November, 16 2021, 04:30pm EDT
COP26 Agreement Fails to Address Climate Emergency, Take Necessary Steps to Protect Amazon and Respect Indigenous Peoples' Rights
Fossil fuel lobby outnumbered Indigenous representation two to one, nations struck deal on international carbon markets despite Indigenous opposition to carbon pricing.
WASHINGTON
Undermining global hopes for meaningful action, the 26th annual Conference of Parties (COP26) climate summit in Glasgow concluded over the weekend without successfully addressing key drivers of the climate crisis, among them the destruction of the Amazon rainforest and the role of fossil fuels. Countries pledged to end deforestation by 2030 and announced $1.7 billion in support to Indigenous forest defenders, without input from Indigenous communities. The commitments are non-binding and fall short of the demands of Indigenous and frontline communities, as well as the urgency and ambition needed to address today's climate crisis.
During the first week of COP, the Amazonia for Life: Protect 80% by 2025 coalition announced new data on the Amazon degradation and deforestation, which has reached 22%, signaling that the rainforest has reached an irreversible tipping point. Undeterred, Amazonian Indigenous peoples continue to mobilize, calling on governments to act immediately to implement measures to achieve 80% protection.
Rather than taking meaningful action, COP26 provided powerful political and corporate actors the opportunity to cement false solutions like "net zero" targets and carbon trading mechanisms. Eschewing growing calls, from activists to the scientific community, for the rapid phasing out of fossil fuels and moratoriums on further forest felling, it allowed governments to push back zero deforestation targets for another decade. Brazil's Bolsonaro administration was even congratulated for empty deforestation commitments amid surging Amazon destruction.
Despite being deeply exclusive toward frontline communities, Indigenous peoples, women, and youth attended in full force, organizing for climate justice and against the fossil fuel industry's corporate greenwash that dominated COP26.
For some Amazonian defenders, traveling to Glasgow was a brief respite from the death threats they face at home. Just days following her return to the Brazilian Amazon, Munduruku leader Alessandra Korap Munduruku's home was burglarized in a clear attempt to intimidate her and undermine her people's struggle against illegal mining and government-backed megaprojects. Kakataibo leader Herlin Odicio has gone back to the Peruvian Amazon, where he will likely face ongoing attempts to silence his advocacy for Indigenous rights at the hands of narco-land grabbers.
"Considering the climate emergency, we traveled to COP26 to amplify the urgency of protecting the Amazon, respect for Indigenous rights, lives, and territories, and demand climate justice. Despite the travel restrictions and inequities due to the COVID-19 pandemic, Indigenous representation was substantial both inside and outside the COP, including the largest delegation of Brazilian Indigenous leaders and youth in the history of climate negotiations calling for 'Land Back' as a climate solution," shared Leila Salazar-Lopez, Executive Director of Amazon Watch.
"While Indigenous solutions were clearly present at the COP, the Glasgow agreement failed to address the climate emergency. While nearly $20 billion was pledged to protect forests by 2030, that's too late for the Amazon, which faces a catastrophic tipping point. We must protect 80% of the rainforest by 2025. This means implementation of the Amazon for Life Declaration, which calls for an immediate moratorium on deforestation and fossil fuel expansion, direct forest finance to Indigenous and forest communities on the front lines of protection, and the exclusion of forest-carbon offsets, " Salazar-Lopez concluded.
Finance "Greenwashes" Away Role in Climate Chaos
In the world of climate finance, much has been made of the Global Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ), a group of private sector financiers with assets totaling $130 trillion, signing a commitment at COP26 to achieve net-zero portfolios by 2050.
"This agreement reeks of greenwash: it includes no near-term commitments for any action on fossil fuels or forest protection. In fact, JPMorgan and UBS, both members of the GFANZ, are some of the worst financiers of oil and gas in the Amazon rainforest. It appears that this net-zero pledge is simply another hallow corporate commitment like those that over 700 civil society groups across the world, including Amazon Watch, condemned in the lead-up to COP26," said Pendle Marshall- Hallmark, Climate Finance Campaigner at Amazon Watch.
The COP also marked long-fought climate victories.
Marshall- Hallmark continued, "Due to years of grassroots movement building, COP26 signaled the decline of the coal age, signaling a clear path for the next targets: oil and gas. We're building momentum for an Exit of Amazon Oil & Gas by the world's largest banks through our Amazon Exclusion campaign. In the runup to COP26, Dutch bank ING announced an end to new oil financing in Peru, adding to its earlier commitment to end new oil financing in Ecuador. We're seeing that with pressure, we can move banks to make the rainforest the next Arctic exclusion."
Overall, wealthy nations of the Global North yet again failed to take responsibility for their role in driving the climate crisis, as the U.S. and EU banded together to block "loss and damage" financing that would have provided crucial support for Global South nations that are most affected by climate change. As such, COP26's climate finance outcomes were a continuation of climate colonialism.
Jade Begay, Climate Justice Campaign Director of NDN Collective and Amazon Watch Board Member shares more: "This year, Indigenous Peoples mobilized our efforts to challenge Article 6 in particular because of its severe implications to our land rights. This article promotes carbon market mechanisms that would open up opportunities for land grabs by corporations and governments. We firmly took the position that we would not accept Article 6 unless it includes specific language respecting Indigenous knowledge, proper consultation with Indigenous Peoples throughout the entirety of any decision making processes, and an independent grievance mechanism that holds bad actors accountable."
Amazonian governments double-speak
Ecuador President Guillermo Lasso received widespread praise for announcing the expansion of a maritime protected area for the Galapagos Islands. But he conveniently failed to mention his government's plans to double Amazon oil production over the opposition of Indigenous peoples. The decision runs contrary to the recent IEA report indicating the need to keep fossil fuels in the ground and end new financing of new expansion and exploration, which are incompatible with the Paris agreement and the latest IPCC report, as well as COP26's ambition to limit warming to 1.5C. These projects violate Indigenous rights and are a death sentence for those living in voluntary isolation.
After two weeks in Glasgow, Indigenous Amazonian women defenders from the Kichwa territory of Sarayaku shared, "We Indigenous peoples, resist resource extraction, including fossil fuels, on our lands with our bodies and with our lives. Our contribution to protecting the climate should be recognized and our solutions should be heard. We call upon all governments and the United Nations to recognize our Kawsak Sacha, Living Forest proposal as a solution. Indigenous territories are sources and spaces of life and should be free from all extractive activity to mitigate climate change and ensure human survival. We call on all states, companies, and multilateral organizations to focus on true, not false solutions, and keep fossil fuels in the ground."
Brazilian climate negotiators attempted to use COP26 to burnish the country's tattered environment image, announcing a new commitment to achieve zero deforestation and reduce methane emissions by 30% by 2030. Brazil also vowed to end "illegal" deforestation by 2028, two years earlier than a previous target. However, these pledges mean nothing given how deforestation has soared under Bolsonaro to levels last seen in 2008, as the extreme-right populist aims to open the Amazon to industrial development. The preliminary data from the national space research agency INPE showed about 877 square kilometers of forest were cleared in October, a 5% increase from October 2020. It was the worst October deforestation since the current monitoring system began in 2015.
Sonia Guajajara, Executive Coordinator of APIB (Association of Indigenous Peoples of Brazil), stressed the need for Indigenous voices to be central in climate change discussions for real change to occur during a COP 26 special session: "We are not the ones who are creating the pollution, the ones who are making the problem, but we are the people who are being killed by it: this is environmental genocide. Although Indigenous people form only 5 percent of the global population, they protect 8 percent of the Earth's biodiversity. Yet, they continue to be excluded from decision-making. Governments need to reforest their minds and understand that climate change is already a reality, not a problem for the future. We are here to echo the call of Mother Earth because she is crying, and it is our duty to replicate her call while we still have time. What happens when she stops crying?"
The Peruvian Government maintained its tradition of using the COP to leverage financing. It was one of the countries that signed on to the declaration on forests and land use. Indigenous defenders at the COP reminded international governments that the Peruvian Amazon is facing a humanitarian crisis in which the funds invested to date have not prevented increased violence and deforestation.
Amazon Watch is a nonprofit organization founded in 1996 to protect the rainforest and advance the rights of indigenous peoples in the Amazon Basin. We partner with indigenous and environmental organizations in campaigns for human rights, corporate accountability and the preservation of the Amazon's ecological systems.
LATEST NEWS
Billionaire Palantir Co-Founder Pushes Return of Public Hangings as Part of 'Masculine Leadership' Initiative
"Immaturity masquerading as strength is the defining personal characteristic of our age," said one critic in response.
Dec 07, 2025
Venture capitalist Joe Lonsdale, a co-founder of data platform company Palantir, is calling for the return of public hangings as part of a broader push to restore what he describes as "masculine leadership" to the US.
In a statement posted on X Friday, Lonsdale said that he supported changing the so-called "three strikes" anti-crime law to ensure that anyone who is convicted of three violent crimes gets publicly executed, rather than simply sent to prison for life.
"If I’m in charge later, we won’t just have a three strikes law," he wrote. "We will quickly try and hang men after three violent crimes. And yes, we will do it in public to deter others."
Lonsdale then added that "our society needs balance," and said that "it's time to bring back masculine leadership to protect our most vulnerable."
Lonsdale's views on public hangings being necessary to restore "masculine leadership" drew swift criticism.
Gil Durán, a journalist who documents the increasingly authoritarian politics of Silicon Valley in his newsletter "The Nerd Reich," argued in a Saturday post that Lonsdale's call for public hangings showed that US tech elites are "entering a more dangerous and desperate phase of radicalization."
"For months, Peter Thiel guru Curtis Yarvin has been squawking about the need for more severe measures to cement Trump's authoritarian rule," Durán explained. "Peter Thiel is ranting about the Antichrist in a global tour. And now Lonsdale—a Thiel protégé—is fantasizing about a future in which he will have the power to unleash state violence at mass scale."
Taulby Edmondson, an adjunct professor of history, religion, and culture at Virginia Tech, wrote in a post on Bluesky that the rhetoric Lonsdale uses to justify the return of public hangings has even darker intonations than calls for state-backed violence.
"A point of nuance here: 'masculine leadership to protect our most vulnerable' is how lynch mobs are described, not state-sanctioned executions," he observed.
Theoretical physicist Sean Carroll argued that Lonsdale's remarks were symbolic of a kind of performative masculinity that has infected US culture.
"Immaturity masquerading as strength is the defining personal characteristic of our age," he wrote.
Tech entrepreneur Anil Dash warned Lonsdale that his call for public hangings could have unintended consequences for members of the Silicon Valley elite.
"Well, Joe, Mark Zuckerberg has sole control over Facebook, which directly enabled the Rohingya genocide," he wrote. "So let’s have the conversation."
And Columbia Journalism School professor Bill Grueskin noted that Lonsdale has been a major backer of the University of Austin, an unaccredited liberal arts college that has been pitched as an alternative to left-wing university education with the goal of preparing "thoughtful and ethical innovators, builders, leaders, public servants and citizens through open inquiry and civil discourse."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Hegseth Defends Boat Bombings as New Details Further Undermine Administration's Justifications
The boat targeted in the infamous September 2 "double-tap" strike was not even headed for the US, Adm. Frank Bradley revealed to lawmakers.
Dec 07, 2025
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Saturday defended the Trump administration's policy of bombing suspected drug-trafficking vessels even as new details further undermined the administration's stated justifications for the policy.
According to the Guardian, Hegseth told a gathering at the Ronald Reagan presidential library that the boat bombings, which so far have killed at least 87 people, are necessary to protect Americans from illegal drugs being shipped to the US.
"If you’re working for a designated terrorist organization and you bring drugs to this country in a boat, we will find you and we will sink you," Hegseth said. "Let there be no doubt about it."
However, leaked details about a classified briefing delivered to lawmakers last week by Adm. Frank Bradley about a September 2 boat strike cast new doubts on Hegseth's justifications.
CNN reported on Friday that Bradley told lawmakers that the boat taken out by the September 2 attack was not even headed toward the US, but was going "to link up with another, larger vessel that was bound for Suriname," a small nation in the northeast of South America.
While Bradley acknowledged that the boat was not heading toward the US, he told lawmakers that the strike on it was justified because the drugs it was carrying could have theoretically wound up in the US at some point.
Additionally, NBC News reported on Saturday that Bradley told lawmakers that Hegseth had ordered all 11 men who were on the boat targeted by the September 2 strike to be killed because "they were on an internal list of narco-terrorists who US intelligence and military officials determined could be lethally targeted."
This is relevant because the US military launched a second strike during the September 2 operation to kill two men who had survived the initial strike on their vessel, which many legal experts consider to be either a war crime or an act of murder under domestic law.
Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), the ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, watched video of the September 2 double-tap attack last week, and he described the footage as “one of the most troubling things I’ve seen in my time in public service.”
“Any American who sees the video that I saw will see its military attacking shipwrecked sailors,” Himes explained. “Now, there’s a whole set of contextual items that the admiral explained. Yes, they were carrying drugs. They were not in position to continue their mission in any way... People will someday see this video and they will see that that video shows, if you don’t have the broader context, an attack on shipwrecked sailors.”
While there has been much discussion about the legality of the September 2 double-tap strike in recent days, some critics have warned that fixating on this particular aspect of the administration's policy risks taking the focus off the illegality of the boat-bombing campaign as a whole.
Daphne Eviatar, director for security and human rights for Amnesty International USA, said on Friday that the entire boat-bombing campaign has been "illegal under both domestic and international law."
"All of them constitute murder because none of the victims, whether or not they were smuggling illegal narcotics, posed an imminent threat to life," she said. "Congress must take action now to stop the US military from murdering more people in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Leaked Memo Shows Pam Bondi Wants List of 'Domestic Terrorism' Groups Who Express 'Anti-American Sentiment'
"Millions of Americans like you and I could be the target," warned journalist Ken Klippenstein of the new memo.
Dec 07, 2025
A leaked memo written by US Attorney General Pam Bondi directs the Department of Justice to compile a list of potential "domestic terrorism" organizations that espouse "extreme viewpoints on immigration, radical gender ideology, and anti-American sentiment."
The memo, which was obtained by journalist Ken Klippenstein, expands upon National Security Presidential Memorandum-7 (NSPM-7), a directive signed by President Donald Trump in late September that demanded a "national strategy to investigate and disrupt networks, entities, and organizations that foment political violence so that law enforcement can intervene in criminal conspiracies before they result in violent political acts."
The new Bondi memo instructs law enforcement agencies to refer "suspected" domestic terrorism cases to the Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTFs), which will then undertake an "exhaustive investigation contemplated by NSPM-7" that will incorporate "a focused strategy to root out all culpable participants—including organizers and funders—in all domestic terrorism activities."
The memo identifies the "domestic terrorism threat" as organizations that use "violence or the threat of violence" to advance political goals such as "opposition to law and immigration enforcement; extreme views in favor of mass migration and open borders; adherence to radical gender ideology, anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, or anti-Christianity; support for the overthrow of the United States Government; hostility towards traditional views on family, religion, and morality."
Commenting on the significance of the memo, Klippenstein criticized mainstream media organizations for largely ignoring the implications of NSPM-7, which was drafted and signed in the wake of the murder of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk.
"For months, major media outlets have largely blown off the story of NSPM-7, thinking it was all just Trump bluster and too crazy to be serious," he wrote. "But a memo like this one shows you that the administration is absolutely taking this seriously—even if the media are not—and is actively working to operationalize NSPM-7."
Klippenstein also warned that NSPM-7 appeared to be the start of a new "war on terrorism," but "only this time, millions of Americans like you and I could be the target."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


