August, 27 2019, 12:00am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Portuguese/Spanish:
Patxon Metuktire
Neto e assesor do Cacique Raoni Metuktire do povo indígena Kayapó
+55 66 9685 4584
Portuguese/English:
Adriana Ramos
Sócia e Assesora Instituto Socioambiental (ISA)
adriana@socioambiental.org
+55 61 9810 9249
English/Portuguese/Spanish:
Brent Millikan
International Rivers
brent@internationalrivers.org
+55 61 98153-700
Indigenous Leader Delivers Letter to Macron at G-7, Calling for Urgent Measures to Halt Deforestation and Burning in the Amazon
Renowned indigenous leader Raoni Metuktire of the Kayapo people delivered to French President Emmanuel Macron today a joint statement signed by 62 Brazilian civil society organizations and networks, together with international allies, attributing a rapid escalation of Amazonian fires to the dismantling of environmental policy by the government of President Jair Bolsonaro. The document also calls on the G7 countries to ensure effective mechanisms to prevent imports of Brazilian commodities produced in areas characterized by recent deforestation and human rights violations.
WASHINGTON
Renowned indigenous leader Raoni Metuktire of the Kayapo people delivered to French President Emmanuel Macron today a joint statement signed by 62 Brazilian civil society organizations and networks, together with international allies, attributing a rapid escalation of Amazonian fires to the dismantling of environmental policy by the government of President Jair Bolsonaro. The document also calls on the G7 countries to ensure effective mechanisms to prevent imports of Brazilian commodities produced in areas characterized by recent deforestation and human rights violations.
The meeting between the Brazilian leader and the French president took place in Biarritz, France, following the G7 meeting. During the meeting, leaders of the world's wealthiest nations announced a USD $20 million Amazon protection fund, which includes reforestation.
The declaration from the civil society groups states that the problems of burning and deforestation are longstanding, but severely worsened in 2019 as "a direct result of Jair Bolsonaro's behavior." The president has promoted "the systematic and deliberate dismantling of the operational capacity of the federal environmental agency, IBAMA and other agencies responsible for controlling illegal acts of land grabbing, deforestation and burning, logging and mining," while making public statements that signal impunity for environmental crimes, according to the letter.
"Bolsonaro is the main mentor of the problems that are happening in Brazil," Raoni told reporters after meeting with Macron. "Bolsonaro's position encourages farmers to set the fires because they feel supported by a head of state."
The civil society organizations are demanding the Brazilian government adopt five measures, including a moratorium on legislative projects that imply environmental setbacks, which will be discussed this week by former environment ministers with the mayor, and effective support for actions against environmental crime led by IBAMA.
Other demanded measures include the "elimination of obstacles to the demarcation of indigenous territories, as well as recognition of the territorial rights of quilombola communities and other traditional populations," a "re-creation of the steering committee and resumption of activities of the Amazon Fund," and "resumption of the Action Plan for Prevention and Control of Deforestation in the Amazon and adjacent savannahs (cerrado) - currently abandoned by the Government - with adequate financial resources, transparency and participation of federated entities and civil society."
With regard to the G-7 member countries, the signatories demanded, in addition to more stringent controls over the origin of imported commodities, the adoption of effective due diligence policies to avoid investments by companies and financial institutions in Amazonian projects that involve high risks of human rights violations and environmental damage.
Finally, the document recommends that "in the case of an effective change in the Bolsonaro government's posture," that G-7 countries "contribute to the efforts of the government and society to deal with deforestation and burning in the Amazon, with the means of implementation needed to achieve climate change policies in line with the 1.5deg C goal of the Paris Agreement."
According to Brent Millikan of International Rivers, one of the co-signing organizations of the declaration: "At the G7 meeting in Biarritz, deforestation and burning in the Amazon - despite having been included in the agenda as an emergency issue - apparently received very little attention. An ambitious proposal to cooperate with Brazil and neighboring countries to address the grave problem did not emerge. Thus, President Macron's meeting with Cacique Raoni was highly significant, in that it allowed for the voicing of his concerns, while presenting a joint declaration signed by more than 50 civil society organizations that discusses both underlying causes and solutions for the crisis of deforestation and burning in the Amazon, considering the responsibilities of both the Brazilian government and G7 countries."
Read the joint declaration in English and Portuguese.
International Rivers is an environmental and human rights organization with staff on four continents. For three decades, we have been at the heart of the global struggle to protect rivers and the rights of communities that depend on them.
LATEST NEWS
Call Grows to Impeach Trump, 'The Most Dangerous Man on the Planet'
"Trump’s illegal war on Iran and the rule of law," said one pair of campaigners, "establish an intolerable pattern of egregious abuses of power, directly threatening our constitutional order, our safety, and our way of life."
Mar 02, 2026
After the unprovoked bombing of Iran over the weekend by the United States—strikes that included the unlawful assassination of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Hosseini Khamenei—the call for US President Donald Trump to be impeached and removed from office has grown as the straightest path to hold the US leader to account for the attacks which policy and human rights experts have condemned as a serious war crime.
With a regional war in the Middle East that was already boiling from Gaza to Lebanon and from Syria to Yemen now exploding in the wake of the US-Israeli attacks on Iran, Globe and Mail columnist Debra Thompson on Sunday called Trump "the most dangerous man on the planet."
"Rather than ending wars," Thompson notes, "Trump has initiated military action eight times, carrying out attacks in seven countries (Syria, Iraq, Iran, Nigeria, Yemen, Somalia, and Venezuela) in 2025." Such a pattern of violence and warmongering should make clear that failure to restrain Trump has only emboldened him.
"The recurring danger in this latest presidential aggression is that there are no guardrails, no constraints, and no post-hoc justification," writes Thomson, "other than that Mr. Trump is the President of the United States and can do whatever he wants."
But American presidents cannot simply do whatever they want. According to a Reuters/Ipsos poll out Sunday, less than 25% support the president's aggression against Iran. In the first wave of the US military attack, an Iranian school for girls was bombed, killing over 108 civilians, mostly children.
While some congressional lawmakers are pushing for a vote this week on a War Powers Resolution to curtail US military operations against Iran, others are demanding more robust action from Congress to bring Trump's war-making to an end.
"Under Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, only Congress has the power to declare war, as well as to raise and support armies, provide and maintain a navy, and fund and regulate the military," declared novelist and political activists Stephen King on Saturday. "Impeach the SOB."
Mike Hersh and Alan Minsky, respectively the communications director and executive director of the Progressive Democrats of America, argued in a Sunday op-ed for Common Dreams that "Trump's illegal, unconstitutional war on Iran is not only a moral and humanitarian disaster, but also a profound constitutional crisis."
According to Hersh and Minsky:
Trump’s illegal war on Iran and the rule of law establish an intolerable pattern of egregious abuses of power, directly threatening our constitutional order, our safety, and our way of life. These intertwined crises cry out for an immediate, decisive response by the Congress and the US public.
Therefore, PDA demands that all members of Congress, Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike, uphold their oath of office to defend our constitutional republic. The Constitution offers one and only one remedy when President a repeatedly breaks the law and arrogantly refuses to abide by the limits on the power clearly laid out in the Constitution. That remedy is impeachment, followed by removal from office.
Matt Duss, executive vice president for the Center for International Policy, said that US lawmakers, as well as the American people they represent, "must also be ready to hold the president and his administration accountable for this breach of US and international law."
"The failure to hold past presidents liable for war crimes and related violations of our own laws has helped lead to this dangerous moment, with a seemingly unrestrained president endangering millions of lives with impunity," warned Duss. "The forever wars and the imperial presidency must finally come to an end.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Insane This Is Legal': Bettors Make Huge Profits From Suspiciously Timed Wagers on Iran War
"Reminder that Donald Trump Jr. sits on Polymarket's advisory board and his firm invested double-digit millions into the platform last year."
Mar 01, 2026
Bettors on the prediction platform Polymarket made a killing with suspiciously timed wagers that the United States would attack Iran by February 28, the day President Donald Trump announced a bombing campaign against the Middle East nation.
Bloomberg reported that six accounts on Polymarket, all newly created this month, "made around $1 million in profit" by betting on the timing of the US attack on Iran. The accounts, according to Bloomberg, "had only ever placed bets on when US strikes might occur," and "some of their shares were purchased, in some cases at roughly a dime apiece, hours before the first explosions were reported in Tehran."
One account with the name Magamyman raked in over $515,000 by betting roughly $87,000 that the "US strikes Iran by February 28, 2026."
The lucrative bets quickly drew scrutiny from lawmakers. US Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) wrote on social media that "it’s insane this is legal."
"People around Trump are profiting off war and death," Murphy alleged. "I’m introducing legislation ASAP to ban this."
Rep. Mike Levin (D-Calif.) wrote that "prediction markets cannot be a vehicle for profiting off advance knowledge of military action" and demanded "answers, transparency, and oversight."
"Reminder that Donald Trump Jr. sits on Polymarket's advisory board and his firm invested double-digit millions into the platform last year," Levin wrote, referring to the president's eldest son. "The [Justice Department] and [Commodity Futures Trading Commission] both had active investigations into Polymarket that were dropped after Trump took office."
There's no concrete evidence that Trump administration officials or staffers were behind the hugely profitable bets, but the wagers heightened concerns about the possibility of insider trading using increasingly popular prediction market platforms such as Polymarket and Kalshi. Last month, bettors used Polymarket to make big profits on suspiciously timed wagers on when the US would oust Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
Polymarket currently allows users to bet on when Iran will have a new supreme leader, when the US and Iran will reach a ceasefire agreement, and when the US will invade Iran.
The celebrity news tabloid TMZ reported Saturday that "a group at a Washington, DC restaurant was talking openly in the bar area Friday afternoon about a national secret that was about to literally explode hours later—the bombing of Iran."
As journalist David Bernstein noted, that—if true—leaves open the possibility that "these 'insider' bets have been placed by any rich person with good ears in DC."
"Not to mention that for all we know these administration clowns were probably gossiping about it on a text chain with half a dozen people they accidentally invited," Bernstein added. "This is hardly the locked lips brigade we’re dealing with."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Experts Pillory Trump Case for War on Iran: 'Flimsiest Excuse for Initiating a Major Attack' in Decades
"What they posed as the threat they were trying to preempt—an attack by Iran against US forces—is so extremely implausible, it is also laughable," said one analyst.
Mar 01, 2026
Senior Trump administration officials attempted during a briefing with reporters on Saturday to make their case for the joint US-Israeli military assault on Iran that has so far killed hundreds and plunged the Middle East into chaos.
According to experts who listened to the briefing, which was conducted on background, the justification for war was incredibly weak. Daryl Kimball, president of the Arms Control Association, told Laura Rozen of the Diplomatic newsletter that the administration's argument was "the flimsiest excuse for initiating a major attack on another country without congressional authorization, in violation of the UN Charter, in many decades."
During his early Saturday remarks announcing the attacks, President Donald Trump claimed that "imminent threats from the Iranian regime" against "the American people" drove him to act. But Kimball said that administration officials "provided absolutely no evidence" to back that assertion during the briefing.
"What they posed as the threat they were trying to preempt—an attack by Iran against US forces—is so extremely implausible, it is also laughable," said Kimball.
Following the start of Saturday's assault, which Trump explicitly characterized as a war aimed at overthrowing the Iranian government, unnamed administration officials began leaking the claim that Trump feared an Iranian attack on the massive US military buildup in the Middle East, prompting him to greenlight the bombing campaign in coordination with Israel and with a nudge from Saudi Arabia.
Kimball, in a social media post, took members of the US media to task for echoing the administration's narrative. "Reporters need to do more than stenography," he wrote in response to Punchbowl's Jake Sherman.
"The American people were lied to about Iraq. The American people are being lied to again today—and once again, it is ordinary people who will pay the price."
Trump and top administration officials also repeated the longstanding claim from US warhawks that Iran is bent on developing a nuclear weapon, something Iranian leaders have publicly denied—including during recent diplomatic talks. Neither US intelligence assessments nor international nuclear watchdogs have produced evidence indicating that Iran is moving rapidly in the direction of nukes, as claimed by the administration.
Rozen noted that some remarks from administration officials during Saturday's briefing "suggested Trump’s negotiators"—a team that included Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff—"may not have had the expertise or experience to understand the Iranian proposal to curb its nuclear program." Rozen reported that one administration official kept misstating the acronym for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN nuclear watchdog.
Trump administration officials, according to Rozen, seemed astonished that Iranian negotiators would not accept the US offer to provide free nuclear fuel "forever" for Iran's peaceful energy development, viewing the rejection as a suspicious indication that Iran was opposed to a diplomatic resolution—even though, according to Oman's foreign minister, Iran had already made concessions that went well beyond the terms of the 2015 nuclear accord that Trump abandoned during his first stint in the White House.
Experts said it should be obvious—particularly given Trump's decision to ditch the previous nuclear accord—why Iran would not trust the US to stick by such a commitment.
The administration's inability to provide a coherent justification for war tracks with the rapidly shifting narrative preceding Saturday's strikes—an indication, according to some observers, that Trump had made the decision to attack Iran even in the face of diplomatic progress and left officials to try to cobble together a rationale after the fact.
In a lengthy social media post, Pentagon Secretary Pete Hegseth insisted war was necessary because Iran "refused to make a deal" and because the Iranian government "has targeted and killed Americans," hardly the claim of an imminent threat push by the president and other administration officials.
Brian Finucane, a senior adviser to the US Program at the International Crisis Group, noted in response that the Trump administration has "sidelined anyone who could articulate... a coherent argument, partly because expertise is deep state and woke and partly because they just don't care."
The result is another potentially catastrophic war that runs roughshod over US and international law, puts countless civilians at risk, and threatens to spark a region-wide conflict.
"President Trump, along with his right-wing extremist Israeli ally Benjamin Netanyahu, has begun an illegal, premeditated, and unconstitutional war," US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said in a statement on Saturday. "Tragically, Trump is gambling with American lives and treasure to fulfill Netanyahu's decades-long ambition of dragging the United States into armed conflict with Iran."
"The American people were lied to about Vietnam. The American people were lied to about Iraq," Sanders added. "The American people are being lied to again today—and once again, it is ordinary people who will pay the price."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular