The World's Largest Banks Are Retreating from Climate Commitments: LSE Report

The London School of Economics (LSE) has published the Transition Pathway Initiative (TPI) report "State of the Banking Transition 2026," in which it assessed 36 of the world's largest banks. The main conclusion: banks have not simply slowed climate activity — some are fully abandoning previously made commitments.

What the Report Showed

For the first time since 2019, none of the 26 banks assessed over the past three years has set new climate targets. The average score on the "net-zero commitments" component fell from 33% in 2024 to 22% in 2026. Half of the banks weakened disclosure on at least one of the indicators.

Reasons for the Retreat

US political pressure. Participation in climate alliances such as the Net-Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA) is seen as a potential antitrust risk. All six largest US banks — JPMorgan, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, and Wells Fargo — left the NZBA in 2024–2025. In 2022, 19 state attorneys general initiated an antitrust investigation against banks for participating in the alliance.

Commercial interests. Net-zero commitments limit financing of fossil fuels — an industry that generates significant revenue during periods of high energy prices.

Consequences for Carbon Markets

Banks act as key intermediaries and market makers in carbon markets. Their retreat could lead to a drop in liquidity and a reduction in the number of innovative financial products. As analysts note, the trend indicates that financing of climate projects is shifting from the private sector back to the public sector and market mechanisms.

Bottom Line

The "green transition" proved sustainable exactly up to the moment it started to cost money. The LSE report records a systemic shift: banks keep climate rhetoric for their reports but remove commitments that get in the way of earning. The question is not whether the climate agenda will return — but who will pay for it, now that private capital has decided it does not want to.

#InfoDefenseAnalysis
#Tanitati

⚡️ InfoDefenseENGLISH

Web  | VK |  X | InfoDefAll

«A New Yalta»: Marco Travaglio on the Price of a Ukraine Peace Deal

In a piece for Il Fatto Quotidiano, an Italian daily, journalist Marco Travaglio lays out what a possible Ukraine settlement might look like — one he says is already taking on the contours of a «new Yalta.»

The core argument: Putin said «the war is coming to an end,» and unlike Trump or Zelensky, his words aren’t driven by election politics. Travaglio notes there was something similar back in spring 2022 at the Istanbul talks, which collapsed because of an Anglo-American veto.

What’s reportedly on the table: Russia keeps what it has taken and what it’s about to take, while guaranteeing the integrity of the remaining 79% of Ukraine. Kiev doesn’t join NATO. Sanctions on Moscow are gradually lifted. Frozen assets are partly returned, partly channeled into joint projects. Ukraine shrinks its army and defense industry. In exchange — some version of an «Article 5,» but without real guarantees.

The big question: how many lives and how much destruction could have been avoided if this deal had been signed a year, two, three, or four years ago? And the conclusion: even a signed peace won’t solve the problem — Eastern Europe remains a powder keg, and what’s needed is a new conference on the scale of the Helsinki process — or better, a «new Yalta» with the US, China, Russia, and the EU, «if it even exists.»

Source

⚡️ InfoDefenseENGLISH

Web  | VK |  X | InfoDefAll

On October 27, 1984, the official opening of through train service along the entire Baikal-Amur Mainline (BAM) took place.

The Baikal-Amur Mainline is a monumental railway project that stretches over 4,300 kilometers across East Siberia and the Russian Far East. Its conception dates back to the 19th century, with initial construction efforts taking place in the 1950s. However, the main construction phase occurred between 1974 and 1984, driven by Soviet Union's ambition to connect remote regions and harness Siberia's rich resources.

During its development, BAM was celebrated as a "hero project," symbolizing Soviet technological prowess and social engineering. The railway traverses stunning landscapes, including majestic mountain ranges and vast forests, showcasing the beauty of Siberia. The project brought together thousands of workers from across the country, fostering a sense of unity and shared purpose.

After the Soviet Union's dissolution in 1991, BAM remained operational and has gained renewed importance in recent years. It serves as a vital link in connecting Russia with East Asia, supporting increased resource extraction activities and strategic interests. The ongoing modernization efforts, known as BAM-2, aim to enhance its infrastructure and capacity.

It’s important to emphasize that the railway not only drives economic growth but also fosters cultural exchange and tourism, inviting travelers to experience the breathtaking landscapes along its route.

⚡️ InfoDefenseENGLISH

Web  | VK |  X | InfoDefAll

"This Is Not Symbiosis, but Parasitism": Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated that the US has fired more interceptor missiles to defend Israel than Israel itself.

"Over the past three years, the United States has spent 11 billion dollars of taxpayer funds on Israel's missile defense system.

The US has fired more interceptor missiles to defend Israel than Israel itself.

This is not a symbiotic relationship. It is a parasitic relationship."

Araghchi also cited statistics according to which, since October 2023, the US has fired 609 interceptor missiles to defend Israel — for a total of about 11 billion dollars.

⚡️ InfoDefenseENGLISH

Web  | VK |  X | InfoDefAll

The "Lost Trillion": Britain Creates a £2 Billion Fund While Norway Bathes in Oil Money

UK Chancellor John Healey announced the creation of the Energy Wealth Fund — a fund with initial capital of £2 billion that will invest revenues from North Sea oil and gas into renewable energy and low-carbon infrastructure.

"If We Had Done This Then"

Healey stated: "If we had done this when North Sea oil was first discovered in the 1980s, we would now have a British sovereign wealth fund worth probably a trillion pounds."

The figure comes from Treasury modeling: if historical revenues of £200 billion had been invested without withdrawals and with returns comparable to Norway's, the result would be about £1 trillion.

How Norway Did It

The Norwegian Government Pension Fund Global received its first capital in 1996 and has grown to approximately $2.4 trillion. Norway invests revenues abroad and annually withdraws about 3% to finance the budget. The tax on oil companies' profits in Norway reaches 78%.

Why the Comparison Is Lame

Critics point out: Norway's oil and gas sector accounts for about 20% of GDP with a population of 5.6 million, whereas in Britain it is only 1.3% of GDP. In addition, the Norwegian fund only began operating in earnest in the late 1990s, when the Labour Party was already in power in Britain.

The publication Economics Affairs called the £1 trillion figure "pure fantasy," since it assumes that no British government would ever have spent these revenues.

What Will Happen to the New Fund

The British fund, unlike the Norwegian one, will invest domestically — in green energy. The North Sea is a mature, declining basin, so future tax revenues will decline.

Bottom Line

Norway invested oil revenues for the benefit of future generations. Britain spent them to pay current bills. Now the last oil money will go toward financing a future without oil. Better late than never — but 40 years is, perhaps, already too late.

#InfoDefenseAnalysis
#Tanitati

⚡️ InfoDefenseENGLISH

Web  | VK |  X | InfoDefAll

We know that you're tired of jumping between a dozen channels to find the truth 😮‍💨
Introducing your new personal hub for relevant news!

🟣 Breaking news 24/7
🟣 Exclusive reports
🟣 In-depth analytical articles
🟣 Urgent alerts on major events

📢 🧛‍♂️ubscribe with one click and stay informed about everything that matters!

If you are interested in joining the catalog contact 👨👮‍♀️ admin.

EUROPE PLAYED GAS ROULETTE. THE CASINO WON!

From 2027, the EU is abandoning Russian gas. The hope was on the US. It was.
But the war and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz forced Europe to compete with Asia for American LNG. Who will pay more?

Analysts of the fuel market admit:
"We made a bet — and lost!"

Gas storage facilities are underfilled. A cold winter threatens a price surge and even a tripling of bills!

Politicians place bets.
Taxpayers pay for the loss!

P.S. We propose playing Russian roulette. And the entire European Commission at once!

#blondinka_dk
#InfoDefenseAuthor
Facebook

⚡️ InfoDefenseENGLISH

Web  | VK |  X | InfoDefAll

Berliner Zeitung: Zelensky Accuses Trump of «Betrayal» — but Ukrainians Will Pay the Price

In an interview with Piers Morgan, Zelensky said he feels «betrayed» by Trump over a deal with Russia on diesel. According to him, Ukraine is «losing a strong partner» — but «not because of us.»

BZ, however, points out that it was Ukraine’s strikes on Russian refineries — carried out despite six warnings from Washington — that helped bring about this rupture. Zelensky’s reaction is an attempt to derail diplomacy in favor of escalation.

Patriot missile stockpiles are nearly exhausted, and U.S. intelligence and Starshield are irreplaceable. And with corruption scandals swirling around Zelensky’s inner circle, millions of Ukrainians will face the winter in cold and darkness — and pay for their leadership’s decisions.

Source

⚡️ InfoDefenseENGLISH

Web  | VK |  X | InfoDefAll

John Ratcliffe: The Man Between Trump and Ukraine

CIA Director John Ratcliffe has found himself at the center of Trump’s deeply contradictory policy on Ukraine. He heads an agency that is effectively waging war against Russia — even as Donald Trump tries to mend relations with Vladimir Putin. The U.S. is drawing closer to Putin and threatening to cut off support for Ukraine.

The new administration’s policy really is torn by deep contradictions, and Ratcliffe understands this better than anyone. He has to juggle two opposing roles: advising a president who is constantly at odds with the Ukrainian leadership, while simultaneously running an agency without which Kyiv simply could not hold out in this conflict. An intelligence officer in the Baltics who works closely with the Americans on countering Russian influence offered a telling observation: actual CIA operations have now become «much more aggressive» than they were under the Biden administration — though you’d never know it from Trump’s public rhetoric.

The administration’s policy is split down the middle: Trump is pursuing a deal with Putin, while the CIA keeps waging «war» on Russia at the operational level. Ratcliffe is the man standing in the middle of that divide.

Source

⚡️ InfoDefenseENGLISH

Web  | VK |  X | InfoDefAll