For the second time in as many months, Israel has raided a civilian ship in international waters to stop it from reaching Gaza to deliver much-needed humanitarian aid. The Handala was sailing toward the besieged Palestinian territory with baby formula, diapers, food and medicine on board when Israeli forces boarded it on Saturday and detained 21 crew and passengers. “Their blockade is, by all international standards, unlawful,” says Palestinian American human rights attorney Huwaida Arraf, who was among the activists on board and was just released from Israeli detention. She calls on the international community to hold Israel accountable and says the Freedom Flotilla Coalition will continue organizing aid ships to break the blockade of Gaza.

“Why is it that we had to be at sea in international waters, in a small boat, going to confront one of the most brutal militaries in the world? It is because … our countries are allowing Israel to deliberately starve Palestinians as part of this genocidal campaign that it has been carrying out,” says Arraf.

This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

“Their surprise says as much about Martha’s Vineyard as it does about the way this country sees Indigenous people,” Lee writes in his new book, Nothing More of This Land, which was published last week. “Very few people ever say it, but I can always feel an unspoken ‘but I thought you were all dead’ in those moments.”

Throughout his book, Lee grapples with the question of what it means to be Indigenous. It’s a question intricately connected to climate change, Lee says, because it’s a question directly related to land. On Martha’s Vineyard, Lee’s community has long been saddled with the effects of colonization, which fuels both extreme gentrification and rising sea levels. Lee traces the history of his own tribal nation, reflects on being mixed race and living in diaspora, and envisions potential futures unencumbered by colonial constraints.   

This interview has been condensed and edited for clarity.

Q. How would you describe the connection between Indigenous identity and climate change? 

A. When you talk about Indigenous people, you have to talk about land. And right now, when you’re talking about land in any context, climate change is the looming backdrop. So many of the challenges Indigenous communities are facing may not be outwardly related to climate change, but they’re impacted by climate change. Fighting for water rights, which I would say is a sovereignty fight and a political fight, is made more difficult and the stakes are higher because of drought. Tensions around land ownership and what we do with our land are also made more complicated by climate impacts like rising sea levels and stronger storms that are eating away at our land. If you’re fighting over land and land you’re fighting over is shrinking because sea levels are rising, it makes that fight much more intense and much more urgent. You could look at salmon and the right to protect salmon and for subsistence lifestyles and all that’s becoming more complicated not just because of overfishing but because the way that salmon and other fish are impacted by warming waters and climate change. Any area of the story that you’re looking at, climate change is present. 

Q. I also grew up on an island that is a tourism hub, and in so many communities that’s often perceived as the only viable economic driver. Can you talk about what it feels like to be Indigenous in a land that’s become a tourism destination, and how that affects our communities? 

A. In this country, one part of the experience of being Indigenous, is the experience of erasure and of being ignored. That’s throughout history, through culture, through politics, through all these spaces. But I think especially in a place like Martha’s Vineyard, it’s even more extreme because the reputation of the place is so big and so specific. Being Indigenous, people are really often not listening to you. The more your land becomes a tourist destination, the harder it is for Indigenous voices to be heard, the harder it is for Indigenous people to hold onto the land. 

In a very concrete way, tourism typically drives property values up. It drives taxes up. And that makes it harder for folks to hold on to land that’s been in the family for generations. And that’s what’s happened in Martha’s Vineyard. Beyond that, I think tourism is just a really, really difficult and unfortunate choice that people have been kind of forced into. When so much opportunity has been taken away or denied from Indigenous communities in these places, tourism is often the only thing that’s left. So it can become like a choice between having nothing and contributing to tourism, which is probably ultimately harming the community and the land, but there’s no other way to make a living. So I think that’s just a really unfortunate reality.

Q. There’s a part in the book where you’re talking about how every time you say you’re from Martha’s Vineyard, people either assume you’re really rich or they think, oh, I didn’t realize that people live there. And that really resonated with me because when I say I’m from Saipan or Guam, people either don’t know what it is or they assume, ‘Oh, are you military?’ And then when I say I’m not military, they are confused. This is a long way of asking, what do you want people to know about your community and your tribe in particular, separate from the broader journey of this book? Is there anything that you wish people knew that this book could convey so that other tribal members don’t have to be on the receiving end of that question?

A. First, I hope that this will help to change the narrative of erasure that has existed about Wampanoag people for most of this country’s history. At the very least, I hope this helps people know that we exist — we’re here. And also, I like to think that it helps to show some of the complexity and diversity of my community: that we have disagreements, we have different perspectives, we have different talents, we live in different places.

Something else that your question made me think of was the question of audience. And I thought about that a lot. Even growing up within the tribe, there was so much just about my own community that I didn’t know. And so I try not to be judgmental of what people know, whether they’re Indigenous or not. And that’s how I really wanted to approach the book. I would hope that Indigenous and non-Indigenous readers can get something out of it, both in terms of learning things, but also hopefully seeing themselves in the pages and this exploration of figuring out who we are and where we want our community to go. 

Q. Another part that really resonated with me and I think a lot of Indigenous readers will relate to is the struggle of what does it mean to be Indigenous if you aren’t living on your land. I was wondering what you hope Indigenous readers will take away from the book in terms of understanding what distance from their land can mean for their identity. 

A. I hope that Indigenous readers will discover what I’ve discovered, which is that there are so many ways to engage with your homelands and your home community, even if you don’t live there. I used to think that I was only engaging if I was there with the tribe doing some cultural tribal event or something, and I realized that there are so many other ways of engaging. I don’t think any of us are less Indigenous because we live somewhere else.

For a long time I felt like if it wasn’t perfect, it wasn’t worth it. If it wasn’t the perfect ideal of me participating in the tribe, I thought I shouldn’t do it. Ultimately what that led to is I just wasn’t doing anything because I didn’t have as many opportunities to go to these tribal gatherings or participate in tribal politics. And so I just did nothing and I felt the distance sort of growing over the years. What other people can do is realize that there are all these small ways to engage and to try to embrace those, and not let ideas of what it means to be Indigenous be defined by outsiders, or these big colonial structures like federal recognition, for example, or blood quantum.

Q. Why? What’s at stake? Why do you think it’s important for folks to embrace Indigenous identity and why is it important, particularly at this moment? 

A. Circling back to what we talked about at the beginning, we’re not going to be able to address these huge existential crises like climate change if we can’t be at least in some way united as a community, as a people. If we’re always fighting over who belongs and what does it mean to be Indigenous and saying that people are less Indigenous because of XYZ, that takes away our ability to tackle those bigger challenges. Right now we’re facing these serious challenges and that’s what we should be dealing with, so figuring this out is the first step. 

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Rising seas, vanishing voices: An Indigenous story from Martha’s Vineyard on Jul 22, 2025.

This content originally appeared on Grist and was authored by Anita Hofschneider.

By Laura Bergamo in Nice, France

The UN Ocean Conference (UNOC) concluded today with significant progress made towards the ratification of the High Seas Treaty and a strong statement on a new plastics treaty signed by 95 governments.

Once ratified, it will be the only legal tool that can create protected areas in international waters, making it fundamental to protecting 30 percent of the world’s oceans by 2030.

Fifty countries, plus the European Union, have now ratified the Treaty.

• READ MORE: Pacific civil society groups challenge France over hosting UN oceans event as political ‘rebranding’
• Other UNOC reports

New Zealand has signed but is yet to ratify.

Deep sea mining rose up the agenda in the conference debates, demonstrating the urgency of opposing this industry.

The expectation from civil society and a large group of states, including both co-hosts of UNOC, was that governments would make progress towards stopping deep sea mining in Nice.

UN Secretary-General Guterres said the deep sea should not become the “wild west“.

Four new pledges
French President Emmanuel Macron said a deep sea mining moratorium is an international necessity. Four new countries pledged their support for a moratorium at UNOC, bringing the total to 37.

Attention now turns to what actions governments will take in July to stop this industry from starting.

Megan Randles, Greenpeace head of delegation regarding the High Seas Treaty and progress towards stopping deep sea mining, said: “High Seas Treaty ratification is within touching distance, but the progress made here in Nice feels hollow as this UN Ocean Conference ends without more tangible commitments to stopping deep sea mining.

“We’ve heard lots of fine words here in Nice, but these need to turn into tangible action.

“Countries must be brave, stand up for global cooperation and make history by stopping deep sea mining this year.

“They can do this by committing to a moratorium on deep sea mining at next month’s International Seabed Authority meeting.

“We applaud those who have already taken a stand, and urge all others to be on the right side of history by stopping deep sea mining.”

Attention on ISA meeting
Following this UNOC, attention now turns to the International Seabed Authority (ISA) meetings in July. In the face of The Metals Company teaming up with US President Donald Trump to mine the global oceans, the upcoming ISA provides a space where governments can come together to defend the deep ocean by adopting a moratorium to stop this destructive industry.

Negotiations on a Global Plastics Treaty resume in August.

John Hocevar, oceans campaign director, Greenpeace USA said: “The majority of countries have spoken when they signed on to the Nice Call for an Ambitious Plastics Treaty that they want an agreement that will reduce plastic production. Now, as we end the UN Ocean Conference and head on to the Global Plastics Treaty negotiations in Geneva this August, they must act.

“The world cannot afford a weak treaty dictated by oil-soaked obstructionists.

“The ambitious majority must rise to this moment, firmly hold the line and ensure that we will have a Global Plastic Treaty that cuts plastic production, protects human health, and delivers justice for Indigenous Peoples and communities on the frontlines.

“Governments need to show that multilateralism still works for people and the planet, not the profits of a greedy few.”

Driving ecological collapse
Nichanan Thantanwit, project leader, Ocean Justice Project, said: “Coastal and Indigenous communities, including small-scale fishers, have protected the ocean for generations. Now they are being pushed aside by industries driving ecological collapse and human rights violations.

“As the UN Ocean Conference ends, governments must recognise small-scale fishers and Indigenous Peoples as rights-holders, secure their access and role in marine governance, and stop destructive practices such as bottom trawling and harmful aquaculture.

“There is no ocean protection without the people who have protected it all along.”

The anticipated Nice Ocean Action Plan, which consists of a political declaration and a series of voluntary commitments, will be announced later today at the end of the conference.

None will be legally binding, so governments need to act strongly during the next ISA meeting in July and at plastic treaty negotiations in August.

Republished from Greenpeace Aotearoa with permission.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

We get an update from the Madleen, the Freedom Flotilla ship sailing to Gaza with vital humanitarian aid for Palestinians. Brazilian activist Thiago Ávila, one of 12 people on the ship, says “spirits are high” despite the constant presence of drones overhead and threats from the Israeli government. “Palestine is now the strategic place for all peoples to unite and fight against oppression, exploitation and the destruction of nature,” says Ávila. “People’s power is the ultimate power, and love and solidarity can beat any hateful, racist and supremacist ideology, like Zionism.” Earlier this week, the ship made a detour to respond to a mayday call to help dozens of migrants aboard a deflating vessel. The Madleen is expected to reach Gaza on Monday, though Israeli officials have said they will not allow it to land.

This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

In Native Hawaiians’ genealogical stories, says Solomon Kahoʻohalahala, the coral polyp is considered the oldest ancestor, and they hold relationships with animals, including the Koholā, or humpback whale.

“Koholā is the manifestation of our god of the sea and is revered for its ability to dive into the depths of the deep sea and the realm of the sacred place of our creation, far beyond our imaginations,” he said. “Their care and protection are vital for the existence of species and Native Hawaiians.”

For generations, the traditional ecological knowledge, values, and beliefs of Indigenous peoples related to forests, lands, waters, and territories have helped conserve nature and its resources. “We do not see ourselves above nature, which is quite different from the colonial perspective that sees dominion over all things,” said Kahoʻohalahala, chairperson of Maui Nui Makai Network, a group of community and partner organizations across the Hawaiian Islands.

For these reasons, during one of the world’s largest convenings of Indigenous peoples—the U.N. Permanent Forum in New York City—representatives of Indigenous and coastal communities gathered to push for their integration into all aspects of the Agreement on Marine Biodiversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction, sometimes known as the ‘High Seas Treaty’ – a term referring to waters outside the jurisdiction of country. In 2023, the U.N. adopted the agreement for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity and ecosystems within the two-thirds of the world’s oceans that lie beyond any country’s jurisdiction.

These are the first-ever calls by Indigenous and coastal communities as members attending the forum begin steps to prepare for the agreement’s entry into force.

On the high seas, threats to marine ecosystems are escalating—from overfishing and rising ocean temperatures to acidification and potentially devastating deep-sea mining. Indigenous and coastal community leaders say these changes are directly undermining their land, food, water sovereignty, and cultures. Studies show that ocean warming and acidification cause the depletion of fish stocks and other marine species, and have affected communities’ access to marine resources, income sources, and food security.

Even if international policy determines that the high seas are owned by no one, delegates say Indigenous and coastal communities—who depend on migratory species and have spiritual connections to the deep sea—should be included. Their participation could include roles in governance, environmental management, and best-practice strategies grounded in traditional ecological knowledge and values.

“It’s a responsibility to include Indigenous peoples in a meaningful way,” said Ghazali Ohorella, adviser to the International Indian Treaty Council, adding that they can play a key role in ocean management and conservation. “Historically, Indigenous peoples were included only on the sidelines, as we have seen in other processes.”

Studies show that two-thirds of the high seas, which host a range of undiscovered biodiversity, support important fisheries for Indigenous and coastal communities and provide migratory routes for numerous marine species. Meanwhile, these areas harbor rare ecosystems such as deep-water corals and species yet to be discovered.

The treaty includes elements to build ocean resilience, support sustainable fisheries, and ensure environmental impact assessments, while promoting the conservation and sustainable use of marine genetic resources. However, some environmental experts and Indigenous and coastal communities criticize the treaty for not directly regulating deep-sea mining and exempting it from environmental impact assessments—an omission they say could backfire on conservation efforts.

To strengthen the participation of island communities in ocean conservation under the agreement, Kahoʻohalahala said Indigenous peoples should be included in each subsidiary body and committee (smaller units that handle specific tasks) that will be part of the treaty’s implementation. This, he said, will help bridge existing gaps that exclude Indigenous people from conservation decision-making.

“It is no longer appropriate to merely acknowledge our presence, but to seek our input, counsel, and our collective decision-making for ocean conservation and solutions,” says Kahoʻohalahala.

This idea has already attracted the interest of some national representatives during closed-door meetings, he shared. 

Representatives of Indigenous organizations also called for the implementation of traditional knowledge and perspectives in the scientific and technical subsidiary bodies, as well as in the implementation and compliance committees. The upcoming Conference of the Parties for this agreement, they say, should establish a stand-alone committee for Indigenous peoples to uphold Indigenous rights, inclusion, equitable participation, partnership, and benefit-sharing.

According to Clement Yow Mulalap, legal adviser for the Federated States of Micronesia’s permanent mission to the U.N., other possibilities exist as well. The agreement could incorporate the knowledge of Pacific coastal communities on migratory species populations, discuss regulations on hunting in or near the high seas, and include Indigenous peoples and coastal communities in environmental management and best practices.

Leaders who attended the meetings said that capacity building and the transfer of marine technology—a section of the agreement focused on developing and sharing knowledge and technology for marine research—must become a two-way process for sharing skills and knowledge between Indigenous peoples and other stakeholders.

Some parties also discussed the need to achieve equality between science and traditional knowledge, the latter of which is mentioned in the agreement. “They are not otherwise ranked or tiered,” said Yow Mulalap. “So, there will be a need to operationalize that textual parity into practical terms.”

As one potential model, Sara Olsvig, president of the Inuit Circumpolar Council, said the council has developed its own ethical and equitable engagement protocols aimed at making scientists more accountable to Indigenous peoples and their knowledge.

“Challenges exist, but the uniqueness of this structure is that Indigenous peoples are at the table and we are part of the decision-making,” Olsvig said.

The High Seas Treaty will enter into force when at least 60 countries ratify it. So far, 113 countries have signed the agreement, while 19 have ratified the treaty. Delegates hope the agreement will enter into force by the 3rd U.N. Ocean Conference in June 2025. While treaty ratification continues to gain momentum, Kahoʻohalahala said unity is vital for Indigenous and local communities across the Pacific.

“Although divided within Polynesia, Melanesia, and Micronesia, we belong to one ocean. It is important for us to begin erasing some of these boundaries to protect the ancestral knowledge that is common to us as Indigenous peoples and coastal communities.”

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Indigenous leaders push for seat at the table of high seas biodiversity treaty  on Apr 29, 2025.

This content originally appeared on Grist and was authored by Sonam Lama Hyolmo, Mongabay.

The seas around the uninhabited Bikar and Bokak atolls are the Marshall Islands first marine sanctuary, its government said this week. The atolls harbor colonies of seabirds and green turtles and the most outstanding coral reefs in the central and western Pacific.

National Geographic and Marshall Islands marine officials studied the atolls during a 2023 expedition that with hundreds of dives and a submersible documented prolific sea life to depths of 2,340 meters (7,677 feet).

“Bikar and Bokak’s coral reefs are a time machine, like diving in the ocean of 1,000 years ago,” said Enric Sala, the director of National Geographic’s Pristine Seas project.

“In these remote atolls, we saw the healthiest coral, giant clam, and reef fish populations in the central and western Pacific,” he said in a statement. “They are our best baselines for what the ocean could look like if we truly let it be.”

Bikini Atoll, rendered uninhabitable by U.S. nuclear tests in the 1940s and 1950s, was also studied by Pristine Seas to help the Marshall Islands establish its first long-term monitoring sites.

The researchers didn’t give details about the state of Bikini’s environment. They said they had provided a scientific report covering all the studied atolls to the Marshall Islands government and that “Bikar and Bokak stand in contrast to Bikini Atoll.”

The Marshall Islands government said creation of the Bikar and Bokak sanctuary is part of its effort to meet national and international commitments for ocean conservation.

(ENRIC SALA/AFP)

The country of some 40,000 people halfway between Australia and Hawaii last year outlined a plan requiring billions of dollars to fortify its most populated atolls against projected sea-level rise this century.

“The sanctuary will fully protect these areas from fishing and other destructive activities, ensuring the preservation of crucial ecosystems,” the government said in a statement.

Marine sanctuaries are promoted by conservationists as a way to protect the overall resilience of oceans as they help replenish adjacent fish populations and also provide non-destructive economic opportunities.

(ENRIC SALA/AFP)

Marshall Islands President Hilda Heine said the country’s economy, social stability and culture would collapse without a healthy ocean.

“The only way to continue benefiting from the ocean’s treasures is to protect it,” she said.

Significant expanses of the Pacific Ocean are protected areas including U.S. national marine parks that were expanded under President Joe Biden’s administration.

Protecting sanctuaries from illegal fishing and exploitation is a challenge for Pacific island countries, which due to their small economies lack the heft to effectively police exclusive economic zones that span enormous areas of ocean.

Niue, a Pacific coral atoll home to 1,700 people, said in 2021 it would sell sponsorships to square kilometer patches of sea to raise money to protect its pristine ocean territory.

National Geographic said the Bikar and Bokak expedition also found vulnerable fish species such as large groupers, Napoleon wrasse and bumphead parrotfish and potentially new species of fish and invertebrates. Deep-sea sharks were also abundant, it said.

Edited by RFA Staff.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Stephen Wright.

Three years later, research published last week reveals what Lange and the others long suspected: The demise of the Key Largo tree cactus is the first recorded case of sea level rise driving a local species to extinction in the United States. Its collapse was a blow to Lange, a research botanist at Fairchild Tropical Botanic Garden in Coral Gables who coauthored the study. “It was one of the things that made the Keys so special,” he said. “Just a big, bold, beautiful plant.”

Tree cactus is a suitable name for Pilosocereus millspaughii, known to reach towering heights, yield white flowers that entice nectar-hungry bats and produce reddish-purple fruits for birds and mammals to feast upon. Although the cactus still grows on a few scattered islands in the Caribbean, it was restricted to a single population in North America, a thriving stand of 150 plants discovered in the Florida Keys in 1992. By 2021, just six ailing stems remained. 

It is a monumental loss, scientists say, in no small measure because of what it signifies. Anthropogenic planetary warming is no longer solely endangering human communities. It is eradicating the very species that make up the fabric of our natural world. 

“This existential threat that everyone’s aware of, seeing the actual evidence of it happening, giving an expectation of what we can expect moving forward, is important,” said Lange. He remembers how “everything was just looking horrible,” as the sea rapidly encroached on the cluster of plants. “We just knew there was no long-term hope for this population in this area,” he said. “There’s no shortage of plants in the Keys that are threatened with this same fate.”

From the critically imperiled Big Pine partridge pea to the jumping prickly apple, any number of coastal species in the Florida Keys could be wiped out next in one of the places most vulnerable to sea level rise. And unlike the Key Largo cacti, which survives, if only barely, elsewhere, several of them are the last of their kind. 

“It’s very alarming,” said Marcelo Ardón, who studies coastal ecology at North Carolina State University. “Climate change is compounding all of these different drivers that makes these populations even more vulnerable.” 

A major herbivory event, in which a substantial amount of the plants were eaten by animals, stressed the Key Largo cactus species in 2015. (Researchers suspect it might have occurred as a result of tidal flooding causing a shortage of freshwater, driving a gaggle of thirsty racoons or other wildlife to gnaw on the stems.) The threat was magnified by an ensuing series of recurring king tides, in addition to storm surge and damage wrought by Hurricane Irma. Jennifer Possley, lead author of the new study, considers it a possible “bellwether for how other low-lying coastal species will respond to climate change.”

But on a planet being reshaped by warming, plants aren’t the only populations facing a looming threat of extinction. A decade ago, the Center for Biological Diversity identified 233 federally-protected species in 23 coastal states as most at-risk from sea level rise. The Key deer, loggerhead sea turtle, Delmarva Peninsula fox squirrel, Western snowy plover and Hawaiian monk seal topped that list. Today, restoration efforts have kept these five endangered species from being snuffed out, but their future is increasingly in question, as each remains threatened by habitats ceding to rising seas. 

Globally, climate change has already led to the eradication of flora and fauna ranging from the Bramble Cay melomys, a rodent in Australia that was the first confirmed mammal driven to extinction by global warming, to the “functional extinction” of elkhorn corals in the Keys and several bog species in Germany. Some estimates suggest that, if emissions continue on their current trajectory, roughly 1 in 3 species of animals and plants may go extinct by 2070.

The loss of any species to climate change is something plant physiologist Lewis Ziska feels deeply. Bidding farewell to the Key Largo tree cactus, in particular, is all the more meaningful for the scientist, who vividly remembers admiring the spiny cacti when visiting the Florida island chain. “It’s a beautiful plant, it’s very inspiring,” said Ziska. “So when you see it gone, there’s a sense of loss, almost a mourning.”

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline In a first, rising seas drove an entire species to extinction in the US on Jul 19, 2024.

This content originally appeared on Grist and was authored by Ayurella Horn-Muller.

Since May, a powerful struggle has rocked Kanaky (New Caledonia), an archipelago located in the Pacific, roughly 1,500 kilometres east of Australia. The island, one of five overseas territories in the Asia-Pacific ruled by France, has been under French colonial rule since 1853. The indigenous Kanak people initiated this cycle of protests after the French government of Emmanuel Macron extended voting rights in provincial elections to thousands of French settlers in the islands. The unrest led Macron to suspend the new rules while subjecting islanders to severe repression. In recent months, the French government has imposed a state of emergency and curfew on the islands and deployed thousands of French troops, which Macron says will remain in New Caledonia for ‘as long as necessary’. Over a thousand protesters have been arrested by French authorities, including Kanak independence activists such as Christian Tein, the leader of the Coordination Cell for Field Actions (Cellule de coordination des actions de terrain, or CCAT), some of them sent to France to face trial. The charges against Tein and others, such as for organised crime, would be laughable if the consequences were not so serious.

The reason France has cracked down so severely on the protests in New Caledonia is that the old imperial country uses its colonies not only to exploit its resources (New Caledonia holds the world’s fifth largest nickel reserves), but also to extend its political reach across the world – in this case, to have a military footprint in China’s vicinity. This story is far from new: between 1966 and 1996, for instance, France used islands in the southern Pacific for nuclear tests. One of these tests, Operation Centaure (July 1974), impacted all 110,000 residents on the Mururoa atoll of French Polynesia. The struggle of the indigenous Kanak peoples of New Caledonia is not only about freedom from colonialism, but also about the terrible military violence inflicted upon these lands and waters by the Global North. The violence that ran from 1966 to 1996 mirrors the disregard that the French still feel for the islanders, treating them as nothing more than detritus, as if they had been shipwrecked on these lands.

In the backdrop of the current unrest in New Caledonia is the Global North’s growing militarisation of the Pacific, led by the United States. Currently, 25,000 military personnel from 29 countries are conducting Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC), a military exercise that runs from Hawai’i to the edge of the Asian mainland. Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research worked with an array of organisations – a number of them from the Pacific and Indian Oceans – to draft red alert no. 18 on this dangerous development. Their names are listed below.

They Are Making the Waters of the Pacific Dangerous

What is RIMPAC?

The US and its allies have held Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) exercises since 1971. The initial partners of this military project were Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States, which are also the original members of the Five Eyes (now Fourteen Eyes) intelligence network built to share information and conduct joint surveillance exercises. They are also the major Anglophone countries of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO, set up in 1949) and are the members of the Australia-New Zealand-US strategy treaty ANZUS, signed in 1951. RIMPAC has grown to be a major biennial military exercise that has drawn in a number of countries with various forms of allegiance to the Global North (Belgium, Brazil, Brunei, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Israel, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, the Netherlands, Peru, the Philippines, Republic of Korea, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Tonga).

RIMPAC 2024 began on 28 June and runs through 2 August. It is being held in Hawai’i, which is an illegally occupied territory of the United States. The Hawai’ian independence movement has a history of resisting RIMPAC, which is understood to be part of the US occupation of sovereign Hawai’ian land. The exercise includes over 150 aircraft, 40 surface ships, three submarines, 14 national land forces, and other military equipment from 29 countries, though the bulk of the fleet is from the United States. The goal of the exercise is ‘interoperability’, which effectively means integrating the military (largely naval) forces of other countries with that of the United States. The main command and control for the exercise is managed by the US, which is the heart and soul of RIMPAC.

Fatu Feu’u (Samoa), Mata Sogia, 2009.

Why is RIMPAC so dangerous?

RIMPAC-related documents and official statements indicate that the exercises allow these navies to train ‘for a wide range of potential operations across the globe’. However, it is clear from both US strategic documents and the behaviour of the US officials who run RIMPAC that the centre of focus is China. Strategic documents also make it clear that the US sees China as a major threat, even as the main threat, to US domination and believes that it must be contained.

This containment has come through the trade war against China, but more pointedly through a web of military manoeuvres by the United States. This includes establishing more US military bases in territories and countries surrounding China; using US and allied military vessels to provoke China through freedom of navigation exercises; threatening to position US short-range nuclear missiles in countries and territories allied with the US, including Taiwan; extending the airfield in Darwin, Australia, to position US aircraft with nuclear missiles; enhancing military cooperation with US allies in East Asia with language that shows precisely that the target is to intimidate China; and holding RIMPAC exercises, particularly over the past few years. Though China was invited to participate in RIMPAC 2014 and RIMPAC 2016, when the tension levels were not so high, it has been disinvited since RIMPAC 2018.

Though RIMPAC documents suggest that the military exercise is being conducted for humanitarian purposes, this is a Trojan Horse. This was exemplified, for instance, at RIMPAC 2000, when the militaries conducted the Strong Angel international humanitarian response training exercise. In 2013, the United States and the Philippines cooperated in providing humanitarian assistance after the devastating Typhoon Haiyan. Shortly after that cooperation, the US and the Philippines signed the Enhanced Defence Cooperation Agreement (2014), which allows the US to access bases of the Philippine military to maintain its weapons depots and troops. In other words, the humanitarian operations opened the door to deeper military cooperation.

RIMPAC is a live-fire military exercise. The most spectacular part of the exercise is called Sinking Exercise (SINKEX), a drill that sinks decommissioned warships off the coast of Hawai’i. RIMPAC 2024’s target ship will be the decommissioned USS Tarawa, a 40,000-tonne amphibious assault vessel that was one of the largest during its service period. There is no environmental impact survey of the regular sinking of these ships into waters close to island nations, nor is there any understanding of the environmental impact of hosting these vast military exercises not only in the Pacific but elsewhere in the world.

RIMPAC is part of the New Cold War against China that the US imposes on the region. It is designed to provoke conflict. This makes RIMPAC a very dangerous exercise.

Kelcy Taratoa (Aotearoa), Episode 0010 from the series Who Am I? Episodes, 2004.

What is Israel’s role in RIMPAC?

Israel, which is not a country with a shoreline on the Pacific Ocean, first participated in RIMPAC 2018, and then again in RIMPAC 2022 and RIMPAC 2024. Although Israel does not have aircraft or ships in the military exercise, it is nonetheless participating in its ‘interoperability’ component, which includes establishing integrated command and control as well as collaborating in the intelligence and logistical part of the exercise. Israel is participating in RIMPAC 2024 at the same time that it is waging a genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. Though several of the observer states in RIMPAC 2024 (such as Chile and Colombia) have been forthright in their condemnation of the genocide, they continue to participate alongside Israel’s military in RIMPAC 2024. There has been no public indication of their hesitation about Israel’s involvement in these dangerous joint military exercises.

Israel is a settler-colonial country that continues its murderous apartheid and genocide against the Palestinian people. Across the Pacific, indigenous communities from Aotearoa (New Zealand) to Hawai’i have led the protests against RIMPAC over the course of the past 50 years, saying that these exercises are held on stolen ground and waters, that they disregard the negative impact on native communities upon whose land and waters live-fire exercises are held (including areas where atmospheric nuclear testing was previously conducted), and that they contribute to the climate disaster that lifts the waters and threatens the existence of the island communities. Though Israel’s participation is unsurprising, the problem is not merely its involvement in RIMPAC, but the existence of RIMPAC itself. Israel is an apartheid state that is conducting a genocide, and RIMPAC is a colonial project that threatens an annihilationist war against the peoples of the Pacific and China.

Ralph Ako (Solomon Islands), Toto Isu, 2015.

Te Kuaka (Aotearoa)
Red Ant (Australia)
Workers Party of Bangladesh (Bangladesh)
Coordinadora por Palestina (Chile)
Judíxs Antisionistas contra la Ocupación y el Apartheid (Chile)
Partido Comunes (Colombia)
Congreso de los Pueblos (Colombia)
Coordinación Política y Social, Marcha Patriótica (Colombia)
Partido Socialista de Timor (Timor Leste)
Hui Aloha ʻĀina (Hawai’i)
Communist Party of India (Marxist–Leninist) Liberation (India)
Federasi Serikat Buruh Demokratik Kerakyatan (Indonesia)
Federasi Serikat Buruh Militan (Indonesia)
Federasi Serikat Buruh Perkebunan Patriotik (Indonesia)
Pusat Perjuangan Mahasiswa untuk Pembebasan Nasional (Indonesia)
Solidaritas.net (Indonesia)
Gegar Amerika (Malaysia)
Parti Sosialis Malaysia (Malaysia)
No Cold War
Awami Workers Party (Pakistan)
Haqooq-e-Khalq Party (Pakistan)
Mazdoor Kissan Party (Pakistan)
Partido Manggagawa (Philippines)
Partido Sosyalista ng Pilipinas (Philippines)
The International Strategy Center (Republic of Korea)
Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (Sri Lanka)
Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research
Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Socialist)
CODEPINK: Women for Peace (United States)
Nodutdol (United States)
Party for Socialism and Liberation (United States)

When the political protests began in New Caledonia in May, I hastened to find a book of poems by Kanak independence leader Déwé Gorodé (1949–2022) called Under the Ashes of the Conch Shells (Sous les cendres des conques, 1974). In this book, written the same year that Gorodé joined the Marxist political group Red Scarves (Foulards rouges), she wrote the poem ‘Forbidden Zone’ (Zone interdite), which concludes:

Reao Vahitahi Nukutavake
Pinaki Tematangi Vanavana
Tureia Maria Marutea
Mangareva MORUROA FANGATAUFA
Forbidden zone
somewhere in
so-called ‘French’ Polynesia.

These are the names of islands that had already been impacted by the French nuclear bomb tests. There are no punctuation marks between the names, which indicates two things: first, that the end of an island or a country does not mark the end of nuclear contamination, and second, that the waters that lap against the islands do not divide the people who live across vast stretches of ocean, but unite them against imperialism. This impulse drove Gorodé to found Group 1878 (named for the Kanak rebellion of that year) and then the Kanak Liberation Party (Parti de libération kanak, or PALIKA) in 1976, which evolved out of Group 1878. The authorities imprisoned Gorodé repeatedly from 1974 to 1977 for her leadership in PALIKA’s struggle for independence from France.

During her time in prison, Gorodé built the Group of Exploited Kanak Women in Struggle (Groupe de femmes Kanak exploitées en lutte) with Susanna Ounei. When these two women left prison, they helped found the Kanak National Liberation and Socialist Front (Front de Libération Nationale Kanak et Socialiste) in 1984. Through concerted struggle, Gorodé was elected the vice president of New Caledonia in 2001.

Stéphane Foucaud (New Caledonia), MAOW! (2023).

In 1985, thirteen countries of the south Pacific signed the Treaty of Rarotonga, which established a nuclear-free zone from the east coast of Australia to the west coast of South America. As French colonies, neither New Caledonia nor French Polynesia signed it, but others did, including the Solomon Islands and Kūki ‘Airani (Cook Islands). Gorodé is now dead, and US nuclear weapons are poised to enter northern Australia in violation of the treaty. But the struggle does not die away.

Roads are still blocked. Hearts are still opened.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Vijay Prashad.

Akhter grew up some 180 miles south of Savar, in Satkhira — a district home to 2.2 million people on a river delta where, in recent decades, fresh water has become scarce. As sea levels rise, rivers dry up, and cyclones become more severe, Satkhira and the other low-lying districts that surround it have been among the first in the world to experience the sting of climate change-driven saltwater intrusion — the creep of seawater inland. 

The memory of drinking water tainted with salt is burned into Akhter’s mind. “It felt like swallowing needles,” she told Grist and Vox in Bengali. “It doesn’t quench your thirst.” The water was so salty Akhter couldn’t properly clean herself with it. The sodium in the water prevented soap from forming bubbles and left powdery streaks on her skin as it dried. Her hair fell out, and she itched all over. 

When she hit puberty, she had to wash her cloth menstrual pads in salty water. The monthly exposure to salt in her pads made her break out in sores. Akhter’s menstrual cycle became erratic. “One month, it showed up unexpectedly early, catching me completely off guard,” she said. “The next month, it seemed to disappear altogether.” She sought medical advice at the Shyamnagar Upazila Health Complex, the local hospital in Satkhira, but there was no long-term fix available to her, beyond stopping her period altogether with hormonal birth control pills. She left Satkhira a decade ago, when she was a teenager, and moved to Savar, known for having some of the cleanest water in Bangladesh. 

When Akhter first arrived in Savar, she had trouble adapting to city life. She wasn’t used to eating food cooked on a gas stove, and went to extreme lengths to avoid it. “I used to buy biscuits or cakes from the office canteen and sometimes starved,” she said. But, Akhter, who knew she wanted children someday, pushed through. “All I ever wanted was a better life for my kids — a life where they wouldn’t have to worry about food or clean water,” she said.

Studies have shown that saltwater consumption has negative, long-lasting effects on nearly every stage of a woman’s reproductive cycle, from menstruation to birth. Akhter knew that if she stayed in Satkhira and started a family of her own there, she’d be putting herself in real danger. She’s not the only person in her region to leave in search of cleaner water. Millions of Bangladeshis have been internally displaced by flooding in the past decade, and experts say saltwater intrusion is one of the factors driving migration from rural regions of Bangladesh to urban centers. 

In some ways, Akhter is one of the lucky ones. She got out of Satkhira before saltwater consumption led to high blood pressure, a hysterectomy, or worse. But the women, and other people with uteruses, who remain in Satkhira are suffering from reproductive health effects — issues that could become common elsewhere in the coming years. As sea levels rise and intensifying storms stress infrastructure systems along coasts around the world, salt water threatens to infiltrate freshwater drinking supplies in countries like Egypt, Italy, the United States, and Vietnam. The issue, a 2021 study stated, “has become one of the main threats to the safety of freshwater supply in coastal zones.” The health of women living in these areas is on the line. 

Southwestern Bangladesh is accustomed to encroaching salt water. The region sits adjacent to where the Padma River — known as the Ganges in India — empties into the Bay of Bengal. Most of the Bangladesh delta is less than 2 meters, or 6.5 feet, above sea level, with some areas at or even below the tide line. When cyclones wheel into the bay, storm surge pushes salt water inland, flooding the area.

For generations, communities in Satkhira adapted to the ebb and flow that defines the delta ecosystem. In the late 1960s, when a catastrophic period of cyclone-driven storm surge submerged rice paddies in salt water and ruined livelihoods, Satkhira was one of the first districts in Bangladesh to turn those paddies into shrimp farms. Small-scale farmers took advantage of storm surge — trapping seawater in ponds and paddies to cultivate shellfish — and paved the way for other parts of coastal Bangladesh to do the same. Today, shellfish farms have expanded into roughly 675 square miles of land, most of it in southern Bangladesh. Annual shellfish exports are valued in the hundreds of millions of U.S. dollars, and the industry employs more than a million people directly, and millions more indirectly. 

But the district’s legacy of hard-fought resilience is being undone by climate change. 

Already, sea level rise has pushed the saline front more than 62 miles inland along the country’s 450-mile coastline. Climate models indicate that a 380-square-mile area in coastal Bangladesh, home to 860,000 people, could be under the high tide line by the end of this century. Every millimeter of sea level rise contributes to more expansive and intense saltwater intrusion in soil and freshwater resources. 

Between 2000 and 2020, the country was hit by eight major cyclones. One of these powerful storms, 2007’s Cyclone Sidr, produced a 16-foot-high storm surge, rainfall, and tidal waves that flooded an area home to 3.45 million people. This week, a storm of similar proportions, Cyclone Remal, destroyed tens of thousands of homes and trapped thousands of people in the country’s low-lying areas. Nearly 40 percent of the country’s seaside soil already has salt in it, but storms like Sidr and Remal — the severe cyclones that are projected to become more common as climate change worsens — supercharge salinization by spreading unprecedented quantities of salt water deeper inland.

The Bangladeshi government has inadvertently contributed to the problem. In the 1960s, the government built a series of embankments around reclaimed land in southern Bangladesh. These areas, called polders, were meant to protect communities and agriculture from storm surge. But the embankments, which stand up to 13 feet high, are not tall enough to keep major surges out. Seven cyclones with storm surge of more than 13 feet hit Bangladesh between 1970 and 2008. Once the embankments have been overtopped, the seawater can’t flow out again. 

The trend is made worse by the region’s growing shrimp and prawn industry. Black tiger shrimp, the main species of shrimp farmed in Bangladesh, thrive in brackish water — water that is saline but not quite as salty as seawater. When Satkhira began to embrace aquaculture and shrimp farming, the government neglected to study the potential risks of adding saline to freshwater ponds in order to make them suitable for shrimp farming. Over time, salt from the shrimp fields leached into ponds and other in-ground freshwater containers, further contaminating limited drinking water supplies. A 2019 report that tested salinity in 57 freshwater ponds in Satkhira found that 41 of them contained water that was too salty for drinking. 

The Padma River, which carries fresh water from Nepal through India to Bangladesh, is another source of salinity. The river supplies much of the fresh water Bangladeshis use for irrigation, farming, freshwater fishing, and drinking. But the Padma’s flow into Bangladesh is restricted seasonally by India, which controls a dam in West Bengal called the Farakka Barrage. During dry periods, the flow of water coming into Bangladesh from India slows and the volume of river water going into the ocean weakens, allowing seawater to work its way up the Padma. When heavy rain falls, the river swells and salt water is pushed back out, expunging the river of its salinity and transforming the river back into a freshwater resource. 

Families collect rainwater during the winter to use throughout the dry season, but climate change is scrambling those delicate calculations, too. The seasonal rains start later and stop earlier than they did a decade ago, and when it does rain, it rains harder. These compounding issues force Bangladeshis to pull more fresh water from groundwater aquifers, which are rapidly dwindling.

“The people are trapped,” said Zion Bodrud-Doza, a researcher at the University of Guelph in Canada who studies saltwater intrusion in Bangladesh. “When you don’t have water to drink, how do you live?”

In 2008, Aneire Khan, a researcher at Imperial College London, visited Dacope, a division of the Khulna district, which borders Satkhira in southwest Bangladesh. She met a gynecologist there who told her that an unusual number of pregnant women were coming to him with gestational hypertension and preeclampsia. 

The former is defined as two separate blood pressure readings of greater than 140 over 90 in the second half of the pregnancy. The latter occurs when those high blood pressure readings are accompanied by high levels of protein in the urine. 

Both conditions affect how the placenta develops and embeds into the uterine wall, said Tracy Caroline Bank, a maternal fetal medicine fellow physician at The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center. Patients with either condition “have a higher risk of things like a preterm delivery, of fetal loss,” she said, in addition to “a higher risk of the baby growing too small.” Premature babies are dealt a bad hand before they take their first breaths: Low birth weights are linked to poor development, cognitive impairments, cerebral palsy, and psychological disorders. 

The gynecologist Khan spoke to said that high blood pressure readings, especially in women, were occurring with more frequency. Other medical professionals Khan spoke to in Khulna confirmed that observation. They thought salt water may be the culprit. 

People who drink water with small amounts of salt in it can grow acclimated to moderate salinity over time. Khan, who was traveling between London and Bangladesh at the time, tasted the water in Khulna and was surprised to encounter immediate, undeniable salinity. It was “very, very salty,” she said. She conducted a survey of blood pressure levels in pregnant women living along the coast and compared the data to blood pressure in women living inland. More than 20 percent of the women living in coastal zones had been diagnosed with a hypertensive disorder, compared to less than 3 percent of women living in Dhaka. It was clear that a serious public health threat was growing along the coast, but no formal epidemiological study of saltwater intrusion and reproductive health in Bangladesh existed at the time. Khan set out to change that. 

In 2011, three years after she spoke to the gynecologist in Khulna — the man who became her co-author — Khan published a study that showed that hypertension, or high blood pressure, in Dacope occurred seasonally. Out of the 969 pregnant women they analyzed, 90 presented with hypertension. In the wet monsoon months, heavy rains filled ponds with fresh water and diluted salt concentrations in rivers. During the dry season, lack of rainfall caused people to turn to other sources of drinking water that became steadily saltier over the course of the season. Of the 90 cases of gestational hypertension that Khan documented, 70 occurred during the months of November and April, the periods with the least amount of rainfall. 

The World Health Organization recommends that adults consume no more than 5 grams of salt per day, about a teaspoon worth. Khan ultimately discovered that women in Dacope were getting more than three times that amount per day from their drinking water alone during the dry months. 

Consumption isn’t the only way that salt water endangers women’s reproductive health. As Akhter learned as an adolescent, using salt water to wash cloth menstrual pads presents additional dangers. The water “doesn’t clean well,” said Mashura Shammi, a professor at Jahangirnagar University in Bangladesh who studies saltwater intrusion and the effects of pollutants on health. “The salt makes the cloth very hard,” she added, and can cause scratches in the vagina that lead to infection. 

Other women in southwestern Bangladesh, particularly those who make a living working in shrimp aquaculture or fishing in the rivers, suffer even more intense health repercussions. Standing in salt water every day can produce chronic uterine infections and uterine cancer. The International Centre for Climate Change and Development, a research institute, interviewed women from Bangaldesh’s coastal zones and found anecdotal evidence of a host of saltwater-linked health outcomes. “I have cut off my uterus through surgery due to my severe infections,” one 32-year-old woman said. “And I am not the only one, there are many like me.” In the same report, a doctor from the Shyamnagar Upazila Health Complex said she had noticed “an increase in infertility, irregular periods, and pelvic inflammatory disease.” The doctor said that the majority of her female patients over the age of 40 have had hysterectomies or have undergone procedures to eliminate the lining of the uterus in order to lessen heavy menstrual bleeding. 

Roughly 40 percent of the world’s population lives within 60 miles of a coast, and more than 100 countries are at risk of saltwater intrusion. By the end of 2019, 501 cities around the world had reported a saltwater intrusion crisis of some degree — more than a fifth of them home to more than 1 million people each. “Bangladesh isn’t the only country that’s going to be affected by salinity,” Khan said. “Vietnam, China, the Netherlands, Brazil — salinity in the coastal areas is going to be a huge issue, and is already a problem.”

The Mekong Delta, where the Mekong River flows into the ocean, is Vietnam’s breadbasket. Every year during the dry season, seawater flows up the mouth of the river from the South China Sea, turning the river salty for a month or two. People living in the delta — 20 percent of Vietnam’s population, many of them farmers — collect rainwater during the wet season to compensate for the seasonal salinity. But recent years have marked a departure from the norm. Yearslong droughts, more erratic rainfall patterns, and a network of Chinese dams upstream have produced a saltwater intrusion crisis in the Mekong River. The creep of saltwater upstream could lead to $3 billion in agricultural losses per year, and thousands of residents could see their drinking water cut off this year. 

A similar story is unfolding in the Nile Delta in Egypt, where farmers are pumping groundwater to supplant increasingly salty water from the Nile River. Overreliance on coastal groundwater upsets the natural balance between freshwater aquifer and ocean. As groundwater levels drop, the pressure keeping salt water out weakens, allowing the ocean in. If aquifers are drained too quickly, and past a certain point, pumping water out of the ground can actually suck ocean water into the aquifers like a vacuum. Some 15 percent of the most fertile land in the Nile Delta is contaminated with salt water due to drought, sea level rise, and overpumping. 

Nearly every solution to saltwater intrusion hinges on trying to keep seawater out of fresh water to begin with. Armoring coastlines with sea walls, levies, sandbags, and other hard infrastructure is the first line of defense in many countries. Those with water and money to spare can artificially “recharge” underground freshwater aquifers to preserve the natural tension between fresh water and salt water. Governments can also put restrictions on how much water farmers can pull from underground resources. 

Preventative measures are more effective than fixes put in place after the fact. It’s nearly impossible to clean salt out of fresh water without the aid of expensive and energy-intensive desalination equipment, which most countries do not have. A medium-size desalination plant, which is an incredibly energy-intensive piece of infrastructure, costs millions of dollars to build and then millions more in annual operation costs. Even in very rich nations, runaway saltwater intrusion poses risks to infrastructure and people. Most water supply networks’ intake stations in the U.S., for example, are not outfitted with desalination technology. Once saltwater intrusion reaches those stations, they have to be shut off to avoid pulling the water in.

The creep of seawater inland

While global salinity monitoring is spotty, evidence of saltwater intrusion continues to grow.

Electrical conductivity value (µS/cm)

10K–100K

100K–1M

1M–10M

Bangladesh

U.S. Atlantic Coast

U.S. Gulf Coast

Australia

Source: Thorslund & van Vliet 2020 | Clayton Aldern / Grist

Last year, drought in the Mississippi and the Ohio River valleys weakened the flow of water in the Mississippi River, and a massive wedge of seawater from the Gulf of Mexico started to creep north. As the wedge moved upstream along the bottom of the river, intake stations in Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana, started sucking it in. More than 9,000 residents couldn’t drink water from their taps, and local officials started distributing bottled water. Rainwater eventually eased the drought and forced the wedge back toward the ocean. Water in Plaquemines Parish is currently safe to drink again, though experts warn salt water poses a long-term threat to drinking water in southeast Louisiana.

Saltwater intrusion “is an issue along most of the coastline in America,” said Chris Russoniello, a professor of geological sciences at the University of Rhode Island. California, Louisiana, New Jersey, New York, and Rhode Island are some of the states that are already confronting intrusion. But exactly how much of a threat it poses to communities “varies drastically from place to place,” Russoniello said. How much funding states direct to keeping saltwater intrusion at bay will determine the extent to which people feel the burden of intrusion. Many states already lack sufficient drinking water protections and infrastructure, particularly in low-income and minority areas. Saltwater intrusion is likely to exacerbate existing drinking water inequities. But, in general, the U.S. is much better equipped to address saltwater intrusion than other countries grappling with similar issues. 

“The places where this will really be felt are places where the resources are not available,” Russoniello said. In Bangladesh, the government has tried to leverage billions in international and domestic resilience funding to try to protect communities in the southern parts of the country. The solutions often do more harm than good. The embankments are susceptible to breaching, shrimp and prawn farmers have further contaminated soil and drinking water with salt, and an expensive network of gates, locks, and sluices meant to control ocean water are decaying due to lack of regular maintenance. District governments and nongovernmental organizations distribute rainwater collection tanks to a small percentage of families every year, which provide some measure of relief. But none of these fixes are permanent. 

“If the water is saline, you cannot make it fresh water in the blink of an eye,” Bodrud-Doza said. “People are trying to survive, but people need to leave.” Coastal Bangladesh and southeast Louisiana have that, at least, in common. Sea level rise will force a substantial portion of the population in both places to migrate inland. In areas where the encroaching tide, deadly storm surge, and widespread saltwater intrusion are inevitable, there will eventually be no option but retreat. “It’s something we need to think about as a society,” Russionello said. For the women already living on the front lines of a crisis that robs them of their health, reproductive organs, and pregnancies, retreating from the coastline is no longer a question of if, but how. 

Akhter and her husband, Shamim, grew up in adjacent villages and met when they were children. They began dating in high school and later indicated to their families that they wanted to be married. Akhter was living in Savar when her marriage to Shamim was arranged by her parents. After they were married in a traditional ceremony in Satkhira, Akhter temporarily moved to Shamim’s village, where the salt levels in the drinking water were even higher than they had been in her home village. The couple tried purifying the water with aluminum sulfate powder and boiling the water with herbs. As a last resort, Shamim installed a water filter he obtained in Dhaka. Nothing helped. 

Akhter permanently relocated to Savar with Shamim, and, soon after, became pregnant and gave birth to her first daughter, Miftaul. Two years later, she gave birth to a second healthy girl, Muntaha. At first, the family lived together in Savar. But Akhter and Shamim both work full time, and they couldn’t afford day care for both children. Their older daughter, Miftaul, who is now 5, lives in Satkhira with her grandparents for most of the year, and Akhter worries about the impact that saltwater intrusion will have on her young daughter’s life. 

“It’s not ideal for her health, especially now that she’s growing,” Akhter said. “She already has trouble showering with salty water.” Miftaul has begun attending school in Satkhira, but Akhter and Shamim plan to bring her back to the city, where the schools and water quality are better, as soon as possible. 

Akhter doesn’t want her children to relive a version of her own difficult childhood. A piece of her heart will always live in Satkhira, she said, but her future, and her daughters’ futures, are anchored in Savar. “I don’t want them to go through the struggles we faced.”

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Salt in the womb: How rising seas erode reproductive health on May 30, 2024.

This content originally appeared on Grist and was authored by Zoya Teirstein.

In that regard, an excellent new series by The Washington Post d/d April 29th, 2024, “Must Reads” is an eye-opening view into the impact of global warming in real time with real people and real images. For example, it’s a quick fix for anybody who doubts human-caused climate change influence on sea level rise. It’s real; it’s happening now; it should be required reading for America’s Congressional climate deniers.

And required reading for 50 million Americans who do not believe in climate change/global warming, according to a new University of Michigan study. Meanwhile a diametrically opposing viewpoint: “Planet is headed for at least 2.5C of heating with disastrous results for humanity, poll of hundreds of scientists finds.” (Source: “World’s Top Climate Scientists Expect Global Heating to Blast Past 1.5C Target”, The Guardian, May 8, 2024.)

As a prelude to the 2024 elections, it should be noted: “When former President Donald Trump exited the Oval Office in January 2021, he left behind a record of environmental roll backs unrivaled in U.S. History.” Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 playbook will do more: “MAGA Republicans Have a 920-Page Plan to Make Climate Change Worse”, Heatmap News, February 15, 2024.

Here’s the opening tickler for the thought-provoking “Must Reads” series: “This past week, The Post published the first two pieces in a new series showcasing an alarming phenomenon confronting tens of millions of Americans from Texas to North Carolina: The ocean is rising across the South faster than almost anywhere. In some communities, roads increasingly are falling below the highest tides, leaving drivers stuck in repeated delays or forcing them to slog through salt water to reach homes, schools, work, and places of worship. Researchers and public officials fear that in certain places, rising waters could periodically cut off residents from essential services such as medical aid.”

A 2023 Scientific American article: “U.S. Seas Are Rising at Triple the Global Average” conforms to the inescapable conclusion of a need for sirens and flashing red lights to signal the dangers imbedded in Must Reads: “Sea levels have surged along the coastlines of the southeastern United States, new research finds — hitting some of their highest rates in more than a century… the effect on communities near the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Ocean already are being observed.”

Alarmingly, sea-level rise of the Southeast and the Gulf already exceed scientific models projected for the next 30 years, prompting a mad scramble by scientists looking for answers to why sea levels are 30 years ahead of schedule. Nobody is braced for this happening so fast.

“The recent Journal of Climate study suggested that the increase may be driven by changes in a warm-water current passing through the Gulf of Mexico. And these changes may in turn be fueled by a recent slowdown in a major Atlantic Ocean current, driven by human-caused climate change.” (Ibid.)

According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration -NOAA– high-tide flooding along the Gulf and East coasts has increased considerably: High-tide flooding days are up 400% in the Southeast and 1,100% in the Gulf since 2000. It’s no wonder that property insurance premiums are spiking, and shorelines are slipping. It’s real; it’s happening now.

Solutions: Adapt to Sea Levels and Mitigate CO2 to Avoid Worst-Case

What to do: According to Sönke Dangendorf, an expert in coastal engineering at Tulane University and lead author of the new study: “We need to prepare for that: we need to adapt.” (Ibid.)

A new study authored by Lily Roberts at State of the Planet, Columbia Climate School, “Increase in West Antarctica Ice Sheet Melting Inevitable in 21st Century” d/d January 26, 2024, emphasizes the necessity for adaptation measures to combat sea level rise: “The new findings paint a grave picture for the state of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet. We may now have limited capacity to stop ice-shelf collapse in the region and prevent meters of global sea-level rise. Experts are warning that policymakers should consider adaptation to sea-level rise a primary concern, as the window to safeguard the ice sheet from irreversible damage has probably now passed…. This new research paints a more realistic picture for the fate of Antarctic ice shelves and highlights the necessity for continued mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions in order to avoid the worst-case ocean warming scenario, as well as the urgent need for prioritization of adaptation to global sea-level rise.”

Adapting to rising sea levels entails moving physical structures away from coastal areas exposed to loss of shorelines and building massive sea walls, begging the all-important question of whether it’s already too late to stop, full stop, greenhouse gas CO2 emissions produced by oil and gas companies, which, in turn, causes global warming and sea level rise. What to do and how soon to do it is a nagging issue that requires immediate attention at the highest levels. Unless, of course, people simply don’t give a damn and let the chips fall where they may, aka: “avoidance coping.”

Furthermore, compounding the issue for the US, it’s not only the Southeastern and Gulf coasts, but also happening in Maine: “What were once distant projections on TV and in newspapers have now made it to the doorsteps of thousands of coastal residents in Maine: sea levels are rising at an alarming rate, with some areas in the state experiencing water levels eight inches higher than what they were in 1950. Estimates show that sea level rise will only continue to accelerate in coming decades.” (Source: “Manomet Awarded New Funding To Study Sea Level Rise Impacts On Maine’s Coastal Communities”, The Manomet Team, January 25, 2023).

Humanity is smack dab in the early stages of a man-made climate crisis that’s just now starting to strut its stuff in open public The question remains whether a self-induced climate crisis can be self-reduced, but in all honesty and by all appearances, world leadership prefers to continue playing Russian roulette with a single round of fossil fuels. CO2 emissions are 76% of greenhouse gases that cause overheating of the planet, and CO2’s primary source is oil and gas production, which clearly presents the dilemma of all dilemmas.

What to do? And when is it too late? And is it possible to live without oil and gas production?

Humanity did live without oil and gas production for thousands of years pre-Colonel Drake’s heralded discovery of oil in Pennsylvania in 1859 (world population 1.2 billion at the time) that set the stage for a new oil economy. Going forward, can an overcrowding 8.1 billion world civilization exist without oil and gas production, and more importantly, can 8.1B survive with it?

It’s notable that climate scientists say halting CO2 emissions will slow the rate of increase of planetary heat. Thus, things can be done to alleviate the impact of global warming so that it’s not as horribly bad as it is without any mitigation whatsoever. Less horrible is good.

Meanwhile… HOUSTON — “Saudi Aramco CEO Amin Nasser said Monday that the energy transition is failing, and policymakers should abandon the ‘fantasy’ of phasing out oil and gas, as demand for fossil fuels is expected to continue to grow in the coming years.” (Source: “Saudi Aramco CEO Says Energy Transition is Failing, World Should Abandon ‘Fantasy’ of Phasing Out Oil”, CNBC News, March 18, 2024).

Really? Seriously? Amin who?

Because international oil and gas interests plan on increasing production, by a lot, which is accepted by world leaders with open arms, there’s no stopping a sure-fire rapid rate of sea level never witnessed before. The Global Oil and Gas Tracker claims: “Fourfold Increase in New Oil and Gas Fields to Push Climate Further From 1.5°C Pathway”.

Assuming all-above plays out as described, meaning oil and gas producers pump full-blast like psychopaths with a death wish, the only option left is building massive sea walls, re-introducing medieval fortifications throughout the world, a throwback to the 5th-14th centuries when horse-drawn four-wheeled carts and walking were the modes of transportation, thereby establishing Net Zero once and for all.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Robert Hunziker.

Illustration: Liu Rui/GT

The South and East China Seas are among China’s major security concerns in its neighborhood. Despite this, the US still hypes up competition with China in these regions to cover up the tendency of its hegemonic expansion.

The US Congressional Research Service (CRS) recently published a report which pointed out that the South China Sea in the past 10 to 15 years has become the arena of US-China strategic competition, while actions by China’s maritime forces at the Diaoyu Islands in the East China Sea are another concern for US observers. “Chinese domination of China’s near-seas region… could substantially affect US strategic, political, and economic interests in the Indo-Pacific region and elsewhere,” said the CRS report.

The South and East China Seas hold different strategic positions for China and the US. On one hand, as China’s military strength has rapidly progressed, the Chinese navy no longer prioritizes near-shore defense. Instead, it actively and comprehensively seeks to safeguard China’s sovereignty and security in these waters. China’s activities in the South and East China Seas are among the first indications of its rise as a global power.

On the other hand, the South and East China Seas are at the forefront of US hegemonic power. Despite being geographically distant from these waters, the US still perceives China’s near-seas region as a place to show off its military presence and political influence due to the pervasive nature of the US global hegemony. This situation is unlikely to change unless the US hegemonic strategy collapses.

It is evident that the situation in the South and East China Seas has become complicated over the years. Experts told the Global Times that Washington is the biggest driver of the intensifying China-US competition in these regions, noting the US deliberately creates problems in these regions for its own interests. In other words, the US aims to showcase the strength of its hegemony, while simultaneously containing China’s development through its Indo-Pacific Strategy.

Managing the China-US competition in those regions has become an urgent yet difficult task. When China’s growing determination to protect its national security encounters the US’ pursuit for global hegemony in the South and East China Seas, a collision can easily occur. The US will do anything to make sure its needs override China’s, leading to the emergence of more confrontations and future deterioration of bilateral relations.

The intense strategic competition between Beijing and Washington in China’s near-seas region may also affect policymaking in the US. The CRS is a major congressional think tank under the Library of Congress that serves members of Congress and their committees. Its recent report is obviously intended to clarify congressional responsibilities in the China-US strategic competition in the South and East China Seas, so that Congress can better help Washington gain an advantage over Beijing.

The US Congress has passed bills to institutionalize anti-China activities, which in itself will lead to further tensions in the bilateral relationship. This year, the South China Sea and East China Sea Sanctions Act of 2023 has already been introduced in the Senate; we cannot rule out the possibility that Congress may use more legislative resources against China’s development.

But from a strategic point of view, the US actually hopes China’s neighbors in the South and East China Seas to fight Beijing at the forefront, while the US provides strategic support from behind. The question is, as Washington’s sinister intentions of exploiting its allies and partners become increasingly prominent, how many countries will be willing to pay for US hegemonic strategy?

In the face of the US’ intense competition with China in China’s neighboring waters, China should, on one hand, strive for a more favorable international environment through diplomatic means to ensure a long-term peaceful and stable surrounding environment conducive to its development.

On the other hand, the country should not neglect the development of its hard power, including military capabilities. During critical moments, China must demonstrate its determination through action to safeguard national sovereignty, security, and interests, making it clear to those who provoke that there is no room for maneuver when it comes to issues involving China’s red line.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Global Times.

The post The South China Sea’s Resource Wars: It’s Not Only About Fossil Fuels appeared first on CounterPunch.org.

This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Joshua Frank.

The post The South China Sea’s Resource Wars: It’s Not Only About Fossil Fuels appeared first on CounterPunch.org.

This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Joshua Frank.

Sometimes people come as early as 4 a.m., hoping to be first in line for the precious supply of fresh fruit and vegetables.

As people arrive they cross the runway by car, motorbike or on foot. By opening time, an orderly queue has materialized. People sit on chairs or stand while they wait their turn.

Numbers are called and small groups eagerly converge on benches stacked with brightly colored crates. People haul out papaya, leafy greens and ample-sized cucumbers.

“It’s very hard to get fresh vegetables and fruit. This is the only place where we can get the fresh ones,” said grandmother Seleta Kapua Taupo as she waited her turn. “Most of the cabbages when they come [from overseas], most of the carrots, they are already in a stage of getting rotten and we don’t want to have that.”

People are grateful for the vegetables, grown in rows and rows of boxes raised off the porous atoll ground, but some also say it’s never enough. Because Tuvalu is so small – its islands spread over a vast expanse of the Pacific Ocean comprise only 26 square kilometers (10 square miles) – there’s no space for the garden to expand despite its important role in countering an unbalanced diet.

Taiwan’s aid agency, which established the garden as a demonstration project last decade, estimates it now provides most of the fruit and vegetables consumed on Funafuti – Tuvalu’s principle coral atoll made up of islets of barely arable land and reefs encircling the sapphire waters of a lagoon. 

The constraints on the garden show the tradeoffs that low-lying micronations in the Pacific such as Tuvalu grapple with and which will only get more intractable as scarce land is lost to sea-level rise. Without building up and extending land that averages an arm’s length above the high-tide, half of Funafuti will be inundated by tidal waters by 2050 and 95% by the end of this century, based on one-meter of sea-level rise projected by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Aside from locally caught fish and shellfish, much of Tuvalu’s food is imported, expensive and low in nutrition.

Restaurant staples here are large plates overflowing with white rice and fried meat. Cans of Fanta and Coke cost less than bottled water.

“Before we had this market, most of us didn’t know how to use these vegetables,” Taupo said. 

“Before, my grandchildren didn’t like vegetables in their food. But I cut them very small and put them in the soup, so they have no choice,” she said, chuckling. “So now they are used to it and they start to love even the salad. Now they love the salad.” 

Funafuti at its widest is about 400 meters (1,312 feet), a parcel of land that packs together the airport runway, government buildings and infrastructure and homes. Between the two to three international flights a week, the runway is a lively town square where people flock to socialize or play football and volleyball in the evenings. 

At one of the atoll’s narrowest slivers, mere meters, the view takes in ocean waves crashing on one side of the road while lagoon waters lap placidly on the other.

“You don’t want to think about it, that it’s going to disappear,” said Suzanne Kofe, who has repurposed an old shipping container into Sue’s Cafe, serving burgers to locals and the weekly influx of U.N. and other advisers that make up most of Tuvalu’s foreign visitors.

“That’s what scientists say, that it will disappear,” she said. “But I believe it’s not in my lifetime.”

Tuvalu has become emblematic of the plight faced by low-lying islands from projected sea level rise over the coming century.

Its coral atolls, a two-and-a-half hour flight north of Fiji, are home to only 12,000 people, and most people couldn’t locate them on a world map. Yet with clever public relations, fronted by its Foreign Minister Simon Kofe, Tuvalu has called attention to its situation and helped galvanize calls for faster action to reduce reliance on fossil fuels.

In October 2021, a video of Kofe standing knee-deep in the ocean while delivering Tuvalu’s message to the annual U.N. climate change conference went viral online and was reported by news organizations worldwide. 

The following year, Kofe was superimposed into a three-dimensional digital replica of Te Afualiku, an uninhabited filament of palms and pulverized coral that he predicted would be one of the first Tuvaluan islets to disappear. 

He gravely intoned that Tuvalu would upload a digital copy of itself to the metaverse, a purported virtual world accessed through bulky VR goggles, so there would be a record of Tuvaluan culture if its islands become submerged by rising seas.

Months after the idea of a virtual-reality Tuvalu briefly held the world’s attention, it remains more a macabre stunt than reality.

“We’ve been advocating for decades now on the international stage and this is probably the most effective we’ve been,” said Kofe, “in getting the world’s attention on issues of climate change.”

The tech industry’s brief but expensive infatuation with the still largely hypothetical metaverse – hyped up in 2021 by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg as the future of the internet – is now ridiculed by technology commentators.

Facebook-owner Meta, which invested billions of dollars in its own video-game-like version of the metaverse only for it to flop, has laid off thousands of employees. It says it is now investing more in artificial intelligence. 

“The metaverse as Zuckerberg has defined it has been abandoned not just by originally supportive companies, like Disney, Microsoft and Tencent, but even by Meta itself,” said Jordan Guiao, a research fellow at the Australia Institute’s Centre for Responsible Technology.

“There may be more practical and specific applications being trialed,” he said, “but the grandiose and much overhyped visions that we saw over the last 18 months have not come to fruition.”

Societies need to develop policy and initiatives grounded in reality, “as opposed to imagined reality, to solve our problems,” Guiao said.

Business services company Accenture, which rendered Te Afualiku digitally after proposing the idea to Tuvalu, said it’s currently not viewable in the metaverse. 

Even if it were, it would be near impossible to experience it in Tuvalu due to limited Internet bandwidth. 

Despite the attention it has garnered, a virtual Tuvalu is only a small part of the strategy to ensure the country remains recognized as a sovereign state in the “worst-case scenario” of being swallowed by the Pacific Ocean, according to Kofe.

He insists that digital Tuvalu will become a reality and points to Singapore, which uses an immersive digital twin of the city-state for urban and environmental planning. 

“We’re at the early stages of it but a time will come and people will be able to have the access to it,” Kofe said. 

“The challenge that many of the tech companies have now is to find a user case for that sort of platform,” he said. 

“There has been a lot of interest in what Tuvalu is doing because they [tech companies] see the value of it, there’s a sense of purpose in developing something that could actually help save and preserve a culture.” 

Reclaiming an island

Just a two-minute stroll from Kofe’s modest office in the low-rise government building, backhoes and trucks maneuver around giant earth-filled sacks as azure waters wash against an expanding palisade of sand dredged from the lagoon.

An Australian marine engineering company, Hall Pacific, is creating more than seven hectares of new land along a 780-meter (2,560-feet) stretch of lagoon waterfront.

At roughly 4% of the existing area of Funafuti’s largest island, it’s a significant addition to the atoll that would also bolster the ability to withstand king tides and tropical cyclones.

The cost, including coastal protection works for two outer islands Nanumaga and Nanumea to stop them being swamped by storm waves, is about U.S. $30 million.

The project has been several years in the making and is only the first steps in a much larger vision.

“A solution for us,” Kofe said, “is to reclaim land, build sea walls and even raise our islands in some parts – that’s a solution that we see that’s viable for the people of Tuvalu and to save our people.”

Unveiled in November by Tuvalu’s government and the U.N. Development Programme, the decades-long plan to survive higher sea levels envisages more than doubling the size of Tuvalu’s most populated island and linking it to two smaller islets by reclaiming 3.6 square kilometers (1.4 square miles) from the lagoon.

“All involved hope that work will begin very soon and that it will become reality before sea-level rise critically endangers people and property,” said UNDP coastal adaptation expert Arthur Webb.

He said up to U.S. $7 million was needed now for design and engineering studies. He declined to say how much the proposed reclamation works could cost in total.

“There is no conventional adaptation fund or facility that Tuvalu can apply to for assistance on this scale, at this time,” Webb said. “Thus we must now think creatively about how we achieve what needs to be done.”

The plan proposes relocating residents and infrastructure to the reclaimed area and later possibly raising the level of the original island before revegetating it. 

The airport would be moved to a finger of land at one end of the enlarged islet and also serve as a water catchment for the thirsty islands that depend on rainfall for their water. 

Tuvalu’s government and its international advisers now need to secure the support of Tuvaluans and the considerable funding to make the plan a reality. 

“Obviously we will continue to advocate on the international playing field for countries to take stronger climate action,” Kofe said. “But I think we also need to focus our energy on things that are within our control.”

BenarNews is an online news agency affiliated to Radio Free Asia.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Stephen Wright for BenarNews.

Guam is no stranger to typhoons. The last major one, Super Typhoon Pongsona, struck in 2002 and caused $700 million in damage. But Mawar is the strongest since then — and it likely was made more intense, and more dangerous, by climate change. 

As the planet heats up, oceans do, too. Warming seas generate more fuel for cyclones, which feed on hot air and water vapor lifting off the ocean’s surface. Rising sea levels worsen storm surges – up to 10 feet in Mawar’s case – heightening the threat of floods. And higher air temperatures trap more moisture in the atmosphere, which causes typhoons like Mawar to dump more rain. The storm has been pelting Guam with up to 2 inches of rain an hour. 

The eye of Mawar passed just north of Guam, as its southern wall — the windiest part of the storm — lacerated the island of some 170,000 people. As of Thursday morning, no storm-related deaths had been reported. 

“I will be making an assessment of the devastation of our island as soon as it’s safe to go outside,” Guam Governor Lou Leon Guerror said in a video posted to Facebook. She was inside, but as she spoke, wind could be heard thrashing the building. “We will get through this storm as we have in many, many other storms.” 

President Joe Biden preemptively declared a federal disaster emergency on Tuesday. Stronger building codes have minimized damage and deaths from major storms on the island in recent years, the New York Times reported. Usually “we just barbecue, chill, adapt” when storms hit, Wayne Chargualaf, who works at the local government’s housing authority, told the Times. Still, the National Weather Service urged residents to hunker down, describing “destructive winds, life-threatening storm surge, and torrential rain which may result in landslides and flash flooding.” 

Mawar whipped from a Category 1 into a Category 4 storm in just a day, and weather experts say typhoons and hurricanes are charging up and transforming into mega-storms more quickly as the planet warms. Some of the recent major hurricanes in the U.S. intensified right before landfall: Hurricane Ian, which slammed into Florida last year; Ida, which ripped across Louisiana in 2021; and Harvey, which hit Houston with historic floods in 2017. Such rapid escalation can catch officials off guard and make preparing more difficult. 

Scientists are also investigating whether climate change is causing tropical cyclones to slow down. Mawar was moving at only 8 miles an hour on Wednesday evening, while other typhoons in the region have sped up to 15 miles per hour, a meteorologist told the Associated Press. Some research suggests that human-caused warming has kept storms sitting longer over land, causing more flooding, as was the case when Harvey lingered above Texas and Louisiana for several days.

The global El Niño weather pattern, expected to arrive later this year, could make severe storms near Guam more likely. The westerly winds that define the pattern are forecasted to warm the ocean’s surface, shifting the area where cyclones develop, and putting the islands of Micronesia, including Guam, at greater risk, according to the National Weather Service.  The World Meteorological Organization recently warned that the pairing of El Niño with climate change could make the next five years the hottest on record. 

The National Weather Service plans on releasing an official outlook for Guam’s tropical cyclone season on June 1, which just happens to be the start of hurricane season in the Atlantic Ocean. Forecasters say this season could be similar to 2017, the year of Harvey and Maria, which wreaked havoc across the Caribbean.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Guam gets pummeled by Typhoon Mawar — another cyclone charged by warming seas on May 24, 2023.

This content originally appeared on Grist and was authored by Max Graham.

The post The Ghost of Hugo Grotius: The UN High Seas Treaty appeared first on CounterPunch.org.

This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Binoy Kampmark.

Debates about the sea have rarely lost their sting. The Dutch legal scholar Hugo Grotius, in his 1609 work Mare Liberum (The Free Sea), laboured over such concepts as freedom of navigation and trade (commeandi commercandique libertas), terms that have come to mean as much assertions of power as affirmations of international legal relations.

The thrust of his argument was directed against the Portuguese claim of exclusive access to the East Indies, but along the way, statements abound about the nature of the sea itself, including its resources. While land could be possessed and transformed by human labour and private use, the transient, ever-changing sea could not. It is a view echoed in the work of John Locke, who called the ocean “that great and still remaining Common of Mankind”.

With empires and states tumbling over each other in those historical challenges posed by trade and navigation, thoughts turned to a relevant treaty that would govern the seas. While there was a general acceptance by the end of the 18th century that states had sovereignty over their territorial sea to the limit of three miles, interest in codifying the laws on oceans was sufficient for the UN International Law Commission to begin work on the subject in 1949.

It was a project that occupied the minds, time and resources of nation states and their officials for decades, eventually yielding the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Brought into existence in 1982, it came into effect in 1995. UNCLOS served to define maritime zones, including such concepts as the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the exclusive economic zone, the continental shelf, the high sea, the international seabed area and archipelagic waters.

What was missing from the document was a deeper focus on the high sea itself, lying beyond the “exclusive economic zones” of states (200 nautical miles from shore) and, by virtue of that, a regulatory framework regarding protection and use. Over the years, environmental concerns including climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution became paramount. Then came those areas of exploration, exploitation and plunder: marine genetic resources and deep-sea mining.

The High Seas Treaty, in its agreed form reached by delegates of the Intergovernmental Conference on Marine Biodiversity and Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction, retains the object of protecting 30% of the world’s oceans by 2030. The goal is in line with the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) which was adopted at the conclusion of Biodiversity COP15 in December last year. This, it is at least hoped, will partially address what has been laboriously described as a “biodiversity governance gap”, especially as applicable to the high seas. (To date, only 1.2% of the waters in the high seas is the subject of protection.)

The Treaty promises to limit the extent of a number of rapacious activities: fishing, busy shipping lane routes and exploration activities that include that perennially contentious practice of deep-sea mining. As the Jamaica-based International Seabed Authority explained to the BBC, “any future activity in the deep seabed will be subject to strict environmental regulations and oversight to ensure that they are carried out sustainably and responsibly.”

Laura Meller of Greenpeace Nordic glowed with optimism at the outcome. “We praise countries for seeking compromises, putting aside differences and delivering a Treaty that will let us protect the oceans, build our resilience to climate change and safeguard the lives and livelihoods of billions of people.” There were also cheery statements from the UN Secretary General António Guterres about the triumph of multilateralism, and the confident assertion from the Singaporean Conference president Ambassador Rena Lee, that the ship had “reached the shore.”

The text, however, leaves lingering tensions to simmer. The language, by its insistence on the high seas, suggests the principle of “Freedom of the High Seas” having more truck than the “Common Heritage of Humankind”. (The ghost of Grotius lingers.) How the larger powers seek to negotiate this in the context of gains and profits arising out of marine genetic resources, including any mechanism of sharing, will be telling.

The text also lacks a clear definition of fish, fishing and fishing-related activities, very much the outcome of intense lobbying by fishing interests. Given the treaty’s link to other instruments, such as the Agreement on Port State Measures, which defines fish as “all species of living marine resources, whether processed or not”, the risk of excluding living marine resources from the regulatory mechanism is genuine enough.

Then comes the issue of ratification and implementation. Signatures may be penned, and commitments made, but nation states can be famously lethargic in implementing what they promise and stubborn on points of interpretation. Lethargy and disputatiousness will do little to stem the threat to marine species, complex systems of aquatic ecology, and disappearing island states.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Binoy Kampmark.

• Five women sue Texas after being denied abortions even though their lives were in danger
• Israeli raid in Jenin kills six Palestinians and wounds two dozen others
• United Nations agrees to a first of its kind treaty to protect the high seas
• Grim outlook for California salmon population as numbers drop to their lowest point in decades
• Warnings on high energy use and pollution arising from bitcoin

Image courtesy of Center for Reproductive Rights

The post First of its kind lawsuit against Texas by women whose lives were endangered by abortion ban; Another Israeli raid in Jenin kills six Palestinians; U.N. approves treaty to protect the high seas: The Pacifica Evening News March 7 2023 appeared first on KPFA.

This content originally appeared on KPFA - The Pacifica Evening News, Weekdays and was authored by KPFA.

The first-ever international treaty to protect the oceans was agreed to by negotiators from more than 190 countries at a United Nations conference this weekend, capping nearly two decades of efforts by conservation groups. The legally binding pact could help reverse marine biodiversity loss by establishing marine protected areas covering nearly a third of the world’s seas by 2030. We hear more from one of the treaty’s scientist-negotiators, Minna Epps, a marine biologist and director of the Ocean Team at the International Union for the Conservation of Nature.

This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

Ocean conservationists expressed elation late Saturday after it was announced—following nearly two decades of consideration and effort—that delegates from around the world had agreed to language for a far-reaching global treaty aimed at protecting the biodiversity on the high seas and in the deep oceans of the world.

"This is a historic day for conservation and a sign that in a divided world, protecting nature and people can triumph over geopolitics," declared Dr. Laura Meller, the oceans campaigner for Greenpeace Nordic.

"We praise countries for seeking compromises, putting aside differences, and delivering a Treaty that will let us protect the oceans, build our resilience to climate change and safeguard the lives and livelihoods of billions of people," Meller added.

The final text of the Global Ocean Treaty, formally referred to as the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction treaty (BBNJ), was reached after a two-week round of talks that concluded with a 48-hour marathon push between delegations at the United Nations headquarters in New York.

"The High Seas Treaty opens the path for humankind to finally provide protection to marine life across our one ocean."

"This is huge," said Greenpeace in a social media post, calling the agreement "the biggest conservation victory ever!"

Rena Lee of Singapore, the U.N Ambassador for Oceans and president of the conference hosting the talks, received a standing ovation after announcing a final deal had been reached. "The shipped has reached the shore," Lee told the conference.

\u201cBBNJ President Rena Lee: "The ship has reached the shore."\n\nThe BBNJ Agreement is agreed.\u201d

— Duncan Currie (@Duncan Currie) 1677984046

"Following a two-week-long rollercoaster ride of negotiations and super-hero efforts in the last 48 hours, governments reached agreement on key issues that will advance protection and better management of marine biodiversity in the High Seas," said Rebecca Hubbard, director of the High Seas Alliance, a coalition of over 40 ocean-focused NGOs that also includes the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN).

Minna Epps, director of the Global Marine and Polar Programme at the IUCN, said the agreement represents a new opportunity.

"The High Seas Treaty opens the path for humankind to finally provide protection to marine life across our one ocean," Epps said in a statement. "Its adoption closes essential gaps in international law and offers a framework for governments to work together to protect global ocean health, climate resilience, and the socioeconomic wellbeing and food security of billions of people."

Protecting the world's high seas, which refers to areas of the oceans outside the jurisdiction of any country, is part of the larger push to protect planetary biodiversity and seen as key if nations want to keep their commitment to the UN-brokered Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework—also known as the known as the 30x30 pledge—that aims protect 30 percent of the world's natural habitat by 2030.

"With currently just over 1% of the High Seas protected," said the High Seas Alliance in a statement, "the new Treaty will provide a pathway to establish marine protected areas in these waters." The group said the treaty will make acheiving the goals of the Kunming-Montreal agreement possible, but that "time is of the essence" for the world's biodiversity.

"The new Treaty will bring ocean governance into the 21^st century," said the group, "including establishing modern requirements to assess and manage planned human activities that would affect marine life in the High Seas as well as ensuring greater transparency. This will greatly strengthen the effective area-based management of fishing, shipping, and other activities that have contributed to the overall decline in ocean health."

According to Greenpeace's assessment of the talks:

The High Ambition Coalition, which includes the EU, US and UK, and China were key players in brokering the deal. Both showed willingness to compromise in the final days of talks, and built coalitions instead of sowing division. Small Island States have shown leadership throughout the process, and the G77 group led the way in ensuring the Treaty can be put into practice in a fair and equitable way.

The fair sharing of monetary benefits from Marine Genetic Resources was a key sticking point. This was only resolved on the final day of talks. The section of the Treaty on Marine Protected Areas does away with broken consensus-based decision making which has failed to protect the oceans through existing regional bodies like the Antarctic Ocean Commission. While there are still major issues in the text, it is a workable Treaty that is a starting point for protecting 30% of the world’s oceans.

The group said it is now urgent for governments around the world to take the final step of ratifying the treaty.

"We can now finally move from talk to real change at sea. Countries must formally adopt the Treaty and ratify it as quickly as possible to bring it into force, and then deliver the fully protected ocean sanctuaries our planet needs," Meller said. "The clock is still ticking to deliver 30×30. We have half a decade left, and we can't be complacent."

This content originally appeared on Common Dreams and was authored by Jon Queally.

Climate change is forcing people around the world to abandon their homes. In the Pacific Islands, rising sea levels are leaving communities facing tough decisions about relocation.

Some are choosing to stay in high-risk areas.

Our research investigated this phenomenon, known as “voluntary immobility”.

• READ MORE: Climate change forced these Fijian communities to move – and with 80 more at risk, here’s what they learned
• An entire Pacific country will upload itself to the metaverse. It’s a desperate plan – with a hidden message

The government of Fiji has identified around 800 communities that may have to relocate due to climate change impacts (six have already been moved). One of these is the village on Serua Island, which was the focus of our study.

Coastal erosion and flooding have severely damaged the village over the past two decades. Homes have been submerged, seawater has spoiled food crops and the seawall has been destroyed.

Despite this, almost all of Serua Island’s residents are choosing to stay.

We found their decision is based on “vanua”, an Indigenous Fijian word that refers to the interconnectedness of the natural environment, social bonds, ways of being, spirituality and stewardship of place. Vanua binds local communities to their land.

Residents feel an obligation to stay
Serua Island has historical importance. It is the traditional residence of the paramount chief of Serua province.

The island’s residents choose to remain because of their deep-rooted connections, to act as guardians and to meet their customary obligations to sustain a place of profound cultural importance. As one resident explained:

“Our forefathers chose to live and remain on the island just so they could be close to our chief.”

The link to ancestors is a vital part of life on Serua Island. Every family has a foundation stone upon which their ancestors built their house. One resident told us:

“In the past, when a foundation of a home is created, they name it, and that is where our ancestors were buried as well. Their bones, sweat, tears, hard work [are] all buried in the foundation.”

Many believe the disturbance of the foundation stone will bring misfortune to their relatives or to other members of their village.

The ocean that separates Serua Island from Fiji’s main island, Viti Levu, is also part of the identity of men and women of Serua. One man said:

“When you have walked to the island, that means you have finally stepped foot on Serua. Visitors to the island may find this a challenging way to get there. However, for us, travelling this body of water daily is the essence of a being Serua Islander.”

The ocean is a source of food and income, and a place of belonging. One woman said:

“The ocean is part of me and sustains me – we gauge when to go and when to return according to the tide.”

Serua Islanders are concerned that relocating to Viti Levu would disrupt the bond they have with their chief, sacred sites and the ocean. They fear relocation would lead to loss of their identity, cultural practices and place attachment. As one villager said:

“It may be difficult for an outsider to understand this process because it entails much more than simply giving up material possessions.”

If residents had to relocate due to climate change, it would be a last resort. Residents are keenly aware it would mean disrupting — or losing — not just material assets such as foundation stones, but sacred sites, a way of life and Indigenous knowledge.

Voluntary immobility is a global phenomenon
As climate tipping points are reached and harms escalate, humans must adapt. Yet even in places where relocation is proposed as a last resort, people may prefer to remain.

Voluntary immobility is not unique to Fiji. Around the world, households and communities are choosing to stay where climate risks are increasing or already high. Reasons include access to livelihoods, place-based connections, social bonds and differing risk perceptions.

As Australia faces climate-related hazards and disasters, such as floods and bushfires, people living in places of risk will need to consider whether to remain or move. This decision raises complex legal, financial and logistical issues. As with residents of Serua Island, it also raises important questions about the value that people ascribe to their connections to place.

Serua Island is one of about 800 communities in Fiji being forced to consider the prospect of relocation.

A decision for communities to make themselves
Relocation and retreat are not a panacea for climate risk in vulnerable locations. In many cases, people prefer to adapt in place and protect at-risk areas.

No climate adaptation policy should be decided without the full and direct participation of the affected local people and communities. Relocation programs should be culturally appropriate and align with local needs, and proceed only with the consent of residents.

In places where residents are unwilling to relocate, it is crucial to acknowledge and, where feasible, support their decision to stay. And people require relevant information on the risks and potential consequences of both staying and relocating.

This can help develop more appropriate adaptation strategies for communities in Fiji and beyond as people move home, but also resist relocation, in a warming world.

Merewalesi Yee, PhD candidate, School of Earth and Environment Sciences, The University of Queensland; Dr Annah Piggott-McKellar, research fellow, School of Architecture and Built Environment, Queensland University of Technology; Dr Celia McMichael, senior lecturer in geography, The University of Melbourne, and Dr Karen E McNamara, associate professor, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Queensland. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

It’s not surprising that flooding is on the rise here—infrastructure in Rosemont has been neglected for decades. When storm drains and sidewalks were put in throughout the city of Charleston, Rosemont was bypassed. Decades of heavy industry left a legacy of pollution—two superfund cleanup sites lie within roughly half a mile of the community. A hurricane in 1989 destroyed the long dock that gave Rosemont residents access to the marsh and the water beyond—it still hasn’t been replaced. And despite Rosemont’s vulnerability to the impacts of climate change, a proposed $1.1 billion new Charleston seawall ends before the Rosemont community begins, leaving residents unprotected yet again.

Chris DeScherer, an attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC), is concerned about the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ plans. “They are proposing to build this wall around the most affluent part of Charleston,” he says. “This is where the tourists come, the area with the highest market value. But the wall stops before Rosemont, and the Corps has not proposed other protections that would sufficiently protect the Rosemont community.” 

Residents worry about their risk. Cora Connor has lived in Rosemont for 23 years, raising her three children here. She says that since an adjacent freeway and the surrounding trees were demolished, flood water has regularly inundated her yard, lapping at her lowest porch step. Her 90-year-old neighbor sometimes can’t leave the house due to the flooding surrounding it.

“There are so many issues here that need to be addressed,” Connor says. “But no one wants to take responsibility. Rosemont is kind of the little neighborhood that’s been forgotten.”

Expensive infrastructure, vulnerable communities 

Rosemont and the rest of the South Carolina coast have taken a climate-change-induced beating over the past decade. Beginning in 2015, the state’s coast was hammered for five consecutive years by hurricanes, storm surges, and “rain bombs” that caused untold amounts of damage.

The need to invest in protection against future storms and sea-level rise is clear. But the federal economic impact formula—used to assess which U.S. Army Corps of Engineers projects get funding—prioritizes areas with higher property values. Jenny Brennan, a science and policy analyst with SELC, explains that “the cost/benefit analysis is skewed towards the buildings that cost more money. It doesn’t place value on people, history, or culture,” she says. “Rosemont is a good example—if a community doesn’t have a ton of fancy infrastructure, they’re going to lose out on federal funding, compared to wealthy areas. It’s a nationwide problem.”

While vague “non-structural” flood control measures, such as home elevations or relocations, are part of the $1.1 billion seawall plan, it’s unclear how much protection Rosemont will actually receive. “The proposed investment for Rosemont pales compared to what was offered for the more affluent areas,” says Brennan.

The seawall project also raises other concerns. While it might protect against a major storm surge, experts who have analyzed the project have doubts about its capacity. “This is a very controversial, expensive project,” says Jason Crowley, a program director at the South Carolina Coastal Conservation League. The seawall’s maximum height of 12 feet is based on bridge clearances, not potential storm surge heights. “If Hurricane Hugo had been a direct hit, Charleston would have experienced a 20-foot storm surge,” he adds

Crowley also is concerned about the seawall’s safety. He says there’s a risk that it could actually trap floodwaters in the city center, instead of protecting it. “Is that the most resilient thing? To build a wall and create a bathtub effect?” he asks. He also points out that the current design, which includes gates that would only close in the event of a storm surge, do nothing to protect against the “sunny day” or low-grade flooding that regularly creeps into Charleston and nearby communities like Rosemont, swamping roads and causing property damage. In some areas, he says, the seawall may even worsen that issue, deepening flood water rather than draining it. 

A rising tide of concern

The Charleston seawall isn’t the area’s only major proposal designed without full consideration of South Carolina’s rapidly changing climate. The Mark Clark highway extension, which would cost millions, will soon be underwater too. SELC’s independent review found that portions of the newly built highway are expected to be inundated or surrounded by floodwaters. “With such an expensive project, the agencies evaluating it should consider climate change and sea-level rise,” says SELC’s DeScherer. “Otherwise, we’ll be spending billions on new infrastructure that will become obsolete in a couple of decades.”

Another potential Charleston County housing development, called Cainhoy, is in a location surrounded by water on three sides. The current plans will add thousands of new housing units there, 45% of which will lie in a floodplain. The project would also fill in nearly 200 acres of wetlands and put endangered species at risk. SELC has commissioned an engineering firm to design alternatives for building housing there, while minimizing flood risk.

To help the public learn more about the impacts of these types of projects, SELC recently released a new data-rich risk visualization and assessment tool—the Changing Coast website. It shows, for example, that Rosemont not only encompasses areas of high flood risk, but also is very high on the social vulnerability index—a potentially deadly combination, as 2005’s Hurricane Katrina showed in New Orleans. The Changing Coast model also indicates that the Cainhoy project and Mark Clark highway extension are at risk of inundation or increased flooding with the expected sea rise of three or four feet within the next 70 years.

The green alternative 

Tools like the Changing Coast website and the expert reports commissioned by SELC help visualize vulnerabilities and alternative solutions, including greener options for coastal climate change resilience. Traditionally, coastal flood protection has taken the form of rigid concrete seawalls and drainage systems, but a growing chorus of scientists and engineers are now emphasizing nature-based solutions. 

These can take various forms, often with multi-faceted benefits that are missing from grey infrastructure. Plant-covered berms can offer seawall-like protection and double as parks or promenades, for example. Living breakwaters can both provide habitat for sea life and weaken the power of incoming waves. Marshes absorb flood water while also providing wildlife habitat. Solutions like these offer opportunities to create a layered and flexible approach to the unpredictable realities of climate change.

Indeed, one of the biggest benefits of natural solutions may be their adaptability. “Nature-based design is not one-and-done like a concrete seawall,” says Crowley. “If you build a 12-foot wall and sea level rises faster than predicted, you have to take the wall out. Nature-based flood protections can adapt. You can layer onto them or elevate them over time.”

Crowley also points out that nature-based solutions tend to be cheaper over their lifetime. They typically cost the same or less to install, and while green solutions sometimes require more frequent maintenance, it’s less expensive than the maintenance for highly engineered grey infrastructure.

But while green solutions may have much more to offer, those potential benefits aren’t currently included in the planning for many coastal resilience projects. “Building things like wetlands and oyster reefs is certainly better than lining everything with concrete,” says Robert Young, a scientist who runs the program for developed shorelines at Western Carolina University. “But nature-based solutions don’t work with the Corps of Engineers’ computer models. So, they say, ‘after everything is approved, we can add some green lipstick.’”

Growing smarter

While the potential for nature-based flood protection is being dismissed in some quarters, it resonates deeply with people living on the front lines of sea-level rise. “I was opposed to a seawall—I don’t like the idea of a wall closing us in,” says Rosemont’s Connor. “I think they should dig deeper and see what other states have done with things like berms, oyster banks or plant materials that can thrive here and protect us. I want to see more green in my community.”

SELC’s DeScherer believes that the right approach is not to stop building infrastructure, but to design these interventions with community needs in mind. “We are not saying no to new projects and development, but we are saying that there are smarter ways to approach them,” he says. “Cities like Charleston don’t have to stop growing. With the right solutions, we can create coastal communities that are resilient to the impacts of climate change.”

The Southern Environmental Law Center is one of the nation’s most powerful defenders of the environment, rooted in the South. As lawyers, policy and issue experts, and community advocates and partners, SELC takes on the toughest challenges to protect our air, water, land, wildlife, and the people who live here.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline As rising seas swamp South Carolina’s shores, some coastal communities are left unprotected on Aug 15, 2022.

This content originally appeared on Grist and was authored by Grist Creative.

On Aug. 5 China’s Maritime Safety Administration announced a series of live-fire training exercises would be conducted on Aug. 6-15 in the Bohai Sea and in the southern waters of the Yellow Sea, which separates China from the Korean Peninsula.

The exercises can be seen as a “multipurpose strategic move” to expand China’s influence in the Yellow Sea, said Park Byung-kwang, director of the Center for International Cooperation at the Institute for National Security Strategy, a South Korean government-​funded public research institute that focuses on security studies.

“It can be seen that it has the meaning of checking the strengthening of the South Korea-U.S. alliance and furthermore, security cooperation between South Korea, the U.S. and Japan,” he said.

China’s intention is to limit the access of U.S. naval forces, including aircraft carriers, to the Yellow Sea, which Koreans refer to as the West Sea, he said.

Chung Jae-hung, a research fellow at the independent South Korean think tank the Sejong Institute, said the exercises show China is thinking about how to protect its forces moving through the Taiwan Strait from U.S. and South Korean forces.

China’s military fleet is conducting exercises in the Yellow Sea to respond to the U.S. forces stationed in South Korea and Japan in a situation where the Chinese fleet moves to the Taiwan Strait, he said.

It means they are considering protection in the process of moving major forces, including the Chinese fleet, he said.

Bruce W. Bennett, an adjunct international/defense researcher at the RAND Corporation, said China’s moves indicate that it is playing a long game, “something that they’re thinking about for 2030 or 2040.”

“The Chinese play the long game,” he said. “They try to prepare themselves and position themselves so that over a period of many years, they have more capability to pose the kinds of threats that will give them an ability to influence both the United States and South Korea.

“So, this is a longer term effort that they’re carrying on trying to create conditions for dominance in the region,” he said.

Bruce Bechtol Jr., a professor in the Department of Security Studies and Criminal Justice at Angelo State University in San Angelo, Texas, said China is trying to intimidate the South Korean government.

“If Chinese forces are in international waters they are certainly violating no international laws by training in these areas,” he said. “But given the timing, it appears that this training may be taking place in the areas that it is in order to intimidate the ROK [Republic of Korea] government because of its strong support for the ROK-U.S. alliance as well as several ROK policy moves that the Chinese government does not find to be in Beijing's best interests.”

As of Wednesday, neither South Korean nor U.S. military officials had replied to questions from RFA about China’s exercises in the Yellow Sea.

The exercises in the Bohai and Yellow seas follow People’s Liberation Army anti-submarine and sea assault drills in the waters around Taiwan last week after a visit to the island by U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

China regards the democratically-ruled island as a renegade province and seeks to unite it with the mainland, by force if necessary. Beijing frowns on official visits to Taiwan.

Translated by Leejin J. Chung for RFA Korean. Written in English by Roseanne Gerin.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Seung Wook Hong and Jaehoon Shim for RFA Korean.

The fate of barrier islands like Alabama’s Dauphin Island and New York’s Fire Island is important for all coastal residents, even if they don’t live on them. Barrier islands shield the mainland from hurricanes, waves, erosion, and flooding, taking the brunt of a storm’s early blows. Without them, experts say hurricane damage to towns and cities inland would be even worse. Last year, Louisiana’s Grand Isle, the state’s only inhabited barrier island, faced Hurricane Ida head-on. Nearly half the homes there were demolished, and no structure was left untouched.

“These findings can be applied all over the world, but they may be particularly significant in the U.S., where houses are being built extremely close to the beach,” said Giulio Mariotti, a coastal scientist at Louisiana State University and lead author of the study, in a release. Previous studies have estimated that 13 million Americans could be displaced by rising seas, and $1 trillion worth of coastal real estate could be flooded by the end of the century. In May, a viral video of a stilted vacation house on a barrier island in North Carolina’s Outer Banks offered a picture of Americans’ precarious existence on the coast when it collapsed into the ocean.

The scientists created a model based on measurements from a string of islands off the Virginia coast. The islands are uninhabited, so they’re useful for studying a system free of common interventions like sea walls or jetties. Even though climate change has accelerated sea level rise over the past century, the Virginia islands have experienced little change to how fast they migrate, meaning they erode and build up sand in different places, leading them to shift location over time. The model shows that won’t always be the case.

As the seas modestly rose over the last 5,000 years, they created a vast reserve of sand and muck across the coast. Over the last century, storms and tides have devoured that sediment, clearing the way for barrier islands to shift gears. Now that the reserve has been depleted, the scientists expect rising sea levels will hasten the islands’ movements. Even in the unlikely case that the pace of sea level rise remains the same, scientists predict the rate at which the Virginia islands retreat will accelerate by 50 percent — from 16.5 feet per year to 23 feet — in the next century. If the seas keep rising, as experts expect they will, the islands would get pushed even closer to shore, leaving coastal communities even more vulnerable.  

“This study shows that what we are seeing out there today is only a hint of what’s to come given increasing rates of sea level rise, and what is likely in store for developed islands globally,” said Christopher Hein, a co-author of the study and coastal geologist at the Virginia Institute of Marine Science. 

The scientists noted their prediction may be conservative, since their model doesn’t account for the strength and frequency of storms, both of which hurry barrier islands toward the mainland.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Study: Rising seas are weakening nature’s storm shields on Jul 11, 2022.

This content originally appeared on Grist and was authored by Lina Tran.

Tokyo is also considering giving Indonesia patrol boats so its coast guard could strengthen maritime security, Prime Minister Fumio Kishida said, amid Chinese pressure on Jakarta over its oil and gas drilling operations in its own exclusive economic zone in the South China Sea.

“I expressed a strong sense of protest against efforts to change the status quo unilaterally and economic pressures in the East China Sea and South China Sea,” Kishida said, after meeting with President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo in Jakarta.

The Japanese premier’s remarks were a pointed reference to concern over Chinese activities in the region.

Kishida’s eight-day tour will see him visiting “strategic ASEAN partners,” including Vietnam and Thailand.

The prime minister will then proceed to Europe, with stops in Italy and the United Kingdom, both members of the G7 grouping of industrialized countries that also comprises Japan.

Before embarking from Tokyo on his trip, Kishida said at the airport that he would like to “exchange frank opinions on the situation in Ukraine with each of the leaders and confirm their cooperation.”

Indonesia is host of this year’s Group of 20 summit in November, an engagement that has placed Jakarta in a diplomatic bind, amid opposition to the participation of Russia because of its invasion of Ukraine and alleged war crimes there.

On Friday, Jokowi confirmed that Indonesia had invited Ukraine’s president as a guest to the G-20 summit in Bali and that Russian leader Vladimir Putin would also attend.

Kishida said he and Jokowi “exchanged views openly” on the Russian invasion, “which is a clear violation of international law and which we say has shaken the foundations of the international order, including Asia, and must be strongly condemned.”

“Keeping in mind the U.N. resolutions agreed upon by the two countries, I and the president discussed this issue. We have one understanding that a military attack on Ukraine is unacceptable. In any area, sovereignty and territorial integrity should not be interfered with by military force or intimidation,” the Japanese leader said.

Jokowi, for his part, called for all countries to respect sovereignty and territorial integrity.

“The Ukraine war must be stopped immediately,” he said.

A regional ‘reluctance to take sides’

The war in Ukraine has been a divisive issue among members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or ASEAN.

“Across the region there is a reluctance to take sides and an ambivalence about the concert of democracies lining up in support of Ukraine,” said Jeff Kingston, a professor and director of Asian Studies at Temple University in Tokyo.

Most Southeast Asian countries – Singapore being an exception – have been hesitant to condemn Russia or join international sanctions against Moscow. Japan hopes to consolidate their responses during the prime minister’s visit.

“Kishida will [also] seek to gain understanding of what is at stake and the potential implications for Asia in terms of China’s hegemonic aspirations,” Kingston said.

China’s increasing assertiveness in the East China and South China seas will be high on the agenda, and Kishida said he would discuss with Southeast Asian leaders further cooperation “toward realizing a free and open Indo-Pacific,” and maintaining peace and order.

Stops in Hanoi, Bangkok

In Vietnam, where Kishida will spend less than 24 hours over the weekend, he will meet with both the Vietnamese prime minister and president.

Bilateral talks will focus on post-COVID-19 and security cooperation, Vietnamese media said. Vietnam shares interests with Japan in safeguarding maritime security in the South China Sea where China holds expansive claims and has been militarizing reclaimed islands.

In Thailand, Kishida will hold talks with Thai Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-o-cha. Thailand is the host of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum summit in November.

Bangkok and Tokyo are celebrating the 135th anniversary of diplomatic ties this year, and the two sides are seeking to sign an agreement on the transfer of defense equipment and technology to strengthen cooperation in the security field, according to the Bangkok Post.

Government spokesman Thanakorn Wangboonkongchana said it would be the first official visit of a Japanese prime minister to Thailand since 2013.

In March, Kishida visited India and Cambodia, his first bilateral trips since taking office in October 2021.

Later in May, he will host a visit by U.S. President Joe Biden and a summit of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, or Quad.

The White House announced on Wednesday that President Biden would visit South Korea and Japan May 20-24 to advance a “commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific and to U.S. treaty alliances” with the two countries.

The trip will be Biden’s first one to Asia as president.

“In Tokyo, President Biden will also meet with the leaders of the Quad grouping of Australia, Japan, India, and the United States,” the statement said without disclosing the date.

The Quad is widely seen as countering China’s weight in the region.

China has been sneering at the formation of the Quad, calling it one of the “exclusive cliques detrimental to mutual trust and cooperation among regional countries.”

On Thursday, Chinese Foreign Ministry’s spokesman Wang Wenbin said that the Quad “is steeped in the obsolete Cold War and zero sum mentality and reeks of military confrontation.”

“It runs counter to the trend of the times and is doomed to be rejected,” he said.

Dandy Koswaraputra in Jakarta contributed to this report for BenarNews, an RFA-affiliated online news service.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Staff and BenarNews.

As military tensions mount between the United States and China over the Solomon Islands' decision to pursue a security pact with Beijing, former Pacific Island nation leaders on Friday reaffirmed that rising sea levels driven by climate change—not great-power geopolitical jostling—is the region's biggest threat.

"These nations have done very little to address their own greenhouse gas emissions."

The Pacific Elders Voice Group—whose members include the former leaders of the Marshall Islands, Palau, Kiribati, and Tuvalu; a Fijian ex-minister; and a former congressional delegate from the U.S. colony of Guam—issued a statement saying it "reiterates that the primary security threat to the Pacific is climate change."

"The growing military tension in the Pacific region created by both China and the United States and its allies, including Australia, does little to address the real threat to the region caused by climate change," the group asserted. "These nations have done very little to address their own greenhouse gas emissions, despite statements of intent."

According to The Guardian:

Climate-induced migration has already begun from the Pacific, with people across the region forced to leave a number of island groups that are disappearing or becoming uninhabitable due to rising sea levels.

Last year's report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said global heating above 1.5°C  would be "catastrophic" for Pacific Island nations and could lead to the loss of entire countries due to sea level rise within the century.

The former leaders' statement comes amid increasingly tense relations between the United States, Australia, and other allies on one side and China on the other over the latter's recent signing of a bilateral security agreement with the Solomon Islands.

While insisting that Ukraine has the sovereign right to pursue closer ties with NATO and the West, the United States has refused to rule out an invasion of the Solomon Islands if its leaders allow China to establish a military base there.

Meanwhile, as Australian media amplify calls to bomb and invade the Solomon Islands, right-wing Prime Minister Scott Morrison last week threatened that a Chinese base on the archipelago would constitute a "red line."

Firing back at Australian objections to a perceived lack of transparency surrounding the security agreement, Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare said Friday that, "I learnt of the AUKUS treaty in the media," a reference to the new trilateral treaty between the U.S., U.K., and Australia.

"The AUKUS treaty will see nuclear submarines in Pacific waters," said Sogavare. "One would expect that as a member of the Pacific Family, Solomon Islands... would have been consulted," he added, referring to Australia's oft-derided description of regional relations, in which Canberra plays the dominant role.

Numerous analysts say AUKUS—which Beijing denounced as a return to a "Cold War" mentality that would "undermine peace and stability" in the region—was the main impetus for the China-Solomon Islands pact.

"The security and future of the Pacific must be determined primarily by Pacific Island countries and not by external powers competing over strategic interests within our region," the Pacific Elders Voice Group said in its statement. "We call on all nations to respect the sovereignty of all Pacific Island countries and the right of Pacific peoples to develop and implement their own security strategies without undue coercion from outsiders."

This content originally appeared on Common Dreams - Breaking News & Views for the Progressive Community and was authored by Brett Wilkins.