Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Accept Deny

GoGreenNation news

5 Black Environmentalists you should know

News Feed
Friday, April 19, 2024

Environmental Justice has long been a Black issue, our communities have historically, and even now, been disproportionately impacted by environmental issues. From chemical companies to contaminated water, Black and poor neighborhoods are far too often in close proximity to environmental hazards. Despite that, our communities have fought and continue to fight because we understand our lives and the environment are intertwined. Check out these five Black environmentalists who dedicated their lives to advocating for environmental justice throughout history. Hazel M. Johnson 1935 – 2011“For so long, environmental activism has been primarily a white, middle-class issue, far removed from the daily reality of inner-city life.”Affectionately known as the mother of the environmental justice movement, Hazel Johnson became a leading voice on the environmental racism impacting Black communities. After the Louisiana-born activist moved to Chicago, she became an influential figure in the Altgeld Gardens neighborhood she called home. Following the death of her husband from Lung Cancer, Johnson became concerned about a similar pattern of lung-related ailments plaguing other residents. Through her own investigation she learned the Altgeld Gardens was surrounded by several environmental hazards, including having been built over a landfill. Johnson eventually founded the People for Community Recovery, an organization to support Altgeld Gardens tenants and focus on environmental justice. Her persistent advocacy played a crucial role in President Bill Clinton signing an executive order to address environmental issues impacting minority and low-income folks. Wangari Maathai 1940 – 2011Wangari Maathai, 2004 Nobel Peace Prize laureate, speaks during the Nobel Peace Prize Forum, Friday, March 10, 2006, at Luther College in Decorah, Iowa.ASSOCIATED PRESS“When we plant trees, we plant the seeds of peace and seeds of hope. We also secure the future for our children.”Internationally renowned Kenyan human rights activist and environmentalist, Wangari Maathai devoted her life to making this world a more peaceful, equitable and greener place. In 1977, Maathai founded the Green Belt Movement, an organization focused on supporting women, alleviating poverty and planting trees to conserve the environment. The Green Belt Movement resulted in the planting of over 30 million trees across Kenya. Maathai’s advocacy and impact traversed the continent and ultimately the world with her becoming the first African woman and first environmentalist to receive the Nobel Peace Prize. Margie Richard 1941 – Goldman Environmental Prize winner Margie Richard, of Norco, LA., smiles in San Francisco, Saturday, April 17, 2004.AP Photo“The environment is everything around us—the air, the water and the land. The Earth is the foundation of life. Environmental issues should never be ignored.”Margie Richard grew up in a historically Black neighborhood in Norco, Louisiana which is a part of a region known as “Cancer Alley.” Richard’s own house was just a few feet away from a Shell chemical plant. Witnessing her community be afflicted by health issues primed her for a life of activism. However, what solidified her journey into environmentalism was the 1973 Shell Pipeline explosion that killed two people. Another Shell plant explosion would happen in 1988 killing seven workers, and a year later, Richard founded Concerned Citizens of Norco. After a decades-long campaign led by Richard, Shell agreed to buyout the neighborhood and reduce its toxic emissions by 30 percent. Richard’s advocacy expanded beyond her Norco neighborhood earning her the honor of becoming the first African American to win the Goldman Environmental Prize.Robert D. Bullard 1946 – Robert Bullard, the founder of the environmental justice center, poses in his office on the Clark Atlanta University Campus in Atlanta, Tuesday, Aug. 24, 2004, between enlarged versions of two of his books.AP Photo“America is segregated, and so is pollution.”Often regarded as the father of environmental justice, Robert Bullard has been a prominent scholar and activist in the environmental justice movement spanning four decades. An award-winning author of 18 books, much of his work has been focused on environmental racism, sustainability, urban land use, and climate justice. Bullard is also the founding director of the Bullard Center for Environmental and Climate Justice and the HBCU Climate Change Consortium. Bullard’s advocacy and leadership has earned him dozens of prestigious honors, including receiving the 2020 Champions of the Earth Lifetime Achievement Award and being appointed to the White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council by President Joe Biden.John Francis 1946 – “We are the environment and how we treat each other is really how we treat the environment.”Inspired by the 1971 oil spill in San Francisco Bay, John Francis made a decision to live a more environmentally conscious lifestyle. One of the big changes he made was giving up motorized transportation and instead walking. After receiving pushback for his decision, Francis took a 17-year vow of silence. During that time, he remained committed to the cause, founding Planetwalk, a non-profit environmental awareness organization. Over the years, Francis, nicknamed Planetwalker, trekked across the United States taking detours along the way for several degrees, including a Ph.D. in Land Resources. In addition to journeying through the United States, he walked and sailed through the Caribbean, Venezuela, Brazil, Bolivia, Argentina and Chile. As the National Geographic Society’s first Education Fellow, Francis continues to spread awareness to the masses about the importance of taking care of the Earth. Check out our Earth Day Reads on the Black Joy Bookshop to learn more!

These Black environmentalists dedicated their lives to advocating for environmental justice.

Environmental Justice has long been a Black issue, our communities have historically, and even now, been disproportionately impacted by environmental issues. From chemical companies to contaminated water, Black and poor neighborhoods are far too often in close proximity to environmental hazards. Despite that, our communities have fought and continue to fight because we understand our lives and the environment are intertwined.

Check out these five Black environmentalists who dedicated their lives to advocating for environmental justice throughout history.

Hazel M. Johnson 1935 – 2011

“For so long, environmental activism has been primarily a white, middle-class issue, far removed from the daily reality of inner-city life.”

Affectionately known as the mother of the environmental justice movement, Hazel Johnson became a leading voice on the environmental racism impacting Black communities. After the Louisiana-born activist moved to Chicago, she became an influential figure in the Altgeld Gardens neighborhood she called home. Following the death of her husband from Lung Cancer, Johnson became concerned about a similar pattern of lung-related ailments plaguing other residents. Through her own investigation she learned the Altgeld Gardens was surrounded by several environmental hazards, including having been built over a landfill. Johnson eventually founded the People for Community Recovery, an organization to support Altgeld Gardens tenants and focus on environmental justice. Her persistent advocacy played a crucial role in President Bill Clinton signing an executive order to address environmental issues impacting minority and low-income folks.

Wangari Maathai 1940 – 2011

WANGARI MAATHAI

Wangari Maathai, 2004 Nobel Peace Prize laureate, speaks during the Nobel Peace Prize Forum, Friday, March 10, 2006, at Luther College in Decorah, Iowa.ASSOCIATED PRESS

“When we plant trees, we plant the seeds of peace and seeds of hope. We also secure the future for our children.”

Internationally renowned Kenyan human rights activist and environmentalist, Wangari Maathai devoted her life to making this world a more peaceful, equitable and greener place. In 1977, Maathai founded the Green Belt Movement, an organization focused on supporting women, alleviating poverty and planting trees to conserve the environment. The Green Belt Movement resulted in the planting of over 30 million trees across Kenya. Maathai’s advocacy and impact traversed the continent and ultimately the world with her becoming the first African woman and first environmentalist to receive the Nobel Peace Prize.

Margie Richard 1941 –

GOLDMAN RICHARD

Goldman Environmental Prize winner Margie Richard, of Norco, LA., smiles in San Francisco, Saturday, April 17, 2004.AP Photo

“The environment is everything around us—the air, the water and the land. The Earth is the foundation of life. Environmental issues should never be ignored.”

Margie Richard grew up in a historically Black neighborhood in Norco, Louisiana which is a part of a region known as “Cancer Alley.” Richard’s own house was just a few feet away from a Shell chemical plant. Witnessing her community be afflicted by health issues primed her for a life of activism. However, what solidified her journey into environmentalism was the 1973 Shell Pipeline explosion that killed two people. Another Shell plant explosion would happen in 1988 killing seven workers, and a year later, Richard founded Concerned Citizens of Norco. After a decades-long campaign led by Richard, Shell agreed to buyout the neighborhood and reduce its toxic emissions by 30 percent. Richard’s advocacy expanded beyond her Norco neighborhood earning her the honor of becoming the first African American to win the Goldman Environmental Prize.

Robert D. Bullard 1946 –

BULLARD ENVIRONMENTAL RACISM

Robert Bullard, the founder of the environmental justice center, poses in his office on the Clark Atlanta University Campus in Atlanta, Tuesday, Aug. 24, 2004, between enlarged versions of two of his books.AP Photo

“America is segregated, and so is pollution.”

Often regarded as the father of environmental justice, Robert Bullard has been a prominent scholar and activist in the environmental justice movement spanning four decades. An award-winning author of 18 books, much of his work has been focused on environmental racism, sustainability, urban land use, and climate justice. Bullard is also the founding director of the Bullard Center for Environmental and Climate Justice and the HBCU Climate Change Consortium. Bullard’s advocacy and leadership has earned him dozens of prestigious honors, including receiving the 2020 Champions of the Earth Lifetime Achievement Award and being appointed to the White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council by President Joe Biden.

John Francis 1946 –

“We are the environment and how we treat each other is really how we treat the environment.”

Inspired by the 1971 oil spill in San Francisco Bay, John Francis made a decision to live a more environmentally conscious lifestyle. One of the big changes he made was giving up motorized transportation and instead walking. After receiving pushback for his decision, Francis took a 17-year vow of silence. During that time, he remained committed to the cause, founding Planetwalk, a non-profit environmental awareness organization. Over the years, Francis, nicknamed Planetwalker, trekked across the United States taking detours along the way for several degrees, including a Ph.D. in Land Resources. In addition to journeying through the United States, he walked and sailed through the Caribbean, Venezuela, Brazil, Bolivia, Argentina and Chile. As the National Geographic Society’s first Education Fellow, Francis continues to spread awareness to the masses about the importance of taking care of the Earth.

Check out our Earth Day Reads on the Black Joy Bookshop to learn more!

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

COP30 has big plans to save the rainforest. Indigenous activists say it’s not enough

“We need the government to recognize our climate authority and our role as guardians of biodiversity.”

On Friday, at least 100 Indigenous protestors blocked the entrance to the 30th Annual United Nations Climate Change Conference, or COP30, in Belém, Brazil. The action comes on the heels of an action earlier this week when hundreds of Indigenous peoples marched into the conference, clashing with security, and pushing their way through metal detectors while calling on negotiators to protect their lands. These actions brought Indigenous voices to the front steps of this year’s global climate summit — where discussions now, and historically, have generally excluded Indigenous peoples and perspectives. World leaders have attempted to acknowledge this omission: Brazil’s president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva said Indigenous voices should “inspire” COP30, and the host country announced two new plans to protect tropical forests and enshrine Indigenous people’s land rights. But demonstrations like this week’s show even these measures are designed with little input from those affected, garnering criticism. Preserving the Amazon rainforest is critical to mitigating climate change and protecting biodiversity. How this is done is one of the key issues being raised at COP30. Upon the kickoff of the conference, Brazil announced the Tropical Forests Forever Facility, or TFFF, part of a plan to create new financial incentives to protect tropical forest lands in as many as 74 countries, including its own.  The Tropical Forests Forever Facility has been touted as one of Brazil’s new marquee policies for combating the climate crisis. It also potentially represents an opportunity for Brazil to position itself as a leader on environmental conservation and Indigenous rights. The country has had a historically poor track record on rainforest conservation: By some estimates, 13 percent of the original Amazon forest has been lost to deforestation. In Brazil, much of that happens because of industrial agriculture — specifically, cattle ranching and soy production. Research has shown 70 percent of Amazon land cleared is used for cattle pastures. Brazil is the world’s lead exporter of beef and soy, with China as its top consumer for both products.  The TFFF marks an attempt to flip the economics of extractive industry — by paying governments every year their deforestation rate is 0.5 percent or lower. It also attempts to highlight the role Indigenous communities already play in stewarding these lands, although critics say it does not go far enough on either goal.  Under the TFFF, which will be hosted by the World Bank, Brazil seeks to raise $25 billion in investments from other countries as well as philanthropic organizations — and then take that money and grow it four-fold in the bond market. The goal is to create a $125 billion investment fund to be used to reward governments for preserving their standing tropical forest lands. One condition of receiving this funding is that governments must then pass on 20 percent to Indigenous people and local communities. Security personnel clash with Indigenous people and students as they storm the venue during COP30 in Belem, Para State, Brazil, on November 11, 2025. Olga Leiria / AFP via Getty Images The idea underlying the fund is that the TFFF could make leaving tropical forests alone more financially lucrative than tearing them down. In the global climate finance market, there aren’t currently any mechanisms that value “tropical forests and rainforests as the global public good that they are,” said Toerris Jaeger, director of the Rainforest Foundation Norway. These ecosystems “need to be maintained and maintained standing and that is what TFFF does,” he added. But critics say that TFFF merely represents another attempt to tie the value of these critical ecosystems to financial markets. “You cannot put a price on a conserved forest because life cannot be measured, and the Amazon is life for the thousands of beings who inhabit it and depend on it to exist,” said Toya Manchineri, an Indigenous leader from the Manchineri people of Brazil. Manchineri is also the general coordinator of the Coordination of Indigenous Organizations of the Brazilian Amazon. He added that setting aside 20 percent of TFFF funds for Indigenous communities is a good start, but that figure could be much higher.  Other COP30 attendees have criticized the plan for trying to fight the profit-driven industries that lead to deforestation with a profit motive. “The TFFF isn’t a climate proposal, but it’s another false solution to the planetary crises of biodiversity loss, forest loss, and climate collapse,” said Mary Lou Malig, policy director of the Global Forest Coalition. “It’s another way to profit off the problems that these same actors like the big banks and powerful governments and corporations actually created.”  But the performance of the TFFF is contingent on market fluctuations, risk, and the global economy’s health each year. How much governments — and Indigenous peoples — receive each year depends on how well the market does that year.  Manchineri added that the global climate policy to protect tropical forests should do more to recognize the role that Indigenous peoples play in defending it from illegal land grabs that drive deforestation. These communities “will continue to protect” the rainforest, said Manchineri, “with or without a fund. But we need the government to recognize our climate authority and our role as guardians of biodiversity.”  Prior to COP30, Brazil and nine other tropical countries joined the Intergovernmental Land Tenure Commitment, or ILTC, a global initiative to recognize Indigenous land tenure and rights to defend against deforestation and provide a potential backstop on the ground to support efforts like the TFFF. According to Juan Carlos Jintiach, the executive secretary of the Global Alliance of Territorial Communities, this commitment and the accompanying $1.8 billion Forest and Land Tenure Pledge that will support these land recognition efforts are “most welcome.” However, meaningful progress among participating countries entails establishing monitoring instruments that account for and ensure Indigenous peoples see the funds and see their rights recognized.  “We cannot have climate adaptation, climate mitigation, or climate justice without territorial land rights and the recognition and demarcation of indigenous territory,” said Zimyl Adler, a senior policy advocate on forests, land, and climate finance at Friends of the Earth U.S.  But evidence of that recognition is scarce. Under the Paris Agreement, signatory states are required to submit climate action plans called Nationally Determined Contributions, or NDCs. A recent report from global experts that reviewed NDCs from 85 countries found that only 20 of those countries referenced the rights of Indigenous peoples and that only five mentioned Free, Prior, and Informed Consent — an international consultation principle that allows Indigenous Peoples to provide, withhold, or withdraw their consent at any time in projects that impact their communities or territories.  “It was a real missed opportunity to strengthen those commitments to land rights and tenure,” said Kate Dooley, a researcher at the University of Melbourne and an author of the Land Gap report.  As the conference will continue for another week, the protests have raised questions about the distinction between climate talks and action, and whether this year’s COP will translate into the latter for Indigenous communities who see deforestation and weak land tenure rights as immediate threats to their lives and homes.  “We don’t eat money. We want our territory free,” said Cacique Gilson, a Tupinmbá leader who participated in one protest. “But the business of oil exploration, mineral exploitation, and logging continues.”  This story was originally published by Grist with the headline COP30 has big plans to save the rainforest. Indigenous activists say it’s not enough on Nov 14, 2025.

Activism
Climate
Forests

This massive power line was supposed to help Oregon residents. Now it'll likely serve a data center

The 300-mile B2H transmission project was approved to benefit hundreds of thousands of Oregon residents but will now will likely serve a data center

The Oregon Public Utility Commission has reaffirmed its approval of a nearly 300-mile electrical transmission line that’s set to run from Idaho and carry power across five Oregon counties – despite concerns it will primarily serve a private data center rather than the public.The commission on Thursday declined to rescind a certificate that authorizes Idaho Power, the developer and co-owner of the Boardman-to-Hemingway project – B2H for short – to seize private land via eminent domain. Regulators maintained the line remains in the public interest. The decision came in response to a petition filed this summer by the nonprofit Stop B2H Coalition and its co-chair, Irene Gilbert, a retired government employee who has challenged the project for years over its impact on Oregon’s rural landscapes.The petition said the certificate should be revoked because PacifiCorp, the transmission line’s co-owner, suddenly switched plans and told regulators this spring it no longer intends to sell power from the line to Oregon customers but rather to a private industrial user. The utility has declined to confirm the customer is a data center. But the power-hungry facilities have been expanding rapidly in Eastern Oregon, and few other businesses demand the amount of energy the new transmission line would carry. Gilbert and her coalition argued on Thursday that the change in plans constitutes “the abuse of eminent domain” and that “fundamental public purpose has been abandoned for private gain.” The commission had issued the certificate in 2023 because PacifiCorp – which owns 55% of the Boardman-to-Hemingway transmission line – had demonstrated the line would serve its 805,000 customers – including the 620,000 customers in Oregon, most of them on the west side of the state. It would also boost the utility’s transmission capacity between its eastern and western service regions, which encompass six states.The utility had previously told regulators that the line would decrease customer costs by about $1.7 billion through 2042 by allowing it to move more power with greater efficiency.This spring, however, the utility suddenly announced it had changed course. It told regulators it would not be able to send the power west to its Oregon customers because it was unable to procure firm transmission rights from the Bonneville Power Administration due to delays in that agency’s transmission development process. Instead, it said it would sell the power to an industrial customer. “Allowing a project justified for broad public benefit to proceed primarily for the private commercial gain of a single corporation fundamentally undermines Oregon’s constitutional requirements for eminent domain,” said Jim Kreider, an environmental activist from La Grande who co-chairs the coalition with Gilbert. “This is an unjustified taking of public property under private pretenses.” What’s more, Kreider and Gilbert said, PacifiCorp knew it would not be able to serve Oregon customers with power from the line months before it applied for the certificate from state regulators. They said BPA had notified PacifiCorp in October 2022 about the delays, yet the company failed to disclose that information to regulators and applied for the certificate claiming the line would benefit hundreds of thousands of residents. Other advocacy groups – including the Sierra Club, Mobilizing Climate Action Together, Renewable Northwest and the Northwest Energy Coalition – that support grid expansion in the region to advance the state’s climate goals told regulators they were also frustrated that the B2H line may not be used as it was intended and justified by the state-issued certificate. The line, ​​now under construction after two decades of reviews and lawsuits, will be among the largest and one of the few transmission projects built in the Pacific Northwest in recent years – despite a severe shortage of transmission capacity in the region and a growing backlog of renewable energy projects waiting to connect to the grid. The groups maintain that the certificate was premised upon the transmission line’s “broad public benefits, not the needs of a single private entity.” Allowing PacifiCorp to change course would “violate the spirit and legal framework under which the line was approved by this commission,” Alex Houston, an attorney with the Green Energy Institute who represents the groups, told commissioners. It would also “harm Oregon customers and set a dangerous precedent wherein the justifications supporting issuance of a certificate may summarily be disregarded once the utility gets approval,” he said. Instead of revoking the certificate, Houston asked the commission to enforce it, including by issuing financial penalties of up to $10,000 for each day PacifiCorp fails to comply. The commission did not take up the suggestion. Commissioners said the line was still needed, that the shift in use was part of the planning process, and that the line might still serve more Oregon customers in the future. “A transmission line is built with one vision in mind, and as the world evolves, it gets used in a multitude of ways across the timeframe that it’s on the landscape,” said commission chair Letha Tawney. Kim Herb, the agency’s utility strategy and planning manager, admitted that staff were concerned with PacifiCorp’s lack of transparency, but said that didn’t justify revoking the certificate. The company’s change of plans isn’t conclusive, she added, and “serving even one large customer may still meet the statutory standard for public use.”In addition, Herb said, Idaho Power had shown the need for additional transmission capacity to serve its electricity load and maintain grid reliability, which satisfied the line’s public use criteria. Idaho Power serves only about 20,000 Oregon customers. Those customers live in a part of the state that has seen neither growth in the number of residents nor an increase in their energy demand, aside from the data centers moving in. Gilbert argued the utilities have inflated the energy need and that data center operators might opt for local or on-site energy solutions—such as microgrids capable of operating independently from the traditional grid—rather than relying on costly transmission lines and enduring long interconnection delays. Data centers have already adopted or proposed similar strategies in other states, including battery storage, natural gas turbines and even small modular nuclear reactors.If that were to happen, residential customers would be stuck paying for the cost of B2H, she said. “It’s basically setting up a situation where it’s questionable whether the projections regarding the number of large users are actually going to occur. So who will end up paying for these are the residents” Gilbert said. Idaho Power launched construction on the B2H line this summer, cutting several access roads and laying foundations for 100 of the 1,200-plus transmission towers planned in Morrow and Malheur counties. The plan to finish the line in 2027 is still on track. Jocelyn Pease, an attorney who represents Idaho Power, told commissioners the utility has obtained 95% of the access rights to begin construction. PacifiCorp attorney Zach Rogala said the utility might still serve Oregon customers “if we’re successful in securing transmission rights in the future.”If you purchase a product or register for an account through a link on our site, we may receive compensation. By using this site, you consent to our User Agreement and agree that your clicks, interactions, and personal information may be collected, recorded, and/or stored by us and social media and other third-party partners in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

Activism
Business
Climate

A Flotilla Kicks off the People's Summit for Activists at UN Climate Talks

As United Nation climate talks get underway in Belem, a different kind of conference is kicking off: the People’s Summit, a gathering of activists, organizers, environmentalists and Indigenous groups from around the world

BELEM, Brazil (AP) — As United Nations climate talks rolled on Wednesday at the elaborate new venues built for the summit, many of the activists eager to shape the talks took to the water.Carried by scores of boats large and small, a vast group whooped and laughed, smiled and wept. Some splashed canoe paddles through the bay where a northern section of the Amazon rainforest meets the Atlantic Ocean. Others hugged old friends. They pressed their foreheads together or held hands or stood solemnly in moments of prayer and reflection.They were there to celebrate a community from around the world at a gathering of activists, organizers, environmentalists and Indigenous groups, outside the halls where world leaders are discussing climate change for the next two weeks. Their joy came after a brief but tense moment the night before when protesters broke through security barricades at the main conference venue, slightly injuring two security guards, according to the U.N.Many emphasized the importance of making the voice of the people heard after years of these talks being held in countries where civil society is not free to demonstrate.“The Amazon for us is the space of life,” said Jhajayra Machoa, an A'l Kofan First Nation of Ecuador member of A Wisdom Keepers Delegation, who helped paddle one of the canoes. “We carry the feeling and emotions of everything lived in this place, and what we want is to remember. Remember where we are from and where we’re going and what we want." Pressing world leaders to keep those who suffer most in mind The people who are attending the Conference of the Parties, or COP30, have a wide range of hopes for the outcome. This year is different than in past years, because leaders aren't expected to sign one big agreement at the end of it; instead, organizers and analysts have said it's about getting specifics to execute on past promises to act on climate change. “When we’re bridging what’s happening in the mind, when we talk about policy, we need to bridge to the heart, and touch our spirit when we do the work,” said Whaia, another member of A Wisdom Keepers Delegation, a Ngāti Kahungunu woman from New Zealand. “It takes both arms, both branches of the tree to really be strong, to be able to find our resilience in this space.” Activists welcome greater freedom to speak out The ability to express thoughts and feelings freely is a welcome respite for many arriving in Brazil after several years of these talks being held in countries where governments imposed limitations on free speech and demonstrations. The evolution that needs to happen for the world to take action is "not in the halls of the U.N. COP, but it’s in the streets and it is with our people,” said Jacob Johns, an Akimel O'Otham and Hopi member of A Wisdom Keepers Delegation who witnessed the security breach. Now is the time to come together, respect each other and reevaluate the systems that govern the planet, said Pooven Moodley of the Earthrise Collective, which brings together activists from different traditions. For him, the canoes seen in Wednesday's gathering are a metaphor for the situation the world is in with climate change.“The current canoe we’re in is falling apart, it’s leaking, people are being pushed over, and ultimately we’re heading for a massive waterfall. So the question is, what do we do, because we’re in that reality,” Moodley said. “We have to continue to defend the territories and the ecosystems that we can, but while we do that, we launch a new canoe.”The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Oct. 2025

Activism
Climate

China made quiet border advances as ties warmed, Indian critics warn

Buffer zones meant to ease India-China tensions along their shared border have disproportionately restricted Indian forces from patrolling, former officials say.

NEW DELHI — In 2020, after Indian and Chinese soldiers brawled with stones and spiked rods in the thin Himalayan air along their countries’ contested border, nationalist fury gripped India.People smashed Chinese televisions and torched effigies of Chinese leader Xi Jinping. The Indian government banned dozens of Chinese apps and vowed it would not mend ties with its geopolitical rival until border issues were resolved.Five years later, India-China commerce has revived and direct flights between the countries have resumed. At a recent summit in Tianjin, China, Xi met his Indian counterpart, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and the leaders pledged to strengthen relations, with the Indian side touting “the maintenance of peace and tranquility along the border areas.”In New Delhi, however, and along the steep mountain passes that divide the countries, a chorus of critics contend that agreed-upon buffer zones meant to ease tensions have, in practice, disproportionately restricted Indian forces from patrolling in areas they once routinely accessed. With India’s quiet acquiescence, they allege, China has been able to effectively push the boundary lines in its favor.“Some of the buffer zones created are mostly in areas previously patrolled by us and on our side,” said a retired lieutenant general who has overseen these parts of the border. “We are supposed to try and get back our territory, but in the foreseeable future, it is a pipe dream,” he added, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive topic.Warnings about the shifting boundary lines — from former military officials and ambassadors, as well as sitting members of Parliament and border residents — have grown louder and more frequent. The claims are difficult to prove, since foreign journalists are denied access to the area. But the criticisms present a challenge to the Indian government, analysts said, as it mends ties with Beijing and seeks to rebalance its global relations amid an ongoing diplomatic feud with the United States.The Indian army referred questions from The Washington Post to the External Affairs Ministry, which did not respond to requests for comment. The Indian Defense Ministry, the Chinese Defense Ministry, and the Chinese Foreign Ministry did not respond to requests for comment. Chinese officials have urged India not to let the boundary question “define” the relationship.The Chinese strategy is “two steps forward, one step back,” said Jabin Jacob, an associate professor who teaches Chinese foreign policy at India’s Shiv Nadar University. “Then they still have one step in their possession.”A frozen boundaryIndia and China went to war over the border in 1962. More than half a century later, it remains undefined and bitterly disputed.The nuclear-armed neighbors still have drastically different interpretations of the de facto boundary — known as the Line of Actual Control, or LAC — and the soldiers deployed there have periodically come to blows.The most recent confrontation came in June 2020, in the border territory of Ladakh. At least 20 Indian and four Chinese soldiers were killed in the fighting, according to official counts. Tens of thousands of troops were rushed to forward positions, and, even after subsequent pullbacks, both sides have maintained a heightened military presence.Since the conflict, the two sides have struck a series of agreements to prevent flare-ups in the most contentious areas. The new protocols allowed some patrolling to resume, but also gave Chinese troops more favorable positions in several key spots, according to former officials, analysts and local leaders.“Around 450 square kilometers of land was converted into a buffer in my constituency alone,” Konchok Stanzin, an official in Chushul, one of the last villages on India’s eastern border, told The Post. “This land belonged to India but now our soldiers cannot set foot there.”As Indian forces have acceded to the new protocols, they have blocked pastoralists from grazing animals in areas where they once roamed freely. That has stirred anger in Ladakh, a restive Indian territory where locals have campaigned for greater political rights and environmental protections. Four people were killed in late September when police in the regional capital of Leh opened fire on people protesting for statehood, according to Human Rights Watch, and a political office belonging to Modi’s party was torched.In the aftermath, prominent environmental activist Sonam Wangchuk was arrested by Indian authorities under a national security law for allegedly inciting the violence, a claim he denies. Some of his supporters believe he was targeted, in part, for being outspoken about the loss of pasturelands and Chinese encroachment along the border.“It was not sitting well with government narratives that China is not taking our land,” said his wife, Gitanjali J. Angmo. “What Sonam has been fearing for a long time is that we can’t afford as a border state not to address the demands of the Ladakhis who have so far shown India love and passion.”Increasingly, the warnings from border communities are being echoed within the Indian establishment. A 2022 report by a senior police official in Ladakh said Indian forces no longer had a “presence” at 26 of 65 former patrolling points, highlighting what she called her country’s “play safe” strategy.“The Chinese absolutely have come in and established a position that is more advantageous to them than before,” said Ajai Shukla, a defense analyst and former military official, drawing on conversations with contacts on the ground. “The only question is, how much have we lost?”J.S. Bajwa, a former Indian lieutenant general, said “it is not just salami slicing,” referring to previous Chinese tactics that gradually changed the facts on the ground. “They actually took the whole belly of the pork,” he said.Strategic ‘opacity’The Indian government has been careful and sparing in its descriptions of the situation along the border.Last October, the government said it had reached an agreement with China to restore patrolling rights in two key areas, Depsang and Demchok, and that troops on both sides had pulled back slightly along all friction points. In December, however, Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar told Parliament that agreements in areas outside of Depsang and Demchok were “temporary and limited.”The MEA then said there had been a “resolution of the issues that emerged in 2020.” But when pressed by reporters and members of Parliament, Jaishankar and his colleagues have avoided stating categorically that patrolling rights have been restored at all friction points. Responding to similar border questions under the country’s right of information laws, the government has repeatedly called them “vague” and “speculative” and, therefore, not answerable.“The opacity is a way of dealing with the problem,” said Ashok Kanta, the Indian ambassador to China from 2014 to 2016. “If you don’t put it out in the public domain, then you don’t need to defend it publicly.”Some former military officials say Chinese troops have also lost access to previous patrolling points, while others reject the notion that India has surrendered any ground.“In all places, the Chinese have gone back to the original points they were at,” said Manoj Mukund Naravane, the army’s chief general during the 2020 conflict.A pragmatic truceIn late August, amid deteriorating U.S-India relations, Modi visited China for the first time since the clash in Ladakh. Videos of the countries’ two leaders engaging in a lighthearted exchange with Russian President Vladimir Putin rapidly went viral.India and China have since agreed to allow exchanges of scholars and journalists, cooperate on transboundary rivers, resume direct flights and reopen Indian access to a pilgrimage in Tibet. India has termed it a “gradual normalization of bilateral relations.”Rakesh Sharma, a former lieutenant general who served on the border from 2013 to 2015, said these are “logical” moves, mirroring China’s own increasingly relaxed posture. Some former officials argue that Jaishankar’s description of border measures as “temporary” signals India’s expectation that the issues will be addressed in future talks.“From the Indian side, the story is not over, but you have to live with Beijing next door, so you have to find some sort of an equilibrium,” said Manoj Kewalramani, a China studies fellow at the Takshashila Institution in Bangalore.“The danger,” Jacob warned, “is that this becomes permanent out of sheer inertia until the next crisis.”For now, analysts said, India has more pressing problems, like steep U.S. tariffs and sluggish manufacturing growth — and it needs Chinese investment.“We essentially cannot do without China,” said Manoj Joshi, distinguished fellow at the Observer Research Foundation.The hard reality, said Daniel Markey, a senior Stimson Center fellow focused on South Asia and China relations, is that “India does not have an easy, cheap, or effective solution to the broader threat posed by China militarily.”And it is that recognition, according to former Indian brigadier Deepak Sinha, driving the country’s current approach. “We remain intimidated and terrified of a conflict with China escalating,” he said. “It’s a fact of life.”Christian Shepherd in Singapore, Shams Irfan in Srinagar, Indian-administered Kashmir, and Supriya Kumar contributed to this report.

Activism
Animals
Crisis

Jailed climate activist facing deportation from UK fights ‘crazy double punishment’

Marcus Decker is supported by climate experts, religious leaders and celebrities as he fights being first person in UK to be ‘deported for peaceful protest’A climate activist who is appealing against his deportation after serving one of the longest prison sentences in modern British history for peaceful protest has criticised his “crazy double punishment”.Marcus Decker was jailed for two years and seven months for a protest in which he climbed the Queen Elizabeth Bridge over the Dartford Crossing and unveiled a Just Stop Oil banner in October 2022. Continue reading...

A climate activist who is appealing against his deportation after serving one of the longest prison sentences in modern British history for peaceful protest has criticised his “crazy double punishment”.Marcus Decker was jailed for two years and seven months for a protest in which he climbed the Queen Elizabeth Bridge over the Dartford Crossing and unveiled a Just Stop Oil banner in October 2022.The 36-year-old German national, who was released from prison in February last year after serving 16 months, was sent a letter by the Home Office while in prison informing him of his automatic deportation. In his legal challenge, being heard at a tribunal in central London on Monday, Decker has the support of climate experts, religious leaders, celebrities and members of the public.“I would be the first person in this country to be deported for peaceful protest,” he said. “It’s such a crazy double punishment. I have my established life here with my partner, Holly, and the kids [he is stepfather to her two children], we’ve been living together for many years.“We’re in the middle of a multi[faceted] crisis. There’s an inequality crisis, the situation for immigrants has been getting so much worse since Labour has come in, and the climate crisis is getting worse by the day, which, of course, was the reason I took this action in the first place.“It sort of makes sense to be in this situation where I can communicate the values around care that made us take this action in the first place and that need to carry on in this society.”Decker, a teacher and musician, was released from prison in February 2024 after having served 16 months but still has an ankle tag, must report to the Home Office every other week and cannot leave the country. Because he began the appeal against deportation while in prison he served longer than his fellow protester, Morgan Trowland, despite Trowland having been given a longer three-year jail term.“I’m very sorry for those that were impacted by the harm that we caused directly on the day or on the two days,” said Decker. “The people that missed funerals or missed hospital appointments, who were stuck in traffic, that is real harm. But then at the same time whole countries are either on fire, or a third of Pakistan was underwater that year in 2022, London had for the first time experienced 40C heat. If you put it in the greater perspective, zoom out, then we have to keep trying different approaches to addressing these crises, to make change for the greater good.”Decker lauded the “incredible” support he has had in his fight against deportation, which has included a 10-page letter sent to the UK government by the UN special rapporteur on environmental defenders, Michel Forst, a letter signed by 22 Nobel prize laureates and support from 562 actors, musicians and other artists. Much of it is being presented in evidence at his appeal.Lord Hain, the former cabinet minister who was a leader of the anti-apartheid movement during the 1970s and 1980s, said: “It is difficult to see how the further step of deportation can be justified. That seems to me to cross a line and become unnecessarily punitive.”The former chief scientific adviser to the UK government, Sir David King, described the action by Decker and Trowland as a “reasonable and proportionate response in light of the escalating climate crisis”, while the actor Juliet Stevenson said Decker was a father figure to Holly Cullen-Davies’s children, and that his removal “would do them untold harm and cause unnecessary anguish and abandonment”.The former archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, said: “Deportation will reinforce the growing perception that environmental activism at the moment attracts excessively punitive sentencing and assimilates activists to terrorists.”The tribunal’s decision is expected at a later date. The Home Office has been approached for comment.

Activism
Climate
Government

Suggested Viewing

Alguita - The Boat That Changed The World

A retrospective celebratory documentary highlighting the plastic pollution movement that was spurred by Captain Charles Moore and his research vessel - the ORV Alguita.

Activism
Pollution
Documentary

L’eau Est La Vie (Water Is Life): From Standing Rock To The Swamp

On the banks of Louisiana, fierce Indigenous women are ready to fight—to stop the corporate blacksnake and preserve their way of life. They are risking everything to protect Mother Earth from the predatory fossil fuel companies that seek to poison it. The film follows water protector Cherri Foytlin in the swamps of Louisiana as she leads us on a no-nonsense journey of indigenous resistance to the Bayou Bridge Pipeline (BBP), which is an extension of the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL). The pipelines are part of an ongoing legacy of colonization and slow genocide. At the heart of the struggle is a battle between people and profit.

Indigenous
Resources
Activism

The Youth Climate Corps BC

In collaboration with communities across British Columbia, the Youth Climate Corps challenges what resilience looks like through youth led, locally designed, climate action initiatives.

Youth
Activism

Confessions of an Eco-Terrorist

CONFESSIONS OF AN ECO-TERRORIST: A feature length documentary film. A unique look at eco-history from one who was there for 40 years: Peter Jay Brown, and a humorous examination of the word “eco-terrorist” in today’s reality.

Activism
Culture
Documentary

Crossing the Divide

An Iowa farmer reacts swiftly when he hears that radical climate marchers plan to disrupt peace in his tiny town. What he does after that offers a lesson for would-be peacemakers everywhere.

Inspirational
Activism
Climate

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.