@Amazon_Watch_Sverige
•
Amazon Watch Sverige
83 w
•
Vad har företagen Apple, Microsoft, Tesla och Samsung gemensamt? 🤔 De köper alla guld till sina produkter från två raffinaderier som undersöks av brasilianska myndigheter för att ha köpt illegalt guld utvunnet i urfolksterritorier. ⚠️ Läs mer i vår korta brief 👇 https://www.amazonwatch.se/nyheter/2022/10/4/illegalt-guld-fran-urfolksterritorier-i-vara-telefoner-och-bilar
Amazon Watch Sverige
101 w
•
Dear Regeringskansliet, Did you know that respecting indigenous rights is the best way to protect the Amazon rainforest? We have a great idea! We think Sweden should promote indigenous rights as a way to save the climate! Studies have for decades showed that deforestation rates are lower in indigenous and tribal territories where governments have formally recognized collective land rights; and improving the tenure security of these is a cost-effective way to reduce carbon emissions! Sounds great right!? That's why we think the Swedish delegation to STHLM+50 should make it a priority to promote indigenous rights! We want Sweden to: - Increase their commitment to the Amazon and the indigenous peoples who live there. - Review Swedish investments and companies that can be linked to operations in the Amazon rainforest. - Include indigenous peoples in the design of all environmental and climate strategies. We know that Rights Rescues the Rainforest!
26 more agrees trigger contact with the recipient
Amazon Watch Sverige
101 w
•
Will you be in Stockholm for the STHLM+50 Conference? Then you should definetly come listen to indigenous leaders from the Amazon and Sápmi! We are hosting an exciting event with prominent speakers who are one the front lines of the climate crisis and who needs your support and solidarity to continue the fight! Register via www.amazonwatch.se/event
Amazon Watch Sverige
102 w
•
Amazon Watch Sweden invites you to an exciting evening for the rainforest! Meet and listen to the indigenous leaders Patricia Gualinga (Kichwa from Sarayaku and winner of the Olof Palme Prize 2022), Nina Gualinga (Kichwa from Sarayaku and spokesperson for Mujeres Amazónicas), Noemí Gualinga (Kichwa from Sarayaku and leader of the Sarayaku Women's Association), and Märak (Lulesame and former chairman of the Sami Association Stockholm) at the Etnografiska Museet in Stockholm! The evening will offer inspiring and informative speeches, beautiful singing and music and film screenings. The event is free and before the start of the program there is an opportunity to get a tour of the exhibition Human Nature at the museum. Register to the event at www.amazonwatch.se/event
Amazon Watch Sverige
104 w
•
Did you know that respecting indigenous rights is the best way to protect the Amazon rainforest? Deforestation rates are lower in indigenous and tribal territories where governments have formally recognized collective land rights; and improving the tenure security of these is a cost-effective way to reduce carbon emissions! Learn more about this and sign our petition at www.amazonwatch.se/rrr Thank you for showing international solidarity with indigenous peoples in the Amazon!💚
Amazon Watch Sverige
104 w
•
In Brazil, Indigenous communities organized and mobilized to celebrate “Indigenous April” at their 18th annual Free Land Camp (ATL), held in Brasília from April 4-14, 2022. It’s the most important annual event organized by APIB (Association of Brazil’s Indigenous People) and Brazil’s Indigenous movement. Attendees declared 2022 to be the last year of Bolsonaro’s genocidal administration and marked the launch of several actions leading up to national elections in October. With this election year ahead, ATL’s theme was “Retaking Brazil: Demarcating Territories and Indigenizing Politics,” and the event brought together 7,000 Indigenous people in Brasilia before key votes in Brazil’s Congress on bills that would violate the rights of Indigenous peoples, including Bill 191/2020, which would open up Indigenous lands to mining and other extractive industries. Thank you APIB for organizing such a powerful event and showing the world that the future is indigenous! To show international support for the indigenous movement in the Amazon and learn why Rights Rescue the Rainforest visit www.amazonwatch.se/rrr
15 more agrees trigger contact with the recipient
Amazon Watch Sverige
133 w
•
Despite the UN’s demand for Donziger’s release, judge gives him the maximum sentence, a chilling message to anyone working to address the climate crisis and resist corporate exploitation. On Friday, Judge Loretta Preska sentenced human rights attorney Steven Donziger to the maximum sentence of six months in federal prison for the petty misdemeanor contempt of court charges filed by Judge Lewis Kaplan, a pro-Chevron former tobacco industry lawyer. Preska handed down this sentence despite multiple calls for Donziger’s release, including from the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, several members of U.S. Congress, the European Parliament, 68 Nobel Laureates, and virtually every large international environmental justice and human rights organization, including Amnesty International. The charges were prosecuted by corporate law firm Seward & Kissel, appointed by Kaplan himself. This is a firm that had Chevron as a client only a couple of years ago, and its lead lawyer, Rita Glavin, recently left to defend Andrew Cuomo from multiple sexual harassment allegations. Kaplan also hand-picked Preska to try the case. This makes Kaplan the “aggrieved party,” the person who filed the charges, picked the prosecutor, selected the judge, and still remains a judge officially assigned to the case. None of this bears any resemblance to what high school students in the U.S. are taught about “exceptional American justice.” During sentencing, Preska dismissed the recent decision by the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention saying she would “take it for what it’s worth.” This decision directs the U.S. government to immediately release Donziger and compensate him, citing that his detention is a human rights violation. The respected human rights body also said that both judges – Kaplan and Preska – had shown “a staggering lack of objectivity and impartiality.” Demonstrating a complete lack of understanding or concern for the human rights situation in Latin America for those who work to protect human rights and the environment, Preska employed a brutal metaphor that “only the proverbial two-by-four between the eyes will instill in him [Donziger] any respect for the law.” Then, Preska even denied Donziger bail pending an appeal of the decision. His legal team has one week to challenge that denial and if he loses he will have to report to federal prison for six months to file his appeal while incarcerated. While the actions by Judges Preska and Kaplan and law firm Seward & Kissel are shocking, they are not surprising. Key powers within the U.S. Congress, executive branch, and judiciary have been unwilling to respond in any way to egregious abuses of power and injustices that violate the basic tenets of U.S jurisprudence. Their inaction and inability to address the gross attacks against Donziger and the evidence of Chevron’s corruption expose the inordinate power that the fossil fuel industry has over the U.S. government – including its courts. Although it was not Chevron’s intention, the international coverage of this story and the growing outpouring of support for Donziger and the affected communities in Ecuador has grown exponentially since the trial began. This movement will continue to place considerable pressure on the Biden Administration to intervene and put an end to the farce that has placed the interests and profits of the second-largest oil company in the U.S. over those of affected communities and their advocates. Together, we must make sure President Biden takes steps to not only right this terrible wrong, but turn the focus back to the real crime: Chevron’s deliberate dumping of 16 billion gallons of oil waste into the Ecuadorian Amazon. This pollution continues to bring death and destruction daily and as long as Chevron is not held accountable, this case will stand in the way of any dreams for climate justice. As Annie Leanord, Co-Executive Director of Greenpeace USA, said about Donziger’s sentencing: “It is emblematic of the larger trend of silencing activists, many of whom are fighting for the solutions desperately needed to combat the global climate crisis exacerbated by multinational fossil fuel companies. Chevron’s legal attack on Donziger is not the first, nor will it be the last case of its kind. Right now, the right to dissent is being repressed by both our government and corporations. Donziger’s fate could have lasting effects on environmental and corporate accountability activists, against whom threats and legal harassment are already escalating. While today may come as a blow to the environmental community, we know we cannot shy away. We must double down before it’s too late.”
Amazon Watch Sverige
134 w
•
We are living in a world on fire. Over the past year, over 1,000 major fires have ravaged the Amazon rainforest, destroying millions of acres. At the same time, the North American west has seen its most destructive wildfire season in recorded history. Wildfires spurred by historically hot and dry conditions have raged across California and British Columbia, destroying entire towns and disproportionately affecting Indigenous communities. Nlaka'pamux residents of Lytton, British Columbia have seen their hometown destroyed, while the Maidu people of Northern California reacquired their ancestral lands only to see them engulfed in flames. Even European countries such as Greece and France, each beset by historic heat waves, have suffered massive fires that have displaced thousands of people. Deforestation, fires, and the destruction and exploitation of Indigenous lands across the globe are intimately linked. Unlike the fires across North America and Europe, major fires in the Amazon are typically set deliberately to clear areas that have been deforested, often as a result of land grabs of Indigenous territories to benefit the agribusiness, mining, and fossil fuel industries. The resulting carbon emissions from forest destruction and fossil fuel extraction contribute to climate change, exacerbating the hot and dry conditions that feed increasingly severe wildfires in North America and across the rest of the world. In short, the destruction of the Amazon and violation of the land rights of its Indigenous peoples drives a vicious cycle of global climate chaos. Politicians like Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro have worked to erode Indigenous land rights and pave the way for expansion of these destructive, polluting industries, and Amazonian Indigenous movements have mounted a fierce resistance. However, global financial institutions have been equally complicit in driving the destruction of the Amazon and dispossession of its Indigenous peoples. In particular, three financial institutions are pouring money into Amazon destruction: asset managers BlackRock and Vanguard Group and multinational investment bank JPMorgan Chase. A 2019 report by Friends of the Earth and Amazon Watch found that BlackRock was the world's largest investor in companies engaged in deforestation in the Amazon. For its part, Vanguard invested $2.7 billion in such companies between 2017 and 2020. JPMorgan Chase, the largest bank in the United States, is also the world's largest backer of fossil fuels and finances numerous agribusiness and fossil fuel companies involved in environmental and Indigenous rights violations in the Amazon. These financial institutions drive the destruction of the Amazon and the resulting cycle of climate chaos. Additionally, none of them have binding policies requiring them to respect Indigenous peoples' rights to Free, Prior, and Informed Consent concerning extractive operations in their territories. Climate change has made clear what has been true all along: the future of the planet and all of its peoples and ecosystems depends on rejecting the climate colonialism driven by financial institutions and governments and respecting the rights of Indigenous peoples. - ROSHAN KRISHNAN Is Your Bank Using Your Money to Profit from Amazon Destruction? JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Citi, and HSBC are among the banks exposed for pouring billions into Amazon crude The Amazon rainforest is at the tipping point – rapidly approaching an ecological point of no return when, if enough deforestation occurs, the forest will no longer be able to sustain itself, triggering a massic dieback of plant and animal species, and deregulating global climate and temperature patterns. We must take immediate action to protect the Amazon right now, and we can start by Ending Amazon Crude. In July, Amazon Watch and Stand.earth released a new report, Banking on Amazon Destruction, showing that global banks are failing their own social and environmental commitments by financing and investing in the oil and gas industry in the Amazon rainforest. These banks remain highly exposed to the risk of funding corruption, human rights violations, environmental harms, and ultimately climate chaos due to their ongoing relationships with companies and traders operating in the region. And they might be using your money to do it. We need you to join us as we issue a new call: Banks must exclude all types of finance, including investment, for any company engaging in the oil industry in the Amazon by setting markers to end new financing by 2022 and existing financing by 2025. Amazon oil has a history of devastating impact on Indigenous communities. Marlon Vargas, President of the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of the Ecuadorian Amazon (CONFENIAE) shared the following about his experience: "For too long, the oil industry has wreaked havoc on our Indigenous peoples, violated our rights, cut down our forests, seized our territories, and created climate chaos that is leading to the collapse of the Amazon. The banks that finance this destruction are complicit in the genocidal threat to our peoples and an existential threat to humanity and our planet. We call on all institutions that finance oil extraction and the oil trade in the Amazon to make bold decisions to stop bankrolling environmental pollution and climate change. Their investments must be based on sustainable economic alternatives for our countries and communities." This report comes on the heels of our August 2020 investigation revealing that European banks financed the trade of 155 million barrels of Amazon oil from the headwaters region of Ecuador and Peru to refineries in the U.S. for a total of $10 billion. Although this led to commitments by top banks to uphold their policies and end oil trade financing in that region, Amazon Watch and Stand.earth investigators decided to address the continued flow of capital to the companies drilling and significantly impacting the forest and Indigenous peoples territories. Therefore, this new report looks at 14 U.S. and European banks providing both trade and corporate finance for oil activities across the Amazon biome. Spoiler alert: Not a single bank profiled is living up to its Environmental and Social Risk (ESR) commitments. Only an Amazon-wide exclusion will stop Amazon oil expansion and destruction. Along with several other banks listed in the report, Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase hold hundreds of millions of dollars in bonds issued to PetroEcuador (formerly PetroAmazonas), Ecuador's national oil company. These bonds are bankrolling oil expansion into Yasuní National Park, a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve, where new roads to well sites are being carved through the forest, and bringing drilling closer to Indigenous peoples living in voluntary isolation. The company is responsible for thousands of oil spills over the last decade, and is currently at the center of a major corruption scandal that has several senior government officials and Petroecuador executives in jail awaiting trial. JPMorgan Chase is dragging its heels on implementing sound ESR policies, including in the Amazon. It's the biggest banker for the fossil fuel industry worldwide, and it continues to fund Brazil's national oil company, Petrobras, which is ranked one of the largest fossil fuel expansion companies globally. Citi, Goldman Sachs and many European banks provide revolving credit facilities (RCFs) to problematic oil traders including Gunvor and Vitol, which have been implicated in recent bribery scandals. All banks have policies in place to nominally prevent the financing companies linked to corruption, yet only view it as a business risk and do not include it in ESR frameworks. RCF's also make it difficult for clients to know whether their money is being used to fund corruption. Since the report was finalized, Amazon Watch investigators have learned that JPMorgan Chase and Credit Suisse, along with another bank not listed in this report,recently helped arrange the issuance of a $150 million dollar bond for GeoPark, a Chilean oil company currently operating in the Colombian Amazon that is allegedly paying paramilitary groups to ensure the continuation of its operations on and near the territories of Indigenous groups that opposed oil operations. It's time to start winding down oil production, halt oil expansion, and End Amazon Crude. Even the International Energy Agency (IEA), the world's leading authority on the oil and gas industries, has delivered a sweeping call for nations around the world to stop investing in new fossil fuel supply. There simply is no room for new oil expansion. This new report reveals that most banks continue to rely on policies that don't curb oil expansion in the Amazon, preferring instead to influence them to slowly reduce their emissions over time — rather than divest or defund from them. The Amazon, like the Arctic, is an ecosystem that functions across political boundaries, and needs to be off limits to oil and gas extraction and the funding that enables it. Net zero pledges, false solutions, and piecemeal exclusions by country won't get us there. The Amazon could continue to be a draw for oil financing under bank decarbonization strategies as some of the high cost or carbon intense crude is curtailed in other regions. - KEVIN KOENIG AND PENDLE MARSHALL-HALLMARK
Amazon Watch Sverige
136 w
•
Versión en español During his first 100 days in office, Ecuador’s new president, Guillermo Lasso, made it clear that his government’s economic policy will be based on extractivism. According to the new administration, natural resources, such as oil, gas, and minerals, found in Ecuadorian subsoil are "essential," given the economic situation he inherited due to poor management by his predecessors, the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the related oil price collapse. Extractivism has yet to become the golden egg Ecuador’s past presidents expected. Lasso’s plan to double down on it as Ecuador’s only option for economic recovery is a dangerous gambit, considering its dependence on commodities is a major reason for its current economic crisis. It was not that long ago that oil was valued at negative $37 a barrel. Regardless, President Lasso signed Executive Decrees 95 and 151 on July 7 and August 5 of 2021, respectively. They both propose a radical transformation of oil, gas, and mining policies through the implementation of two immediate action plans for the development and modernization of this sector in Ecuador. The first focuses on the deregulation of operational processes in the oil and gas industry, aimed at doubling the country’s oil production. The second seeks to increase mining exports and make Ecuador more appealing to foreign investors. The Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador (CONAIE), the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of the Ecuadorian Amazon (CONFENIAE), and their grassroots organizations rejected both decrees outright. They forewarned government officials that any attempt to regulate state obligations regarding the right to prior consultation and consent must be done with the consultation and consent of Indigenous peoples. On the ground organizing, legal challenges, and resistance combined with international advocacy strategies led by Amazon Watch have effectively derailed government plans to expand extraction into the rainforest before. And now, as the Amazon biome faces a dangerous ecological tipping point, we are using finance and market strategies to bolster the in-country efforts of our Indigenous allies. This pressure compels the government to take steps to respect Indigneous collective rights, the rights of nature, and keep fossil fuels and minerals like gold and copper permanently in the ground. The government’s public policy strategy is nothing new, and it continues to exploit nature. However, it is concerning that this new administration is clearly serving the interest of transnational capital and business ventures seeking to expand the extractive industry into new, remote rainforest and Indigenous territory. Both decrees were carefully written to cover their technical, operational, and legal bases and avoid regulatory scrutiny and constitutional protections. Beginning with the change from a service contract model to a participation model where the Ecuadorian government assumes the financial risk of extractive projects. The oil contract model in Ecuador has been subject to change over the years, often at the whim of the sitting administration. In 2010, companies had a profit margin of 80/20. In order to change these conditions and achieve more government control of resources, it was declared that the distribution of extraction profits had to be at least 50/50, which took away windfall profits and equalized the participation of the government. But the new decree returns the percentage to favor industry and court new investment. The decrees reiterate the narrative of establishing clear, strict rules for environmental protection and the development of communities in the affected areas, but they require strong enforcement. The purpose and implementation of the decrees however, demonstrate setbacks in the guarantee of human and collective rights and the rights of nature. For example, the Ministry of Energy and Non-Renewable Resources and the Ministry of Environment, Water, and Ecological Transition are expected to facilitate procedure approvals and eliminate administrative roadblocks for both oil and mining industries. This means that they will prepare a fast track mechanism for environmental licenses, ignoring the constitutional guarantees and democratic principles of the rule of law. In other countries in the region, such as Chile, Peru, and Colombia, this phenomenon has already occurred. The so-called "socio-environmental fast track has resulted in the bending of rules and impunity for corporate crimes and abuses. At the same time, the government announced new bids for the Intercampo oil round in the northern Amazon, and bids for offshore blocks are pending, which are located in the low-lying coastal region in the province of Guayas. Also on the table is the Ronda Suroiente – the oil auction round for 12 oil blocks in the country’s southeastern remote Amazon, plagued with issues concerning lack of prior consultation and consent, and strong community opposition. The decree aims to double oil production to 1 million barrels per day, opening up these areas in search of new reserves–that the world can’t afford to burn according to the recent EIA and IPCC reports. The oil industry is also a major driver of deforestation, felling standing forests critical for climate change stability. These decisions threaten the commitments made by the government in the Paris Agreement as well as the goal of substantially and rapidly reducing the use of fossil fuels. It is therefore inconceivable that the government would promote this new policy when the experts on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change declared that it is a priority to halt fossil fuel production as well as decrease deforestation drivers and sources of contamination, such as mining, in order to address the climate crisis. Another scandalous aspect of this decision is the change of dispute settlement mechanisms between investors and the government. According to the new extraction policy, conflicts between the parties will be resolved in international arbitration courts, which have historically sided with businesses and have filed million-dollar lawsuits that have been harmful to the government and Ecuadorian society. One clear example is the Chevron arbitration award and the trial for the liquidation of the contract of the Occidental Exploration and Production Company (OXY). Therefore, a return to this type of conflict resolution will hinder access to justice for the communities affected by exploitation. The decree also opens the operation of production fields held by the state-owned company Petroecuador to the private sector in hopes of reactivating and increasing production. Why is this a bad thing? It is true that Petroecuador is in the middle of a structural crisis, but moving operations to the private sector means that the affected communities will face more obstacles in demanding that the government fulfill its obligations, while corporations will be protected by this new type of contract and the new dispute settlement system. Under this framework, all Petroecuador service stations will also be sold. At first, the sale of these services and facilities will generate profit for the government, providing the illusion of economic stability so that people believe that this is the correct decision. However, in the long term, this decision will limit sources of fiscal income and sustainability. Thus, if in the medium-term, the government does not have the necessary income to support its fiscal management, social policies and the guarantee of fundamental public resources such as health and education, among others, will suffer. Likewise, there is talk of implementing a system for complaints, transparency, and access to information guided by the decrees. These strategies already exist in other countries, but experience has shown them to be administrative schemes that seek to manipulate participation. In this context, it should be noted that the national government is required to implement the Escazú Agreement. Therefore, it must implement those mechanisms, and it is also obligated to recognize the work of those who are defending nature. However, both the Agreement and these standards are absent from the decrees. Regarding the mining sector, it was announced that a prevention strategy would be implemented to "combat illegal mining extraction." This means that territorial occupation or intervention operations will be conducted where there is illegal mining activity through the coordination and co-operation of various government institutions responsible for mining control and public safety. In other words, Decree 151 anticipates military occupation of Indigenous territories, and ignores the rights violations brought on by legal mining activity. This is just the beginning. This has been made clear by the slow rollout of measures mentioned in the decrees and the ambiguity of several actions planned for the short and medium-term. The strategy is to gradually issue lower-level legal instruments in order to reduce the government’s responsibility, and sources of fiscal income. Then the administration aims to prevent the implementation of territorial government processes that ensure the fulfillment of the it’s obligation to guarantee human and collective rights and the rights of nature. These decrees are a threat to the Amazon, its peoples, and the climate. They pave the way for a massive expansion of extraction in some of the most ecologically fragile and culturally sensitive areas, and if history is any lesson, promise continued rights violations of Indigenous peoples and nature. We must stand with them in defense of their territories, their rights, and the Amazon that we all depend on. -Sofía Jarrín
Amazon Watch Sverige
137 w
•
The campaign is now a global movement to protect and defend human and environmental rights against polluters Friday the 6th of August saw the anniversary of a shameful chapter in the U.S. legal system and further proof of the dangerous control the fossil fuel industry has over government. It was the two-year anniversary of the house arrest of human rights lawyer Steven Donziger. This violation of human rights would easily be criticized by the U.S. State Department were it happening elsewhere, but the Biden Administration has remained silent, despite repeated requests to investigate. Donziger is facing an unprecedented attack because he helped win one of the most important cases in the history of the environmental and corporate accountability movement in 2011. Ten years ago, Chevron was found liable for its deliberate pollution of the Ecuadorian Amazon and was ordered to pay $9.5 billion in damages to the affected Indigenous and campesino residents. The judgement has been affirmed by six appellate courts, including the Supreme Courts of Ecuador and Canada. Since that time Chevron has denied justice to the people of Ecuador and refused to pay. It threatened the affected communities with a "lifetime of litigation" unless it dropped the case. The U.S. legal system has since failed the people of Ecuador by allowing Chevron to make good on its threat and ignore this judgment. Then, in an attempt to redirect the story, the oil company targeted Donziger and the people it poisoned in Ecuador with a criminalization campaign that has evolved into one of the largest corporate SLAPP suits in history. We are witnessing a staged prosecution by an admitted criminal corporation – Chevron. It is prosecuting him directly via one of its private law firms after the regular federal prosecutor rejected contempt charges manufactured by Lewis Kaplan, a pro-Chevron judge, and former tobacco industry defense lawyer. Chevron attempts to paint Donziger as some sort of criminal for refusing an unlawful order to turn over his computer to the company – a way to redirect attention from its own crimes in Ecuador to avoid accountability. The U.S. government has allowed its court system to be used by Chevron as a mechanism for environmental racism and the suppression of the rights of environmental advocates. But Chevron did not realize that in its persecution of Donziger it would mobilize tens of thousands to demand accountability against its pollution in Ecuador, and around the world. On the 6th, rallies calling for Donziger's immediate release took place in over a dozen cities including, New York, Los Angeles, Richmond, CA, Miami, San Antonio, Seattle, Jacksonville, Boston, Chicago, Vancouver and Toronto, Canada, Tel Aviv, Israel and also in Quito, Ecuador. While Chevron might be able to point to small victories along the way, this movement to secure justice and end fossil fuel destruction has only grown stronger. The many rallies on Friday matched with new statements of support from Nobel Laureates, Members of Congress, and many others indicate that rather than demonizing Donziger, Chevron and their lawyers have made him into a symbol of resistance to the fossil fuel industry. At the same time that Federalist Society member judge Loretta Preska was issuing her guilty verdict saying Donziger was “guilty” of criminal contempt of court, two members of the Senate Judiciary Committee – Whitehouse and Markey – sent a letter to the Administrative Office of Courts. The senators questioned the “fundamental fairness” of the U.S. criminal justice system that allows private prosecutors to prosecute criminal charges. This case presents an obvious conflict of interest, by allowing a firm (Seward & Kissel) with direct ties to Chevron to prosecute Donziger. These Senators also pointed out that Judge Kaplan bypassed the rules by appointing Preska to oversee the case rather than allowing a random assignment. Senators Whitehouse and Markey are investigating how “Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 42” can be used to subvert the rights of individuals and shining a light on the judicial abuses that have allowed Chevron to attempt to silence Donziger. The Senate letter follows an earlier one from six Members of the House of Representatives also calling for an investigation. This is exactly what the movement requires – exposure of the methods by which corporations are manipulating and abusing the system to suppress our work to hold them accountable. Steven Donziger must be freed immediately and Chevron and its law firm at Gibson Dunn & Crutcher should be investigated for its corruption, witness bribery, and intimidation tactics. Chevron should be made to honor the $9.5 billion it owes the people of Ecuador for a cleanup and the members of the U.S. judiciary who have abused the legal system to benefit Chevron – judges Kaplan and Preska should also be investigated. In fact, 200 lawyers already signed a misconduct complaint against Kaplan for his 10-year targeting of Donziger. Filed with the appellate court in New York, it was cavalierly dismissed without even an investigation. Congress should step because the federal courts (at least in New York) are incapable of policing themselves. On October 1st, Preska will sentence Donziger. In an attempt to send a message to all defenders challenging corporations in the pursuit of human rights, Donziger could be sentenced to prison for six months even though he has already served four times that amount on house arrest. We must make sure Preska knows the world is watching and will not stand for this injustice. More voices must join the movement between now and Oct. 1st so that judges Preska and Kaplan recognize that their reputations are on the line and they will face public repercussions unless they release Donziger with "time served" while his appeal makes its way through the courts. We must resist. Donziger's persecution is what might lie in store for many of us in the climate movement as we fight to hold the destructive fossil fuel industry accountable for its actions. That is why we all must stand in solidarity with Donziger and the people of Ecuador. There can be no climate justice if climate advocates are criminalized and persecuted and the U.S. government continues to enable such abuses. - Paul Paz y Miño
Amazon Watch Sverige
148 w
•
"The Amazon is on fire, putting Indigenous lives, biodiversity, and the global climate at great risk. If we lose the Amazon, we lose the fight against climate change." -Sonia Guajajara, Executive Coordinator of the Association of Brazil's Indigenous Peoples As summer in North America begins and the burning season in the Amazon approaches, Sonia Guajajara's words remind us to act urgently. The Amazon is on fire, Indigenous lives are under attack, and the tipping point – the point at which the degradation of the Amazon's ecosystem is irreversible – isn't just near. It's here. Just a few years ago we thought we had ten years to act on climate change and that the tipping point of the Amazon was at 50% deforestation, but corporations and governments have either been slow to act or failed altogether. The reality is that the climate crisis and the tipping point are here now. We have just a few years – not decades – to turn this around. We have no time to waste. According to the Science Panel for the Amazon, "Current deforestation across the Amazon basin is at 17% and approaching 20% in the Brazilian Amazon." The 150-member panel of leading scientists, Indigenous people, and experts estimate that the tipping point will be reached at only 20 to 25% deforestation. We must take bold and immediate action now to avert the tipping point and protect the Amazon and our global climate. In honor of Amazon Watch's 25th anniversary, we have just shared our 2021-2025 Strategic Plan to protect and defend the Amazon in solidarity with Indigenous peoples. Our plan builds upon 25 years of work to protect the Amazon rainforest and defend Indigenous peoples' rights, lives, and territories with bold and ambitious goals and objectives, including the call to permanently protect 80% of the Amazon by 2025. We commit to working in solidarity with Indigenous peoples and a growing global movement calling for urgent action to permanently protect the Amazon, defend the defenders, and advance climate justice. Considering the Amazon is at a tipping point, we commit to address root causes and threats to the Amazon and seek systemic solutions while opposing false solutions like carbon offsets. We recognize that the systems that continually violate human rights also destroy the Earth and must be dramatically transformed or abolished. The reality is Indigenous peoples have declared an "Indigenous Emergency" due to the threats and attacks to rights, lives, and territories, including the spread of COVID-19. We must take action now to show our solidarity and protect the Amazon before it's too late. At Amazon Watch, we focused intently during this time of crisis to put together our plan to address this growing crisis. Let's stand together to protect, defend, and decolonize! Amazon Watch 2021-2025 Strategic Goals 1. Advance and amplify Indigenous rights, resistance, and solutions to protect and defend the Amazon-Basin. 2. Develop and implement rapid response protocols and campaigns to defend Earth Defenders of the Amazon. 3. Expand international advocacy campaigns to halt and hold accountable the global drivers of Amazon destruction. 4. Support movement-building for Pan-Amazon protection. 5. Amplify a global narrative of the integral role of the Amazon rainforest and respect for Indigenous rights to advance climate justice. 6. Deepen engagement and broaden the base of donors to support mission fulfillment. 7. Increase and strengthen internal capacity to support team well-being and the successful delivery of the strategic plan.
Amazon Watch Sverige
149 w
•
In a major victory for the environment, human rights, and our climate, nine Amazonian girls just put an end to the oil industry's gas flaring in the Ecuadorian Amazon! The practice has been hiding in plain sight across the Amazon rainforest for decades. For years, Amazon Watch has brought attention to flaring as a source of contamination through its campaigning and on-the-ground advocacy work alongside our long-term Indigenous partners. Amazon Watch's Ecuador Advocacy Advisor, Sofia Jarrin Hidalgo, and I supported the press work needed to amplify this case. Additionally, through our Amazon Defenders Fund, we provided a solidarity grant to the Union of Persons Affected by Texaco/Chevron (UDAPT), one of the organizations spearheading the case. The grant supported the strategies needed to build a successful case, including communications and legal support. In this case, without precedent, an Ecuadorian appellate court ruled in favor of nine children who are growing up in the shadow and contamination of hundreds of gas flares in the Ecuadorian Amazon. The flares burn 24/7 and have been a common industry practice, releasing toxic chemicals like benzene, hydrogen sulfide, and other pollutants into the surrounding air and water, and they take a huge toll on the health of nearby communities and the region's unparalleled biodiversity. The amount of flaring from Ecuador's oil fields also makes the country one of the western Amazon's largest emitters of CO2 emissions. According to the judgment, companies have 18 months to begin the phase-out of existing flares and end the practice by 2030. The lawsuit brought by the "Amazonian Nine" is a historic victory against an industry that has been granted impunity for the last 50 years. The plaintiffs, girls between 9 and 13 years old, have grown up next to these flares and oil wells that poison their families daily. They filed suit in February 2020 against Ecuador's Ministry of the Environment and Water and Ministry of Health, Ministry of Energy, and Non-renewable Resources over the violations of their right to health, water, and food sovereignty. Their motivation? To grow up free of contamination, to live in an Amazon where life is protected and has fresh, clean water. In their current community, they are forced to live alongside the oil infrastructure built by Texaco (now Chevron), state-run Petroecuador, and myriad other companies. The river water is too toxic to drink or use for bathing, fishing, or washing clothes. Here, even a "solution" is a problem. Rainwater catchment systems aren't safe either because of the toxins in the rainwater from flaring. Motivation for the "Amazonian Nine" was born both out of a sense of justice and precautionary action for their own health. Many of them have had to witness firsthand the struggles of their mothers and other family members with cancer, a result of living among oil industry contamination, and hope to avoid the same fate. A 2017 study from the Environmental Clinic of leading Ecuadorian environmental organization Accion Ecologica found elevated rates of cancer among residents in close proximity to oil infrastructure and gas flares in the two oil-producing provinces of Orellana and Sucumbios in the country's northern Amazon region. The appellate court ruled in favor of the youth back in January 2021, but only recently announced the measures the oil industry must take to implement the judgment. It also has several measures such as annual monitoring of ecosystem restoration, evaluation of water resources for the implementation of a potable water supply system, the creation of an oncology clinic if supported by data, apologies to the plaintiffs, and monitoring of the implementation of the judgement by the Ombudsman's Office. The order could have been stronger but the industry and state-run Petroecuador argued that eliminating flaring overnight would shut down and bankrupt the industry, and used the three-plus months between the decision and writ to pressure the court. The court recognized that the government violated the right to health of the plaintiffs, however, it did not order remediation or damages from the flaring impact, and kept the door open to future permitting if "technological advances" could be found. The decision is still a point of no return for the industry and provides relief for hundreds of Amazonian families who live day to day with the noise, smell, and health effects of flaring. This case is important because it confirms the crimes of an industry that has profited at the expense of Ecuadorian Amazon and its people; many lives were taken too soon, aided by government complicity, neglect, and impunity. This ruling recognizes the violations of human rights and the rights of nature – violations that often seem only evident to those who are affected. Those who have seen their rivers run black with crude, who live under the "flames of death" that billow smoke and toxins into the air and those who watch the flares incinerate any insect or living creature that gets too close. While we celebrate this victory, this is just one step in the struggle to keep it in the ground. Our partners will continue to resist until there is full and complete action, and an end to this industry in their communities "There is an inconsistency with the sentence issued in January that recognizes that the Ecuadorian government violated rights, the right to health, the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment, and the right to nature. The logical thing to do was provide adequate measures to redress these rights and restore them fully. We waited three months with the hope of a very sensible sentence, but this does not provide full reparation," shared Pablo Fajardo, UDAPT attorney in a statement. This ruling adds to the recent exclusion of trade finance for Ecuadorian crude due to environmental, social, and climate reasons from six top European Banks, and the bombshell report from the International Energy Agency last week which concluded that alignment on a 1.5°C pathway implies the end of investments in new fossil fuel supply and an end to new oil and gas development. Extracting oil from the Amazon rainforest and all the consequent businesses of this industry, such as gas flaring, is becoming unsustainable for the economy after more than 50 years of being unsustainable for life. The ruling presents an obstacle to the plans of Guillermo Lasso, Ecuador's newly inaugurated president who hopes to solve the country's economic crisis by doubling oil production. But Ecuador's oil dependence has never been sustainable for its economy, and it has never been sustainable for our Amazon. A country's economy cannot rebound from a path of death and destruction. The Amazon that the government is carving up and calling "oil concessions," are Territories of Life. The way forward is to listen to the voices of the youth who are fighting for future generations, and for a sustainable world and a balanced relationship with nature. It is our responsibility to continue to stand with these girls and fight alongside them to ensure respect for their rights and dignity. This is a tribute to the nine Ecuadorian girls who finally extinguished fifty years of gas flaring in the Ecuador Amazon. We stand with you. The world and our planet thank you!
Amazon Watch Sverige
151 w
•
Last weekend, tens of thousands of Brazilians took the streets in more than 200 cities and towns to decry their government's disastrous handling of the coronavirus pandemic to its persistent corruption and assault on environmental protections. In São Paulo alone, an estimated 80,000 people took to the streets, in loud, masked, social-distanced protest and resistance. The largest street protests in years called for the defense of democracy and human rights at a critical moment, as the Bolsonaro administration has allowed organized crime to overrun Amazonian ecosystems and communities. Unchecked environmental destruction and violence are increasing rapidly on the lands of the Munduruku people, whose forests and waterways are being destroyed by illegal miners. At least ten prominent Munduruku leaders have routinely faced death threats for their resistance to this devastating illicit activity and last week brought a new wave of terror and conflict to Pará state's Tapajós River basin. On May 26, a major Federal Police operation to remove illegal gold miners from Munduruku Indigenous Territory turned violent, as armed miners first attacked a police outpost and then turned their fury upon the Munduruku themselves, attacking a village, firing shots, and targeting key leaders. Two houses were set ablaze, according to a statement from the Munduruku's Ipereg Ayu Movement. In response, a major mobilization to support the Munduruku people has been launched by national and international allies, in order to pressure Brazilian authorities to ensure the safety of their communities and the continuity of the Federal Police operation. As the violence unfolded, Amazon Watch joined partners to organize rapid response advocacy, sending an open letter to Climate Envoy John Kerry and urging him to speak out about the violence facing the Munduruku. "We demand that law enforcement against illegal mining continues and that the security forces return to expel all the miners that are still operating within our lands and ensure the safety of our people," demanded four Munduruku organizations, in a letter released two days after the attacks, as threatened leaders had been forced to flee their homes because of the continuing threats. On May 30th, after a broad mobilization of legal action, including support from the Association of Brazil’s Indigenous Peoples (APIB) and parliamentarians allied to the cause, a high court gave the federal government a deadline of 24 hours to redeploy security forces to the municipality of Jacareacanga. And yesterday, the Federal Supreme Court gave the Federal Police 48 hours to immediately adopt all necessary measures to guarantee the life and safety of all those in and around the Munduruku Indigenous Territory in Jacareacanga. However, according to local sources, there are no indications yet of a resumption of the operation or increased security in the region. Maria Leusa Kabá, coordinator of the Munduruku's Wakoborum Women's Association, was one of the leaders targeted during last week's attack and remains under threat. A frequent victim of death threats, her association in the city of Jacareacanga was ransacked and burned in March. In addition to the armed invasion of Maria Leusa's village, a group of illegal miners, known as garimpeiros, attempted to overrun a police base and plunder equipment to stop agents from reaching the illegally occupied lands. These brazen moves were a show of strength from well-financed criminal networks with the backing of corrupt local politicians and businessmen and the high-level support of the Bolsonaro regime. By terrorizing vulnerable communities and their steadfast leaders, the miners are attempting to send a message that they will not be deterred from exploiting federally-protected Indigenous territories. The threats of illegal mining have soared under Bolsonaro. Just this year in late April, during his weekly online "live" statement, Bolsonaro clearly announced his support for illegal mining, a hallmark of his government. He also stated that he was planning a visit to the military garrisons in the northern region of Brazil and to visit an illegal mining operation. "We are not going to arrest anyone. This will not be an operation to punish irregular miners. I want to talk to people, [learn] how they live there. To start to get a sense of how much gold is produced," he said. In the face of this destruction and Bolsonaro's failure to act, the time has come for the U.S. Climate Envoy John Kerry – who is currently in negotiations with Brazil's Minister of Environment over the future of the Amazon – to also send an unequivocal message: there can be no climate deals with Bolsonaro while he openly allows attacks on Indigenous peoples and the destruction of the rainforest. In 2020, Kerry was the keynote speaker at the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Award ceremony, honoring Alessandra Korap Munduruku, an important leader and voice of the indigenous movement. In his speech he underscored Indigenous peoples in general as sources of environmental wisdom and recognized the Munduruku people in particular for actively resisting "the constant, violent, illegal, and sometimes state-sponsored push by loggers and miners to exploit their land." In lauding the Munduruku, Kerry expressed his determination to "… continue to be part of this great battle. I look forward to fighting alongside [Alessandra and other Indigenous leaders]." Alessandra and the Munduruku people are now asking him to stand by his words and take action. In our joint letter to Kerry, with allies the Environmental Investigation Agency, International Rivers, Greenpeace, Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights, we call on the Biden Administration to act immediately to eliminate the threat of violence as the first step. The letter goes on, “Further actions should include an immediate response to the back-sliding on environmental and human rights legislation. This includes examining the implications for addressing the climate crisis in the Amazon. An in-depth criminal investigation into the supply chains that allow for illegal exploitation of gold and timber on indigenous lands of the Amazon, and their export to the United States, Europe, and other countries. This investigation should include the role of the Brazilian Central Bank and other federal agencies in failing to exercise effective monitoring and control over illegal supply chains." Amazon Watch and allies have monitored this escalating threat closely, acting quickly to pressure U.S. leaders to act before tragedy struck in Munduruku communities. Two months ago twelve U.S. Representatives wrote to the U.S. Ambassador to Brazil Todd Chapman about the intensifying threats, encouraging diplomatic action. To date, the letter has not received a response from the Ambassador. Unfortunately, public statements from the U.S. government about the Munduruku situation or others, like the assault on Yanomami territory, are still lacking. As the crisis continues to escalate on Brazil's Indigenous territories, it is essential that the international community, particularly U.S. political leaders, speak out and attempt to prevent the next attack. The Biden administration’s leadership should not only concern itself with climate change mitigation but strive for climate justice as well. It must strive to support Indigenous people in defending their rights and their territories against invasions and threats, whether from criminals or the government itself. The Biden Administration must prioritize the protection of human rights within its strategies related to the protection of the Amazon biome. We must all denounce the violence publicly and stand with Indigenous peoples of Brazil and the Amazon. They are often the last lines of defense and without their stewardship, the Amazon as we've known it would disappear.
Ingmar Rentzhog
151 w
•
•
Tack Amazon Watch för allt ni gör. Är en stolt månadsgivare!
58 more agrees trigger contact with the recipient
Amazon Watch Sverige
151 w
•
Tomorrow, May 26, will be Chevron's 11th shareholder meeting since the company lost a historic $9.5 billion judgement for deliberately polluting the Ecuadorian Amazon. Since then, many more Ecuadorians have gotten sick and died awaiting justice, as Chevron pulled its assets from Ecuador and waged a retaliatory legal assault. It spent well over a billion dollars on lawyers and PR firms to attack its victims in Ecuador and the lawyers who helped defeat Chevron. The 16 billion gallons of toxic pollution Chevron admitted to deliberately dumping remains in the Amazon rainforest, continuing to leech poison into rivers and streams every single day. During its annual general meeting (AGM), there is no doubt that Chevron CEO Mike Wirth will once again try to brush aside shareholders calling for justice in Ecuador, by hiding behind a deceptive 2014 RICO decision that Chevron orchestrated. For many years before and now a decade since their landmark 2011 legal victory of the affected communities in Ecuador, we have stood alongside Ecuadorians demanding justice, and now the tide is turning due to the outrageousness of Chevron's retaliation and our united persistence. Dozens of human rights and environmental organizations, 68 Nobel Laureates, legal scholars, law students, legendary artists, activist leaders, and now even members of the U.S. Congress have joined together to expose Chevron's crimes. The ongoing resistance in Ecuador is rapidly being recognized as a front line struggle for climate justice and a bellwether case against the fossil fuel industry. Last Friday, the 8th Annual Global Anti-Chevron Day took place with actions in the streets, at Chevron refineries, and online. Affected communities from around the world – harmed by Chevron's negligence or deliberate acts of destruction – organized to demand action in defense of their families, communities, and our climate. In the U.S., Chevron is widely seen as a threat not only to the environment but to the political process and justice system. Denouncing the attacks and criminalization of those who fight back – most specifically human rights lawyer Steven Donziger – has become a rallying call across the movement. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wxaIqc8o6s&ab_channel=BachelorFantakeBachelorFantakeVerified Chevron's goal has always been to make Donziger into a criminal as a warning to other environmental lawyers who might champion similar causes. And while they might win the battle to have Donziger thrown in jail, the brazenness of their attacks and the increasingly negative perception of big oil, may well cause them to lose the war. In their fever to destroy Donziger, Chevron and its legal team at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher have shown that they were hired to invalidate the suffering of the Ecuadorian people, silence their advocates, and in service to fossil fuels, reinforce corporate impunity. "The fight against corporate power and greed is one of the key environmental and economic justice challenges facing our planet. Indigenous Amazon communities won one of the most important class action lawsuits ever, holding Chevron accountable for environmental devastation with nearly $10 billion in damages, and ever since Chevron has sought to use its money and power to illegitimately nullify this result," said Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib The reason Congresswoman Tlaib joined Representatives Cori Bush, Jim McGovern, Jamaal Bowman, Jamie Raskin, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to ask the DOJ to intervene in Donziger's case is that Chevron's manipulation of the U.S. judiciary has become recognized for what it is – nothing more than a attempt to "illegitimately nullify" the Ecuadorian judgment. How to criminalize a human rights lawyer, Chevron-style This month I spent the better part of a week in a federal courtroom in New York City watching what has been rightly called the first corporate criminal prosecution in U.S. history (listen to this Drilled podcast to learn more about this sham trial). Fossil fuel corporate lawyers – appointed to the case after the U.S. attorney declined to prosecute – questioned other Chevron lawyers for a week about Donziger's alleged "scheme" to violate Kaplan's RICO decision. The judge – Loretta Preska, a Federalist Society member hand-picked by Kaplan (in violation of SDNY rules) – listened to Rita Glavin of the corporate law firm Seward & Kissel (which had Chevron as a client as recently as 2018) questioning Gibson Dunn lawyers who literally built their careers on undermining justice in Ecuador and vilifying Donziger. Essentially the judge, prosecution, and witnesses were all Chevron allies and made no attempt to hide it. As Steven Donziger's defense lawyer Ron Kuby said to a large rally of supporters outside the courthouse in New York on May 7th: "We are not here to witness justice. We are here to bear witness to injustice." After five long days witnessing this corporate prosecution I can attest to that truth. It was a shocking spectacle of injustice – not surprising, but shocking nonetheless. Unchecked, Chevron's corporate takeover of the U.S. judiciary as a means of escaping liability for its crimes in Ecuador will do immeasurable harm to corporate accountability efforts. The criminal contempt of court trial of Steven Donziger is an example of how corporate power and legal bullying can use outrageous and well-funded lies to demand money, and then use that pretext as an excuse to further violate the rights of a human rights lawyer. When Steven Donziger resisted Chevron's unlawful and corrupt means to seize his bank accounts and access confidential information, he was labeled a criminal by a U.S. court. Chevron‘s goal has never been to challenge the truth of what happened in Ecuador. It was never even to debate its level of responsibility for what it did there. It has only been to disrupt and undermine the legal process, dehumanize its victims in Ecuador, deny their suffering, label THEM as criminals and scare their advocates into giving up the fight for justice. The reason Chevron itself pushed to have Donziger held in contempt of court was because it wanted information on who was helping him enforce the judgment outside of Ecuador. This was something which he had every right to do even according to Judge Kaplan‘s RICO decision. That is a threat to Chevron because the judgement from Ecuador is valid and any fair court in the world that reviews the evidence will uphold the decision of 17 Ecuadorian judges and its Supreme Court and demand that Chevron pay to clean up the Amazon. An even deeper threat to justice and those challenging corporate power is the unholy alliance of high paid corporate law firms, oil companies, and now U.S. federal judges working to advance corporate interest with complete indifference to even the appearance of fairness. The essential facts of this case, often overlooked must be repeated to understand this saga: - Texaco deliberately dumped the oil waste in the Amazon and admitted to doing it as a cost-saving measure. - Working within a legal system that had already failed to hold Chevron criminally liable, the Ecuadorians launched a class action suit in New York, only to be rejected after eight years of legal battles and sent back to Ecuador to start the process all over again. - After losing in Ecuador in 2011, Chevron waged a legal scorched earth campaign back in the U.S. to nullify the Ecuadorian judgment and deny the people access to justice. - Judges Kaplan and Preska have used the court system to uphold Chevron blatant lies, permitted bribed witnesses, persecuted Donziger with almost two years of home detention all part of a process meant to scare other lawyers and human rights advocates from taking cases that truly challenge corporate power in America. The truth is that Chevron is a criminal enterprise using its wealth and power to buy the justice system and destroy its enemies using the gavels of federal judges complicit in their unethical and immoral tactics. All you need to know to understand the truth of the matter is that Chevron admitted to dumping 16 billion gallons of toxic waste into the Amazon as a cost-saving measure. It fought every attempt at a legal process by trying to derail the case using technicalities and legal bullying. It lost a $9.5 billion judgement upheld by 17 judges and the highest courts in Ecuador and validated by the Supreme Court of Canada, yet thus far it has escaped paying by denying the rights of the Ecuadorians and legitimacy of their courts. It has even targeted the victims of its admitted pollution in Ecuador and called them criminals. The phrase "David versus Goliath" is appropriately used to describe this case. Having witnessed the decades of attacks and abuses leveled at Steven Donziger by Chevron's army of lawyers, it's nothing short of miraculous that he continues to persist and the movement behind him and for justice in Ecuador continues to grow. As Congresswoman Cori Bush said, "Too often Indigenous and frontline communities are denied the justice they deserve after racist fossil fuel pollution and corporate violence put their lives and livelihoods at risk." David has a lot more allies now and Goliath may have gone a step too far.
Amazon Watch Sverige
152 w
•
How the world’s largest asset managers quietly pour billions into oil companies tied to rights abuses Read the report here in English, Spanish, or Portuguese The world's three largest asset management firms have billions tied up in environmental and Indigenous rights abuses across the Amazon through the oil companies they invest in. Amazon Watch's latest report, Investing in Amazon Crude II: How the Big Three Asset Managers Actively Fund the Amazon Oil Industry, exposes BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street risk in providing debt and equity investment in oil companies operating throughout the rainforest, despite pledges to prioritize climate and Indigenous rights. The asset managers control the vast majority of the investment management market and are collectively referred to as the “Big Three.” Together, these firms have provided $46 billion to oil companies currently operating in the Amazon rainforest that are linked to Indigenous rights abuses, hazardous pollution, corruption, biodiversity loss, and climate warming. In late May, the world's foremost authority on energy policy, the International Energy Association (IEA), published a new "roadmap" for the energy sector in which it argued that the world needs a "radical" shift in energy sources in order to meet the goal of a 1.5°C global warming limit laid out in the Paris Climate Agreement. The report affirmed that “there is no need for investment in new fossil fuel supply in our net zero pathway.” This is significant: There is now mainstream consensus that avoiding climate disaster requires immediately ending all further investment in new fossil fuel supply. The “Big Three” manage trillions of dollars of investments for individual and institutional investors all over the world, including pension funds and university endowments. Together they control nearly 20 trillion dollars. By investing in oil companies with horrific environmental and human rights records, they are not only flagrantly ignoring scientific experts, but also actively supporting the Indigenous and human rights abuses, forest destruction, biodiversity loss, and further climate chaos inherent in oil production in the Amazon rainforest. Concern and awareness around the links between major financial firms and these issues are mounting. In early 2021, communities impacted by GeoPark – a Chilean oil company with operations in the Colombian Amazon in which BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street collectively own over $10.4 million of debt and equity – denounced that the company was actively paying paramilitary forces to threaten and intimidate local residents of the campesino community known as Perla Amazónica, in Putumayo, Colombia, in order to ensure that oil operations could continue. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) attempted to partner with GeoPark on an “economic revitalization” project for the region, but quietly cut ties with the oil company after its links with paramilitary groups were made clear. This is only the latest in a long history of extractive companies disregarding the health and safety of local communities and attempting to broker partnerships to greenwash their image. The report provides numerous examples of local opposition to oil projects. It outlines, for example, the decades-long struggle of the Kichwa Peoples of Sarayaku in the Ecuadorian Amazon to stop oil companies ENAP and Petroamazonas – operating in Ecuadorian oil Block 28 which overlaps Kichwa territory – from continuing to drill and spill devastating amounts of oil in their lands. Currently, BlackRock and Vanguard control $1.2 billion of debt and equity in ENAP and Petroamazonas, despite public statements both firms have made about the importance of environmental sustainability. As long as BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street continue to provide equity and investment in oil companies operating in the Amazon, they cannot claim to be climate champions. Our report concludes by outlining five essential actions that the Big Three must take immediately if they are serious about walking their talk. First, they must immediately exclude from their active funds all Amazon and climate-harming companies. This must be accompanied by an expansion of their stewardship teams' pro-climate engagement and voting practices. While these firms claim to have ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) funds that are free of climate-damaging companies, they have yet to adopt a global baseline climate standard for ESG funds, and as such cannot be held accountable for ensuring that the funds they are marketing to their clients are indeed safe for the climate. These firms must also actively promote human and Indigenous rights in their investments, and ensure that all funds they offer to their clients are climate- and Amazon-safe by default. The reality is that the world's largest asset managers have a huge role to play in the fight against climate change and injustice. The decisions they make about how to invest their clients' money have tremendous impacts not only on the lives of frontline communities in the Amazon but on all of us. It is vital, therefore, that we hold the industry accountable and demand it center Indigenous peoples, human rights, and the climate.
Amazon Watch Sverige
153 w
•
Can the United Nations support human rights defenders with one hand, while receiving money from an oil company with the other? An emerging scandal in the Colombian Amazon is forcing the U.N. to deal with the fallout from this contradiction. UPDATE: Since Amazon Watch published this blog post, launched a virtual action, and filed a complaint before the UNDP Social and Environmental Compliance Unit – in addition to numerous other advocacy initiatives carried out in close collaboration with grassroots community groups and ally organizations like Justicia y Paz, Amazon Frontlines, and Healing Bridges – UNDP Colombia announced privately on May 12 that it is cutting its ties with GeoPark. This is an important step in both severing public relations connections that benefit GeoPark and fighting against the corporate capture of the United Nations. That said, the Siona People of the Buenavista Reservation issued a blistering statement calling on the UN to publicly acknowledge its mistake and to apologize to the communities as a key step toward rebuilding confidence and mutual respect. "The oil companies are operating in the Amazon anyway, and we can help make sure they abide by human rights standards." Such was the rationale presented by the head of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in Colombia, Jessica Faieta. The UNDP managed to get itself into quite a pickle and found itself in the uncomfortable position of trying to justify an ill-fated decision to outraged community partners. The week prior, UNDP Colombia had announced a new private sector partnership to implement a program called "United for Territorial Reactivation," part of a series of initiatives to kick-start local economies in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Who was their corporate partner? None other than the Chile-based oil company GeoPark, which had been run out of the northern Peruvian Amazon by Achuar and Wampis communities. Somehow, in their rigorous application of scrutiny of their new partner, UNDP missed an important part of GeoPark's history in the region. Two local community groups in the Putumayo department – both of which were beneficiaries of another UNDP program – had publicly accused GeoPark of environmental devastation and support for illegal paramilitary groups that were threatening the grassroots Amazon defenders. Both community processes – the Siona community of Buenavista and the Campesino Reserve of La Perla Amazónica – have been indicated by the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights as facing high risks of human rights abuse. So much for "due diligence" by the UNDP. In fact, it appears that the UNDP taking money from the oil industry has recently become a regular practice. In 2018, the UNDP announced that they had signed a global agreement with the Spanish oil company Repsol. These arrangements are strategically transactional: the UNDP gets financial backing for programs and the oil companies get to tout their association with a prestigious international agency and ward off any accusation of impropriety. GeoPark has proven thirsty for such arrangements as a means of finessing their image toward the investment community and other international audiences. Prior to their forced departure from Peru's Block 64 in June of 2020, GeoPark struck up an agreement with the Smithsonian Institution's Center for Conservation and Sustainability and attempted to join the "Amazon Best Social and Environmental Management Practices" initiative, supported by the U.S. Agency for International Development. Those efforts were ultimately fruitless, as GeoPark eventually realized that these PR exercises would never buy them the missing social license to operate in the Peruvian Amazon. The newest scheme with UNDP might well also backfire. Within days of learning about the UNDP-GeoPark agreement, the communities rapidly issued a joint public denunciation, directed to UNDP (full text below). Later that week, they held a withering Zoom meeting with UNDP Colombia head Faieta, in which all justifications were disabused and the communities forcefully reiterated their vehement opposition to any association of UNDP with GeoPark, whether in Putumayo or anywhere in Colombia. Other parts of the United Nations system have heard the call of the communities and started to add their voice to the discussion. The U.N. Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues weighed in, expressing their concern in an official resolution that came out of their annual two-week session in New York City: "The Permanent Forum is concerned about reports of UNDP entering into a strategic partnership with the oil company GeoPark, a private entity that has been accused by Indigenous communities of disregarding their rights, to carry out economic development activities in Colombia without the Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) of the Indigenous communities that will be impacted. This contradicts UNDP's own Social and Environmental Standard 6, and the Forum urges UNDP to suspend all related partnership activities until a proper FPIC process can be carried out." Interestingly, following the communities' advocacy over the last week of April, UNDP Colombia has begun to scrub their social media timelines of any reference to the GeoPark deal. It has disappeared from their Twitter and Facebook pages. However, UNDP has not yet announced a cancellation of the agreement and GeoPark continues to feature the UNDP at the top of their partnerships page. Meanwhile, the international pressure mounts, as will the reputational cost to the UNDP of maintaining their association with an oil company that has been accused of abuses against grassroots and Indigenous communities in the Colombian Amazon. Read the Joint Public Complaint here
Amazon Watch Sverige
153 w
•
Remembering the Shuar Amazon Women Defender and Protective "Boa" Woman In our Indigenous worldviews, our grandmothers and grandfathers have taught us that when our people die, they return to the jungle... in other spirits, in other beings. In each encounter with María Taant, a Shuar leader from the Ecuadorian Amazon, she mentioned a boa that protected us. We heard what turned out to be her last song, during our gathering of the Network of Amazonian Women last month on International Womens' Day. In recognition of all Amazonian women, she sang to us in Shuar: Kinkia Pangui nuachitjai, which means, "I am a boa woman." This image and the sound of a boa that she embodied in her songs protected us as we marched and defended our territories. A month ago today, Maria was struck and killed by a hit-and-run driver as she returned from our gathering of Amazonian Women in the town of Puyo. She physically left us, but we are sure that she returned to the jungle. She always said that as Amazonian women, we are connected and always keeping an eye on each other. Her return is surely as a great magical and sacred boa, extending throughout our Amazonian territories. People say that our loved ones transcend worlds and do not go away completely if we keep them present. For this reason, we remember Maria's voice, her laugh, and her songs, which always stood out when we got together. Maria was not like everybody else. Maria had different magic that brought her our way. We met her three years ago when we traveled to Quito to deliver our "Mandate of the Amazonian Women Defenders of the Forest Against Extractivism," which has not been implemented so far. Since that time, we have learned that she resisted for her territory, body, and four children, as a single mother. Her life was hard, but she would always raise her arms and, with a big smile and full of energy, declare, "I am still here!" She spoke like the experienced leader she was. Maria also loved participating in her Shinkiatam community and in her Shuar organization. She grew the best peanuts in the area. With her songs, she always demanded fairness, justice, and respect for nature. She never gave up. And when she noticed that we felt weak, she told us, "I'm going to sing, to raise the energy." And she sang. Her song was strong and alive, and she sang with both her voice and her hands. She always arrived with the energy of the forest and taught us that the best way forward was always together. We also remember her advice on how our main principles should be dignity, our struggle, and the defense of our territories. We learned from her about how we should not let fear paralyze us. We learned from her how strength and unity made Amazonian Women exceptional. In the last couple of days that we saw her, she was delighted to see us all together. She told us that she had been afraid that COVID-19 would take the life of one of us, and that was why she was pleased to see us again. She reminded us of the strength of our plants and traditional medicine, and how we healed ourselves thanks to our forest. Given that, she encouraged all of us to applaud in celebration of our lives and our health. We laughed a lot in those last few days. She sang before saying goodbye to the representatives of the Kichwa, Sapara, and Shuar nationalities. Together they danced and clapped. When she said goodbye to all of us, she did so with a big hug and asked us: "When will I see you again? When will we meet again?" Today, with the admiration we feel towards her, we find her in these words, we find her in our gardens, we find her in our rivers and territories that we defend. She told us that when she left this world, she would do it by standing up for what's right, and that's how she passed away. Now, she's always present; she's always fighting. Therefore, in her name, we will strengthen our resistance, and we will continue to accompany each other despite the distance. María is a woman that we will never forget. María, you're a fighter, you're a boa, and you're a singer. Thank you for your life and your songs. You're still here. You fight with us. You accompany us. You protect us. You are and will always be in our thoughts.
Amazon Watch Sverige
154 w
•
As previously mentioned in the beginning of the campaign, Brazil's most problematic political situation relates to the trade agreement between the EU and Mercosur in numerous ways. The agreement's ambition that all countries implement the Paris Agreement and accompanying conditions, unfortunately will not have a major impact given the current crisis in Brazil. There, the climate and environmental policies go in an entirely different direction under the leadership of president Jair Bolsonaro, who continues to twist and distort the truth around the situation in the Amazon. Under Bolsonaros leadership fires, devastation, and violence have greatly risen while he somehow simultaneously claims that Brazil has become a safer country. Devastation has hit a new record high, and the president has ensured that Brazil's budget for addressing the bigger picture of climate change lays at zero after a staggering 95% reduction. Bolsonaro has also simultaneously removed the control mechanisms that were able to previously control and minimize destruction in the Amazon. This is directly in line with the president's environmental crisis denying policy, which is one of the worst threats to the Amazons future. These actions however are not at all in line with the proposed EU and Mercosur trade agreement, which states that Brazil must stop illegal deforestation in the Amazon and reduce carbon emissions by 35% by the year 2025. How could a trade agreement with the EU result in these goals being met, when Jair Bolsonaro shows absolutely no indication towards saving the environment? His nonchalance has resulted in an impunity that gives the green light to landowners to set fires to free up grazing land. In addition, Bolsonaro has actively tried to open up indigenous territories to agriculture, mining, and enforced policies that promote “land grabbing” in indigenous areas, implying that land seized illegally should be legalized for agriculture. Around a year ago, he even sent a bill to congress in which he proposed that indigenous reserves be opened up to mining and oil drilling. Bolsonaro said to critics “Indigenous groups will be allowed to give their opinion on proposed projects, but cannot stop them”. This is yet another gross display by the president showing just how far Brazil's policies are from a sustainable future. Furthermore, the trade agreement will develop a framework for how the parties should address human rights, with special regard to indigenous peoples. The trade section of the agreement includes decisions that encourage indigenous communities' role in sustainable supply chain management of agricultural products and collaboration on social projects that involve these communities. Through ratifying the agreement in its current form, the EU is choosing a path that continues environmental degradation and is actively participating in the attacks against indigenous people and their rights as advocated by the Bolsonaro government. In the organisation Ferns recommendations for reform of the trade agreement, they call for the EU to support good forest management in Brazil. The EU should pressure Brazil to adopt policies that protect the rainforest and human rights, and see to that the political space in Brazil opens up to civil society that wants to preserve the rainforest and indigenous peoples. We at Amazon Watch stand behind this and call for even more activism. Given the political climate it is now more important than ever to support the indigenous groups who actively work against Bolsonaros policies and for the good of the rainforest.
Amazon Watch Sverige
154 w
•
Part one of this mini-article series outlined how vulnerability for indigenous peoples of the Amazon would only increase if the trade agreement between the EU and Mercosur came into effect. In addition to the loss of their land, there is an underlying and constant danger of violence and threats. Rio Jacy-Parana reserve in Brazil is home to several indigenous groups who described how they were driven from their home due to the creation of a new livestock pasture. More than half of the land is now occupied by livestock and deforestation is greatly increasing, the reservation was the most deforested reservation in Brazil in 2019. The area lost 94km of its forest between August 2018 and July 2019. Here, testimonies reveal how families no longer dare return to their homes in the reservation for fear of being subjected to violence or killed by the armed men who drove them away. Abelardo lived in the reservation before and told the following to Amnesty International: “It is impossible for us to come back. There is someone who lives there (on my land). If someone goes there he or she will die. These people are killers.” He continues: “It was usually very beautiful. We saw many animals: tapir, wild boar, deer, jaguar, and lots of fish. Today you no longer see that. We used to extract copaiba oil, we don’t do that anymore. My father in law used to harvest nuts, grow maniok. Now we can no longer enter the forest.” These stories from Aberlarda clearly show how the traditional lifestyle of indigenous people is so affected to the point where they can no longer live their lives as before, and how fear for their lives forces them to flee from their homes. We heard similar descriptions from the Rio Ouro Preta reservation where, like the other reservations, there have long been violations of indigenous peoples’ rights. The reservation is in the Brazilian state of Rondonia and is home to around 500 people in 12 communities. Between August 2018 and July 2019 the reserve lost 3km of its forest. Inhabitants of the reservations said how they no longer dared gather their natural resources like nuts and acai that are located near the area occupied by farmers, for fear of being killed after receiving several threats from the livestock farmers. Claudio, who lives on the reservation, said: “It is distressing to see such deforestation. Apart from just being a great loss, it is also a setback for us because the reservation is our livelihood. We are dependent on the reservation to survive.” Uru-Eu-Wau-Wau peoples have, on several occasions, faced threats from intruders after trying to protect their territories from being occupied. Testimonies from the indigenous people explain that they found around 40 people armed with machetes who cut their way into the territory. They even threatened to kill the indigenous peoples children if they did not leave their reservation. In addition to that, several indigenous people received death threats from the men who farmed the livestock. Amazon Watch has reported before how indigenous leaders have been murdered and threatened. In april 2020 indigenous leader Arbildo Melendez was shot to death in Peru after he confronted those who tried to invade his land. As recent as the 12th of February this year was indigenous leader Isac Tembe assassinated by a member of the Brazilian military police. According to the Tembe-Theneterah people the military police earn money from defending agriculturalists and ranchers, whose activities illegally occupy the Tembe peoples territories where Isac Tembe was. Unfortunately, this is a tendency which does not seem like it will be improving. As deforestation of the Amazon continues, testimonies like these will become more common and threats more numerous.
Amazon Watch Sverige
155 w
•
Since the beginning of time the Amazon rainforest has been home to indigenous peoples, whose constant battle is to protect and preserve the forest against threats. Threats that we humans subject the forest to through the things we do in our daily lives. It is understandable that it can be difficult to see the consequences of our actions when it is happening all the way on the other side of the world. All the sunny vacations to Spain, holiday shopping, and taco tuesdays make it easy to take the Amazon for granted. But the fact of the matter still stands, the Amazon is the world's lungs and should it disappear those sunny vacations will be a thing of the past. After nearly 20 years of negotiations, the EU and Mercosur have shaken hands on a trade agreement. From the outside it looks quite great. Europe and South America will have an economic exchange with each other, which can result in a better quality of life for many individuals in the global south. Their hard work to escape poverty seems to have paid off, and that is of course something to celebrate. However, there is a big problem with this trade agreement: The Amazon’s guardian angels will disappear. In Brazil, the political state has made its intent incredibly clear with president Jair Bolsonaro disregarding both the climate and the rainforest. Several studies point out that this trade agreement in its current form will only increase agricultural activity in indingeous peoples territories; areas that are already incredibly delicate. Therefore, the trade agreement will only hinder indigenous peoples ability to protect themselves and their lands. Kretã Kaingang, a member of Articulation of Indigenous Peoples of Brazil (APIB) said in a speech: “The Mercosur agreement heightens the threat against our lives, our culture, and our way of living. This agreement brings with it fires, destruction, and even more illegal intrusions to our territories.” Imazon, a nonprofit organization that works with Amazon preservation, looked further into how lowered tariffs on grocery items such as soy, pork, ethanol, poultry, sugar, dairy products, and beef would affect the Brazilian Amazon. The investigation showed that pressure against Indigenous peoples territories and nearby areas would only increase, which could disrupt any pre-existing protections from invasion and deforestation of their land. The most vulnerable states being Pará, Rondonia, Mato Grosso, Minas Gerais and Goiás. The trade agreement certainly has the ambition that all countries should implement the Paris Agreement and the accompanying conditions, but in the Brazilian political climate of president Bolsonaro, that is definitely not going to happen. There the president advocates instead that indigenous territories should be opened up for mining and agriculture by introducing policies for “land grabbing”. Martin Persson at Chalmers therefore emphasizes the importance of including other interests in the trade agreement negotiations. This is to safeguard that the marginalized groups such as indigenous people get a say in the matter. It is not yet too late to reassess the agreement and reform where necessary to take into account not only the climate and deforestation, but also indigenous peoples' human rights.
Amazon Watch Sverige
155 w
•
To understand the importance of the Amazon, first, we need to get to know better about some basic biological and chemical processes. Why are trees important? As most people know, trees - or plants in general - make photosynthesis. This means that they get energy from sunlight, take carbon dioxide from the air and water from the ground to produce energy for their survival. In this process, they release oxygen to the atmosphere. This is basically what supports life on earth. Since oxygen is the main factor for keeping humans and other animals alive. At night, without sunlight, plants breathe too, releasing CO2 into the atmosphere. This process is balanced and the amount of carbon released could be easily compensated by the photosynthesis. However, with the rise of human settlements and the increase in technology, the number of natural areas with such important living things are being reduced. And since the industrial revolution, the amount of carbon in the atmosphere has increased by 45%. Photo credit: Sebastian Coronado Why do we talk so much about carbon? Not just carbon, but also other pollutants are affecting the planet. However, we focus more on carbon because it corresponds to about three-fourths of total gas emissions. But what is the matter with those gases? The Earth receives solar radiation from the sun that is partly absorbed by the Earth and partly is reflected back to space. The part that is reflected back to space is partly absorbed by gases of the atmosphere, which generates heat. Those gases are what we call greenhouse gases, it includes carbon dioxide, water vapor, methane, nitrous oxide, and ozone. Those are natural gases present in the atmosphere, without them, the planet would lose all the heat and Earth would not be a pleasant place to live. However, the increase of those gases in the air makes the part of the solar radiation that would escape to space stay stranded on Earth. Which in turn increases the temperature of the planet, and this is what we call global warming. How is Amazon related to carbon? As stated above, plants are the main tool for carbon absorption. However, there are different types of forests, and rainforests are the one that supports the biggest amount of biodiversity and vegetation density, even occupying only 6% of the planet. Among rainforests, tropical rainforests are the most biologically diverse terrestrial ecosystems on earth. And the Amazon rainforest is the largest tropical rainforest on the planet. It has around 40,000 plant species, and it is estimated to have 400 billion trees. New growing plants absorb more carbon than old ones, however old-forest store carbon as biomass, and adding carbon absorption with the stocked carbon makes old tropical rainforests the biggest carbon sink of the planet. The Amazon stores in its biomass around 120 Pg (1.2 × 10^17 g) of carbon. And annually, the forest processes 18 Pg C through photosynthesis and respiration, which represents more than twice the amount of fossil fuel emissions. This has helped to slow the rate that CO2 accumulates in the atmosphere, in this way acting as a buffer to global climate change. Amazon and fires The carbon that gets stored as biomass is released back into the atmosphere when the trees are burned. The whole Amazon rainforest stocks the equivalent of 100 years of the United States CO2 emissions. And part of this stock has been emitted back to the atmosphere with the recent fires. What causes the fires? Some forests have evolved with fire and have strategies to survive it. The Amazon rainforest however is NOT one of those forests, it is not adapted to the fires and has no defense mechanism against it. The fires in the Amazon do not happen naturally and occur due to anthropogenic actions. The Amazonian forest has huge and dense vegetation, it is not easy to just chop down some trees. The way that deforestation works are usually by two trucks with a big chain attached from one to the other passing through the forest, cutting down the trees. The big trees are sold and the rest is set on fire to clear the area. This fire is not well controlled and spreads to other areas. Some indigenous groups use the technique ‘slash and burn’ or ‘shifting cultivation', which is an agricultural management that includes the use of fire. With the recent fires in the Amazon, some people blamed the indigenous, accusing them of spreading the fire. However, how come that they used this strategy for more than 12 thousand years and just in the past 30 years the forest started to burn? The indigenous technique is a complex mechanism well developed through the years which they know how to control. The biodiversity It was stated above that the Amazon is extremely biodiverse. What is the relevance of that? Forests are ecosystems consisting of different species that interact with each other, balancing out each other's processes. Different areas of the planet have evolved to thrive in the different temperatures, humidity, solar incidence, etc. The species evolved together and developed deep-connected interactions, sometimes unique for given species. This made the ecosystems a complex net of interactions. Many of them are still undiscovered by man. All these things make the forest more resilient. Plants are sensitive and, like all other living things, are suffering the effects of climate change. They get stressed by the heat, causing drought and the increase in plagues. Plants that are in a healthy environment are more prone to survive for longer, grow better, and therefore absorb more carbon. Indigenous people and the conservation Indigenous groups occupy around 20% of the planet, each group has different cultures but one thing that they all have in common is a holistic view of the universe. Unlike the industrialized society, they see themselves as part of nature, they have a deep connection with that, they celebrate nature and do not see it as a way of getting profit by its destruction. They are not alien to nature, they make part of it. Studies have been conducted with different indigenous groups to see if their use of resources is sustainable, and in most cases, it is. An indigenous group from Thailand says: “If you eat from the forest, you must protect it”. Having the knowledge that those groups are not destructive like us, they should be ensured to have the rights to their lands, and let that be a way of protecting the environment. Many of the remaining forest areas were not yet disturbed due to the presence of indigenous groups, they are serving as guardians to the forest. The forest and medicines Many of the drugs that we use today are derived from isolated compounds found in nature. In some cases, this compound is discovered through the use of traditional knowledge (ethnobotanical), and in others, it is discovered by random collection and screening of plant material. Discovering the active compound through ethnobotanical usually takes less effort. The researchers can go to communities and ask for example what they use to treat a given symptom, and then they can study this product to find which component is responsible for that, then isolate that and develop a medicine. Not just medicines can be developed that way, but also beauty products. Rainforest plants are responsible for around 25% of all drugs. And the Amazon is called “The World’s Largest Medicine Cabinet” but only a fraction of this chemical diversity is known. Much of this knowledge will be lost by the destruction of the forest and the traditional knowledge, therefore protecting indigenous groups and the Amazon rainforest would ensure the discovery of new medicines that might come to be essential in the future. Zoonoses Due to the increase in deforestation, urban centers are getting closer to natural areas, which makes the interaction between wildlife, domestic animals, and humans more prone to happen. In that way spreading diseases that would normally not reach humans. Deforestation also changes ecological interactions, so as some species go extinct, others can benefit from that and increase the population, e.g. mosquitos, that can spread more diseases. Many of the pandemics that have happened in our history were due to those imbalances, e.g. ebola. Conclusion The Earth has its natural processes that have been much altered by industrial society. Since the increase in technologies and capitalism, the natural areas have been more and more impacted. Due to its specific location, the Amazon rainforest is the richest forest in the world, having huge dimensions and being home to huge biodiversity. This area stocks large amounts of carbon, which is crucial to reduce the high amount of this gas in the atmosphere. Keeping the forests undisturbed also reduces the spread of zoonoses, and forests are an important source of medicines. The constant deforestation and fires are threatening the forest, and one of the ways to protect it is by guaranteeing the indigenous rights, people from the forest, who have not been distanced from nature as the industrialized society did.
Amazon Watch Sverige
156 w
•
Oatly is part-owned by a few problematic companies mainly Blackstone and China Resources. BLACKSTONE Blackstone own and invest in Brazilian companies that are responsible for the destruction of the Amazon, as well as the construction of a highway through the rainforest so that soy and other crops can be transported to the rest of the world. This is done to expand the agricultural industry in the Amazon region, an industry that is devastating for the rainforest and the indigenous peoples who live there. In addition, Blackstone's owners and founders support politicians who want to phase out environmental protection and oppose climate initiatives. The UN has also criticized Blackstone for its merits regarding human rights violations. Oatly's argument why they need an investment from Blackstone is as follows: “… we needed dollars, like 400 million, to be able to grow both quickly and sustainably, as demand increases both in the places where we already are, and we also launch ourselves in new places and builds factories in Europe, USA and Asia…” AGGRESIVE EXPANSION There are two ways for a business to grow globally. The first way is based on demand and a steady expansion that grows naturally as people ask for the company's products. The second way is to plant oneself in a multitude of markets at once and simply force oneself to claim a dominant share of the market with the help of enormous financial resources. A major reason why we are in a climate crisis is this second form of expansion, which is a form of aggressive capitalism in which a dominant position in the market takes precedence over everything else. This form of aggressive business practices is what has created the environmental problems we have in the first place. Oatly is not the only company that offers milk-free products. There are local businesses in other countries that Oatly will crush when they arrive with their $400 million. If Oatly really wants to make a difference, why not share their profits and sponsor similar companies in other countries? Why do they have to be there themselves and take over? Starbucks (whose former CEO Howard Schulz also owns parts of Oatly) became a huge global brand thanks to a very aggressive expansion that family-run local cafes could not compete with. McDonalds and many other chains have had a similar tactic that has virtually eradicated "mom and pop stores"; which is an American term that signifies a business / activity that is independent, usually only operates in one place and is owned by a family. Such companies have little chance when Oatly comes knocking. GREENWASHING Blackstone's $200 million investment is one of their smallest investments ever, yet the company has been quick to signal its goodness. This is a classic example of greenwashing. It is naive of Oatly to think that they can influence Blackstone. Oatly writes on their website: “Getting a company like Blackstone to invest in us is something we have been working for for several years and for us this is a big step forward in our sustainability project. Not everyone shares our opinion and that's fine. But hopefully most will continue to share our ultimate goal, namely a better and more sustainable world.” If there really is a need for more resources, we do not understand why it was so important to have Blackstone, which is one of the worst culprits when it comes to not running a sustainable business. We understand that Oatly thinks that if they can attract Blackstone to green investments, the rest will follow. But there is no indication that Blackstone's investment is genuine, as they continue to fund the destruction of the Amazon. We really do not share Oatly's views on this issue and we hope their customers see through their arguments. This is about profit, nothing more. There are lots of investment companies that actually work with sustainable investments or at least are not as bad as Blackstone, but they may not be able to write as big a check as Blackstone can. VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS We welcome Oatly to openly criticize Blackstone and demand that they suspend their devastating investments in the Amazon. Until they do so it doesn’t matter what green good Oatly claim they provide. Years ago, Oatly was criticized, when the Chinese state-financed company China Resources became a major shareholder. Even then, some questioned whether Oatly could call itself climate-smart while part of their profits went to the Chinese state, which does not have much respect for the climate or human rights. Likewise, the activities that Blackstone invests into in the Amazon violates the human rights of indigenous peoples. In this discussion Oatly always falls back on the “good” they do for the environment, but they never ever say what “good” they do for human rights; and that is because they are owned by companies that systematically and continuously violate human rights. It was not enough for Oatly to make $1 million in profit for the owners, they must have $10 million or $100 million... it never ends. It is exactly that way of thinking that has put us in the situation we are in. Right now, the Amazon is burning more and more each year. It burns due to the increased devastation. Blackstone has a member on the board of Oatly, and Oatly has clearly stated numerous times that they will not denounce Blackstones activities in the Amazon nor will they demand that they seize. The indigenous peoples in the Amazon do not care how good you feel drinking an alternative to milk when they themselves are fighting for their lives, when their homes are destroyed and the most biologically diverse place on Earth is ruined. Thanks Oatly. Illustration av Emil Gustafsson Ryderup
34 more agrees trigger contact with the recipient
Amazon Watch Sverige
156 w
•
After weeks of intense mobilization by more than 300 Brazilian and international organizations, social movements, Indigenous leaders, traditional communities, policymakers, and artists from Brazil, the United States, and other parts of the world, President Biden heard the message and made a choice: the Amazon rainforest. Contrary to recent speculation, including comments by a State Department spokesperson, Biden did not announce any deal with Bolsonaro at the Leaders Summit on Climate last week. Sometimes a “done deal” isn't so done, after all. Civil society organized against it and we prevailed. Amazon Watch worked with a coalition of several organizations in Brazil and the U.S. Together, we sent letters to President Biden, engaged the media and members of the U.S. Congress, and mobilized artists who signed a letter calling on Biden to choose: the Amazon or Bolsonaro. It was a powerful and impressive collective effort to avoid possible agreement on the rainforest between Bolsonaro and Biden. Today, we celebrate that any agreement crafted behind closed doors never made it to fruition. Despite his environmental track record, Bolsonaro was included as one of the Summit's 40 global leaders but did not interact directly with Biden. At the event, Bolsonaro presented a commitment to reduce deforestation and to end illegal deforestation by 2030, adding that it would reduce the country's greenhouse gas emissions by roughly 50% by that date. Bolsonaro also pledged to double funding for environmental enforcement efforts and called for international support for Brazil's climate efforts. However, Bolsonaro had previously eliminated deforestation from the country's environmental goals, and his new pledge for Brazil to reach carbon neutrality in 2050 was rightfully met with skepticism by Brazilian civil society and Indigenous leaders. During that day's White House press briefing, John Kerry didn't mention Brazil or Bolsonaro in a list of notable countries and leaders in the climate effort until explicitly asked by a journalist. He was surprised by Bolsonaro's discourse but mentioned that the question now is whether or not Bolsonaro will do what he says and whether there would be follow-through and enforcement. In a vivid and concrete demonstration of his bad faith, less than 24 hours later Bolsonaro signed off on the 2021 federal budget that included BR$ 2 billion reais (US$ 365 million) for the Environmental Ministry and the agencies it oversees, a budget cut of 24 percent, initially approved last year. Now we are one week after Earth Day and Bolsonaro's allies in the Brazilian senate attempted to approve a land-grabbing bill that would grant amnesty to those responsible for past deforestation, ultimately incentivizing it in the future. Again, after significant pressure from civil society and the Brazilian press, the Brazilian Senate pulled the bill for now. But it will likely be back soon. For now, Biden appears to have chosen to keep the United States on a proactive path for tackling the climate crisis. Even if this is only because it could be too risky for the U.S. to reposition itself as a protagonist in the fight against climate change, while also supporting the Bolsonaro administration whose policies have been disastrous for the Amazon and its peoples. But wouldn't an international environmental agreement to protect the Amazon rainforest be a good thing? Yes, it would, but if it is led by civil society, Indigenous, and traditional peoples and based on communities based-solutions. Unfortunately, this is the opposite of what Bolsonaro wants, because he's made it abundantly clear that his real intention is to “develop” the Amazon and exploit its resources. Fundamentally, it's essential to ensure the inclusion of social movements and civil society in the negotiation. The issue isn't a lack of money, as framed by Environment Minister Ricardo Salles, who can't stop talking about all the money the international community should send for the Amazon. It's about the lack of political will to protect the forest, and the peoples who live in it. That's why it's important to stay alert, continue monitoring, and keep up the pressure. We won a couple of battles in the last few days – and for that, we must celebrate – but the struggle to defend the Amazon rainforest and Indigenous peoples' rights continues. As we approach the next burning season in the Brazilian Amazon, we hope that Biden will call for accountability and leverage his new relationships to demand an end to the destruction. Otherwise, Biden will risk failing to reclaim the country's essential role as a leader on climate.
Amazon Watch Sverige
156 w
•
In July of 2020, the European Union published in the Official Journal of the European Union, the EU taxonomy, which is a system that aims to help the European Union to reach its energy and climate targets for 2030. The document states which activities are environmentally sustainable or not. However, this system classifies some activities as environmentally friendly that, in fact, are not. On the contrary, it would make the climate targets much more distant to reach. The EU taxonomy was made to help in the implementation of the European Green Deal, which is the European new growth strategy that focuses on the environmental development of the economy. The proposal of the European Green Deal is to decarbonize sectors, reaching the goal of having zero carbon emission by 2050, as stated in the Paris Agreement. The policymakers, companies and investors should base their decisions on the taxonomy to be sure that they are moving towards a more environmentally sustainable economy. The problem comes with the statement that the use of biofuels contributes to mitigating climate change. The taxonomy classifies almost all forms of bioenergy as sustainable. Nowadays, around 60% of European renewable energy comes from biomass. However, burning biomass for producing energy emits a lot of CO2, which is far from being carbon neutral. In fact, burning biomass emits more CO2 than burning natural gas, and the carbon emitted by this will have just a small fraction recovered by planting new trees before 2030. The belief that the production of energy from biomass is sustainable comes from the idea that the carbon released with the burn was already extracted from the atmosphere when the plants were growing. But this is a misconception. The areas that would be used to grow plants for biofuels are areas that naturally were supposed to be already covered with vegetation. It is not an “extra” amount of trees that are capturing carbon, instead, it is clearing areas to plant trees that will be burnt. In addition, plants need years to grow, but just a few minutes to burn. Apparently, the pressure to not tighten the restrictions around what could be burnt came from several central and eastern European countries. There are strong lobbies supportive of biomass that believes that without biofuel the renewable energy target will be harder to reach. The European Union is asking the countries to increase the percentage of its energy from sustainable sources, with the goal of the whole union having 32% of its energy from sustainable sources by 2030. And the countries, to reach that goal, are preferring to have looser restrictions, even if this makes no sense for the environment. The Swedish and Finish governments have big forest industries, and in the negotiations, they went against anything that would restrict what can be done with forest biomass. Even if both countries use just waste for bioenergy, the importation of trees to other countries is not restricted. In many cases, the “sustainability” of biofuels is made by maps that do not track the origin of the biomass till the place it is burnt. In that way, the trees are grown in one country and burnt in another. Ahead of the Leaders Summit on Climate Summit, together with many other organizations, Sami villages, and civil society actors, we wrote an open letter to EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on the importance of not classifying forest biomass combustion as "renewable" energy. In the letter is expressed: "The cheapest and most effective climate solution is to let forests grow older and to reduce logging altogether. Natural forests that are allowed to age act like a carbon bank, while burning forest biomass for energy effectively turns forests into the ‘new coal’" Some types of biomass can be accounted as sustainable, but only if it comes from abandoned agricultural lands or waste biomass. The other sort of biomass is only contributing to the deforestation of undisturbed ecosystems. The EU cannot keep loosening rules and brag about being sustainable. The EU Taxonomy must be tightened and focus on what is really sustainable, and not just to create fake sustainability goals that are “more reachable”. It is better to have reduced goals but be transparent about that than to spread a lie around such an important matter as climate change.
Write or agree to climate reviews to make businesses and world leaders act. It’s easy and it works.
Certified accounts actively looking for your opinion on their climate impact.
One tree is planted for every climate review written to an organization that is Open for Climate Dialogue™.