climate activism
-
DRC: ‘Defending the environment means becoming the target of politicians and businesspeople’
CIVICUS discusses the hopes and roles of civil society at the forthcoming COP28 climate summit with Guillaume Kalonji, a youth climate activist and founder of Rise Up Movement DRC.Rise Up Movement DRC is a citizen movement founded and led by young people in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). It aims to help communities combat climate change and adapt to its effects. It amplifies the voices and experiences of young activists in the Global South, provides climate education in schools and communities and promotes sustainable land use and the development and use of renewable energies.
Why did you become a climate activist?
I graduated in general biology and trained as a teacher. I soon realised I would be unable to practise my biology skills on a dead planet or teach starving people.
The DRC is a country in the throes of war, especially in the eastern region. It is also undergoing a huge economic and food crisis. People are hungry and spend much of their time looking for food. As a result, they have no time to think about the climate, even though they are severely affected by the effects of climate change caused by the countries of the global north. A lot of what they are suffering is climate related.
So I decided to organise and mobilise against climate change. I realised I needed to be ready to play my part at every level, from my local community to international forums. That’s why I taught myself English – my mother tongue is French – within a year of realising that COP climate summits and other major international climate conferences are held in English.
What environmental issues do you work on?
Upon realising that so many people are unaware of the root causes of the problems they face, I started focusing on environmental education. I visit schools and universities to raise awareness amongst young people, in the hope that they’ll join me in one way or another in demanding those who have caused climate change to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions to stop causing harm, and pay reparations for the harm they have already caused.
The DRC is a direct victim of the disruption of the seasons and the rainfall cycle that characterises climate change. This is what’s at the root of the drop in agricultural production, a major source of the food insecurity that currently affects more than 25 million Congolese people.
In addition, I host the Vash Green School Project, which installs clean cooking stoves in schools to reduce deforestation caused by excessive use of wood as an energy source, as well as to improve cooking conditions in schools.
Have you faced any restrictions or reprisals for the work you do?
In the DRC, and in most of Africa more generally, defending the environment means becoming the target of certain politicians and businesspeople, because we challenge their interests. Behind every acre of forest illegally cut down by Chinese or European corporations hides a Congolese politician. When I started my activism, I received threatening messages warning me not to look for trouble by meddling with politicians. Friends and members of my extended family put a lot of pressure on me when I started protesting against oil exploitation in the Congo rainforest. But I can’t stop defending the environment, because I think if I remain silent in the face of a crime I would become an accomplice.
How do you connect with the global climate movement?
It wasn’t easy, but it happened fairly quickly. When I realised that expressing revolt against climate change and the destruction of nature was a real possibility, I wanted to make my voice heard. The problem was that when I expressed myself in French, my voice didn’t go far; it stayed close by, only creating insecurity for myself and others.
But thanks to Twitter, I discovered Uganda’s Rise up movement team led by Vanessa Nakate, who became my friend. They are very active in Africa and around the world. In order to join them and speak up for the Congolese people I decided to learn English – and given the right incentives, I was able to do it very quickly. I downloaded Vanessa´s speeches and listened to them every day, so that I learned more about climate change at the same time as I learned English. The more I tweeted in English, the more followers and new connections I got. Today I have over 3,000 followers and connections on every continent. I’m succeeding in becoming a voice of French-speaking Africans crying out for help in adapting to the effects of climate change.
What priority issues do you want to see addressed at COP28?
COP28 must be the one to take a clear decision on fossil fuels worldwide, because this is the main cause of the climate change we are experiencing. In my country, the rainforest is in imminent danger. It is going to be sacrificed for the sake of oil exploitation, choosing to ignore the fact that this forest stores a level of CO2 equivalent to more than 10 years of global emissions.
The phaseout of fossil fuels must be accompanied by provisions for a just transition, so that costs do not fall on those who have done the least to cause the problem we are now in.
COP28 should also come back to the issue of loss and damage, by deciding to make those who have polluted the most pay, now and not in the future, so that victimised countries can survive.
Another big issue that should be addressed is that of migration. Those who are responding to climate disaster by taking the route of migration must regain their right to life, which they currently don’t effectively have. The countries of the global north have turned the Mediterranean and the Tunisian desert into cemeteries in which they are burying migrants by the thousands.
Because these issues need to be urgently addressed, it’s vital to involve civil society at COP28. Civil society is made up of members of forgotten communities, the real victims of climate change. A COP to which only presidents and ministers are invited won’t work, because they are the kind of people who will cope with rising temperatures by turning on their air conditioners and will be able to import food when there are local shortages, all while ordinary people starve because their land receives no rain. Only victims can bring in the reality of climate change, explain what it really looks like in their communities.
Civic space in the DRC is rated ‘repressed’ by theCIVICUS Monitor.
Get in touch with Rise Up Movement DRC byemail and follow@Guillaume0905Kl and@RiseUpMovt_DRC1 on Twitter.
-
GERMANY: ‘Our street blockades hurt society the least and put no one’s life in danger’
CIVICUS speaks with Zoe Ruge of Last Generation about climate activism and its criminalisation in Germany.Last Generation is an international network of climate activists using civil disobedience to urge governments to address the climate emergency, enabling citizen participation and financially supporting the global south as a primary victim of climate change that it hasn’t caused.
What forms of protest has Last Generation deployed in Germany?
Last Generation has come to dominate the climate movement in Germany, so its tactics have become the prevailing tactics. The most common form of climate protest in Germany is currently street blockades, and blockades of public infrastructure more generally, because they are efficient at creating a certain level of disruption. A small number of people protesting peacefully is all it takes to generate a wide public reach. Additionally, street blockades are a platform to have talks with politicians and citizens about the climate crisis, do media work and underline our demands.
Alongside disrupting everyday traffic, we draw attention to the major responsibility of the richest one- to-10 per cent of the population. To target them specifically, we block airports, spray-paint private jets, disrupt big events and bring protests into museums and other public spaces.
Our street blockades hurt society the least and put no one’s life in danger. We take adequate security measures, for instance to make sure no emergency vehicle gets stuck in traffic. In case of an emergency, we are ready to open the blockade and clear the street.
We know the kind of civil disobedience tactics we use face criticism, and we constantly reflect on our practices and take all feedback into consideration. We have aimed to choose a protest form that effectively rises awareness and is the least disruptive for people, and we think the street blockade is one such form. It may cause people to get to work half an hour late one day, but it provides a much-needed opportunity to stop people’s everyday routine and encourage them reflect on what we’re doing and where it’s leading us.
What have been your biggest achievements?
More people are realising the seriousness of the crisis we’re facing. Street blockades allow us to talk to people who would normally not get involved but are forced to listen and ask questions about our reasons to be there and our demands. Through disruption, we’ve been able to bring a lot of climate-related topics into public discourse, not only through media coverage but also thanks to local, face-to-face conversations. We are seeing rising awareness, which is necessary to deal with the consequences of the climate crisis.
In terms of policies, one of our demands during the first protest wave was a law similar to the one France has, to save food from going to waste in supermarkets. One third of all food is lost in the production chain, which equates to a lot of preventable CO2 emissions. Such a law is currently being discussed in several federal states.
In terms of public awareness, when street blockades began about a year ago they attracted 25 to 30 people, and now they bring thousands to the streets in Berlin. Churches are standing behind us and civil society groups are also voicing demands for climate action.
Overall, we are receiving increasing support from the whole society. We get invitations to discuss the climate crisis with politicians, artists, at schools and with other parts of civil society. In response to the criminalisation we are facing, which has included the freezing of some of our assets, we have also seen a rise in donations from the public.
What are your demands to the German government?
What Last Generation demands are pretty simple things that must be done to tackle the consequences of the climate crisis and prevent it escalating. We demand a speed limit of 100 kilometres per hour in Germany, which would bring a reduction of more than 6.7 million tons of CO2 emissions a year, and a permanent €9 (US$9.90) monthly ticket to make public transportation affordable. This was tested last year and was a huge success, as many people shifted from using cars to using public transport – but now it’s quite expensive again.
Our third demand is the establishment of a citizen assembly as a long-term mechanism for us to deal with the climate crisis as a society and end the use of fossil fuels in a socially just manner by 2030. Since our politicians are not even able or willing to implement a speed limit, we need citizens to be able to help tackle the climate crisis through more direct democratic tools.
As part of a global movement, Last Generation works in close cooperation with Debt For Climate, a grassroots global south-driven initiative connecting social justice and climate justice struggles with the aim of freeing impoverished countries from a debt burden that is often used as a tool for further natural resource extraction. We support their demand for financial support because they are the primary victims of climate change that they haven’t caused. German politicians tend to argue that the climate catastrophe isn’t happening in Germany, although it is indeed taking place, maybe to a lesser extent. But in other parts of the world people are already dying because of it while more developed countries continue benefiting from their resources.
How have German authorities reacted to your demands?
Reactions have varied at different government levels. We’ve had very productive talks with local politicians who have shown openness and understanding. But at the federal level we’ve faced a harsh and criminalising public discourse. Last Generation is being called a criminal group and increasingly treated as such.
We face accusations that we are hurting the cause of climate protection because our tactics are scaring people away. But it’s not true. The government is just trying to shift the focus from the substance of our demands to the form of our actions and avoiding our questions of why we still don’t have a speed limit and why we still don’t have proper affordable public transportation even though we have the resources for it.
The fact that our government isn’t willing to act as the climate emergency demands and is instead turning against us is the main challenge that we as climate activists currently face.
How is the government criminalising climate activism?
There are between 3,000 and 4,000 cases coming to court soon, mainly connected to street blockades. In Germany, this kind of spontaneous demonstration is protected by law, but once the police intervene and tell you to leave, it’s not so clear whether the assembly continues to be legally protected. There are also accusations of vandalism on the basis that people have damaged walls by spray-painting them.
A serious accusation being used against climate activists is that of being part of a criminal group. Based on section 129A of the German Criminal Code, when the police start an investigation on these grounds they can listen to your phone calls, read your messages and search your homes. This is weird because Last Generation is so transparent that anything the government would like to know about us – our structures, our funding, our planned protests – is publicly accessible. We have nothing to hide.
This June, some of us experienced searches of our homes, our website was taken down, our bank accounts were frozen and we had work materials confiscated. Activists are struggling because it’s scary to feel that the police could force their way in, search your entire home and take away whatever they want.
A friend of mine, Simon Lachner, was recently taken from his home to the police station and kept there for the entire day, just because he had publicly announced a protest scheduled for that afternoon. In Bavaria, people have been repeatedly taken into preventive custody for long periods of time to keep them from protesting. This form of preventing protests is becoming more common.
What kind of support are you receiving, and what further support would you need to continue your work?
The criminalisation of peaceful protests organised by people who aren’t trying to hurt anyone but who want to protect lives elicits instant solidarity. Thousands of people have joined Last Generation’s protest marches. Frozen funds have been almost fully replaced by donations pouring in. People contact us to ask how they can play their part in climate activism.
We’re also part of the A22 international network of climate movements that use civil disobedience tactics, and this also supports us, especially in the face of criminalisation. Other organisations from all around the world are reaching out to us and offering help such as legal support.
What we need is for everybody to consider their potential role in building a more resilient society. One of the most efficient ways to fulfil our collective responsibility is by exercising our right to protest within a democratic system.
Civic space in Germany is rated ‘open’ by theCIVICUS Monitor.
Get in touch with Last Generation through itswebsite orFacebook page, and follow@AufstandLastGen onTwitter.
-
ITALY: ‘Accusing activists of vandalism is much easier than implementing renewable energy policies’
CIVICUS speaks with Gabriella Abbate of Last Generation about climate activism and its criminalisation in Italy, a country that has recently experienced both drought and devastating floods.Last Generation is an international network of climate activists using civil disobedience to compel governments to address the climate emergency by enabling citizen participation and financially supporting the global south as a primary victim of climate change that it hasn’t caused.
Why are climate protests on the rise in Italy?
Italy is heavily affected by climate and ecological crises: it experienced 310 climate disasters in 2022 alone, one of the main reasons behind them being the use of fossil fuels. The Italian government’s funding of fossil fuels has been steadily increasing, reaching €2.8 billion (approx. US$3 billion) between 2019 and 2021 and comprising 90 per cent of Italy’s total investment in fossil energy. Italy is the world’s sixth largest fossil energy lender, ahead even of Russia and Saudi Arabia.
In reaction to these energy policies, transnational activist networks including Last Generation, Extinction Rebellion and Scientists Rebellion are organising climate protests throughout Italy. They all use nonviolent civil disobedience tactics such as roadblocks, soiling with washable and vegetable-based paint and gluing. Last Generation is currently protesting to demand that the Italian government immediately cease public funding for fossil fuels and respect the agreements made by European Union member states in the 2030 climate and energy framework to increase the share of renewable energies, improve energy efficiency and cut greenhouse gas emissions.
What challenges are climate protesters facing in Italy?
A major challenge has been the criticism of our ways of protesting and the way we have been portrayed by the media. I think it is much easier to present someone as a vandal than to try to understand the root causes of the anger driving their action. The media and the state strongly exploit people’s lack of awareness regarding the innocuous materials used in the actions, such as vegetable charcoal, which leads to plenty of misinformation. However, more and more people are still joining our movement, perhaps driven by personal fear of the climate catastrophe, but also due to the realisation that the label of ‘eco vandalism’ is only a facade to mask the problem and that the negative consequences of our actions are minor and superficial.
On the other hand, the consequences of our activism being portrayed as violent and as acts of vandalism have been profound. There are currently three Last Generation activists facing trial for spraying the Senate building in Rome. They’re accused of ‘criminal damage’ and risk up to three years in prison. Never mind that the paint they used in the protest was washable.
In April, the Italian government introduced a new law specifically to punish climate actions seen as damaging monuments or cultural sites with fines ranging from €20,000 to €40,000 (approx. US$21,500 to US$43,000) and possible imprisonment for those caught in the act. In this regard, it should be noted that an essential part of Last Generation’s activism is to draw attention to one’s responsibility for one’s choices, which ends up accentuating the consequences of the actions we take. We take responsibility by not running away after an action, and this puts us in an even riskier position. Another tool used by the Italian state is indictment for ‘criminal conspiracy’, a charge historically used against the mafia.
The Italian government criminalises climate activists because by doing so it can continue avoiding its responsibilities regarding the wellbeing of its citizens. Accusing activists of vandalism is much easier than implementing renewable energy policies.
How does Last Generation support activists so they can continue mobilising for climate action?
Last Generation supports prosecuted activists by using funds from donations to pay their legal fees and hire experts to help them navigate court proceedings. We also share information about their cases on social media to gather international solidarity and support.
How do you connect with the global climate movement?
Last Generation is part of the A22 coalition, an international network of nonviolent civil disobedience campaigners, all of which demand their governments adopt measures to address ecoclimate collapse. The coalition was established in 2022 and it already includes at least 10 different campaigns advocating with governments in Europe, the Pacific and the USA.
Within the coalition we share not only strategies and best practices but also victories, such as that obtained in the Netherlands last month. In April, following months of continuous campaigning by our Dutch allies, Schiphol Airport decided to ban private jets and night flights from 2025. It is setting new rules that establish clear limits on noise and emissions and has dropped plans to build an additional runway.
This network is a great source of support. We help each other increase the visibility of our campaigns. It has certainly helped us attract more people to Non Paghiamo il Fossile (We Don’t Pay for Fossil) and other environmental campaigns in Italy and beyond.
Civic space in Italy is rated ‘narrowed’ by theCIVICUS Monitor.
Get in touch with Last Generation through itswebsite or itsFacebook page, and follow@ultimagenerazi1 onTwitter.
-
NORWAY: ‘On top of being environmentally irresponsible, deep-sea mining is unlikely to be profitable’
CIVICUS speaks with Martin Sveinssønn Melvær, Materials and Industry Lead at the Bellona Foundation, about the bill recently passed by Norway’s parliament to allowcommercial-scale deep-sea mining.The Bellona Foundation is an independent civil society organisation that seeks to meet climate challenges by identifying and implementing sustainable environmental solutions.
What’s wrong with commercial-scale deep-sea mining, and what should be done about it?
The main problem with deep-sea mining is that it is starting up too fast, without fundamental knowledge about impacts on biology, ecosystems and carbon sinks. It entails a high risk of severe environmental consequences such as massive carbon emissions, the degradation of fish stocks and the extermination of potentially key species – including some that, for all we know, could have provided a cure to the next pandemic.
Exploration and mining should be banned until the science base is sufficient to understand their impacts and how to mitigate them, and until preservation areas have been established. If science turns out to show that deep-sea mining can be done responsibly, it should be allowed to proceed, but it would still have to be strictly regulated.
A second problem is the way deep-sea mining has been pushed in Norway. The government vastly exaggerates the amounts of mineral resources in Norwegian waters. The Geological Survey of Norway has stated that the Norwegian Offshore Directorate’s estimates have not been done according to established standards and they are exaggerated and therefore misleading. Independent experts have supported this claim and pointed out that if a private company had used a similar method to the Offshore Directorate, it would have qualified as fraud.
A third problem is timing. The rush to allow deep-sea mining is based on a gross miscalculation. Seabed minerals are presented as a solution to the shortage of metals needed for the green transition. But forecasts by the International Energy Agency and other serious sources indicate that the mineral bottleneck, in which mineral supply will have problems meeting demand, will last about 10 or 15 years, while the most optimistic estimates indicate that commercial seabed mining in Norwegian waters will only be able to start between 15 and 25 years from now. The technology needed for deep-sea mining is still very immature and history shows that it takes many years of development to move new technology to an industrial scale. At Bellona, we believe the solution to the mineral bottleneck is not deep-sea mining but a strong focus on circularity combined with more sustainable mining practices on land.
Why has the Norwegian government rushed to allow commercial-scale deep-sea mining?
It’s difficult to understand why the Norwegian government would rush this process. My impression is that it’s overly eager to find a new industry that can create jobs as the oil industry declines, not realising, or not wanting to realise, that on top of being environmentally irresponsible, deep-sea mining is unlikely to be profitable. Even the main Norwegian oil company, Equinor, has warned against deep-sea mining and referred to the precautionary principle, which calls for the adoption of precautionary measures when scientific evidence about an environmental or human health hazard is uncertain and the stakes are high.
Something that should also be factored in is strong pressure by Offshore Norge, the oil industry’s lobbying organisation. Although the main oil companies have not shown much interest in deep-sea mining, Offshore Norge has promoted it very actively. You could call it ‘petroholism’. Our government is used to giving the oil industry everything it wants.
How have Norwegian environmental organisations advocated against the bill?
We have participated in public hearings and drawn media attention to the major knowledge gaps and flawed governmental process. We have met with politicians and presented the facts, and although many politicians have listened, the government managed to gather enough support to pass the bill.
Thanks to our advocacy, the bill passed in a slightly improved version that requires parliament to approve the first mining licences before mining can start. This gives us further space for continuing advocacy. We will keep fighting to stop licensing when time comes for parliament to discuss their approval.
How have key stakeholders reacted to the new law?
There has been a lot of criticism of the Norwegian process from various sources. Norwegian companies such as Morrow Batteries have signalled that they don’t want seabed minerals, while others, such as Storebrand Asset Management, have directly criticised the process.
At the European level, many have reacted strongly. European Parliament members have voiced criticism. Two famous French activists, alongside actor Lucas Bravo, have criticised the process and travelled to Norway to protest. An online petition by Avaaz gathered more than 550,000 international signatures.
Deep-sea mining should be stopped until current knowledge gaps have been filled. We encourage everyone to support a global moratorium on deep-sea mining.
Civic space in Norway is rated ‘open’ by theCIVICUS Monitor.
Get in touch with Bellona through itswebsite or Facebook page, and follow it onTwitter andInstagram.
-
PHILIPPINES: ‘Climate change is no longer theoretical. It is a fact of life and a threat to our lives’
CIVICUS speaks about the impacts of climate change and the response of climate activism with Ronan Renz Napoto, founder and executive director of Balud, a youth-led movement from the Philippines that promotes ecological consciousness by engaging with and empowering young people.Why did you become a climate activist?
What made me a climate activist was the trauma of living through one of the strongest-ever recorded super typhoons in the world’s history. Almost 10 years ago, on 8 November 2013, super typhoon Yolanda (Haiyan) hit the Philippines. It provoked a lot of global discussions on how climate change was affecting the global south, particularly the Philippines and Southeast Asia.
The typhoon caused enormous damage and killed more than 6,000 people. We lost relatives and friends, our homes were destroyed and our livelihoods were compromised.
Because typhoons usually hit around this time of year, now we are all anxious again. We are constantly reminded of how our lives and livelihoods were affected, and of how nothing changed for the better despite our efforts and the global media coverage we got.
We have continued to experience similarly destructive typhoons. Extreme weather events have affected our farmers’ crops and diminished the catch of our fishers. Climate change has resulted in greater food insecurity and poverty.
In the Philippines, climate change is no longer theoretical. It is a fact of life and a threat to our lives. Before the typhoon we had dreams and hopes for the future, but we have had to push them aside to focus on surviving and fighting back.
What is climate activism focusing on in the Philippines?
We want to hold polluters accountable for their emissions and for the neglect of their climate responsibilities. In the Philippines, environmental defenders are often threatened and risk their lives when protecting our resources from corporations’ greed. To hold them accountable for their emissions, numerous organisations and activists have submitted a landmark petition to the Philippines’ Commission of Human Rights. The next step should be to force them to decrease their emissions drastically and eventually stop emitting carbon.
We push for reparations so that communities are properly compensated, and for funding for adaptation. The transition to renewable energy sources must be a just transition, ensuring that communities’ vulnerability to disaster decreases. Otherwise catastrophes will hit over and over, and the response will continue to be reactive, limited to responding to what has happened instead of producing proactive and preventative solutions. It’s not enough to go help communities after the disaster has happened – disasters must be prevented from happening.
But the resources of the Philippines are limited, so we will need external support. Since this crisis is the global north’s doing, it is only right for them to support our adaptation.
We want global north governments to acknowledge their responsibility for their pollution and its effects on the global south. If you look at emissions data, you will find the Philippines contributes very little compared to the big polluters of the global north. But the biggest impacts of their pollution are being felt in the Philippines and the rest of the global south. This is unfair.
But it’s not just our issue; it is a global issue. What has happened – and continues to happen – in the Philippines is an experience shared with many other countries, particularly in the Pacific, where people are very susceptible to sea level rise, typhoons and cyclones.
That’s why the leaders of nine small island states have gone to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, the United Nations’ maritime court, to ask it to determine if carbon dioxide emissions absorbed by the oceans can be considered pollution, and if so, what obligations countries have to prevent it.
Why is it important to have carbon dioxide emissions absorbed by oceans recognised as pollution?
In an archipelagic country like the Philippines, which is surrounded by waters, livelihoods depend on the bounty of marine resources. Whatever comes into the ocean that is not part of its natural ecosystem is bad. Pollution of our marine sanctuaries, oceans and beaches translates into health risks and economic losses. It affects sea life and therefore our food security.
Carbon dioxide is a pollutant, but it is not specifically mentioned in international law on maritime pollution, and as long as it is not recognised as such, it creates no obligations for states.
Will you take part in the upcoming COP28 climate summit?
I don’t think I will be taking part in COP 28 since it is far away, expensive and very hard to get funding for. I think this will be the case for most climate activists in the Philippines. Unsurprisingly, one of our main concerns is getting a good amount of representation in the ongoing discussions on climate change. Apart from the lack of funding, it is always hard to get into global climate discussions because there is not a dedicated space for us.
However, I look forward to seeing planned actions being implemented. So far, the results of the summits have been mostly about acknowledging concerns and making statements. Now it’s time to ensure that decisions are operationalised and states – particularly the rich and powerful ones that are part of the problem – are held to account. We cannot continue planting trees on one side while allowing them to cut down trees on the other side. That way we’ll never make any substantial progress.
Civic space in the Philippines is rated ‘repressed’ by theCIVICUS Monitor.
Get in touch with Balud through itsFacebook page, personalemail andLinkedIn.
-
THE NETHERLANDS: ‘People are beginning to realise that we need real and systemic change’
CIVICUS speaks with Sieger Sloot, an actor and climate activist from a Dutch branch of Extinction Rebellion (XR), about climate protests and the criminalisation of climate activism in the Netherlands.XR is a global decentralised network of climate activists working to compel governments to address climate change and prevent biodiversity loss and ecological collapse through the use of non-violent civil disobedience tactics.
What forms of protests has XR deployed in the Netherlands, and what have you achieved?
In the Netherlands, XR organised over 300 protests in 2022 alone. One of the most successful was a blockade of the A12 highway in The Hague city centre. We were 30 people when we started blocking the road last June, and since then, the number of participants doubled or tripled every time, so we grew exponentially. On 11 March 2023, around 4,000 protesters blocked the same spot.
It is XR’s strategy to use non-violent disruptive actions like blockades to draw attention to the climate crisis, and especially to the €30 billion (approx. US$32.9 billion) annual fossil fuel subsidies provided by the government. These attract way more media coverage than regular protests. The Dutch law allows a great deal of protesting and XR is actively investigating the limits of what is allowed.
These forms of protest have had a huge effect on Dutch society. For the first time we witness mainstream media talking about fossil fuel subsidies. Some 400 Dutch economists wrote an op-ed on why and how fossil fuel subsidies should be terminated. Members of parliament are making proposals for ending fossil fuel subsidies. The Dutch Secretary for Climate has announced a press conference on the climate crisis. A wave of famous musicians, actors, writers and directors are joining the XR movement. So our tactics are proving to be quite effective.
What are your demands to the Dutch government, and how has the government reacted?
The Dutch government promised to end fossil fuel subsidies in 2020 but still hasn’t done it, so with every blockade XR demands it end all fossil fuel subsidies immediately, or otherwise the protesters won’t leave. Until now, the government hasn’t complied with our demand. Instead, police have arrested protesters who weren’t willing to leave and fined others. They also used water cannon to disperse crowds and tried to infiltrate XR.
Over the past months, between 40 and 50 climate activists have been prosecuted in the Netherlands. The accusations vary from vandalism, which can be just about spray paint, to not following police orders and trespassing, all the way to sedition.
This included eight activists arrested for sedition because they posted on social media about their intention to go to the protest and block the highway. This had never happened before: it is a totally unprecedented attack on free speech and freedom of assembly. This provoked a lot of anger among Dutch people, since according to both Dutch and European Union law it’s allowed to block roads while protesting. Over 70 civil society organisations showed their solidarity with XR following the arrest of those eight activists by joining the A12 protest.
I think the Dutch government is criminalising climate activists just to ‘restore law and order’, but it has totally backfired on them. The District Attorney (DA) is prosecuting the eight activists, probably to make a case that not all ways of protesting are allowed – even though XR’s actions are always non-violent. We’ve had some quite violent farmers’ protests in recent years, but it seems that the DA didn’t dare to make a case against them. Of course they have tractors and aren’t as easy to target as climate activists.
What kind of support are your receiving from international allies?
We get a lot of international support online, which is absolutely awesome. Right now, I think we’re really thriving and growing rapidly. It feels as if XR is becoming more and more accepted and mainstream every day. Along with other activists I’ve started giving ‘Headed for Extinction’ talks to all kinds of people, which translated into more attention for our story from people in power and in the media. More and more people are now joining us because they see it’s the logical thing to do. A lot of powerful and smart people are beginning to realise that we need change, real and systemic change.
Civic space in the Netherlands is rated ‘open’ by theCIVICUS Monitor.
Get in touch with XR through itswebsite orFacebook page, and follow@ExtinctionR onTwitter.
-
USA: ‘Our aggressive tactics helped amplify the demands of the broader climate movement’
CIVICUS speaks with Evan Drukker-Schardl of Climate Defiance about the disruptive tactics the organisation uses to put climate change on the agenda.Climate Defiance is a youth climate organisationdetermined to challenge political betrayal and fight for a just world. Through mass protest and peaceful direct action, it seeks to force politicians to address the existential climate crisis, rejecting the constraints of current political realities in favour of transformative change.
What makes Climate Defiance different from other climate action groups?
Climate Defiance takes a direct approach, confronting climate criminals wherever they are – whether they are being honoured by industry peers or speaking in public. We challenge their presence in society and highlight the damaging impact of politicians and fossil fuel executives on our collective future.
This approach has resonated widely, particularly online, where millions have supported videos of young activists confronting those responsible for endangering their future. It has also allowed us to amplify the climate movement’s demands. Notably, our protests have had tangible results, such as the resignation of Harvard professor Jody Freeman from the board of ConocoPhillips. Similarly, Assistant Secretary of the Interior Tommy Beaudreau resigned just 15 days after we disrupted his participation at an event.
What are your demands, and how has the US government responded to them?
Our demands focus on ending coal, gas and oil infrastructure, both in specific cases and as a general policy. We have also joined others in calling for an end to new liquefied natural gas (LNG) export permits. Over the past year, we have consistently raised these issues, most notably during a meeting at the White House where we repeatedly stressed the need to address LNG exports. Shortly afterwards, the Biden administration announced a moratorium on new permits.
While Climate Defiance cannot take sole credit for these developments, our aggressive tactics have helped amplify the demands of the broader climate movement. We understand we are not here to make friends; rather, we are focused on forcing those in power to listen and respond to our demands.
Although the Biden administration and Congress may not meet all our demands, we have made it clear they have no choice but to address our concerns, even if it goes against the interests of fossil fuel companies that hold significant power. Our actions ensure that those in power are aware of and accountable to the demands of the climate movement.
What forms of protest have you undertaken so far, and why?
So far, our protests have taken a variety of forms, all aimed at holding climate criminals accountable. For instance, we recently targeted Senator Lisa Murkowski, who was instrumental in getting the Biden administration to approve the Willow Project in Alaska, allowing new drilling on federal lands. She was receiving an award at a non-profit gala in Washington DC, presented by Chevron’s top lobbyist. We interrupted her speech with a banner that read ‘Murkowski is a murderer’. This direct action brings our energised activists to where the powerful are being honoured and exposes the truth about their destructive actions.
Similar actions led to the resignations of Beaudreau and Freeman. While we don’t expect Murkowski to resign, our actions ensure she cannot expect to go unchallenged in public forums. We specialise in these confrontational tactics, disrupting events like the Congressional baseball game, a bipartisan event attended by numerous climate offenders from both parties. This game symbolises a political consensus that perpetuates fossil fuel subsidies at the expense of our planet and its people.
We’re present at such events to demand an end to these subsidies and highlight the bipartisan support for policies that harm our environment. While we cannot predict the immediate outcome of these protests, they are essential in raising awareness and pressuring policymakers to prioritise climate action over corporate interests.
Are you seeing restrictions on protests?
Climate Defiance has so far managed to protest effectively while minimising the risk of arrest for our activists. Avoiding arrest ensures the safety of our activists and conserves our resources and capacity.
However, the broader protest landscape in the USA has seen concerning developments, particularly in relation to the Gaza and Palestine solidarity movements. Across university campuses in the USA and around the world, there has been a noticeable shift in how disruptive and confrontational protests are handled. Authorities have responded with excessive force and repression, seeking to silence criticism and dissent.
While Climate Defiance focuses on confronting climate criminals, it is important to recognise and condemn any undemocratic actions taken by those in power to stifle legitimate dissent. Such behaviour reflects poorly on the democratic principles that should underpin society, and those responsible should be held to account.
We stand in solidarity with all people protesting against genocide in Gaza. It is unconscionable that university administrations, police forces and politicians are brutalising and targeting student protesters instead of listening to their principled calls for justice and an end to massacres in our name and on our dime. Crackdowns on college campuses are a threat to us all and should alarm people even if they are not part of the Palestine solidarity movement in the USA.
How has the public reacted to your protests?
Public reaction to our protests has been mixed. While some people appreciate our direct approach and see the urgency of our cause, others are uncomfortable with our disruptive tactics. We build relationships with politicians who want them and whose values align with ours, but we are not afraid to criticise those in power who further the destruction of our planet, wherever they are on the political spectrum. Our priority is to be vocal, public and disruptive to drive home that our lives depend on transformative action now to end fossil fuels.
Regardless of whether people agree with our methods, we have been able to achieve tangible results. Even those who don’t support us cannot ignore the impact we are having. We believe that discomfort can be a catalyst for change. We challenge people to confront uncomfortable truths to motivate them to act.
Ultimately, our aim isn’t to win a popularity contest but to insist that everyone, regardless of their background, deserves a healthy and prosperous future. We see protest as a means of subversion, a way of challenging the status quo and demanding a better world for future generations and ourselves.
Civic space in the USA is rated ‘narrowed’ by theCIVICUS Monitor.
Get in touch with Climate Defiance through itswebsite orFacebook page, and follow @ClimateDefiance onTwitter,Instagram andTikTok.
