blocks prominent Egyptian journalist from entering Canada first appeared on Spring.

Checks & Balances Project (C&BP) has briefed the FBI on potential fraud involving Sussex County Board of Supervisors Chairman Steve White and the Stony Creek Volunteer Rescue Squad (SCVRS) that he runs.

The briefing followed a July 14 complaint to the FBI that detailed 10 issues of concerns about White’s apparent corruption in office, including his conflicts of interest in voting to send taxpayer money to SCVRS and potential Medicare and Medicaid billing fraud tied to SCVRS.

C&BP also filed a complaint on July 17 with the inspector general of the Trump administration’s Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees Medicare and Medicaid. C&BP briefed an HHS investigator on Aug. 6 about the details included in its complaint.

The FBI and the HHS inspector general reached out to Checks & Balances Project.

The HHS complaint alleged potential fraud involving billing for ambulance calls conducted by SCVRS and the lack of transparency in the squad’s finances.

SCVRS lost its federal nonprofit status in 2023, because it failed to file tax returns for three years. C&BP also reported that in the five years for which tax returns are available – 2015 through 2019 – SCVRS reported a $304,000 surplus.

Outstanding FOIA requests

C&BP is still waiting for Sussex County to reply to Freedom of Information Act requests seeking data on SCVRS response times to calls for help and the number of times White used his state of Virginia email address for Sussex County work.

The county is also in apparent violation of Virginia law for not maintaining public records, including the agenda packets and minutes of supervisors’ meetings, on its website.

Sussex County’s site includes no information on meetings before 2025 and is missing minutes from some meetings after that date.

State law § 2.2-3707.2. says, “Posting of minutes for local public bodies. Except as provided in subsection I of § 2.2-3707, any local public body subject to the provisions of this chapter shall post minutes of its meetings on its official public government website, if any, within seven working days of final approval of the minutes.”

However, attempts to access the links on the site for meetings before 2025 yield this message: “Sorry! That page doesn’t seem to exist.”

Neither the office of Attorney General Jay Jones nor Sussex Commonwealth Attorney Regina Sykes have responded to C&BP’s offers to brief them.

Ray Locker is the executive director for Checks & Balances Project, an investigative watchdog blog holding government officials, lobbyists, and corporate management accountable to the public. Funding for C&BP is provided by Renew American Prosperity and individual donors.

You may also want to read:

Checks & Balances Project files FOIA request seeking Sussex County EMS records

Checks & Balances Project seeks Sussex County’s recusal policy

Checks & Balances Project seeks more tips from Sussex County residents

Share Post Share

The post Checks & Balances Project briefs FBI on alleged fraud in Sussex County appeared first on Checks and Balances Project.

On Thursday, Aug. 27, registered nurses – joined by patients and community allies  – will be mobilizing nationwide to demand hospitals and elected officials immediately cut ties with the artificial intelligence giant Palantir. The nurses belong to National Nurses United, which has opposed Palantir’s growth as a dangerous threat to democracy and human rights.

Registered nurses at St. Joseph’s Medical Center in Stockton, Calif., will hold a rally and press conference on Wednesday, Aug. 26, to condemn proposed layoffs of critical support staff,

Ryan Costello, Policy Director with the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), issued the following statement as the Trump administration moves to intensify its economic pressure campaign against Iran following months of war and instability:

“President Trump, the ultimate gambler in geopolitics, is poised to double down on a bad hand on Iran yet again.

“We’ve been down the maximum pressure road with Iran many times. What we’ve learned is that President Trump can impose extensive economic pain on Iran, but ordinary Iranians overwhelmingly bear the cost.. The ruling elite in Iran remains largely insulated, while Tehran has repeatedly refused to capitulate to Washington’s demands.. Trump’s gamble is that this time, amid the destruction of war, and with the reinforcement of a blockade, time is on his side and ultimately Iran will be forced to concede defeat.

“The pivot back to economic coercion comes with enormous risks the administration appears determined to ignore. After all, it was the United States that waived sanctions on Iranian oil already at sea during the height of the war in March, and again issued a waiver allowing Iran to sell oil freely in June. Now attempting to choke off those same oil sales exposes the contradiction at the heart of Trump’s strategy: Washington needed to relieve economic pressure when the consequences became too costly, yet is now betting that it can reimpose that pressure without suffering the same blowback.

“Within the United States, ordinary Americans are paying the price for this deeply unpopular war at the gas pump and in their grocery bills. Trump’s polls have plummeted amid the war - one he said he’d avoid - heading into all-important midterms. Continuing economic warfare risks deeper turmoil in the energy markets and the global economy, which could cascade into a full-blown catastrophe. Moreover, starting a trade war with China risks retaliatory measures that the U.S. economy can ill afford.

“Iran has also indicated clearly that it will not tolerate economic warfare and will escalate across the region, if necessary, to target any nation that supports President Trump’s efforts to cripple the Iranian economy. While the President may think economic warfare is less risky than military warfare, ultimately Tehran will view it as a different tactic in the same campaign to crush the country.

“None of this appears likely to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. Rather, it appears intended to delay and avoid a deal that ends not just the war, but also the maximum pressure campaign that the President has waged since 2018. Oftentimes, admitting you have a problem is necessary in order to stop an addiction. President Trump has proven unable and unwilling to stop his gambling on Iran that risks further undermining U.S. and regional security and the global economy.”

Nurses at West Anaheim Medical Center in Anaheim, Calif.; Saint Mary’s Regional Medical Center in Reno, N.V.; Saint Mary of Nazareth Hospital in Chicago, Ill.; and nurses and health care workers at Shasta Regional Medical Center in Redding, Calif. gave notice to their employer Prime Healthcare that they will hold one-day strikes from Sept. 3 to Sept. 4 to protest the administration’s refusal to address deep concerns about patient care and safe staffing.

On Friday, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation released a two-year plan for the Colorado River, requiring the Lower Basin states of Nevada, Arizona, and California to cut their use of water. The seven states that share water from the Colorado River failed to reach a consensus agreement earlier this year, prompting the federal government to step in.

Under the Bureau of Reclamation’s operating plan, the three Lower Basin states will be required to cut their Colorado River water use by 1.25 million acre-feet, with Arizona bearing the brunt of the required cuts. The Upper Basin states of Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, and New Mexico are also encouraged to undertake voluntary water conservation measures, but are not yet forced to make cuts in Colorado River water use under the two-year operating plan.

“What’s clear after seeing the projections for reservoir elevations over the next couple of years is that the buffer the Colorado River reservoirs provided over the last many decades is gone,” Jennifer Pitt, Colorado River program director for the Audubon Society, told the Colorado Sun. “There is real risk for the cities, farmers and ranchers, Tribes, and the entire natural world that depends on the Colorado River.”

Quick hits The BLM may stop notifying landowners about drilling under private land. Ranchers are alarmed

High Country News

National park maintenance work sidelined as Trump’s Freedom 250 takes precedence

Associated Press

A White House official helped an oil company advance its projects. Now she’ll lead its DC office

E&E News

Bigger, hotter fires are slowly erasing America’s great forests

New York Times

Developers now targeting public lands to build huge AI data centers

Cowboy State Daily

Drive for nuclear power boosts uranium industry—and Tribal health concerns in Utah

Salt Lake Tribune

Inside the struggle to dismantle America’s greenhouse gas data

DeSmog

Editorial: A simple concept lawmakers should be able to get behind

Grand Junction Daily Sentinel

Quote of the day

I’ve worked with really incredible federal personnel with the BLM who take every single comment to heart, and they have improved applications immensely based on public feedback, because no one knows their land better than those people who are being directly drilled on.”

—Gwen Lachelt, Western Leaders Network, High Country News

 

Picture This @usinterior

National Park Week is back!

From August 22-30, we’re celebrating the incredible places that protect America’s landscapes, history and stories.

If you love hiking, walking across a historic battlefields, watching wildlife, or standing in the places where history was made, this week is for you.

And mark your calendar: August 25 is the National Park Service’s 110th birthday. In celebration, entrance fees will be waived at NPS sites that normally charge them.

This National Park Week, get out there and find your park.

Photo of Lehman Caves at Great Basin National Park by David Caldwell

Featured image: Lake Mead, Kumar Appaiah via Wikimedia Commons/CC BY-SA 2.0

The post Feds release 2-year Colorado River plan requiring Lower Basin cuts appeared first on Center for Western Priorities.