

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Jennifer K. Falcon, Indigenous Environmental Network, jennifer@ienearth.org
From March 14-29th the UN Convention on Biodiversity (CBD) will resume talks in Geneva on a Global Biodiversity Framework to halt biodiversity loss. The concept of "nature-based solutions" is expected to be a controversial issue at the talks, with some governments pushing for it while many governments from the global South are concerned about more loopholes for carbon offsets. An IPCC report due to be released later this month is likely to lend more unwarranted credence to the "nature-based solutions" concept, as the UN climate COP26 talks in Glasgow did.
In a statement released today 364 organisations, networks and movements and 128 individuals from 69 countries expose these "nature-based dispossessions", warning of harmful practices such as the expansion of monoculture tree plantations and industrial agriculture lurking behind the "nature-based solutions" marketing/greenwashing ploy. They call for a rejection of "nature-based solutions", because these carbon offset schemes in disguise are not designed to slow climate breakdown. Rather, "nature-based solutions" are a means for corporations to continue, and even increase, their greenhouse gas emissions.
"Nature-based solutions" promotes the illusion that plants and soils can undo the climate damage caused by carbon emissions from fossil fuel burning. This is a dangerous deception and provides window dressing for "net-zero" pledges from governments and corporations. Instead of agreeing on the drastic emissions reductions needed to prevent climate chaos, they make false, inaccurate claims that "nature" will remove enough excess carbon from the atmosphere to avert catastrophe.
These are just three of the many corporate net-zero pledges that will cause unspeakable harm to peoples and territories in the global South. The reality is that corporate demand for "nature-based solutions" will enclose living spaces of Indigenous Peoples, peasants and forest-dependent communities on a massive scale.
To avert catastrophic climate chaos and biodiversity loss, the destruction of underground fossil carbon stores must be stopped and frontline communities must be supported and protected. "Nature-based solutions" must be halted in its tracks. They are dangerous distractions from ending fossil fuel burning, and will result in massive land grabs aimed at dispossessing Indigenous Peoples and rural communities in the global South.
No to the dangerous deception of "nature-based solutions"!
Quotes:
Tom BK Goldtooth, Indigenous Environmental Network: "Nature-based solutions is dangerous for Indigenous Peoples." "Under the umbrella of net-zero emissions targets the private sector corporations, the UN and governments are using it to push for more land-based offsets for a global carbon pricing system. "Nature-based solutions" has Big Ag, Big Oil and Big Pharma behind it. We are seeing a huge push for policies that falsely claim to save Mother Earth - the planet. The reality will be more land grabbing from Indigenous Peoples' lands and territories."
Silvia Ribeiro, Latin America Director for ETC group: "The umbrella term of NBS is functioning effectively to greenwash and expand profit-making opportunities - so the number of corporate 'NBS pledges' has exploded. But there simply isn't enough nature to go round, so companies are pushing also for technological means of "enhancing" nature, such as huge bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) projects and other geoengineering technologies."
Shalmali Guttal, Focus on the Global South: "Nature-based solutions" are solutions only for corporations, that are constantly looking for more ways to make profits regardless of their impacts on people and the planet. These are dangerous deceptions that will lead to large scale dispossessions of rural peoples, and increase conflicts over land and territories between rural communities and states. 'Net zero' is a cynical corporate calculus to produce bogus data and fool the world that destructive corporate operations can be offset somehow. We have to join forces across the world to dismantle corporate power, and halt their continuing attempts to extract value from nature and people."
Kirtana Chandrasekaran, Friends of the Earth International: "In crucial Convention on Biological Diversity meetings this week, "nature-based solutions" is being presented as necessary for biodiversity, but really, all NBS does is use nature to offset ever-growing carbon emissions, at the expense of the rights of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities, who are biodiversity's true custodians. Commercializing biodiversity and offsetting are not the answer to the climate or biodiversity crises. Corporations and governments must cut carbon emission at source, rather than use NBS for greenwashing."
Henk Hobbelink, GRAIN: "If we let big oil, agribusiness and other giant corporations offset their emissions with what they call "nature based solutions", we will not only allow them to continue polluting the atmosphere but also to create a giant new farmland grab at the cost of small-scale farmers and global food production. We need to promote food sovereignty instead, which is the best way to keep farmers on their land while fighting the climate crisis."
Soumya Dutta, India Climate Justice / South Asian People's Action on Climate Crisis / Friends of the Earth India: "Agricultural soil carbon sequestration projects such as the 'Boomitra' controlled project in India are false solutions to the climate change crisis. They let polluting corporations and countries continue with high emissions in return for carbon market money. They put the data of millions of small farmers in the hands of big corporations, through their micro surveillance, exposing small farmers to more control from big agri-corporations. This will have serious adverse consequences for food sovereignty."
Jutta Kill, World Rainforest Movement: "The beautiful sound of "nature-based solutions" is deceitful. "Nature-based solutions" is REDD re-branded and expanded. For 15 years now, REDD has distracted from ending large-scale deforestation and provided cover for fossil fuel companies to keep on destroying underground carbon deposits. "Nature-based solutions" will result in the same conflicts, land grabs as REDD has done the past 15 years and fuel, not slow climate breakdown and deforestation."
Established in 1990 within the United States, IEN was formed by grassroots Indigenous peoples and individuals to address environmental and economic justice issues (EJ). IEN's activities include building the capacity of Indigenous communities and tribal governments to develop mechanisms to protect our sacred sites, land, water, air, natural resources, health of both our people and all living things, and to build economically sustainable communities.
"Trump has turned Venezuela into an effective US colony," said one critic.
Some critics of the Trump administration are reacting with horror to revelations that US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has been serving as the de facto ruler of Venezuela.
According to a Saturday report in The New York Times, Rubio for the last several months has been acting informally as the "viceroy" of Venezuela ever since its recognized president, Nicolás Maduro, was abducted by the American military in January and brought to the US to face charges related to "narco-terrorism."
The Times' sources revealed that Rubio "effectively controls Venezuela’s finances, the distribution of its natural resources, and its government" and "is deeply involved in the country’s day-to-day operations," while maintaining regular contact with acting Venezuelan President Delcy Rodríguez.
Under current arrangements, the US Treasury Department takes in revenue from Venezuela's exports, including its petroleum, and then disperses the money back to the country through its private banks with strict conditions set by Rubio over what it can be spent on.
In explaining the system, the Times likened it to "parents handing out allowances to children," adding that it gives Rubio "immense leverage over... Rodríguez, who depends on the money to pay workers and prop up the national currency."
Elizabeth Saunders, professor of political science at Columbia University, described Rubio's power over Venezuela as "insane," as well as "derelict, unconscionable, and impeachable."
"The secretary of state's time is scarce, valuable, and not outsourcable," Saunders emphasized.
Orlando J. Pérez, professor of Political Science at the University of North Texas at Dallas, said the Times report made a mockery of Rubio's professed claims to want to bring democracy back to Venezuela.
"It appears Rubio has transformed from democracy promotion warrior," Pérez commented, "to transactional realpolitik operative!"
Kenneth Roth, former executive director at Human Rights Watch, wrote that US control over Venezuela appeared similar to the kind of imperial power wielded by European nations in the 19th Century.
"Trump has turned Venezuela into an effective US colony," said Roth, "with Marco Rubio as the viceroy and Washington controlling the country’s oil revenue and dictating major foreign and domestic policies. Democracy has been relegated to the distant future."
Bradley Simpson, historian at the University of Connecticut, also saw the current US arrangement with Venezuela as a return to overt imperialism.
"We are literally back in the Dollar Diplomacy days of the 1910s," Simpson wrote, "when the United States invaded countries and took over their financial systems and ran them as effective colonies. Flagrantly illegal, enormously corrupt. Where is the organization of American states or UN in denouncing this?"
"These hoodlums come in with machine guns—M4, an American-made machine gun—and they detain us. They block off the road."
Rep. Ro Khanna this week was detained by a group of Israeli settlers whom he described as "hoodlums... with machine guns" while making a visit to a Palestinian village in the occupied West Bank.
In an interview with Reuters published on Saturday, Khanna (D-Calif.) said he and his tour group were surrounded by armed settlers as they were traveling through the West Bank on Wednesday.
"We were at a village that Israeli settlers had destroyed, they had destroyed the school, they had destroyed that village, and we were just looking at it," said Khanna. "And these hoodlums come in with machine guns—M4, an American-made machine gun—and they detain us. They block off the road."
The California Democrat said that the settlers called in members of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) to help them deal with him and his group.
"The IDF is on their side," Khanna remarked, "not on the side of the Americans."
Cameron Kasky, an aide to Khanna, told Reuters that the group was held for over an hour before officials whom he believed to be police intervened and secured their release.
The IDF told Reuters that both military troops and police officers dispersed the settlers who had set up a roadblock near the small Palestinian village of Khirbet Zanuta.
Khanna wasn't the only American to have a run-in with Israeli settlers this week, as CNN reported that four settlers attacked groups of journalists, including CNN reporters and crew, who were traveling through an area north of the Palestinian city of Ramallah on Saturday.
As the journalists were driving, four settlers blocked off the road with their cars and began attacking the reporters' vehicles with wooden clubs and metal rods.
"The settlers then began to jump on the vehicle behind CNN's—carrying another group of journalists—and smashed the windshield of that vehicle," the network reported. "Another group of settlers tried to block a separate exit route before chasing the journalists towards the town of Sinjil."
Israeli police arrived on the scene and arrested four settlers who were allegedly responsible for the attacks, CNN reported.
"The Israel Police and the IDF view any manifestation of violence or causing damage to property very seriously," the Israeli officers said after the arrests, "especially when it concerns media personnel performing their work."
Israeli settlers for years have carried out violent attacks on Palestinians living in the West Bank, and witnesses have regularly described IDF soldiers at the scene either standing by as the attacks occur or even actively helping the attackers.
In an interview with CNN on Tuesday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that claims about settler violence have been "blown up beyond belief," describing attacks as being carried out by a small number of "juvenile delinquents."
"This brazen act should be seen as nothing more than an attempt to prevent the public from knowing what is happening in their country by intimidating journalists from doing their jobs."
The Trump administration on Friday escalated its war with the press by subpoenaing several reporters at The New York Times days after the paper published a story on Wednesday that detailed security concerns about the luxury jet the Qatari government gave to President Donald Trump.
According to the Times, the subpoenas are attempting to force reporters to testify before a federal grand jury in Manhattan on Wednesday next week, a move that the paper describes as an "extraordinary escalation in President Trump’s efforts to threaten and intimidate independent news organizations."
The issued subpoenas do not specifically name the Times' reporting on the Qatari jet as the reason for the grand jury probe, although they were given to all four journalists—Tyler Pager, Julian Barnes, Eric Schmitt, and Eric Lipton—who reported the story.
Additionally, the Times noted, a senior official at the FBI had asked the paper to hold off publishing its story on the jet before it came out on Wednesday, citing unspecified national security concerns about its content.
David McCraw, the top attorney representing the Times' newsroom, denounced the subpoenas as an attack on the freedom of the press.
"The appearance of federal law enforcement agents on the doorstep of news reporters should shock the conscience of any American who believes in the Constitution and the press freedom it protects," said McGraw. “This brazen act should be seen as nothing more than an attempt to prevent the public from knowing what is happening in their country by intimidating journalists from doing their jobs."
It is highly uncommon for government investigators to subpoena journalists when they are probing national security leaks, as such actions are generally seen as having a chilling effect on reporters’ ability to gather information.
Rick Stengel, former under secretary of state for President Barack Obama, said that the Times' reporting on the Qatari jet, whose security upgrades are being financed with US tax dollars, is completely within the scope of constitutional protections for press freedom.
"The reporting that the Times journalists have been subpoenaed for is exactly the kind of journalism the First Amendment is designed to protect: matters involving national security and taxpayer dollars," wrote Stengel in a Saturday social media post. "Reporting that embarrasses a president is protected speech."
Fox News chief national security correspondent Jennifer Griffin also denounced the Trump administration for trying to drag reporters into a grand jury investigation.
"This action by the US government to subpoena reporters for reporting legitimate news on security concerns about Air Force One should alarm every American," Griffin wrote.
Seth Stern, chief of advocacy for the Freedom of the Press Foundation, accused the Trump administration of abusing government power not to defend national security, but to protect the president from personal humiliation.
"We've long said that when the government claims it needs to investigate journalists to protect national security, it really means its own reputational security," said Stern. "This is as clear an example as you can get. The administration's embarrassment that it reportedly charged taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars to retrofit a flying bribe that still isn't secure enough for hostile times does not supersede the need for a free and independent press."
This is the second time in recent weeks that the Trump administration has tried to subpoena reporters to compel their testimony in grand jury investigations.
In June, the US Department of Justice issued subpoenas for national security reporters at The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal related to national security leaks.
Subpoenas against both news organizations were withdrawn after they issued legal challenges in sealed filings.