SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
amazon rainforest
As Left-Wing Opposition Banned, Ecuador Court Rejects Terrible UAE Treaty
The decision blocks the right-wing president's unconstitutional attempt to bypass the National Assembly. Still, this is just one step in Ecuador's continued fight for its Constitution and its democracy.
Mar 13, 2026
In a major rebuke to President Daniel Noboa, Ecuador's Constitutional Court ruled unanimously on March 9 that his controversial Bilateral Investment Treaty with the United Arab Emirates cannot be fast-tracked and must be approved by the National Assembly.
The decision blocks the right-wing president's unconstitutional attempt to bypass the National Assembly. Still, this is just one step in Ecuador's continued fight for its Constitution and its democracy.
This treaty is the test case for a far broader corporate coup, one that aims to resurrect a legal weapon Ecuador’s people have repeatedly rejected: Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS).
The treaty, signed in a rushed ceremony in December 2025, was littered with errors, referencing the non-existent "United Arab States" and citing provisions that aren't there. When Ecuador’s pro-corporate Constitutional Court rightly demanded a corrected text, it asked for an English version, a bizarre move in a Spanish-speaking republic.
“We are witnessing a government ignoring its own Constitution and the will of its people to serve the interests of transnational capital."
In response, Noboa issued an extraordinary decree authorizing Ecuador’s ambassador to unilaterally correct the text, bypassing normal diplomatic and legal channels.
The court has now sided with Ecuador’s progressive Constitution. However, that is not where this fight ends; instead, the treaty will have to be taken through a two-stage review process, unless Noboa decides to ignore the court altogether—a move that would be unsurprising given the young autocrat’s continued destruction and dismissal of Ecuador’s other branches of government.
The Constitutional Court will have 30 days to conduct a second, deeper review of the treaty's content to verify its full conformity with the Constitution. If the treaty survives that scrutiny (or if the court does not respond in 30 days), it will go to the National Assembly, where it requires absolute majority approval. Currently, Noboa’s party only has two-fifths of the total assembly seats, with leftist, pro-Indigenous, and some centrist parties occupying the rest.
The urgency of this corporate agenda explains the government's simultaneous brutal crackdown on democratic opposition. In a move that has drawn international condemnation, an electoral judge, on the request of the Noboa-aligned prosecutor general, suspended the country's largest opposition party, the left-wing Revolución Ciudadana (RC), for nine months.
The RC would not be able to conduct any political activities, or run in the 2027 local elections. The left-wing party, which won 44% of the vote in the last presidential election, controls the country's largest cities, including Quito and Guayaquil.
Interestingly, the right-wing pro-Trump billionaire president has himself been credibly accused of electoral fraud, corruption, and stakes in the drug-trafficking trade.
The case against RC relies on the testimony of an individual awaiting trial for child sexual abuse, who was given preferential treatment in prison in exchange for implicating the party on cooked-up money laundering charges. This follows the February pre-trial detention of Guayaquil's Mayor, Aquiles Alvarez, another opposition leader targeted by the prosecutor general. This thus follows a long pattern of Noboa's crackdown on opposition. The right is also cutting off the opposition's ability to vote against Noboa's measures in the assembly.
The UAE BIT contains ISDS provisions that grant foreign investors the right to sue Ecuador in international tribunals for billions over laws or policies that harm their profits, and those they expect to make in the future, including environmental and health regulations that protect local and marginalized populations. This is explicitly prohibited by Article 422 of Ecuador’s Constitution, a prohibition upheld by the people in national referenda in 2024 and again in 2025.
“This is all very clearly unconstitutional,” says Ladan Mehranvar, a senior legal researcher at the Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment who focuses on international investment law and human rights. “They are trying to push the BIT through by sidestepping constitutional safeguards, including the requirement of prior approval by the National Assembly,” she added.
“We are witnessing a government ignoring its own Constitution and the will of its people to serve the interests of transnational capital,” said Pedro Labayen Herrera and Mario Osorio, both researchers with the Center for Economic and Political Research (CEPR) in Washington. “They are fast-tracking the UAE treaty by claiming it requires only executive ratification, thus avoiding the scrutiny of the Ecuadorian legislature and the public. That is simply false.”
There are serious concerns about the court’s independence. One justice, Claudia Salgado, nominated by Noboa, comes from a family of legal and arbitration specialists and has previously written on Ecuador’s constitutional ban on ISDS. Her apparent shift, alongside pressure from an executive that has publicly attacked and threatened the Constitutional Court judges, paints a picture of a state institution under siege. “Either the Constitutional Court is captured, or it feels threatened,” Mehranvar noted.
So why such a reckless, rushed push for a treaty with the UAE? Because it is the blueprint and the battering ram for something far more consequential, namely, a Free Trade Agreement with Canada and other pro-corporate actions that would permanently lock in ISDS for the (mostly foreign) mining industry.
There is also significant personal corruption at play. The Noboa family holds a significant stake in Silvercorp, a Canadian mining company, as well as other financial holdings with direct interests in ISDS and the president’s deregulation crusade.
An ISDS chapter in a Canada-Ecuador FTA would directly benefit the president’s own financial interests, allowing corporate actors, potentially including his family’s holdings, to sue the Ecuadorian state. “ISDS is a tool for the Noboa family to protect their own financial interest,” said Herrera and Osorio.
This agenda is being synchronized with a brutal domestic deregulation campaign. In late January, Noboa proposed gutting Ecuador’s Mining Law by replacing the mandatory environmental license with a simplified authorization, which local Indigenous groups say decimates their constitutional right to prior consultation, a key tool they use to oppose harmful extractive projects. Ecuador is one of the most biodiverse countries on Earth; about half of its territory is made up of the Amazon rainforest and Indigenous lands.
Combined with ISDS, this creates a vicious trap—remove environmental safeguards now, deter future governments from reinstating them, and use international tribunals to sue any future government that tries to reinstate them for “indirect expropriation” of future profits.
Companies could do this even without any intent to finish the projects, or invest while knowing that the projects are legally or politically untenable, winning out on billions of dollars in Ecuadorian taxpayer funds, at a time when Ecuador is facing a historic financial, energy, and security crisis, and remains one of the poorest countries in the Western Hemisphere.
The United Nations special rapporteur on human rights and the Environment has argued that ISDS has catastrophic consequences for climate action and human rights. Nobel prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz has even argued ISDS is “litigation terrorism,” while even the libertarian Cato Institute has said the mechanism actually threatens the rule of law, growth, and investment.
This deal and its progenitors represent the fusion of state and corporate power against democracy. It was preceded by the violent crushing of protests against subsidy removals, the criminalization of water defenders, and the continued advancement of mining projects in sensitive ecosystems like the Amazon and near the Yasuní National Park, despite, once again, popular referenda opposing them. The Noboa government has conducted a war against democracy, the rule of law, and human rights.
If the court and National Assembly allow this breach, the floodgates open for a corporate takeover dressed as trade policy, with only global mining capital standing to gain. Ecuador’s people have resisted corporatocracy many times over. Their government is now trying to force it on them by decree, while suppressing all opposition. At a time when global democracy and rights are falling off a cliff, the world must heed this crucial test.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Defeat for Justice': Ecuador to Pay Amazon-Polluting Chevron $220 Million
"A debt is not owed to Chevron. A debt is owed to the Amazonian families still waiting for truth, justice, and full reparation."
Dec 09, 2025
A US advocacy group, American human rights lawyer Steven Donziger, and the group in Ecuador behind a historic legal battle against Chevron over its dumping of toxic waste in the Amazon rainforest are condemning the Ecuadorian government's plans to pay the oil giant hundreds of millions of dollars due to an arbitration ruling.
In response to the legal fight in Ecuador that led to a $9.5 billion judgment against Chevron—which bought Texaco—the fossil fuel company turned to the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system, suing the South American country in the Hague-based Permanent Court of Arbitration. As part of the latter case, Ecuadorian Attorney General Diana Salazar Méndez's office announced Monday that the government would pay the US company only around $220 million, rather than the over $3 billion Chevron sought.
While Chevron said in a statement that it was "pleased with the resolution of this matter" and claimed the decision "strengthened the rule of law globally," and Salazar Méndez's office celebrated the dramatically lower figure, and the Union of Peoples Affected by Chevron-Texaco (UDAPT)—the group that began the case against oil company in 1993—pushed back against the government's framing of the reduction "as if it was a success and an economic achievement."
"The reality is it is a defeat for justice," UDAPT argued in a Tuesday statement. "For 32 years, UDAPT has documented pollution, environmental crime, and lives broken by Chevron, proving what should be obvious: Communities have not recovered, health has not been restored, clean water has not returned, and the territories that sustain life remain contaminated. A debt is not owed to Chevron. A debt is owed to the Amazonian families still waiting for truth, justice, and full reparation."
Amazon Watch deputy director Paul Paz y Miño similarly said Tuesday that "this illegitimate arbitration process is nothing more than Chevron abusing the law to escape accountability for one of the worst oil disasters in history."
"Ecuador's courts ruled correctly and based largely on Chevron's own evidence, that Chevron deliberately poisoned Indigenous and rural communities, leaving behind a mass cancer zone in the Amazon," the campaigner continued. "Adding insult to injury, the idea that Ecuador's people should now pay a US oil company that admitted to deliberate pollution is the epitome of environmental racism."
Ecuadorian President Daniel Noboa "must not honor this ISDS award, and the international community must stand behind the victims of Chevron's crimes and demand that the company clean up Ecuador once and for all," Paz y Miño added. "Amazon Watch stands with the affected Indigenous peoples and communities of the Ecuadorian Amazon. We urge President Noboa to reject this illegitimate award, disclose any negotiations with Chevron, and enforce Ecuadorian law by ensuring Chevron pays its debt to those it poisoned."
Donziger—who was detained in the United States for nearly 1,000 days after Chevron went after him in the American legal system for representing Big Oil's victims in Ecuador—was also sharply critical, saying Tuesday that "the decision by a so-called private corporate arbitration panel that claims to absolve Chevron of its massive pollution liability in Ecuador has no legitimacy and does not affect the historic $9.5 billion damages judgment won by Amazonian communities."
"That judgment still stands as the definitive public court ruling in the case," he said. "The private arbitral panel has no authority over the six public appellate courts, including the Supreme Courts of Ecuador and Canada, that issued unanimous decisions against Chevron and confirmed the extensive evidence that the company devastated local communities by deliberately dumping billions of gallons of cancer-causing oil waste into rivers and streams used by thousands of people for drinking, bathing, and fishing."
"I also strongly condemn President Daniel Noboa for his plans to betray his own people by agreeing to send $220 million from the public treasury to Chevron, a company that owes Ecuador billions under multiple court orders for poisoning vulnerable Indigenous peoples with toxic oil waste," Donziger added. "Noboa would effectively grant Chevron a taxpayer-funded bailout financed by the same citizens who remain victims of the company's pollution. This would be an outrageous dereliction of duty and a violation of his oath of office, warranting removal."
Keep ReadingShow Less
COP30: Climate Course Correction or Another Collision Course?
With 2024 confirmed as the hottest year ever on record, the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, and the massive financial shortfalls left by lackluster negotiations at COP29, this year's climate talks are pivotal.
Nov 09, 2025
The 30th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change will take place in Belém, a remote, underdeveloped, and poor region of the Brazilian Amazon.
Delegates from over 190 countries, NGOs, Indigenous representatives, and Brazil's President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, alongside COP President André Corrêa do Lago, will all participate in this year's high-stakes climate negotiations.
Missed Targets and Weak Ambition: It's Now or Never
With 2024 confirmed as the hottest year ever on record, the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, and the massive financial shortfalls left by lackluster negotiations at COP29, this year's climate talks are pivotal.
A 2024 report by the UN revealed that current policies put the planet on track to reach a catastrophic 3.1°C warming by 2100 (Emissions Gap Report). This scenario would expose 600 million people to flooding, reduce food yields by half, cause severe water shortages, lead to insurmountable habitat and biodiversity loss, create month-long brutal heatwaves and wildfires, heighten the risks of insect-borne diseases, and profoundly deepen inequalities.
Progress will be stalled unless the global climate investment gap can be closed and pledges are finally turned into real investments.
At last year's summit, it was agreed that at least $1.3 trillion in annual climate finance would be mobilized for developing countries by 2035. This funding is intended to support a just transition to clean energy, climate adaptation policies, and addressing loss and damage from climate change.
Tackling the climate crisis is IMPOSSIBLE without adequate funding. Since President Donald Trump took office, at least $18 billion has been stripped from climate finance—6% of the new global $300 billion annual target. The current pace of financing is entirely insufficient to meet the agreed-upon goals.
At COP30, all members of the UNCCC are expected to publish their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), outlining their national plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate impacts.
The NDC Synthesis Report was released in October 2025, which, according to Melanie Robinson, global climate, economics, and finance program director for World Resources Institute, "lays bare a frightening gap between what governments have promised and what is needed to protect people and planet."
Progress will be stalled unless the global climate investment gap can be closed and pledges are finally turned into real investments. This will prove even more difficult as militarization grips the planet. NATO has increased its spending commitments to an unprecedented 5% of GDP, and the EU Special Debts for Rearmament will further siphon money into warmongering, posturing, and weapons stockpiling.
A new initiative, the Global Ethical Stocktake, launched by the President of Brazil, Lula da Silva, and the United Nations Secretary-General, António Guterres, aims to integrate ethical considerations into climate negotiations, an aspect that has previously been omitted.
Jaded by a lack of action in previous COPs, former UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, along with other influential figures such as Mary Robinson and Christiana Figueres, labelled the current climate policy process "no longer fit for purpose."
Finally, a COP President with Credentials: André Corrêa do Lago
This year's COP president holds higher hopes than others. He is a veteran climate diplomat and serves as the current secretary for climate, energy, and environment at the Brazilian Ministry of External Affairs.
He has worked with Brazil's diplomatic corps since 1982 and has represented Brazil in similar negotiations, including as chief negotiator at Rio+20, COP28, and COP29.
In a positive initial call to action, he has called on all stakeholders in the climate negotiations process to "act decisively in the face of climate urgency through an ambitious and integrated Action Agenda at COP30."
A COP Built on Deforestation: Brazil Controversy
The location of this year's climate summit is highly contentious. Destroying thousands of acres of rainforest to make way for a new four-lane highway, which is intended to ease congestion for COP visitors, is a blatant contradiction. This is the very environment Brazil has pledged to protect.
Rather than addressing the concerns, classic greenwashing terms like 'sustainable" are being used to describe the 8-mile road. Cutting through the Amazon rainforest, the road will fragment the ecosystem, disrupt the movement of wildlife, affect the livelihoods of local communities, and be inaccessible to those who live on either side of the highway. It will, however, have bike lanes and solar-powered lights!
The lack of infrastructure in the area means that more than 30 large-scale construction projects will be taking place to accommodate and prepare for the 50,000 expected visitors. The port is being redeveloped for cruise ships, and $81 million will be spent on expanding the airport to double its current capacity.
Emissions, emissions, emissions!
The expansion of the fossil fuel industry seriously contradicts the Brazilian government's climate narrative and threatens the country's credibility at COP30.
After three climate conferences in countries with restrictions on protests, Amazonian leaders and social movements are wary that their participation may be discounted and silenced. Since February, Indigenous groups have been occupying the Secretary of Education and blocking roads that cut through their territories. The protests have already begun.
Brazil is also no climate leader, but rather an empire built on oil. Its vast mining, fossil fuel, and agribusiness sectors mean that Brazil is responsible for more than 4% of total global emissions. In 2023, it emitted 2.3 billion tonnes of greenhouse gases, making Brazil the world's fifth worst polluter.
In this country of deep inequalities, the poor are disproportionately affected by climate change, including sea-level rise; heatwaves; and heavy, erratic rainfalls.
Just weeks before the conference begins, a new bill to dismantle Brazil's environmental license framework was passed. It eases restrictions on oil exploration and road development in the Amazon. A self-licensing process enables fossil fuel and construction companies to act with impunity and avoid the need for impact studies and mitigation measures.
Immediately after the bill change, Petrobras, the country's majority state-owned, scandal-ridden oil company, began drilling for oil a mere 200 miles away from Belém. The license was previously denied due to the risk of widespread biodiversity loss in this fragile ecosystem in the event of a spill. A new report reveals that since 2024, big banks have provided $2 billion in new financing for oil and gas in the Amazon.
Estimates suggest that up to 60 billion barrels of oil may exist in the Brazilian Amazon. If burned, they could emit 24 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide—more than Brazil's emissions over the past 11 years. The expansion of the fossil fuel industry seriously contradicts the Brazilian government's climate narrative and threatens the country's credibility at COP30.
Good COP, Bad COP
"Climate is our biggest war," said Ana Toni, chief executive of COP30.
Hopes are high. Expectations are low. Change is happening, it is just painfully slow.
We need this to be the "delivery COP." One thing is for sure, COP30 will be make or break for people, our precious flora and fauna, and our planet as a whole.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Report Reveals $2 Billion of New Financing by Big Banks for Oil and Gas in the Amazon
"These investments are complicit in genocide: They are killing our culture, our history, and destroying the biodiversity of the Amazon.”
Oct 21, 2025
A day after the Brazilian state-run oil firm Petrobras announced it would begin drilling for oil near the mouth of the Amazon River "immediately" after obtaining a license despite concerns over the impact on wildlife, an analysis on Tuesday revealed that banks have added $2 billion in direct financing for oil and gas in the biodiverse Amazon Rainforest since 2024.
The report from Stand.earth—and Petrobras' license—come weeks before officials in Belém, Brazil prepare to host the 2025 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP30), where advocates are calling for an investment of $1.3 trillion per year for developing countries to mitigate and adapt to the climate emergency.
Examining 843 deals involving 330 banks, Stand.earth found that US banks JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, and Citi are among the worst-performing institutions, pouring between $283 million and $326 million into oil and gas in the Amazon.
The biggest spender on oil and gas in the past year has been Itaú Unibanco, the Brazilian bank, which has sent $378 million in financing to oil and gas firms for extractive activities in the Amazon.
"Oil and gas expansion in the Amazon endangers one of the world’s most vital ecosystems and Indigenous peoples who have protected it for millennia," said Stand.earth. "In addition to fossil fuels leading global greenhouse gas emissions, in the Amazon their extraction also accelerates deforestation, and pollutes rivers and communities."
The group's research found that banks have directly financed more than $15 billion to oil and gas companies in the Amazon region since the Paris Agreement, the legally binding climate accord, was adopted in 2016. Nearly 75% of the investment has come from just 10 firms, including Itaú, JPMorgan Chase, Citi, and Bank of America.
The analysis comes weeks after the UN-backed Net-Zero Banking Alliance said it was suspending its operations, following decisions by several large banks to leave the alliance that was established in 2021 to limit banks' environmental footprint, achieve net-zero emissions in the sector by 2050, and set five-year goals for reducing the institutions' financing of emissions.
"Around 1,700 Indigenous people live here, and our survival depends on the forest. We ask that banks such as Itaú, Santander, and Banco do Nordeste stop financing companies that exploit fossil fuels in Indigenous territories."
Devyani Singh, lead researcher for Stand.earth's new bank scorecard on fossil fuel financing, noted that European banks like BNP Paribas and HSBC have "applied more robust policies to protect the sensitive Amazon rainforest than their peers" and have "significantly dropped in financing ranks."
But, said Singh, "no bank has yet brought its financing to zero. Every one of these banks must close the existing loopholes and fully exit Amazon oil and gas without delay.”
More than 80% of the banks' Amazon fossil fuel financing since 2024 has gone to just six oil and gas companies: Petrobras, Canada's Gran Tierra, Brazil's Eneva, oil trader Gunvor, and two Peruvian companies: Hunt Oil Peru and Pluspetrol Camisea.
The companies have been associated with human rights violations and have long been resisted by Indigenous people in the Amazon region, who have suffered from health impacts of projects like the Camisea gas project, a decline in fish and game stocks, and a lack of clean water.
“It’s outrageous that Bank of America, Scotiabank, Credicorp, and Itaú are increasing their financing of oil and gas in the Amazon at a time when the forest itself is under grave threat," said Olivia Bisa, president of the Autonomous Territorial Government of the Chapra Nation in Peru. "For decades, Indigenous Peoples have suffered the heaviest impacts of this destruction. We are calling on banks to change course now: by ending support for extractive industries in the Amazon, they can help protect the forest that sustains our lives and the future of the planet.”
Stand.earth's report warned that both the Amazon Rainforest—which provides a habitat for 10% of Earth's biodiversity, including many endangered species—and the people who live there are facing "escalating threats" from oil and gas companies and the firms that finance them, with centuries of exploitation driving the forest "toward an ecological tipping point with irreversible impacts that have global consequences."
Oil and gas exploration is opening roads into intact parts of the Amazon and other forests, while perpetuating the new fossil fuel emissions that scientists and energy experts have warned have no place on a pathway to limiting planetary heating.
"With warming temperatures, the delicate ecological balance of the Amazon could be upset, flipping it from being a carbon-absorbing rainforest into a carbon-emitting savannah," reads the group's report.
Jonas Mura, chief of the Gavião Real Indigenous Territory in Brazil, said "the noise, the constant truck traffic, and the explosions" from Eneva's projects "have driven away the animals and affected our hunting."
"Even worse: they are entering without our consent," said Mura. "Our territory feels threatened, and our families are being directly harmed. Around 1,700 Indigenous people live here, and our survival depends on the forest. We ask that banks such as Itaú, Santander, and Banco do Nordeste stop financing companies that exploit fossil fuels in Indigenous territories."
"These companies have no commitment to the environment, to Indigenous and traditional peoples, or to the future of the planet," he added. "These investments are complicit in genocide: They are killing our culture, our history, and destroying the biodiversity of the Amazon.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Historic Mistake': Brazil Opens Up Amazon to New Oil Drilling Ahead of Global Climate Summit
"For us all to have a future, the oil industry can have no future," said one campaigner.
Oct 20, 2025
As climate leaders and policymakers arrive in Belém, Brazil next month, for the global climate summit that officials have pledged will stand apart from previous conferences due to its emphasis on "implementation," the country's government-run Petrobras firm will be drilling for oil just over 200 miles away in the Amazon, after the company was granted a license Monday.
Petrobras said it plans to begin drilling immediately in a project that will last about five months at the mouth of the Amazon River—the Foz de Amazonas region.
Despite President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva's reputation as an international climate leader, he has claimed that oil revenue will help fund Brazil's transition to renewable energy, but Ilan Zugman, Latin America and Caribbean director at the grassroots climate action group 350.org, said Monday that in granting the license, the Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources (IBAMA) was "doubling down on a model that has already failed."
Petrobras is planning to drill an oil well at an offshore site, Block 59, that is 310 miles from the mouth of the Amazon.
IBAMA previously denied Petrobras the license, saying the company had not provided adequate plans for how it would protect wildlife in the case of an oil spill.
"The history of oil in Brazil shows this clearly: huge profits for a few, and inequality, destruction, and violence for local populations."
In September, the agency approved a pre-operational environmental assessment and said a new "fauna simulation" would take place after the license was issued, allowed Petrobras to prove after obtaining permission for drilling that it would protect wildlife.
The Amazon region is home to about 10% of the planet's wildlife, and climate advocates have raised alarm that the river's currents would swiftly bring the damage from an oil spill straight to the habitats of many animals and plants.
Brazilian NGO the Climate Observatory said the approval of the license "sabotages" the 30th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP30), which World Meteorological Organization Secretary-General Celeste Sauro said recently "aspires to be a turning point, a moment when the world shifts from ambition to implementation."
Last year was the first year to exceed 1.5°C above average preindustrial temperatures, and the previous 10 years have been the warmest on record. Scientists and the International Energy Agency have warned that no new oil or other fossil fuel projects have a place on a pathway to reaching net-zero global carbon emissions by 2050.
“The decision is disastrous from an environmental, climate, and sociobiodiversity perspective," said the Climate Observatory.
The group told The Guardian that civil society organizations would be taking the Brazilian government to court over the license, saying its approval was rife with "illegalities and technical flaws."
Despite IBAMA's approval, an opinion signed by 29 staff members at the agency in February said they recommended denying the license due to the risk of “massive biodiversity loss in a highly sensitive marine ecosystem."
Zugman called the decision a "historic mistake."
"The history of oil in Brazil shows this clearly: huge profits for a few, and inequality, destruction, and violence for local populations," said Zugman. "Brazil must take real climate leadership and break the cycle of extraction that has led us to the current climate crisis. We urgently need a just energy transition plan, based on renewables, that respects Indigenous, quilombola, and riverside peoples and guarantees them a leading role in decisions about climate and energy—including at COP30."
Earlier this year, Indigenous leaders representing dozens of Amazon ethnicities and tribes signed a declaration demanding that officials at COP30 "nullify oil blocks that have not had the consent of Indigenous people," "halt investment in new oil infrastructure," and create phase-out plans for oil and gas operations.
Nick Young, co-head of story and communications at Greenpeace International, called IBAMA's decision "disastrous."
"A spill here would be catastrophic and uniquely hard to contain in the Amazon plume," said Young. "And in addition to the risk of oil spills, the science clearly shows that we cannot afford to burn even existing oil reserves, let alone new ones."
"For us all to have a future, the oil industry can have no future," he added. "It makes zero sense to allow them to find new oil to throw on the fire."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Amazon Countries Shouldn’t Have to Fight Environmental Crime Alone
While progress among Amazon countries is laudable, we also need countries from outside the region to take a stand against environmental crimes, illegally sourced natural resources, and illicit financial flows stemming from environmental destruction.
Sep 11, 2025
On August 22, leaders from the eight Amazon countries gathered to take stock of current efforts to protect the world’s largest rainforest and river basin. The meeting came at a time when the Amazon faces unprecedented threats from illegal logging and mining, unchecked expansion of ranching and farming into protected areas, uncontrolled megafires, and rising levels of crime and violence. 2024 was the fifth worst year on record for deforestation in the Amazon region, with over 4.3 million acres of forest lost. Meanwhile, illegal gold mining in the Amazon has doubled since 2018, expanding into increasingly remote and ecologically sensitive areas and threatening the safety and well-being of local communities.
In the balance hangs the future of one of the most special and biodiverse places on Earth. The Amazon is home to a staggering 3 million species, including flagship species such as jaguars, pink river dolphins, and some of the largest eagles in the world. Beyond its incredible biodiversity, the Amazon rainforest plays a key role in our global defense against climate change, absorbing one-fourth of the carbon dioxide absorbed by all the land on Earth.
The Amazon is also critically important as a home to an estimated 40 million people (roughly the population of Canada), including an estimated 400 Indigenous groups speaking 300 languages. Amazon residents are facing complex threats including rising levels of violence and insecurity, mercury contamination from illegal mining, extreme weather events such as droughts and wildfires, limited state presence, and insufficient economic opportunity. Many of these challenges stem from the rising role of environmental crime in the region, which threatens local livelihoods, contaminates food and water sources, and empowers criminal organizations operating with increasing levels of violence and sophistication.
As leaders gathered at the Fifth Presidential Summit of Amazon Countries in Bogota, Colombia, it was clear to many of us attending that the stakes were high. On balance, the results of the summit were positive. Those of us working to combat environmental crimes were pleased to see countries formally commit to crucial issues, including:
- Addressing mercury use;
- Strengthening security cooperation in response to cross-border illicit activities in the Amazon Region, including environmental crimes, threats to environmental defenders, and human rights violations; and
- Increasing technical cooperation among member countries for the exchange of information, experiences, and best practices related to gold traceability.
While these commitments mark progress, much more is needed. Some of the commitments are quite vague, particularly around illegal mercury use. With over 200 tons of illegal mercury trafficked into the Amazon region over the past five years, and emerging accounts of Amazon children who cannot speak or walk due to exposure to this toxic substance, countries need to commit to far more than “advancing the development of initiatives that allow addressing” this deadly harm.
Yet the region will have a hard time addressing these challenges without cooperation from the countries that serve as the destination for products and profits deriving from the Amazon’s destruction. Our work at the FACT Coalition has shown how the profits from environmental crimes in the Amazon flow to financial hubs outside of the region, notably the United States.
Take gold, for example. Our research has shown that the United States is a major destination for both illegally sourced gold and the illicit funds associated with its sale. Other global financial and trade centers play similarly important roles. The United Kingdom is among the world’s largest gold centers and is home to influential standards-setting bodies such as the London Bullion Market Association (LBMA), and Switzerland is a global hub for gold refining. Could the Amazon region reasonably be expected to address illicit gold trading without engagement from these multibillion dollar markets?
The US should also resume recently-cancelled funding for international projects related to combating environmental crimes.
This is an important reminder that the devastating, rapidly growing environmental crimes threatening the Amazon with illicit extraction of natural resources do not occur in a vacuum. Illegally sourced natural resources from the Amazon region often enter global markets—and the illicit wealth they produce ends up far from the banks of the Amazon river, secreted away in shell companies, real estate, and other opaque structures.
While progress among Amazon countries is laudable, we also need countries from outside the region to take a stand against environmental crimes, illegally sourced natural resources, and illicit financial flows stemming from environmental destruction. They can do this by closing loopholes in their trade and financial systems, prosecuting environmental criminals, and cracking down on shell and front companies, the preferred financial getaway vehicle for environmental criminals.
Specifically, the US should address corporate and financial opacity in its own markets by implementing key reforms. This should include:
- Addressing the outsized role of US anonymous shell companies in environmental crimes by fully implementing the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA);
- Making transnational environmental crimes—such as those committed in the Amazon rainforest—an underlying offense for money laundering, which would help US prosecutors go after billions of dollars in dirty money driving environmental destruction;
- Requiring the same documentation needed to bring $10,000 in cash into the United States for $10,000 worth of gold, thereby closing a major loophole that is currently used by environmental criminals;
- Passing the bipartisan United States Legal Gold and Mining Partnership Act, which would establish a multi-year strategy to reduce the environmental and social impacts of illegal gold mining in the Western Hemisphere; and
- Ensuring that US government agencies working to protect the Amazon and combat environmental crimes have the resources they need to effectively do their job.
The US should also resume recently-cancelled funding for international projects related to combating environmental crimes. This should include support for formalization efforts for local workers, such as artisanal gold miners, helping to connect them with environmentally friendly techniques and responsible consumer markets.
It’s great to see Amazon countries committing to new measures to combat environmental crime. But they shouldn’t have to do it alone—especially when partnership from global allies could make all the difference.
Keep ReadingShow Less
JBS Doesn’t Deserve a Place in Our Markets or on Our Plates
Even in industrial meat production, an industry known for its corruption and poor conditions, JBS stands out for the scope and severity of its violations.
Aug 20, 2025
Earlier this summer, JBS, the world’s largest meatpacking corporation, was approved to list on the New York Stock Exchange. The move was celebrated in business media as a milestone of corporate growth and a testament to the leadership of JBS’ 33-year-old CEO of their US division Wesley Batista Filho. But behind the headlines lies a far more troubling story, one of exploitation, impunity, and environmental devastation that should not be ignored.
Turning a blind eye to abuses at a company as large and powerful as JBS is dangerous, with the harms extending far beyond the meatpacking industry. Consumers, advocates, and investors must stop normalizing this behavior. We have the power and the responsibility to demand better.
JBS has built its empire not through innovation or sustainability, but through exploitation. Price fixing, child labor, wage theft, bribery, tax avoidance, deforestation, animal cruelty—these are not isolated scandals. They are core ingredients of JBS’ business model. And while many corporations would work to correct and address their abuses, JBS has repeatedly treated legal penalties and reputational damage as just another cost of doing business.
Even in industrial meat production, an industry known for its corruption and poor conditions, JBS stands out for the scope and severity of its violations. The company recently agreed to pay over $80 million to settle a beef price-fixing lawsuit. Earlier this year, the company was cited for illegally employing migrant children, some as young as 13, on overnight cleaning shifts in its slaughterhouses. Meanwhile, workers across its global operations report being injured, silenced, or discarded when they speak up.
We must stop sending the message that corporations can endanger workers, break the law, and destroy the environment without consequence, as long as they remain profitable.
A recent federal lawsuit filed by Salima Jandali, a former safety trainer at JBS’ Greeley, Colorado plant, alleges that she faced racial and religious harassment, was retaliated against for raising safety concerns, and was pressured to falsify injury reports. Her allegations closely mirror a separate class action lawsuit filed by Black workers at another JBS facility in Pennsylvania who describe enduring racist slurs, being passed over for promotions, and working in unsafe conditions.
Beyond the factory floor, JBS has long been linked to illegal deforestation and environmental destruction in the Amazon, both directly through its supply chains and indirectly through pressure on local ecosystems. The company’s climate footprint is staggering, with greenhouse gas emissions that rival those of entire countries. And yet, instead of reckoning with this impact, JBS continues to expand production and avoid accountability.
In Brazil, where the company is headquartered, the recent passage of most of the so-called “devastation bill” further weakens environmental safeguards and accelerates the damage. Now that President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva approved the bill, even with some environmental restrictions, it continues to grant free rein to agribusiness giants like JBS that profit from the destruction of forests and the displacement of Indigenous communities.
This is not a case of a few bad actors or isolated scandals. JBS has thrived because of weak enforcement, political influence, and a financial system that rewards short-term gains over long-term responsibility.
Just months before its New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) debut, JBS subsidiary Pilgrim’s Pride made a $5 million donation to the Trump-Vance Inaugural Committee. This is the context in which JBS was allowed to access US capital markets. Even though top proxy advisory firms, including Glass Lewis and Institutional Shareholder Services, urged shareholders to vote against the listing, citing serious governance concerns and lack of transparency, their warnings were ignored, and just this June, JBS began trading on the NYSE.
JBS now generates over $39 billion a year from its US operations alone, profits that are often routed through tax havens in Luxembourg, Malta, and the Netherlands. And when caught breaking the law, JBS often faces only minor consequences that rarely match the scale of the harm.
We must stop sending the message that corporations can endanger workers, break the law, and destroy the environment without consequence, as long as they remain profitable. There is another path forward. Consumers, advocates, and investors need to reject this status quo and demand change.
That starts with consumers actively choosing not to buy JBS products. Investors can divest from JBS and urge their asset managers to do the same. Universities, pension funds, and retirement plans can reexamine whether their portfolios are supporting a company with this kind of track record. At the same time, policymakers must push for stronger corporate accountability, not just in meatpacking, but across industries that harm people and the planet.
JBS should not be rewarded with more money, more access, and more influence. Instead, we must make JBS the example and let it serve as a warning about the costs of putting profit above all else. The future of our food system, our environment, and our communities depends on drawing the line and holding it.
Keep ReadingShow Less
An Open Letter to Mahmoud Khalil and Noor Abdalla’s Newborn Child
The miracle of this moment is that even genocide cannot exterminate our will to live, nor the love that endures through the pain.
May 12, 2025
Dear Little One,
I do not know your government name. But I know what my government wants to name you. Criminal. Terrorist. Problem. A threat to national security. Better off dead. Everything they’re naming your father: Mahmoud Khalil. Everything except a precious child of God, which you are.
When I heard two plainclothes Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents abducted your father for protesting the genocide in Gaza, I trembled. When I found out he was captured at Columbia University, where I teach, right in front of your mother, Noor, who had been carrying you in her womb for eight turbulent months, my chest sank into my stomach.
I have not stopped thinking of you since. Your heart has been beating on the door of my conscience.
I’m here to tell you, Little One, that the world is yours. All of it. Not because you have the right to own the Earth, but because you have a responsibility to steward its survival and splendor.
I’m embarrassed to admit that I was surprised your father was taken. I’m the child of persecuted people who were kidnapped, locked in chains, and ripped away from their families by the founders of this country. I know America became the most powerful nation on Earth by seizing the labor of Black folks and the land of Indigenous people. I also know that Columbia, where your father helped lead the student protests, was never an institution that values freedom—academic or otherwise. It is a gatekeeper of the U.S. empire and the largest real estate owner in New York City.
That’s why I won’t belabor what the circumstances of your birth already prove. Fascism is here. It is criminal to learn. Telling the truth can get you doxxed, locked up, or kicked out of the country. Nobody is safe.
I wish this were not the case. I wish I could write to you about the beauty of the Earth without the brutality of its inhabitants. I wish I could show you the majesty of the Amazon, the Earth’s largest rainforest, without the greedy CEOs that have remade it into a commodity. I wish I could describe the sound and smell of Baltimore, Miami, and St. Louis without the pop! of a cop’s gun or the stench of a homeless woman languishing on the street.
I wish I could paint you a picture of your people, the Palestinian people, without barren olive trees, countless checkpoints, shopping malls built atop graves, and a 25-miles-long open-air prison where over 50,000 Palestinians, including nearly 16,000 children, have been slaughtered by the Israeli military. I wish I could read you a story without the cries of a mother and her baby buried beneath rubble.
But I’m afraid that the writing is on the wall, Little One. And the wall—whether snaking through Palestine or enclosing the borders and prisons of America—is stained with blood and wrapped in barbed wire.
I do not mean to frighten you. Only to share what you need to know to survive. Not just your little limbs and endearing eyes, but your precious heart. For those who think they hate you will attack your inner life. Do not be complicit. We can only lose if we surrender the sword of truth and the shield of self-regard. So guard your heart. Reject bitterness and hatred. Heartbreak is better than having no heart at all.
The truth is: It is themselves they fail to love. And this is but one symptom of the sickness we bear today. The decay of moral life, the death of the human spirit.
But all is not lost. The miracle of this moment is that even genocide cannot exterminate our will to live, nor the love that endures through the pain. This is what makes you profoundly dangerous to the powers that be, although you have yet to take your first step or mumble your first word. For you are proof of irrepressible life.
A new world is not waiting to be born. It is here!
I caught a glimpse of its beauty at Columbia’s encampment. Sprawled between sleeping bags was a makeshift library, medical clinic, food stations, art murals, music circles, and signs that read “Stop Funding Genocide” and “Jews for Free Palestine.” Muslim students held Jummah while Jewish students observed Seder and Christians organized Sunday service. Professors and organizers co-led teach-ins on global politics and the history of student activism as kids flew kites and police helicopters hovered above.
There was no fee to learn or break bread or receive medical support. The only debt we accrued is the love and care we owe to one another. The encampment was education (and life!) at its best. Not because it was perfect. It wasn’t. But because it modeled what it means for a multiracial and multifaith community to learn how to live together and support each other.
Some will try to convince you that opponents of genocide are champions of hate. Don’t be fooled by their lies. Their efforts to defame your father and all those acting with moral courage reveal who they are, not you.
James Baldwin, who came of age not far from where your father was abducted, knew this better than any writer I’ve read. In 1963, just a few months before four Klu Klux Klan members bombed the 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, Alabama, brutally murdering four black girls during Sunday school, he penned a letter to his teenage nephew, James. “I said that it was intended that you should perish in the ghetto, perish by never being allowed to go behind the white man’s definitions, by never being allowed to spell your proper name.”
Little One, know this. The world will try to define you by your zip code, skin color, religious tradition, and native tongue. And some will try to make you feel small and worthless. But identity is a birthright, not a birthmark. Your right, and responsibility, is to decide who you will grow up to be.
I pray you grow strong and beautiful. I pray you grow to be curious and committed to something bigger than yourself. I pray you cherish life, even when it hurts. I pray you and your father laugh together beneath the shade of olive trees. I pray you and your mother dance until the stars shimmer. I pray you reap the fruits of their labor, and all of us who sow seeds of freedom on this wretched Earth. I pray you fight so that, one day, no child will become a martyr. I pray you always believe another world is possible. And that—even beneath the shadow of death—there is beauty in the struggle.
When I found out you were born, I felt a mixture of fury, relief, and joy. I hate that your father is trapped in a cage in Louisiana, over 1,400 miles away, as your mother brought you into this world in New York City. I hate that this government kept him from holding her hand and hearing your very first cry. I wept at the idea of you weeping without his tender touch and wonderstruck eyes.
And yet, I thank God you entered History’s gates at such a time as this. I know that may sound strange, even cruel. If we do not change course, by the time you’re able to read this letter, Miami might drown; the Amazon may be no more; and another generation of Palestinian children will have grown up beneath war-torn skies. This is not the world any child should inherit, or any adult should have to endure.
But, alas, here you are. And I’m here to tell you, Little One, that the world is yours. All of it. Not because you have the right to own the Earth, but because you have a responsibility to steward its survival and splendor.
The sunset is yours to cherish. The evergreen is yours to tend and explore. Children are yours to raise, teach, and protect. Elders are yours to learn from and look after. Walls are yours to tear down. Wars are yours to end. Secrets are yours to keep. Ancestors are yours to grieve, honor, and avenge. Your parents are yours to love. And you, you are ours to keep! We belong to each other.
Please know that you are loved. And that, with love, we will fight for your life, and for your father’s life, and for every and all life—to the death.
Sumud and Salām,
nyle
Keep ReadingShow Less
'We Need Urgent Global Action': Study Warns Humanity on Path to Trigger 16 Climate Tipping Points
"It is clear that we are currently on a dangerous trajectory," said one University of Exeter professor.
Apr 23, 2025
Scientists on Wednesday released yet another study warning that humankind is at risk of triggering various climate "tipping points" absent urgent action to dramatically reduce planet-heating emissions from fossil fuels.
The new peer-reviewed paper, published Wednesday in the journal Earth System Dynamics, comes from a trio of experts at the United Kingdom's University of Exeter and the University of Hamburg in Germany.
Climate scholars use the term "tipping point" to describe a critical threshold which, when crossed, "leads to significant and long-term changes of the system," the paper notes. Debate over it "has intensified over the past two decades," prompting several studies of specific risks.
"Climate tipping points could have devastating consequences for humanity," said co-author Tim Lenton in a statement. "It is clear that we are currently on a dangerous trajectory—with tipping points likely to be triggered unless we change course rapidly."
"We need urgent global action—including the triggering of 'positive tipping points' in our societies and economies—to reach a safe and sustainable future," added the Exeter professor and Global Systems Institute director.
Lenton's team calculated the probabilities of triggering 16 tipping points. They looked at the risks of serious damage to key glaciers, ice sheets, sea ice, and permafrost; the dieback of forests such as the Amazon; the die-off of low-latitute coral reefs; and the collapse of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC), which is part of a crucial "global conveyor belt" of ocean currents.
To assess the risk of current policies triggering climate tipping points, the researchers focused on a scenario in which median warming of 2.8°C takes place by the end of the century.
On that pathway, the study says, "our most conservative estimate of triggering probabilities averaged over all tipping points is 62%... and nine tipping points have a more than 50% probability of getting triggered."
Under scenarios with lower temperature rise, "the risk of triggering climate tipping points is reduced significantly," the study continues. "However, it also remains less constrained since the behaviour of climate tipping points in the case of a temperature overshoot is still highly uncertain."
The paper concludes that "rapid action is needed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, since climate tipping points are already close, and it will be decided within the coming decades if they will be crossed or not."
Lead author Jakob Deutloff shared that takeaway a bit more optimistically, saying that "the good news from our study is that the power to prevent climate tipping points is still in our hands."
"By moving towards a more sustainable future with lower emissions, the risk of triggering these tipping points is significantly reduced," he added. "And it appears that breaching tipping points within the Amazon and the permafrost region should not necessarily trigger others."
▶️New paper from Jakob Deutloff, Hermann Held and Tim Lenton highlights the need for action to prevent triggering climate tipping points. More on this at The Global Tipping Points conference @exeter.ac.uk Register now! global-tipping-points.org/conference-2... esd.copernicus.org/articles/16/...
[image or embed]
— Global Systems Institute (@gsiexeter.bsky.social) April 23, 2025 at 4:45 AM
The paper was published during Covering Climate Now's joint week of media coverage drawing attention to the 89% of people worldwide who want their governments to do more to address the global crisis; ahead of a Global Systems Institute conference on tipping points this summer; and just over six months away from the next United Nations climate summit, COP30, in Brazil.
While some governments are trying to prevent the worst-case scenario by taking action to cut emissions, U.S. President Donald Trump has made clear since returning to office in January that he aims to deliver on his pro-fossil fuel campaign pledge to "drill, baby, drill."
On the heels of the
hottest year in human history, Trump is working to gut key agencies, ditched the Paris climate agreement, and has taken executive action to boost planet-wrecking coal, gas, and oil, including declaring a national energy emergency.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Humanity's Chance to Reverse Amazon's Slide Toward Tipping Point Is 'Shrinking'
The world's largest rainforest showed "ominous indicators," including wildfires and extreme drought, in 2024.
Dec 31, 2024
The Amazon, sometimes called the "lungs of the planet," this year showed signs of further inching toward a much-feared tipping point, threatening the very existence of the world's largest rainforest.
Rampant wildfires and extreme drought ravaged large parts of the Amazon in 2024. The fires and dry conditions were fueled by deforestation and the El Niño weather pattern, and also made worse by climate change, according to the World Economic Forum. "The number of fires reached its highest level in 14 years this September," the group reported in October.
Drought has also impacted the Amazon River, causing one of the river's main tributaries to drop to its lowest level ever recorded, according to October reporting from The Associated Press. The drop in the river has negatively impacted local economies and food supplies.
Andrew Miller, advocacy director at Amazon Watch, told the AP last week that the fires and droughts experienced across the Amazon in 2024 "could be ominous indicators that we are reaching the long-feared ecological tipping point."
"Humanity's window of opportunity to reverse this trend is shrinking, but still open," he said.
The Amazon plays a vital role in keeping the planet healthy. 150-200 billion tons of carbon are stored in the Amazon, and it also carries 20% of the earth's fresh water to sea.
According to the World Economic Forum, if the Amazon tipping point is reached, "it will release billions of tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere through fires and plants dying off. This would further exacerbate climate change and make the 1.5°C goal impossible to achieve. It would also alter weather patterns, which would impact agricultural productivity and global food supplies."
A paper published in the journal Nature in February indicates that up to half of the rainforest could hit a tipping point by the middle of the century. "We estimate that by 2050, 10% to 47% of Amazonian forests will be exposed to compounding disturbances that may trigger unexpected ecosystem transitions and potentially exacerbate regional climate change," explained the researchers behind the paper.
However, it wasn't all bad news out of the Amazon in 2024. According to the AP, the amount of deforestation in Brazil and Colombia declined in this year. In Brazil, which houses the largest chunk of the Amazon, forest loss dropped 30.6% compared to the year prior, bringing it to the lowest level of destruction in nearly a decade.
The improvement is an about-face from a couple of years ago, when the country registered 15-year high of deforestation during the leadership of former far-right President Jair Bolsonaro. Brazil is now led by the left-wing President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who—despite presiding over this drop in deforestation—has also come under scrutiny, as AP noted, by environmentalist for backing projects that they argue could harm the environment.
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy