Up First from NPR - ICJ Ruling, Border Deal Falling Apart, Biden Administration LNG Pause

Episode Date: January 26, 2024

The UN's top court will deliver its interim ruling on the genocide charges brought against Israel by South Africa. Campaign politics is putting a bipartisan Senate border deal in limbo as former President Donald Trump urges Republican lawmakers to reject it. And, The Biden Administration is pausing approval of new natural gas export facilities as it weighs their impact on climate change.Want more comprehensive analysis of the most important news of the day, plus a little fun? Subscribe to the Up First newsletter. Today's episode of Up First was edited by Kelsey Snell, Sadie Babits, Ally Schweitzer and Mohamad ElBardicy.It was produced by Ziad Buchh, Ben Abrams and Kaity Kline.We get engineering support from Stacey Abbott and our technical director is Zac Coleman.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

The U.N.'s top court will deliver its interim ruling on genocide charges brought against Israel. South Africa asked the judges for a provisional measure to stop Israel's military campaign in Gaza. But can any court decision be enforced? I'm E. Martinez, that's Leila Fadl, and this is Up First from NPR News. The Senate is close to a bipartisan deal pairing border security with Ukraine aid, but former President Trump is telling Republican lawmakers to reject it. And the Biden administration is tapping the brakes on natural gas exports. A lot has happened in the past decade since this program was created,

and we need to have an even greater understanding. The Department of Energy is looking into whether new natural gas facilities are in the public's interest. So stay with us. We'll give you the news you need to start your day. Now Our Change will honor 100 years of the Royal Canadian Air Force and their dedicated service to communities at home and abroad. From the skies to our change, this $2 commemorative circulation coin marks their storied past and promising future. Find the limited edition Royal Canadian Air Force $2 coin today. Just moments ago, in a much-anticipated ruling, the United Nations top court in The Hague stopped short of ordering a ceasefire in Gaza, but demanded that Israel do more to contain the death and damage its military operation has wrought there.

This provisional ruling is in response to a lawsuit brought by South Africa alleging that Israel's war in Gaza amounts to genocide against the Palestinian people. A definitive ruling on that question isn't likely to come for another few years. NPR's Lauren Frayer has been following this case from her base in London, and she joins me now. Good morning, Lauren. Hi, Leila. So tell us more about this ruling. So the president of the International Court of Justice, Joan Donahue, who is an American judge, read out statements from UN officials about Gaza's destruction, about the plight of Palestinian children there. She also read out quotes from Israeli officials about how their military

operation in Gaza is not aimed at genocide, they claim. And then she read out quotes from Israeli officials about how their military operation in Gaza is not aimed at genocide, they claim. And then she read out parts of the Convention on Genocide that both Israel and South Africa, the plaintiff in this case, are signatories to. And then she said that the court orders Israel to, quote, take all measures within its power to prevent commissions of acts in this genocide convention. And she listed them. Here she is. A, killing members of the group. B, causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group. C, deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part. And the group that she's referring to there is the Palestinian people.

Donahue said judges voted 15 to 2 on this. There are 17 judges on the court. The two dissenters were the one Israeli judge and another judge on the court. And what has Israel, if they've said anything yet, said about this ruling? Israel's lawyers were at the court taking notes. Presumably, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli officials have been watching this from afar. In testimony before the court two weeks ago, Israel's attorneys pushed back very hard at this genocide allegation,

acknowledged that civilians in Gaza have suffered terribly, but insisted that civilians are not Israel's target in Gaza. And they say that the enemy is Hamas, which Israel accuses of using civilians as human shields, of embedding its fighters in schools and hospitals. One of Israel's attorneys two weeks ago in the court told the court that if the term genocide applies to anyone, it applies to Israel's foes, militants who have called for the destruction of Israel.

Here he is. Israel is defending itself against Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and other terrorist organizations whose brutality knows no bounds. Attorneys for Israel listed in great detail efforts that Israel says it's made to warn civilians in Gaza before attacks and to get aid shipments into Gaza, although the UN and aid agencies that have said it's not nearly enough. But today, basically, the court said it is plausible that Israel has committed acts of genocide, but that a final determination on that is still to

come. Okay, the court saying it is plausible, the court also saying that Israel needs to do more to contain the death and damage its military operation has wrought in Gaza. What happens now, though? I mean, is this order binding? Can it be enforced? So the president of the court, Joan Donahue, said, yes, this is legally binding. But in reality, it's pretty hard to enforce. I mean, Israel's prime minister has said specifically that this court will not stop him from his goal of destroying Hamas.

There is precedent here. A 2019 case brought by the country of Gambia in West Africa sued Myanmar for alleged genocide against the Rohingya minority. The court ordered a similar emergency measure urging Myanmar to do more, and Myanmar ignored it then. NPR's Lauren Frayer in London. Thanks, Lauren. You're welcome. A high stakes will they or won't they is happening on Capitol Hill. Yeah. Senate negotiators say they're finalizing the details of a bipartisan agreement on immigration reform. But after months of negotiating, the potential deal could topple just before crossing the finish line as Republicans decide if they should defy former President Trump, who has demanded a hard line Republican solution at the border.

NPR's Eric McDaniel is here in the studio and has the latest. Hey, Eric. Good morning. Good morning. So where does the deal stand? These talks have been going on a long time, but now negotiators say they're very close to some sort of bipartisan agreement on a proposal. That's notable, right, in and of itself. Yeah, I agree. So Republican Senator James Lankford of Oklahoma has been the chief Republican negotiator. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, an independent former Democrat, has been involved. Democrat Chris Murphy of Connecticut is the point person for Democrats, and they have worked by all accounts pretty tirelessly on this since the fall, with preliminary talks happening as early as last spring.

Murphy told me yesterday that the policies here, what's involved, is basically decided. Now they're dealing with dollar amounts and finalizing text. And part of the reason we're seeing a bipartisan framework here, bipartisan negotiations at all, is, well, the same reason we usually see them in Congress, which is a consensus that the problem's now too big to ignore. They're an all-time record number of people presenting themselves to border protection agents, often more than 10,000 a day, to put in asylum claims. And the system just isn't set up to deal with that as it stands. It's worth remembering that Republicans also told Biden that the only way to get a deal on Ukraine aid, something that's important to him, Israel aid, was to address the crisis at the U.S. border with Mexico. Biden agreed to that, which is how all of this got linked together. And there are also political reasons, though, to link these issues, right? Right. It's a pretty common strategy in Congress to link things together that people feel

strongly about. That way, if you're a lawmaker, maybe you can overlook your hang up about some details or policies that you care less about in order to get the whole package through. Right. Now, there is some uneasiness on the part of Republicans. Right. It was a little kind of folks were on tenterhooks yesterday on the Hill, and I think we'll have to wait and see where things end up. On Wednesday, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader in the Senate, acknowledged in a closed-door meeting with his Republican colleagues that this could be a politically hard vote. He supports the deal, but GOP presidential frontrunner Donald Trump has said he opposes it. And in the House, where this was always going to be sort of a long shot just

because of the dynamics in that chamber, there are immigration hardliners much like Trump himself for whom any deal with Democrats won't go far enough. You know, it's just not worthwhile. And with a narrow majority, they don't want to risk opposing Trump, which is a bit like kicking a hornet's nest for a Republican lawmaker. Say he backed a primary challenge or somehow otherwise opposed you, and they might not want to send it through. So we're in this weird position.

Republicans want to see the text of the deal, weigh whether they're going to take a policy win, i.e. securing the border, and risk a potential Biden political win, credit for that deal, taking action on immigration reform. It's all in open question. Many Republicans really do earnestly want to see something like this get through, want to send money to Ukraine. But as ever, there are other political concerns involved. Okay, so what's next? When's this going to be a deal if it's going to be a deal? Well, we have to wait for the text. Kyrsten Sinema told reporters yesterday in a rare gaggle that we could see this as early as next week. We want to see what the reforms are to see whether Republicans react positively to it once they've actually seen the policy and to see if

there are defections from the left. This thing needs 60 votes in all to pass the Senate. All right. NPR congressional reporter Eric McDaniel. Thanks, Eric. Yeah, my pleasure. The Biden administration announced today that it will pause approval of new natural gas export facilities. That's so the Department of Energy can review whether these plants are in the public's interest, especially given their outsized contribution to climate change. The decision comes as Louisiana has been moving forward with what would be the country's largest natural gas export terminal. Hallie Parker with member station WWNO in New Orleans joins us to discuss this. Hi, Hallie. Hey, Layla. So how big of a decision is this? Well, I would say it's huge. You know, over the

past few years, there's been this like massive rapid build out of new natural gas terminals in the U.S., so much so that the U.S. is now the world's largest exporter of gas. And the projects that are being built right now could almost double U.S. export capacity by the end of the decade, even without the 17 other proposals that are in front of the energy department. And, you know, here in Louisiana, we've really been ground zero for this expansion that the gas industry is proposing. Well, us in Texas. And this decision would start to slow that development down. On a call yesterday with reporters, Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm put it this way. A lot has happened in the past decade since this program was created, and we need to have an even greater understanding. So this pause gives the Biden administration a chance to review what the impacts of this

buildout have been, whether that's economically, on public health, and also when it comes to addressing planet warming emissions that cause climate change. And how is the gas industry responding to the pause? Well, you could say they're up in arms. Industry groups argue this decision could hurt relationships with allies like Europe that started importing more gas from the U.S. after the Ukraine war began. They're framing this as Europe needs this gas to survive, and industry groups say this flies in the face of Biden's promises back in 2022 when he pledged to supply countries. But I will say that's not entirely true.

Numerous studies and senior administration officials say the pipeline of projects that are already underway are enough to meet those energy needs. Now, climate activists are applauding this decision. What are you hearing in Louisiana? Well, this kind of pressure has been building for months as national environmental groups have ramped up their own campaigns against this expansion for natural gas exports. Just last week, I was at a protest in New Orleans, and hundreds of people from fishermen to climate activists across the Gulf Coast came together. People like Rayshetta Ozean, who's been opposing this project for years. She says this decision signals the Biden administration is finally listening, and the

president is delivering exactly what they've asked for. There's still some big things that we're working on, but in this moment, we are celebrating. We're breathing a little easier. Yeah. Ozean says they're playing a long game, and they're going to look to ensure that the people that are most affected by these plans are included in the Department of Energy's review. So this is a pause. I mean, how long does this go on? What happens next? Yeah. So the Energy Department is going to start this review of the proposed natural gas export projects, but senior administration officials say it's not clear how long this review will take. The pause is going to last as long as the review takes, but it will likely go through November and the election. That's Hallie Parker with member station WWNO.

Thanks, Hallie. Thanks, Leila. And that's Up First for Friday, January 26th. I'm Leila Faudel. And I'm Amy Martinez. Today's episode of Up First was edited by Mark Katkoff, Kelsey Snell, Sadie Babbitts, and Mohamed El Mardisi. It was produced by Ziad Butch, Ben Abrams, and Katie Klein.

We get engineering support from Stacey Abbott, and our technical director is Zach Coleman. Please start your day here with us on Monday. And also, don't forget, Up First airs on Saturday, too. Aisha Roscoe and Scott Simon have the news. It'll be here in The Speed. Thank you.