Kashmir's breathtaking landscapes have long made it one of India's most sought-after tourist destinations. But rapid tourism-driven construction is now raising serious environmental concerns. According to official figures, more than 5,000 hotels have been built across the Kashmir Valley since 2021, with authorities stating that around 90% allegedly lack the required approvals. Popular destinations such as Gulmarg, Pahalgam, Sonamarg, Gurez, and Doodhpathri are witnessing a surge in hotels, homestays, and commercial buildings.

Kashmir's Tourism Boom Sparks Environmental Alarm | 90% of New Hotels Allegedly Illegal

After some beach closures and tense hours over hundreds of black balls washing up on Australian sea shores, the mystery appears to have been solved.

Earlier reported to be the result of a possible oil spill in the ocean or even speculated as dinosaur eggs, the black objects have now been identified as tar balls, reports said on Wednesday (Oct 16).

Watch: Oil spill in Trinidad &amp; Tobago; 10 miles of coastline affected due to oil spillage

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/oil-spill-in-trinidad-tobago-10-miles-of-coastline-affected-due-to-oil-spillage-689095/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

A tar ball is a hardened blob of petroleum. It can form naturally or as a result of oil spills and after floating in the waters for long periods of time. They are considered a pollutant.&nbsp;

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/in-pics-singapore-intensifies-clean-up-as-rare-oil-spill-prompts-closure-of-public-beach-732295/singapore-intensifies-clean-up-efforts-after-rare-oil-spill-732292">Also read: In pics | Singapore intensifies clean up as rare oil spill prompts closure of public beach</a>

Local news channel 9 News reported that Randwick City Council determined after tests that the objects were tar balls.

The council said preliminary test results from samples collected on Tuesday showed the balls were a hydrocarbon-based pollutant consistent with the makeup of tar balls, as was suspected, News.co.au said in an update.

Randwick Mayor Dylan Parker said council staff were working to remove the balls from the beaches. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/typhoon-gaemi-causes-ship-sinkings-and-major-oil-spill-risk-in-manila-bay-744126">Also read: Typhoon Gaemi: Oil tanker and cargo ship sink, huge oil spill risk in Manila Bay</a> 
 
"Our community is rightfully very protective of our natural environment and this has been a very concerning incident," 9 News&nbsp;quoted Parker as saying.

Since Tuesday when the balls were first noticed by lifeguards in Sydney's iconic Coogee beach, authorities had closed access to it, as well as the nearby Gordons Bay beach. Both beaches remained closed as of&nbsp;Wednesday evening.

Cleaning crews are at work to clear the debris.

(With inputs from agencies) 
&nbsp;

After some beach closures and tense hours over hundreds of black balls washing up on Australian sea shores, the mystery appears to have been solved. Earlier reported to be the result of a possible oil spill in the ocean or even speculated as dinosaur eggs, the black objects have now been identified as tar balls, reports said on Wednesday (Oct 16).

After some beach closures and tense hours over hundreds of black balls washing up on Australian sea shores, the mystery appears to have been solved. Earlier reported to be the result of a possible oil spill in the ocean or even speculated as dinosaur eggs, the black objects have now been identified as tar balls, reports said on Wednesday (Oct 16). Watch: Oil spill in Trinidad & Tobago; 10 miles of coastline affected due to oil spillage × A tar ball is a hardened blob of petroleum. It can form naturally or as a result of oil spills and after floating in the waters for long periods of time. They are considered a pollutant. Also read: In pics | Singapore intensifies clean up as rare oil spill prompts closure of public beach Local news channel 9 News reported that Randwick City Council determined after tests that the objects were tar balls. The council said preliminary test results from samples collected on Tuesday showed the balls were a hydrocarbon-based pollutant consistent with the makeup of tar balls, as was suspected, News.co.au said in an update. Randwick Mayor Dylan Parker said council staff were working to remove the balls from the beaches. Also read: Typhoon Gaemi: Oil tanker and cargo ship sink, huge oil spill risk in Manila Bay "Our community is rightfully very protective of our natural environment and this has been a very concerning incident," 9 News quoted Parker as saying. Since Tuesday when the balls were first noticed by lifeguards in Sydney's iconic Coogee beach, authorities had closed access to it, as well as the nearby Gordons Bay beach. Both beaches remained closed as of Wednesday evening. Cleaning crews are at work to clear the debris. (With inputs from agencies)

Australia solves mystery of black balls washing up after two Sydney beaches closed. Here is what they are

The Biden administration intends to revive federal environmental protections for millions of streams, marshes and other bodies of water across the country that had been eliminated by former President Donald Trump in his quest to please homebuilders, farmers and ranchers.

The Environmental Protection Agency made the announcement Wednesday after it said it had found that the changes under Trump caused “significant environmental degradation.”

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/restoring-environmental-rules-rolled-back-by-trump-could-take-years-358684">Restoring environmental rules rolled back by Trump could take years</a>

The problem is particularly glaring in arid states such as New Mexico and Arizona, where nearly every one of more than 1,500 streams lost environmental protections under the Trump rules, said Michael Regan, administrator of the EPA. More than 300 development projects were able to go forward without regard to whether they were polluting streams or waterways under the changes made by Trump, the EPA said.

It marked the latest in a series of decisions by President Joe Biden to restore environmental protections that Trump had weakened or repealed, and it sets the stage for a regulatory and legal battle over an issue that has pitted environmental groups against agricultural interests for decades.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-using-last-days-to-lock-in-policies-and-make-bidens-task-more-difficult-344719">Trump using last days to lock in policies and make Biden’s task more difficult</a>

The effort also will be a test for Regan, who came to Washington with a reputation as a consensus builder who could find common ground between industry and environmentalists. In a statement Wednesday, Regan said the agency is “committed to establishing a durable definition of ‘waters of the United States’” and added that he intends to draw “from the lessons learned” from the Obama and Trump administrations.

By starting early to revise the policy, the Biden administration stands a greater chance of defending it against the legal challenges that are expected to come, said Richard Revesz, a professor of environmental law at New York University. “That makes it much more likely it will stick,” Revesz said.

Republicans on Wednesday criticized the move and vowed to fight it, saying Trump’s policy had protected farmers and removed what many felt were onerous cleanup burdens. “It’s a shame the Biden administration wants to undo the good work of the Trump administration,” Sen. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., said, adding that his state was “well-positioned in the event of overreach” to fight the Biden EPA’s plan. Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, called it a “gut punch” to her state. Sen. John Boozman, R-Ark., dubbed it a “Biden administration power grab.”

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-administration-secretly-seized-phone-records-of-times-reporters-389303">Trump administration secretly seized phone records of Times reporters</a>&nbsp;

The original measure, known as the Waters of the United States rule, dates to the Obama administration and extended the range of bodies of water that were subject to the 1972 Clean Water Act, an issue that had for decades lacked clarity.

The Obama administration protected about 60 per cent of the nation’s waterways, including large bodies of water such as the Chesapeake Bay, Mississippi River and Puget Sound, and smaller headwaters, wetlands, seasonal streams and streams that run temporarily underground. It limited the discharge of pollutants such as fertilizers, pesticides and industrial chemicals into those waters.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/biden-revokes-trumps-ban-on-chinese-apps-tiktok-wechat-orders-criteria-based-decision-390430">Biden revokes Trump's ban on Chinese apps TikTok, WeChat; orders 'criteria-based decision'</a>

Trump repealed the policy in 2019, calling it “one of the most ridiculous regulations of all,” and claimed that his repeal caused farmers to weep in gratitude. One year later, his EPA finalized the Navigable Waters Protection Rule, which removed protections for more than half of the nation’s wetlands and hundreds of thousands of miles of upland streams by narrowing the definition of what constitutes a “water of the United States.”

In doing so, Trump framed the change as the rightful return of power from the federal government to landowners and states. In a statement on Wednesday, Chuck Fowke, chairman of the National Association of Homebuilders, expressed concern that changes to the water rule will “add unnecessary requirements” that will hurt housing affordability.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-was-scared-biden-would-be-replaced-with-hillary-clinton-or-michelle-obama-book-claims-390209">Trump was scared Biden would be replaced with Hillary Clinton or Michelle Obama, book claims</a>

Tuesday’s announcement does not start the process of revising the regulation. That will come when the EPA officially promulgates a proposed new rule, possibly later this year. Wednesday’s action was a legal move in which the Department of Justice and Department of the Army formally requested repeal of the Trump-era rule.

“Communities deserve to have our nation’s waters protected,” Jaime Pinkham, acting assistant Army secretary for civil work, said in a statement. He said the Trump-era rule resulted in a significant drop in determinations of waters that would otherwise have been afforded protection.

Environmental groups and Democrats in Congress praised the announcement and pressed the administration to work quickly to unravel the Trump policy. “Every day the ‘Dirty Water’ rule remains in effect, it causes irreparable harm to our health, to our environment, and to our economies,” Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., chairman of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, said in a statement.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/biden-administration-moves-to-unkink-supply-chain-bottlenecks-390215">Biden administration moves to unkink supply chain bottlenecks</a>

However, some legal experts said that by moving to repeal Trump’s measure and start over again, rather than building on the previous rule, the Biden administration might only prolong the back and forth that has gone on for years. “It could perpetuate this place we are in, in which each administration throws out what the last administration does, and that is not good for anyone who is interested in this issue,” said Kevin Minoli who served as a lawyer at the EPA in the Clinton, Bush, Obama and Trump administrations.

Regan has years of experience working with Republicans on the clean water rule, which was a major issue in North Carolina where he served as head of the state’s Department of Environmental Quality before leading the EPA.

When he testified before lawmakers in April, Regan vowed not to return to what many Republicans felt was the Obama administration’s overly expansive definition of a federal waterway. “We’ve learned lessons from both, we’ve seen complexities in both, and we’ve determined both rules necessarily did not listen to the will of the people,” he said. “We don’t have any intention of going back to the original Obama Waters of the US&nbsp;verbatim.”

The Biden administration’s decision to restore the federal protections is one in a string of reversals it is making to Trump-era environmental decisions, which were themselves reversals of Obama administration actions. The Trump administration repealed or weakened more than 100 environmental rules or laws, loosening or eliminating rules on climate change, clean air, chemical pollution, coal mining, oil drilling and endangered species protections.

The Biden administration intends to revive federal environmental protections for millions of streams, marshes and other bodies of water across the country that had been eliminated by former President Donald Trump in his quest to please homebuilders, farmers and ranchers.

The Biden administration intends to revive federal environmental protections for millions of streams, marshes and other bodies of water across the country that had been eliminated by former President Donald Trump in his quest to please homebuilders, farmers and ranchers. The Environmental Protection Agency made the announcement Wednesday after it said it had found that the changes under Trump caused “significant environmental degradation.” Also read | Restoring environmental rules rolled back by Trump could take years The problem is particularly glaring in arid states such as New Mexico and Arizona, where nearly every one of more than 1,500 streams lost environmental protections under the Trump rules, said Michael Regan, administrator of the EPA. More than 300 development projects were able to go forward without regard to whether they were polluting streams or waterways under the changes made by Trump, the EPA said. It marked the latest in a series of decisions by President Joe Biden to restore environmental protections that Trump had weakened or repealed, and it sets the stage for a regulatory and legal battle over an issue that has pitted environmental groups against agricultural interests for decades. Also read | Trump using last days to lock in policies and make Biden’s task more difficult The effort also will be a test for Regan, who came to Washington with a reputation as a consensus builder who could find common ground between industry and environmentalists. In a statement Wednesday, Regan said the agency is “committed to establishing a durable definition of ‘waters of the United States’” and added that he intends to draw “from the lessons learned” from the Obama and Trump administrations. By starting early to revise the policy, the Biden administration stands a greater chance of defending it against the legal challenges that are expected to come, said Richard Revesz, a professor of environmental law at New York University. “That makes it much more likely it will stick,” Revesz said. Republicans on Wednesday criticized the move and vowed to fight it, saying Trump’s policy had protected farmers and removed what many felt were onerous cleanup burdens. “It’s a shame the Biden administration wants to undo the good work of the Trump administration,” Sen. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., said, adding that his state was “well-positioned in the event of overreach” to fight the Biden EPA’s plan. Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, called it a “gut punch” to her state. Sen. John Boozman, R-Ark., dubbed it a “Biden administration power grab.” Also read | Trump administration secretly seized phone records of Times reporters The original measure, known as the Waters of the United States rule, dates to the Obama administration and extended the range of bodies of water that were subject to the 1972 Clean Water Act, an issue that had for decades lacked clarity. The Obama administration protected about 60 per cent of the nation’s waterways, including large bodies of water such as the Chesapeake Bay, Mississippi River and Puget Sound, and smaller headwaters, wetlands, seasonal streams and streams that run temporarily underground. It limited the discharge of pollutants such as fertilizers, pesticides and industrial chemicals into those waters. Also read | Biden revokes Trump's ban on Chinese apps TikTok, WeChat; orders 'criteria-based decision' Trump repealed the policy in 2019, calling it “one of the most ridiculous regulations of all,” and claimed that his repeal caused farmers to weep in gratitude. One year later, his EPA finalized the Navigable Waters Protection Rule, which removed protections for more than half of the nation’s wetlands and hundreds of thousands of miles of upland streams by narrowing the definition of what constitutes a “water of the United States.” In doing so, Trump framed the change as the rightful return of power from the federal government to landowners and states. In a statement on Wednesday, Chuck Fowke, chairman of the National Association of Homebuilders, expressed concern that changes to the water rule will “add unnecessary requirements” that will hurt housing affordability. Also read | Trump was scared Biden would be replaced with Hillary Clinton or Michelle Obama, book claims Tuesday’s announcement does not start the process of revising the regulation. That will come when the EPA officially promulgates a proposed new rule, possibly later this year. Wednesday’s action was a legal move in which the Department of Justice and Department of the Army formally requested repeal of the Trump-era rule. “Communities deserve to have our nation’s waters protected,” Jaime Pinkham, acting assistant Army secretary for civil work, said in a statement. He said the Trump-era rule resulted in a significant drop in determinations of waters that would otherwise have been afforded protection. Environmental groups and Democrats in Congress praised the announcement and pressed the administration to work quickly to unravel the Trump policy. “Every day the ‘Dirty Water’ rule remains in effect, it causes irreparable harm to our health, to our environment, and to our economies,” Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., chairman of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, said in a statement. Also read | Biden administration moves to unkink supply chain bottlenecks However, some legal experts said that by moving to repeal Trump’s measure and start over again, rather than building on the previous rule, the Biden administration might only prolong the back and forth that has gone on for years. “It could perpetuate this place we are in, in which each administration throws out what the last administration does, and that is not good for anyone who is interested in this issue,” said Kevin Minoli who served as a lawyer at the EPA in the Clinton, Bush, Obama and Trump administrations. Regan has years of experience working with Republicans on the clean water rule, which was a major issue in North Carolina where he served as head of the state’s Department of Environmental Quality before leading the EPA. When he testified before lawmakers in April, Regan vowed not to return to what many Republicans felt was the Obama administration’s overly expansive definition of a federal waterway. “We’ve learned lessons from both, we’ve seen complexities in both, and we’ve determined both rules necessarily did not listen to the will of the people,” he said. “We don’t have any intention of going back to the original Obama Waters of the US verbatim.” The Biden administration’s decision to restore the federal protections is one in a string of reversals it is making to Trump-era environmental decisions, which were themselves reversals of Obama administration actions. The Trump administration repealed or weakened more than 100 environmental rules or laws, loosening or eliminating rules on climate change, clean air, chemical pollution, coal mining, oil drilling and endangered species protections.

Biden administration to restore clean-water protections ended by Trump

The Swiss government's coronavirus aid package should be used to make the country's economy more sustainable and help tackle climate change, environmentalists said on Monday (May 4).

Swiss environmentalists demand green reconstruction after coronavirus crisis

If the world is looking at Canada, it&rsquo;s because of Prime Minister Trudeau&rsquo;s heart and hair. He&rsquo;s photogenic, which critics take as proof he&#39;s a selfie-taking cerebral lightweight (as if Stephen Harper fended&nbsp;off Vanity Fair photographers). Critics&nbsp;also mock&nbsp;Trudeau&#39;s pathologically progressive PR (handshaking Syrian refugees at the airport, proclaiming himself a feminist, etc) as affected or&nbsp;mawkish. Yet&nbsp;however cultivated&nbsp;Trudeau&#39;s&nbsp;media image is, it does&nbsp;seem to accurately reflect him as a person. Probably nobody&nbsp;thinks&nbsp;Trudeau is secretly a woman-hating xenophobe.&nbsp; 
 
In an era where political campaigns are essentially advertising contests, should a serious person&nbsp;ignore a politician&#39;s chosen&nbsp;symbols? No. While it&#39;s&nbsp;definitely calculated, the symbolism&nbsp;a politician selects for mass appeal&nbsp;does reveal a lot, and does have intrinsic value. 
 
Internationally, Trudeau&rsquo;s aura is a meaningful breath of fresh air to millions of Indians tired of rancid patriarchy and caste oppression, or Modi speaking twee platitudes from one side of his mouth and strident <a href="https://newrepublic.com/article/133014/new-face-india-anti-gandhi">hindutva</a> from the other. Or to anybody tired and terrified of Trump. As leaders around the world tack right by appealing to lizard-brain paranoia, it&rsquo;s understandable and meaningful that people are inspired by a symbolic counterbalance. 
 
Policy matters above all, not talk or imagery. But no doubt Canada&rsquo;s Muslims prefer that the Prime Minister doesn&rsquo;t dog whistle at them (<a href="https://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2015/10/05/stephen-harpers-dog-whistle-populist-politics.html">like Canada&rsquo;s thrice-elected last Prime Minister</a>). The marginalised shouldn&rsquo;t be spat on by the person most capable of improving their lives. Politics of division from the top <a href="http://thetyee.ca/News/2015/11/23/Muslim-Assaults-Canada/">breeds</a>&nbsp;violence. If inclusive branding does absolutely nothing but ensure the absence of that, that&rsquo;s something.&nbsp; 
 
But there&rsquo;s a limit. Liberals believe in their ideals until they&rsquo;re faced with a choice, to embody them or make a lot of money.&nbsp; 
 
For all Trudeau&rsquo;s outsized display of heart he presides over a government selling $15-billion worth of armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia, the generous sponsor of&nbsp;terrorists and <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/saudi/analyses/wahhabism.html">radical Wahhabi madrassas</a> around the world. 
 
<img alt="" class="img-responsive" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/19432753795_234e50aa59_b-20160915124053.jpg" />

<div class="media-description">
Trudeau enjoying a gay pride parade in Toronto, very much&nbsp;not in Riyadh.
</div>

 
Trudeau commendably supports the LGBT community whereas Saudi Arabia sometimes stones them to death, but rather than condemn the House of Saud he is weaponizing them. The Canadian-made &ldquo;jeeps&rdquo; will be mounted with machine guns, and possibly anti-tank missiles. The <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/the-saudi-arms-deal-what-weve-learned-so-far/article28180299/">well-founded fear</a> is they will be used against dissenting Saudi civilians. Saudi Arabia is currenly targeting civilian infrastructure in <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/crimes-against-humanity-britains-complicity-in-saudi-arabias-terror-campaign-against-yemen/5545686">Yemen</a>, also. This makes arming Saudi Arabia not just unethical but likely illegal under Canada&rsquo;s weapons export laws. It&rsquo;s worth considering that a Saudi Arabian&nbsp;openly expressing Trudeau&#39;s views in&nbsp;may be at risk of the Canadian-made weapons Trudeau&#39;s party signed off on. (Or just a&nbsp;public <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/29/world/middleeast/raif-badawi-wife-saudi-arabia.html">lashing</a>, if he&#39;s lucky.) 
 
The deal was brokered by Canada&rsquo;s Conservative Party, who crowed about job creation (as if arming violent foes is honourable, if a Canadian is paid to do it). But Trudeau&rsquo;s Liberals opted not to cancel it. That they didn&rsquo;t initiate the deal gives the Liberals undeserved plausible deniability. Each party is blaming the other for a human right&rsquo;s travesty, and they&rsquo;re both right. 
 
The Canadian tradition of speaking from the left and governing from the right is on display in Trudeau&rsquo;s attitude to the Trans Pacific Partnership (TTP). The TPP, if ratified, would be the biggest &ldquo;free trade&rdquo; deal in history, but international trade is only a minor part of it. Corporations don&#39;t like being beholden to&nbsp;international law, so the TPP lets them rewrite it. Negotiations have been conducted in secret since 2010 (thankfully there have been <a href="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/10/final-leaked-tpp-text-all-we-feared">leaks</a>). In addition to impacting 18,000 tariffs, the deal includes measures to punish corporate whistleblowers, needlessly restrict copyright and intellectual property laws, and enable companies to sue governments if their social spending cuts into their market. The TPP only exists so that the profits of major corporations will legally supersede the public interest in court. 
&nbsp;

<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>Either ideological TPP proponents are naive and gullible enough to believe that CEOs and politicians secretly met for five years to discuss how best to uplift the middle class and impoverished.</h5>

<h5>Or, the people praising the TPP are the&nbsp;very people who stand to profit by it, and they&nbsp;know the game is rigged because they supervised or participated in the rigging.&nbsp;</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Either ideological TPP proponents are naive and gullible enough to believe that CEOs and politicians secretly met for five years to discuss how best to uplift the middle class and impoverished. Or, the TPP is praised?by the very people who stand to profit, and who know the game is rigged because they supervised or participated in the rigging.?" target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>

&nbsp;

During Canada&rsquo;s 2015 election Trudeau was officially non-committal to the TPP, unwilling to hastily sign an unknown thing. On becoming Prime Minister he hastily signed an unknown thing. Now he says he won&rsquo;t ratify it, that being hasty.&nbsp; 
 
Nobody, including Trudeau, has adequately explained why the onus is on the public to demonstrate what parts of the TPP are objectionable, rather than why it&rsquo;s being thrust on the people in the first place. To the extent leaders are talking about the TPP at all, their justifications are dubious; jobs and the economies of twelve countries can&rsquo;t all simultaneously grow. It&rsquo;s a zero-sum game, something has to give. In physics, every action has an opposite and equal reaction.&nbsp;Only in the junk science of free trade deals does everything constantly expand without an&nbsp;eventual correction. NAFTA promised the US 200,000 jobs, and ended up <a href="https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/05/trans-pacific-partnership-obama-fast-track-nafta/">costing over 600,000</a> in the manufacturing sector alone.&nbsp; 
 
Either ideological TPP proponents are naive and gullible enough to believe that CEOs and politicians secretly met for five years to discuss how best to uplift the middle class and impoverished. Or, the people praising the TPP are the&nbsp;very people who stand to profit by it, and they&nbsp;know the game is rigged because they supervised or participated in the rigging.&nbsp; 
 
<img alt="" class="img-responsive" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/trudeaunatives2-20160915013114.jpg" />

<div class="media-description">
Trudeau has worked to repair relationships with Canada&#39;s Natives. How he reconciles&nbsp;their interests and environmental stewardship&nbsp;with proposed pipelines&nbsp;will be watched closely.
</div>

 
To be sure, even if Trudeau resolved to stop selling the Saudis arms and halt the TPP, he&rsquo;s a small cog international politics. All national leaders&nbsp;are surrounded by vulture lobbyists and purchased bureaucrats, who collectively decide things. For example, how Trudeau will reconcile the competing pressure to build pipelines with his pledge to protect the environment and improve relations with aboriginal people remains to be seen, but <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/tough-calls-ahead-for-trudeau-on-aboriginal-issues/article31913955/">early signs</a> lean towards big oil.&nbsp;Nobody should expect Trudeau to singlehandedly shape Canada, let alone the world.

In late September his cabinet approved the construction of a $11.4 billion (Canadian Dollars) terminal to <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/pacific-northwest-lng-decision/article32092033/">export liquefied natural gas</a>&nbsp;that has angered environmentalists&nbsp;and Canadian Aboriginal groups. The project has certain&nbsp;environmental conditions attached, to be named in time, but&nbsp;what they are and&nbsp;whether they&#39;re actually upheld remains to be seen. His image will take a beating if his base thinks his&nbsp;environmental, energy and economic juggling&nbsp;errs&nbsp;too much on the side of business. 
 
But it isn&rsquo;t that his sunshiney&nbsp;symbols are meaningless, just they have limits. Assuming any politician is authentically fond of&nbsp;the environment&nbsp;and opposed to militarisation or&nbsp;obscene concentrations of wealth,&nbsp;they&#39;re still pretty powerless against Big Business. Trudeau fits in here.

So while critics find&nbsp;his ostentatious shows of&nbsp;pluralism&nbsp;corny,&nbsp;at least they&#39;re not&nbsp;just&nbsp;fashionable masks for bigotry.&nbsp;The world needs more leaders who aren&rsquo;t preprogrammed to whip up and then appeal to caveman instincts.&nbsp;Just nobody should think his theater for social, environmental or&nbsp;economic justice will translate into policy that adequately addresses, let alone fixes, the biggest problems facing the world. 
 
(WION)

His sincere and heartening political messaging can be meaningful, but it doesn't stand up to military contracts or Big Business

If the world is looking at Canada, it’s because of Prime Minister Trudeau’s heart and hair. He’s photogenic, which critics take as proof he's a selfie-taking cerebral lightweight (as if Stephen Harper fended off Vanity Fair photographers). Critics also mock Trudeau's pathologically progressive PR (handshaking Syrian refugees at the airport, proclaiming himself a feminist, etc) as affected or mawkish. Yet however cultivated Trudeau's media image is, it does seem to accurately reflect him as a person. Probably nobody thinks Trudeau is secretly a woman-hating xenophobe. In an era where political campaigns are essentially advertising contests, should a serious person ignore a politician's chosen symbols? No. While it's definitely calculated, the symbolism a politician selects for mass appeal does reveal a lot, and does have intrinsic value. Internationally, Trudeau’s aura is a meaningful breath of fresh air to millions of Indians tired of rancid patriarchy and caste oppression, or Modi speaking twee platitudes from one side of his mouth and strident hindutva from the other. Or to anybody tired and terrified of Trump. As leaders around the world tack right by appealing to lizard-brain paranoia, it’s understandable and meaningful that people are inspired by a symbolic counterbalance. Policy matters above all, not talk or imagery. But no doubt Canada’s Muslims prefer that the Prime Minister doesn’t dog whistle at them (like Canada’s thrice-elected last Prime Minister). The marginalised shouldn’t be spat on by the person most capable of improving their lives. Politics of division from the top breeds violence. If inclusive branding does absolutely nothing but ensure the absence of that, that’s something. But there’s a limit. Liberals believe in their ideals until they’re faced with a choice, to embody them or make a lot of money. For all Trudeau’s outsized display of heart he presides over a government selling $15-billion worth of armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia, the generous sponsor of terrorists and radical Wahhabi madrassas around the world. Trudeau enjoying a gay pride parade in Toronto, very much not in Riyadh. Trudeau commendably supports the LGBT community whereas Saudi Arabia sometimes stones them to death, but rather than condemn the House of Saud he is weaponizing them. The Canadian-made “jeeps” will be mounted with machine guns, and possibly anti-tank missiles. The well-founded fear is they will be used against dissenting Saudi civilians. Saudi Arabia is currenly targeting civilian infrastructure in Yemen, also. This makes arming Saudi Arabia not just unethical but likely illegal under Canada’s weapons export laws. It’s worth considering that a Saudi Arabian openly expressing Trudeau's views in may be at risk of the Canadian-made weapons Trudeau's party signed off on. (Or just a public lashing, if he's lucky.) The deal was brokered by Canada’s Conservative Party, who crowed about job creation (as if arming violent foes is honourable, if a Canadian is paid to do it). But Trudeau’s Liberals opted not to cancel it. That they didn’t initiate the deal gives the Liberals undeserved plausible deniability. Each party is blaming the other for a human right’s travesty, and they’re both right. The Canadian tradition of speaking from the left and governing from the right is on display in Trudeau’s attitude to the Trans Pacific Partnership (TTP). The TPP, if ratified, would be the biggest “free trade” deal in history, but international trade is only a minor part of it. Corporations don't like being beholden to international law, so the TPP lets them rewrite it. Negotiations have been conducted in secret since 2010 (thankfully there have been leaks). In addition to impacting 18,000 tariffs, the deal includes measures to punish corporate whistleblowers, needlessly restrict copyright and intellectual property laws, and enable companies to sue governments if their social spending cuts into their market. The TPP only exists so that the profits of major corporations will legally supersede the public interest in court. Either ideological TPP proponents are naive and gullible enough to believe that CEOs and politicians secretly met for five years to discuss how best to uplift the middle class and impoverished. Or, the people praising the TPP are the very people who stand to profit by it, and they know the game is rigged because they supervised or participated in the rigging. During Canada’s 2015 election Trudeau was officially non-committal to the TPP, unwilling to hastily sign an unknown thing. On becoming Prime Minister he hastily signed an unknown thing. Now he says he won’t ratify it, that being hasty. Nobody, including Trudeau, has adequately explained why the onus is on the public to demonstrate what parts of the TPP are objectionable, rather than why it’s being thrust on the people in the first place. To the extent leaders are talking about the TPP at all, their justifications are dubious; jobs and the economies of twelve countries can’t all simultaneously grow. It’s a zero-sum game, something has to give. In physics, every action has an opposite and equal reaction. Only in the junk science of free trade deals does everything constantly expand without an eventual correction. NAFTA promised the US 200,000 jobs, and ended up costing over 600,000 in the manufacturing sector alone. Either ideological TPP proponents are naive and gullible enough to believe that CEOs and politicians secretly met for five years to discuss how best to uplift the middle class and impoverished. Or, the people praising the TPP are the very people who stand to profit by it, and they know the game is rigged because they supervised or participated in the rigging. Trudeau has worked to repair relationships with Canada's Natives. How he reconciles their interests and environmental stewardship with proposed pipelines will be watched closely. To be sure, even if Trudeau resolved to stop selling the Saudis arms and halt the TPP, he’s a small cog international politics. All national leaders are surrounded by vulture lobbyists and purchased bureaucrats, who collectively decide things. For example, how Trudeau will reconcile the competing pressure to build pipelines with his pledge to protect the environment and improve relations with aboriginal people remains to be seen, but early signs lean towards big oil. Nobody should expect Trudeau to singlehandedly shape Canada, let alone the world. In late September his cabinet approved the construction of a $11.4 billion (Canadian Dollars) terminal to export liquefied natural gas that has angered environmentalists and Canadian Aboriginal groups. The project has certain environmental conditions attached, to be named in time, but what they are and whether they're actually upheld remains to be seen. His image will take a beating if his base thinks his environmental, energy and economic juggling errs too much on the side of business. But it isn’t that his sunshiney symbols are meaningless, just they have limits. Assuming any politician is authentically fond of the environment and opposed to militarisation or obscene concentrations of wealth, they're still pretty powerless against Big Business. Trudeau fits in here. So while critics find his ostentatious shows of pluralism corny, at least they're not just fashionable masks for bigotry. The world needs more leaders who aren’t preprogrammed to whip up and then appeal to caveman instincts. Just nobody should think his theater for social, environmental or economic justice will translate into policy that adequately addresses, let alone fixes, the biggest problems facing the world. (WION)

Canada's Justin Trudeau: Liberal signs and symbols

environmental-protection

Environmental Protection, News on Environmental Protection, stories on Environmental Protection, articles on Environmental Protection, Environmental Protection stories at Wion, Environmental Protection news, Environmental Protection latest news