Category: Protest

  • Demonstrations that began with death of Mahsa Amini while detained by morality police pose biggest threat to regime in 13 years

    Iran’s president has vowed to “deal decisively” with protests that are gathering momentum across much of the country one week after the death of a woman in custody who had been detained by the morality police.

    Demonstrations have spread to most of Iran’s 31 provinces and almost all urban centres, pitting anti-government demonstrators against regime forces, including the military, and posing the most serious test to the hardline state’s authority in more than 13 years.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Police reportedly use teargas to disperse crowds as protests spread after death of Mahsa Amini

    Iran has sent police to the streets in a scramble to end protests that have spread to at least 15 cities, as rights groups and local media reported up to six people had been killed in crackdowns.

    There were reports of internet blackouts in parts of the country in an apparent attempt to quell growing anger. The telecommunications minister, Issa Zarepour, was quoted by the official Irna news agency as saying there had been some “temporary restrictions in some places and at some hours”.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • We’d like to hear from people in Iran how they feel about the protests following the death of Mahsa Amini in custody

    We’d like to hear how Iranians feel about the protests taking place in Iran after Mahsa Amini’s death in custody in Tehran.

    Whether you have witnessed street protests directly or just want to share your views on the situation in Iran, we’re interested to hear from you.

    Continue reading…

  • A week after FBI agents ransacked her bedroom in August 2017, Ruby Montoya sat before a videographer. Just steps away from the rooms where FBI agents had hauled dozens of bags and boxes from the Des Moines Catholic Worker House where Montoya lived, the 27-year-old addressed his questions with a preternatural calm.

    “You really put your life on the line. How do you feel about the whole ordeal?” he asked.  

    “I don’t have kids,” she explained. “I don’t have any obligations like that, and I saw a necessity to act in a different way that I believe is more effective.” 

    That “way” entailed a series of arsons that Montoya and her friend and Catholic Worker housemate, Jessica Reznicek, committed along the route of the Dakota Access Pipeline a few months earlier. Beginning on election night 2016 and continuing intermittently through early May 2017, the women ignited oil-soaked rags to try to destroy heavy machinery. They also lit acetylene torches to burn holes in the 1,172-mile-long pipeline, which at the time was under construction but nearing completion. 

    Though the women were never apprehended by law enforcement while taking these actions, they failed to stop completion of the pipeline. So, that July, Montoya and Reznicek called a press conference and took credit for the arsons, even though they knew doing so would expose them to felony prosecution. “If we have any regrets,  it is that we did not act enough,” the women said in their joint statement, which was intended to steer attention toward the threat the pipeline posed to drinking water sources along its route from North Dakota to Patoka, Illinois. (This pipeline has leaked at least five times since it began carrying oil in May 2017.)

    “We anticipated the repercussions of every action that we took,” Montoya told another interviewer that same summer. “We were fully prepared going into it, in that mental mind game of, ‘I’m driving myself to jail right now.’”

    Despite expressing their willingness to surrender themselves to authorities in the weeks following their credit claim and the FBI raid that followed, law enforcement officials did not bring charges for more than two years. By early September 2019, the women were a thousand miles apart. Reznicek lived with nuns and attended daily mass at the St. Scholastica monastery in Duluth, Minnesota. Montoya taught grades 3 and 4 at the Running River Waldorf School in Sedona, Arizona.

    A photo of two women in front of a camera crew reading off of a notecard
    Jessica Reznicek and Ruby Montoya, right, stand in front of the Iowa Utilities Board in July 2017 and read statements taking credit for acts of sabotage against the Dakota Access pipeline. Courtesy of Des Moines Catholic Worker Archives

    By that month’s end, however, a grand jury had indicted both women on nine identical federal felonies. Each faced a maximum 110 years in jail — one of the most aggressive prosecutions of environmental activists in U.S. history. After accepting a plea deal, Reznicek was sentenced to eight years in prison last year. Half of those years are the result of a controversial  terrorism enhancement that the government applied to her sentence. On Wednesday, more than five years after admitting to her crimes, Montoya is scheduled to be sentenced at a federal courthouse in Des Moines, Iowa.

    Both women initially committed to participating in a joint defense agreement engineered by Lauren Reagan, a lawyer with the Civil Liberties Defense Center, an Oregon-based nonprofit that has represented high-profile eco-activists, including members of the Earth Liberation Front. In early 2021, Reznicek and Montoya accepted identical deals to plead guilty to one charge only: conspiring to damage an energy facility. In exchange, the federal government agreed to drop its additional eight charges.

    In the days before and after Reznicek’s June 2021 sentencing, however, Montoya endeavored to exit the joint defense agreement and change her plea to not guilty. For over a year, Montoya has tried to proceed with a trial. The decision appears to be, in part, motivated by the terrorism enhancement applied to Reznicek’s sentence. The women repeatedly described their actions as peaceful and nonviolent; nobody was harmed as a result of their actions, in part because they targeted sites at night, when they were empty.

    The enhancement charge surprised Bill Quigley, a retired law professor at Loyola University who served as part of Reznicek’s defense. “I never ever believed that Jessica’s actions constituted terrorism, and I never believed that any judge would think that her actions did,” he told the Real News Network.

    In June, Judge Rebecca Goodgame Ebinger denied Montoya’s motion to retract her guilty plea. Nevertheless, the documents produced to support her motion have complicated the public narrative around the women’s actions. Had Montoya’s retraction been accepted, according to at least five affidavits entered into the court record over this past year by Montoya’s new lawyer, Daphne Silverman, the court would likely have heard arguments about the role unaddressed childhood trauma played in exacerbating Montoya’s climate anxiety. Additional documents filed by Silverman claimed that this abuse also made Montoya susceptible to the coercive tactics of government agents or private security officers hired by the pipeline company — operatives who the documents suggest pushed the women to resort to arson, going as far as to teach them how to operate welding torches.

    Though Montoya had previously stated under oath that she did not suffer from any mental health condition and that she had been provided with satisfactory legal advice and counsel, Montoya’s legal team successfully argued for a postponement of her sentencing the month after Reznicek was sentenced, in part by arguing that the full extent of Montoya’s traumatic history had not previously been disclosed to her legal team.

    Montoya’s sentencing was postponed for two months. However, five days before she was to be sentenced, Montoya abruptly dropped her legal team and secured representation from Silveman, a Texas-based lawyer who had represented other Dakota Access Pipeline protestors. 

    Prior to this representation, Montoya consistently appeared as someone who knowingly sacrificed her freedom, and who deliberately chose to take illegal actions in the hope of preventing water contamination by stopping oil from flowing through the pipeline.

    From late August 2021 onward, however, Silverman filed documents that underscored her client’s vulnerability. “Ms. Motoya is exceptionally bright. She presents with calm composure,” Silverman wrote in her 19-page motion to withdraw Montoya’s guilty plea in August of last year. But, Silverman warned, “bright and a facade of composure doesn’t overcome trauma.”

    Silverman used a series of letters supplied by Montoya’s family and friends to argue that, owing to severe and complex childhood abuse and neglect, Montoya was unduly influenced by the Des Moines Catholic Workers. In other words, Montoya did not participate in the actions with the same frame of mind as Reznicek, a long-time activist, and therefore deserved a different judicial process. 

    Montoya’s new defense highlighted her lack of a criminal record, in contrast to Reznicek’s long list of protest-related arrests. Gabriel Montoya, Ruby’s older half-brother, pointed out that his half-sister had “never showed any real interest in politics or civil rights as a teenager or college student, which would seem off for a purported radical.”

    “What turned a relatively apolitical former kindergarten teacher into a dedicated environmental activist?” he asked in his affidavit.

     “The natural trauma response to protect,” Silverman argued, “made it impossible to choose her own interests over those of her co-defendant, Ms. Reznicek.”

    These letters — written and supplied by Montoya, her two stepmothers, a former employer, and her housemate-turned-counselor — say that Montoya was sexually assualted by a nonfamily member as a toddler and severely neglected and physically harmed throughout her childhood in Phoenix, Arizona. They claim that this foundational trauma made her vulnerable to manipulation as an adult, and that she unwittingly adopted the nihilistic mindset of those who had wronged her as a child when she turned to arson as an adult.

    In a September letter to the judge, Montoya speculated that the court viewed her as a “haughty ruffian … spinning out, lost, terrified, and alone in the world after angering a multi-billion dollar corporation in their own flagrant and consistent disregard for the law.” Montoya argued that her actions against the pipeline were an inevitable reenactment of her unrealized and untreated post-traumatic stress disorder.

    “My previous lawyers would not hear me” she told the judge, “when I would attempt to articulate that I was ‘not the same’ as [Reznicek], that I ‘did not know or understand’ what I was doing at the time.”

    A close-up of Ruby Montoya (a woman with long brown hair) looking somber while sitting inside a vehicle
    Montoya sits in a police car after being arrested at the Iowa Utilities Board in 2017. Courtesy of Des Moines Catholic Worker Archives

    Another reason Montoya withdrew her guilty plea was that, according to Silverman, her previous legal team overlooked legitimate defense strategies. Foremost among them were allegations that government agents or private pipeline security operatives who were pretending to be activists exploited Montoya’s growing exasperation and sadness as the multiple protests she participated in failed to jeopardize completion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. 

    The infiltration of the Indigenous-led Dakota Access Pipeline protests by undercover private security agents and FBI informants has been well-documented by The Intercept and other news outlets, though no reports have claimed that Reznicek or Montoya themselves personally encountered undercover infiltrators. However, in a motion to compel the discovery of additional evidence, which was granted by the court, Silverman asserts that someone “incited Reznicek and Montoya to use fire and trained them on the welding torch, a person we believe is a government operative.”

    According to the motion, a private intelligence officer “embedded in the places where [Montoya and Reznicek] stayed such as camps and in the Catholic Worker House, as well as the Standing Rock Camp … and that this officer or officers [were] clearly participant(s) in conversations that led to/resulted in the charged conduct, that is, specifically including but not limited to evidence of Ruby Montoya’s intent and the coercion imposed on Montoya.”

    In a sworn statement she provided in support of these assertions, Montoya claims that “at least three people” manipulated her in this manner, “unlawfully pressuring me to engage in these illegal acts.” The first approached her in the fall of 2016, showing her pictures of pipeline valve sites that were sabotaged and claiming that sabotage of construction sites was a regular occurrence.

    Montoya met the second alleged operative late that November in the kitchen of a protest camp in North Dakota. After this individual argued that traditional protest actions weren’t working, Montoya says they told her, “Sabotage always works.” They suggested using thermite to damage the project’s steel pipes. As a blizzard blew in later that day, according to Montoya’s affidavit, that person handed Montoya a recipe for thermite. The person later offered Montoya a ride to Iowa, during which she says she noticed that they paid for accommodations with a government-issued credit card.

    After Montoya reunited with Reznicek in Iowa, the women discussed these ideas. They ultimately drove to the individual’s apartment in Colorado, where Montoya says she observed “army training manuals on how to destroy infrastructure.” The individual and their roommate subsequently demonstrated how to use thermite and an oxy-acetylene welder, telling the women,“that’s what will burn through steel.”

    This narrative contradicts or at least complicates the explanation Montoya and Reznicek gave in the summer of 2017, when they claimed they acted alone in response to a spiritual calling, inspired by activist traditions of engaging in symbolic property destruction. Montoya and Silverman, her lawyer, declined Grist’s requests for interviews.

    Despite this barrage of filings by Montoya’s defense, there was ultimately no official courtroom discussion about Montoya’s life circumstances, nor that she had coercive legal representation. Furthermore, claims that her actions were influenced by government or private security agents will not be argued. In June, Judge Ebinger ruled that Montoya “failed to show a fair and just reason to allow her to withdraw her guilty plea.”

    Perhaps the one thing that has remained consistent throughout Montoya’s legal odyssey is her claim that her actions have been grounded in concern for the well-being of children. Describing in July 2017 why she left her job to protest the Dakota Access Pipeline, she publicly claimed that she and Reznicek “acted for our children” because “the world that they are inheriting is unfit.” In a subsequent interview she said, close to tears, “I was a preschool teacher and I love kids. We’re not leaving them anything.”

    Montoya’s 2021 letter to Judge Ebinger expresses the same concern: “I am of the millennial generation, the most educated, most underpaid, and most in-debt generation that this country has produced.” During Montoya’s three decades of life, she wrote, “‘Armageddon’ has always been on the newsreels … from global warming to climate change to climate chaos to soon climate catastrophe. We have finally hit a ‘code red’ but these alarm bells had been incessantly ringing all my life. Many of my generational peers have refused to have children, and it is not because we are selfish but prudent given the state of our world.”

    If Montoya now regrets her means — claiming that the traumatic violence of her childhood led her to engage in destructive acts as an adult — Montoya’s ends remain the same: “Now, as an adult, I wished to act in a way that was protecting all children, from the violence perpetuated on our very existence — we all need clean, drinkable water to grow into healthy, well-adjusted members of society.”

    This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The long legal saga of alleged DAPL arsonist Ruby Montoya is coming to an end on Sep 21, 2022.

    This post was originally published on Grist.

  • Despite warnings, hundreds of people have reportedly gathered in Mahsa Amini’s home town of Saqqez for her burial

    A series of protests have broken out in Iran after the death of a 22-year-old Kurdish woman, Mahsa Amini, who died in hospital on 16 September, three days after she was arrested and reportedly beaten by morality police in Tehran.

    Demonstrators initially gathered outside Kasra hospital in Tehran, where Amini was being treated. Human rights groups reported that security forces deployed pepper spray against protesters and that several were arrested.

    Continue reading…

  • ANALYSIS: By Maria O’Sullivan, Monash University

    During the present period of mourning for Queen Elizabeth II, public sensitivities in the United Kingdom and Australia are high. There is strong sentiment in both countries in favour of showing respect for the Queen’s death.

    Some people may wish to do this privately. Others will want to demonstrate their respect publicly by attending commemorations and processions.

    There are also cohorts within both countries that may wish to express discontent and disagreement with the monarchy at this time.

    For instance, groups such as Indigenous peoples and others who were subject to dispossession and oppression by the British monarchy may wish to express important political views about these significant and continuing injustices.

    This has caused tension across the globe. For instance, a professor from the United States who tweeted a critical comment of the Queen has been subject to significant public backlash.

    Also, an Aboriginal rugby league player is facing a ban and a fine by the NRL for similar negative comments she posted online following the Queen’s death.

    This tension has been particularly so in the UK, where police have questioned protestors expressing anti-monarchy sentiments, and in some cases, arrested them.

    But should such concerns about the actions of the Queen and monarchy be silenced or limited because a public declaration of mourning has been made by the government?

    This raises some difficult questions as to how the freedom of speech of both those who wish to grieve publicly and those who wish to protest should be balanced.

    What laws in the UK are being used to do this?
    There are various laws that regulate protest in the UK. At a basic level, police can arrest a person for a “breach of the peace”.

    Also, two statutes provide specific offences that allow police to arrest protesters.

    Section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 UK provides that a person is guilty of a public order offence if:

    • they use threatening or abusive words or behaviour or disorderly behaviour
    • or display any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening or abusive.

    The offence provision then provides this must be “within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress” by those acts.

    There is some protection for speech in the legislation because people arrested under this provision can argue a defence of “reasonable excuse”. However, there’s still a great deal of discretion placed in the hands of the police.

    The other statute that was recently amended is the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act of 2022, which allows police to arrest protesters for “public nuisance”.

    In the context of the period of mourning for Queen Elizabeth II, the wide terms used in this legislation (such as “nuisance” and “distress”) gives a lot of discretion to police to arrest protesters who they perceive to be upsetting others.

    For instance, a protester who holds a placard saying “Not my king, abolish the monarchy” may be seen as likely to cause distress to others given the high sensitivities in the community during the period of mourning.

    Is there a right to protest under UK and Australian law?
    Protest rights are recognised in both the UK and in Australia, but in different ways.

    In the UK, the right to freedom of expression is recognised in Article 10 of the Human Rights Act.

    In Australia, there’s no equivalent of the right to freedom of expression at the federal level as Australia doesn’t have a national human rights charter. Rather, there’s a constitutional principle called the “implied freedom of political communication”.

    This isn’t a “right” as such but does provide some acknowledgement of the importance of protest.

    Also, freedom of expression is recognised in the three jurisdictions in Australia that have human rights instruments (Victoria, Queensland and the ACT).

    Can the right to protest be limited in a period of mourning?
    In this period of public mourning, people wishing to assemble in a public place to pay respect to the queen are exercising two primary human rights: the right to assembly and the right to freedom of expression.

    But these are not absolute rights. They cannot override the rights of others to also express their own views.

    Further, there is no recognised right to assemble without annoyance or disturbance from others. That is, others in the community are also permitted to gather in a public place during the period of mourning and voice their views (which may be critical of the queen or monarchy).

    It is important to also note that neither the UK nor Australia protects the monarchy against criticism. This is significant because in some countries (such as Thailand), it is a criminal offence to insult the monarch. These are called “lèse-majesté” laws — a French term meaning “to do wrong to majesty”.

    The police in the UK and Australia cannot therefore use public order offences (such breach of the peace) to unlawfully limit public criticism of the monarchy.

    It may be uncomfortable or even distressing for those wishing to publicly grieve the Queen’s passing to see anti-monarchy placards displayed. But that doesn’t make it a criminal offence that allows protesters to be arrested.

    The ability to voice dissent is vital for a functioning democracy. It is therefore arguable that people should be able to voice their concerns with the monarchy even in this period of heightened sensitivity. The only way in which anti-monarchy sentiment can lawfully be suppressed is in a state of emergency.

    A public period of mourning does not meet that standard.The Conversation

    Dr Maria O’Sullivan, associate professor in the Faculty of Law, and deputy director, Castan Centre for Human Rights Law, Monash University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Jailed activist-blogger may escalate six-month hunger strike as supporters say UK is failing to pressure its Cop27 partner

    The British-Egyptian activist Alaa Abd El-Fattah has warned his family he may die in prison, as he reaches six months on hunger strike in the run-up to the Cop27 climate conference in Sharm El Sheikh.

    “I don’t want to upset you, but I don’t believe there’s any chance of individual salvation,” he told his mother during her visit to Wadi al-Natrun prison. He passed on a list of demands, including the release of those detained by the Egyptian security forces and thousands held without charge in pre-trial detention.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • By: Yogashen Pillay

    See original article here.

    Durban – The National Freedom Party (NFP) said that they support the call by workers and labour unions across South Africa for the introduction of a Basic Income Grant and a decrease in the price of fuel and electricity.

    On Wednesday morning, dozens of members of the Congress of SA Trade Unions (Cosatu) and the SA Federation of Trade Unions (Saftu) are holding marches across the country, including in Durban, to demonstrate their unhappiness with the rising costs of living.

    NFP MP Ahmed Munzoor Shaik Emam said that the cost of living in South Africa was becoming unaffordable for the majority of South Africans.

    “The poor and working class are facing the brunt of the high cost of living. Therefore, we support the call for a basic income grant.”

    Emam added a staggered approach to the introduction of the Basic Income Grant, will allow for its implementation.

    “We understand that at this very moment, the government does not have the funds to implement a comprehensive Basic Income Grant for all qualifying citizens. However, we believe a staggered approach is both feasible and practical.”

    Emam said that the party calls upon the government to:

    – Utilise the infrastructure of the Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grants and convert it for the purposes of the Basic Income Grant

    – Develop a qualifying criterion for the Basic Income Grant

    – Select a portion of qualifying citizens to start the roll-out with – such as those between 18 and 25 who are in the process of looking for jobs and need the support for transport and internet access for the applications process

    – Set roll-out targets and increase the number of qualifying citizens over a defined period so that all qualifying citizens can benefit.

    Emam added that the NFP also supported the call for today’s national shutdown by labour unions as a mechanism to push the government to take action.

    This post was originally published on Basic Income Today.

  • This article includes a mention of suicide and self-harm

    A woman with a freedom of speech badge on her bag pleads with the cops to arrest us. She doesn’t like the fact that we’re standing in front of her bigoted banner. She doesn’t like the fact that we don’t agree with her. Freedom of speech is, apparently, a very limited right if you’re from the far-right Patriotic Alternative.

    Drag Queen Story Hour is taking place at my local library. It isn’t an event that should need an anti-fascist presence. It should just be kids going to enjoy stories in a library. It’s a bit of a no brainer. I spoke to a friend last week, and we were both incredulous that we’d got to this point in the culture wars – that this is where battle lines were being drawn – over reading stories to kids at libraries.

    I wasn’t really expecting Patriotic Alternative (PA) to turn up in my home town. I was planning to walk down to my local library for an hour and then go home. But after seeing their hate five minutes from my house, we decided we couldn’t abandon the rest of Cornwall and so a group of us spent three days travelling around libraries to ensure we were providing an alternative to their vile rhetoric.

    Fascism on our streets

    PA is a fascist group. Let’s call it what it is. It’s a group that promotes “indigenous rights” for white people. Its website proudly carries posts proclaiming “migrants not welcome” and its stated aim is to:

    raise awareness of issues such as the demographic decline of native Britons in the United Kingdom, the environmental impact of mass immigration and the indoctrination and political bias taking place in British schools.

    Time and again the police tell us that they want to facilitate both sides, that everyone has a right to express their views, that they are neutral. But that says it all. Staying neutral in the face of fascism is not an option. It puts everyone at risk.

    The group in Cornwall pretends not to be associated with PA. But they hand out the group’s leaflets and are happy standing next to people who actually say they are fascists. One man does a Sieg Heil and is ignored by the cops and his fellow protesters. They say they’re intimidated and harassed by us. They call us “Antifa” as if it’s an insult. I tell them I’m proud to be anti-fascist. They say they feel threatened. And they do seem to have a thoroughly miserable time as we dance round them with our colourful flags and block their hateful banners.

    Promoting love and inclusivity

    Aida H Dee is reading stories to kids. These are stories that give children a positive alternative and that stand up to bullying. He also wants to ensure children receive a positive message about being part of the LGBTQI+ community. This is important. Because as the Drag Queen Story Hour website states:

    • 65% of LGBT+ secondary school pupils experience homophobic bullying at school

    • 97% of LGBT+ pupils report regularly hearing homophobic language in school

    • 80% of LGBT+ pupils have NOT been taught about safe sex in relation to same-sex relationships

    • More than 80% of trans young people have self-harmed, as have 60% of lesbian, gay and bi young people who aren’t trans.

    • Just under 50% of young trans people have attempted to take their own life, and 20% of lesbian, gay and bi students who aren’t trans have done the same.

    Drag Queen Story Hour is attempting to change this in the best possible way:

    If you are introduced to something new in a positive way, you will react in a positive way. We want to do the same for anybody who is different in the UK.

    The children at the libraries certainly agree. They roar with laughter, and both the kids and parents are full of smiles and praise when they leave. Aida H Dee is doing an amazing thing, and is, at times, paying a terrible price for doing it.

    Moments of joy and beauty in dark times

    While it’s sad that we had to come out on the streets to counter the hate, there were moments of joy and beauty that will stick with me forever:

    And whether it was the security guard who after the first event decided to volunteer his time and go for 36 hours without sleep to help, the amazing library staff, locals chasing fascists off the streets, or the parents who were so happy to see us there, there were many moments of joy and lightness in these horrid times.

    As a statement from the local group who were at the libraries says:

    Communities across Cornwall made it clear that this hate does not represent us. We are both from the LGBTQ+ community and stand in solidarity with the LGBQT+ community. Cornwall has said it loud and clear – we are anti-fascist and proud.

    The chants of “Cornwall is anti-fascist” on the streets of Launceston as the last of the haters skulked away on Wednesday still ring in my ears. There is no place for hate in Cornwall and those that tried to perpetrate this message were firmly told they were not welcome here. And while this is just one battle in a much bigger fight, it’s a battle we definitely won, and I’m so proud of my community for its response.

    Featured image via Twitter screen grab and author’s own

    By Emily Apple

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Campaign group Don’t Pay UK has hit the headlines recently. It’s gaining momentum for its action against the so-called ‘cost of living crisis’: specifically, soaring energy bills. And one tweet from it sums up the situation millions are facing. But will the campaign actually work? And is it inclusive of everyone?

    Don’t Pay UK: the “state of Britain”

    Don’t Pay UK is trying to organise a mass non-payment of energy bills. It says on its website that:

    we are demanding a reduction of energy bills to an affordable level. Our leverage is that we will gather a million people to pledge not to pay if the government goes ahead with another massive hike on October 1st.

    Don’t Pay UK’s action comes as the government and corporations continue to allow energy prices to spiral out of control. Analysts now say that the price cap could hit over £3,600 by January 2023. This is a 158% increase since October 2021, when the cap was £1,400. This could leave around 30% of all households in the UK in fuel poverty. On Tuesday 2 August, Don’t Pay UK summed the situation up well on Twitter. It shared an email from a supporter to their energy supplier. The person said that the cost of energy meant their “3 children won’t eat regular meals”:

    As the person who sent the email noted, energy companies are raking it in. Five of the world’s biggest fossil fuel companies saw combined profits of £50bn in the first half of the year.

    So, Don’t Pay UK is determined to take action to stop the price rises. But will it make a difference – firstly to the poorest people, and secondly in the long term?

    Poorest people: no choice but to pay

    Don’t Pay UK’s campaign is specifically aimed at people who pay their energy bill via direct debit. As its website says:

    There are many different ways to support the strike if you’re on a pre-payment meter, but you won’t be able to join the non-payment strike itself. If you don’t pay while on a pre-payment meter, you’ll be disconnected once your credit runs out – so we won’t be asking people on a pre-payment meter to withhold payment.

    The problem is that it’s the poorest families in the UK who have prepayment meters. Government data released in 2020 showed that for prepayment meters:

    • Social housing residents are more likely to have them.
    • The majority (52.5%) of families where the main person didn’t work have them.
    • 38.9% of lone-parent households have them.

    These people cannot protest by not paying – because they would simply have no energy. As someone pointed out on Twitter:

    Don’t Pay UK replied by saying:

    About 4.5 million on pre-payment meters, paying higher tariffs and in real danger of “self-disconnection” if they can’t top up. They can help support the campaign because if it wins, we all win.

    Moreover, for poorer people who do pay their energy bills by direct debit, there could be further problems. Not paying could negatively impact their credit score.

    “Serious trouble”

    So, long-term, what is it that Don’t Pay UK want to “win”?

    The campaign states on its website that it hopes to:

    put energy companies in serious trouble… We want to bring them to the table and force them to end this crisis.

    It makes a comparison to another non-payment action:

    One example would be in the resistance to the Poll Tax: more than 17 million people refused to pay and it became impossible for the Thatcher government to successfully implement the policy.

    But as with every campaign on a specific issue, the challenge is whether it will make a lasting difference in the long term. One example is Don’t Pay UK’s citing of the anti-Poll Tax movement. While direct action and non-payment worked initially, the UK has been left with the Council Tax system. As the Resolution Foundation think tank summed up, this is now as “regressive” as the Poll Tax would have been anyway.

    Nationalise now

    Don’t Pay UK, while excluding the poorest people, is a worthwhile show of public defiance in the face of the corporate capitalist system. But it is only a short-term solution to an entrenched problem. Negotiating with corporate monoliths will only end in compromise or a quick-fix. Long term, and as a minimum, nationalised energy would be the first step in ensuring that the chaos millions of people are facing never happens again.

    Featured image via Wikimedia 

    By Steve Topple

  • In today’s newsletter: As the junta gets ever more brutal, Gen Z protesters are forming a patchwork militia. Burmese journalist Aung Naing Soe on why the executions could signal a new phase in the struggle for democracy

    Good morning. On 1 February last year, Myanmar’s military, the Tatmadaw, staged a coup in the middle of the night, detaining Aung San Suu Kyi and many other leading figures from the country’s ruling party. Military television said the army had taken charge for one year in response to electoral fraud. Eighteen months later, the junta is still in power, almost 12,000 people are in detention and more than 2,000 have been killed.

    This week, the military executed four prisoners, including a former politician and a veteran activist, in the first use of capital punishment in decades. For many in the west, the end of Myanmar’s spell of quasi-democracy was a brief moment of dismay. But these executions are only the latest signal of the regime’s ongoing status as among the most oppressive and ruthless in the world.

    Coronavirus | Ministers played “fast and loose” when awarding £777m in Covid contracts to a healthcare firm that employed Conservative MP Owen Paterson as a lobbyist, the head of parliament’s spending watchdog has said.

    Strikes | The railways will again grind to a halt on Wednesday as workers strike over pay, job security and working conditions. Union leaders rejected a “paltry” offer of a 4% pay rise for the remainder of 2022.

    Politics | Rishi Sunak has made a dramatic U-turn by promising to scrap VAT on household fuel bills for a year if he becomes prime minister. He set out the policy after the second Tory leadership debate ended abruptly when presenter Kate McCann fainted.

    Oil | 27 EU member states have agreed on a plan to ration natural gas this winter to protect themselves against any more supply cuts by Russia.

    Sri Lanka | Former president Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who fled the country after mass protests over economic mismanagement, is expected to return home, according to a cabinet minister. Rajapaksa has been in Singapore since he was forced out of office but has not applied for asylum.

    Continue reading…

  • Human rights leaders report receiving emails from account purporting to be from Pavlou in recent days after campaigner’s arrest in London

    Australian activist Drew Pavlou has said he was the victim of an “orchestrated campaign” before his arrest over a false “bomb threat” after it emerged that human rights leaders and politicians have been receiving emails from an account purporting to be him in recent days.

    Pavlou was arrested after a “small peaceful human rights protest” outside the Chinese embassy in London, where he intended to glue his hand to the outside of the embassy building.

    Sign up to receive an email with the top stories from Guardian Australia every morning

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Pavlou says the emailed threat was intended to frame him after he staged a peaceful protest carrying a Uyghur flag outside the embassy

    Australian activist Drew Pavlou has been arrested in the UK over a false “bomb threat” delivered to the Chinese embassy in London that he claims came from a fake email address designed to frame him.

    Pavlou said the “absurd” email claimed he would blow up the embassy over Beijing’s oppression of its Uyghur Muslim minority, but that it was confected by the embassy in order to have him arrested.

    Continue reading…

  • Police monitoring groups have been busy keeping their local communities safe. On 10 July, Hackney Copwatch and Tottenham Copwatch showed up to Trans Pride. And on 14 July, the Copwatch Network took part in Mad Pride. Meanwhile, new groups are gearing up to challenge state violence in their areas.

    Trans liberation

    On 10 July, Hackney Copwatch and Tottenham Copwatch marched at Trans Pride:

    As Tottenham Copwatch suggest, our collective freedom from police and state violence necessitates trans freedom from this and all forms of violence. The state and its institutions are inherently transphobic.

    As LGBTQ+ prisoners’ rights group the Bent Bars Project highlights, trans people – especially those who are people of colour, disabled, homeless, and/or sex workers – are at extreme risk of policing and criminalisation. As extremely vulnerable and marginalised communities, they bear the brunt of state violence.

    The state detains trans and gender nonconforming people in prisons according to binary gender categories imposed at birth. Here, they are frequently subjected to violence, held in isolation, and denied access to basic healthcare. It is a basic right for trans people to be able to access gender affirming healthcare.

    Trans liberation doesn’t mean the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) opening a new prison unit to detain trans people. It means no trans people in prison, because it means no prisons.

    Mad Pride

    On 14 July, copwatching groups joined Mad Pride, an event run by the Campaign for Psych Abolition. The aim of the event is to resist the state’s stigmatisation, policing and detention of people with mental health issues.

    As explained in the campaign’s Twitter graphic, the state continues to use the 1983 Mental Health Act to police and criminalise people experiencing mental ill health:

    Mental health services are contributing to the traumatisation and criminalisation of those in need of support. As the graphic states, police have the power to detain members of the public who appear to be experiencing mental ill health by sectioning them against their will. When sectioned, the state has the power to force detainees take medication without consent. Patients who resist risk further violence and criminalisation.

    Casework and monitoring by INQUEST – a charity that works to support victims of state violence – shows that people with mental health issues are overrepresented in the number of deaths following the use of force. This was Olaseni Lewis’ fate. Lewis tragically died while held in a mental health hospital in 2010 after 11 police officers restrained him. The inquest into the fatal incident concluded that officers’ “excessive, unreasonable, unnecessary and disproportionate” use of force contributed to the 23-year-old’s death. This treatment is rooted in ableist perceptions of people with mental health issues as ‘dangers to society’.

    Alternatives to policing

    Coming up, Liverpool’s Bizziewatch will be hosting an open meeting to discuss alternatives to policing on 27 July:

    Spaces where we are able to imagine abolitionist alternatives are essential to the creation of a world without police, prisons, immigration detention, surveillance, and all other forms of the carceral system.

    It isn’t about having all the answers, but understanding that we can and must develop new ways of living that ensure everyone’s wellbeing and safety. This includes investment in the essential services that communities need to survive and thrive, such as health, education, and housing, rather than police and prisons.

    Freedom for everybody

    Noting the annual uptick in policing over the summer months, the Copwatching Network shared this helpful information on how to intervene in a police stop:

    New police monitoring groups are popping up in the face of state violence and surveillance. Barnet Copwatch is a brand new group, and is welcoming members. And Camden Anti-Raids is gearing up to challenge immigration raids in the local area. According to the Copwatch Network, Brighton will soon have its own police monitoring group.

    There’s no better time to join your local copwatching group. If there isn’t one currently operating in your area, find out how to set up a police monitoring group using Netpol’s practical guide. In order to resist state violence in all its forms, it’s vital that we build community power. The state and its actors don’t keep us or our communities safe, but collectively we can.

    Featured image via Karollyne Hubert/Unsplash 

    By Sophia Purdy-Moore

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • West Midlands Police has announced that it is the first UK force to livestream body-worn camera footage. This is recorded by police on the ground, and viewed by officers in an operations room. The quality of the footage is said to be so good that the officer viewing it remotely will be able to see better than police at the scene. The force said:

    From today, the latest body worn camera live streaming technology will be switched on, making us the first force in the country to use it and allowing officers to remotely view another officer’s body cam.

    The police stated that it has already trialled the software at protests:

     We’ve used it at policing operations such as football matches and protests, and during pursuits with traffic officers.

    It also said that it had consulted the public on the use of the bodycams, and that most people questioned were happy to be livestreamed:

    We have carried out extensive consultation and over 90 per cent of people told us they strongly agreed with us being able to use this new function.

    Of course, the police didn’t state who exactly the people it consulted were. It is doubtful that they spoke to the members of the public that they were trialling the surveillance on: those attending protests and football matches. When The Canary contacted West Midlands Police, asking which protests the technology had been used on, the force refused to give a specific answer.

    Protest is not an invitation for surveillance

    As the Network for Police Monitoring has pointed out, “choosing to take part in a protest is not an invitation to surveillance”. When we take to the streets, we don’t automatically consent to our every move being tracked, and we don’t consent to police officers filming our items of clothing, the people we are talking to, or the conversations we’re having.

    This new technology could mean that the police are breaching Article 8 of the Human Rights Act: the right to respect for a private life. But, of course, there are a number of ways that the state can get around this. Authorities can interfere with your right to respect for privacy in order to:

    protect national security
    protect public safety
    protect the economy
    protect health or morals
    prevent disorder or crime, or
    protect the rights and freedoms of other people.

    The state, will, of course, argue that such intrusive surveillance of a protest is needed to protect national security (even if they’re actually trying to protect their own power). Even while it tracks your every move, the state will say that it is only protecting the public. And in a society where capitalism is the religion, it will argue that it needs to track you in order to protect the economy.

    It remains to be seen how the police will utilise the livestream footage. Will police in an operations room, for example, instruct officers at a protest to film, follow or arrest certain individuals that it deems troublemakers? The answer is, most likely, yes. Together with increasingly powerful facial recognition technology, the chances of being able to attend a demonstration anonymously are becoming a thing of the past.

    Years of state surveillance

    Police surveillance at protests is, of course, nothing new in the UK. Police Forward Intelligence Teams (FIT), armed with their video cameras, have been a regular fixture at demonstrations for decades. Fifteen years ago, protesters began to organise collectively, trying to prevent officers from filming them. Known as Fitwatch, people on the ground used homemade banners to actively block police cameras. Back in 2010, Canary editor Emily Apple wrote in the Guardian:

    Fitwatch was formed three years ago as a street-level response to intimidation and harassment from the forward intelligence teams (Fits), with tactics ranging from blocking cameras to printing numbers, names and photographs of known police officers on our blog, and offering advice to demonstrators about staying safe in protest situations.

    Fitwatch’s tactics were effective, which, of course, made them targets for repression and arrest.The Metropolitan Police even succeeded in getting Fitwatch’s website – temporarily – shut down for perverting the course of justice. In fact, the tactics were so successful that a report from Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary in 2021 lamented the fact that FIT tactics are not regularly used “because [some forces] fear that this might increase confrontation with protesters”.

    The report further stated that:

    Guidance from the Royal College of Policing advises commanders that their use may have a ‘significant impact on the public’s perception of police and their legitimacy’.

    On top of this surveillance, people have been – and likely still are – covertly spied upon by police or corporate infiltrators posing as activists. Hundreds, if not thousands, of activists and campaigners have been spied upon by the British police over the years. An inquiry into undercover policing is ongoing, with more than 200 participants who were spied upon taking part in the inquiry. If that wasn’t enough, more than 30 women now know that they were deceived into relationships with undercover police officers. Despite the ongoing inquiry into undercover policing, the government has passed the sinister Covert Human Intelligence Sources Act, which has legalised all activity of undercover police officers.

    No, the police won’t use their own footage to hold themselves accountable

    You might be forgiven for thinking that the police’s livestreamed footage might actually be a good thing. After all, it could be used to catch police officers committing their all-too-frequent acts of violence, and they could then be held accountable.

    This is, of course, wishful thinking. West Midlands Police has stated that

    at this stage [the technology] will not be used for any independent scrutiny around use of force or stop and search.

    In other words, the police will use their new surveillance technology (paid for with public money, of course) to keep their eagle eye on you and me, but they will still be unaccountable for the Black men and boys that they continually harass during stop and searches. And they’ll continue to be unaccountable for murdering people.

    The technology is yet to be rolled out nationwide. It remains to be seen how it will be used in court cases, or whether defence barristers will be allowed to demand records of what happens between police on the ground and the officers instructing them in operations rooms.

    However, the experiences of the Fitwatch campaign also show that we can effectively take action on the streets to challenge police surveillance, and that such campaigns can have an impact on how policing strategies are enforced. It’s therefore vital that we all take steps to resist surveillance and to keep each other safe.

    Featured image via West Midlands Police / Flickr, Creative Commons 2.0, resized to 770 x 403 px. 

     

    By Eliza Egret

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • When you come down around the bend in the road that runs along the Coal River, a pickup riding your tail because you’re not inclined to take hairpin turns at 60 miles an hour, you’ll arrive at the house where Junior Walk grew up, where his parents still reside. Eunice, West Virginia, is not much more than a row of bungalows that sit with their backs right up against the road and their front doors maybe a hundred feet from the freezing-cold Coal River. Walk’s sister Natasha and her partner and baby live in the same stretch of homes, and he himself owns a house two doors down. But his roof is falling in and the cost to fix it is more than the house itself is worth, so he’s “giving it back to nature.” There are three junk cars in his yard pending sale to John at the gun and pawn shop in the next town over, once a suitable price is agreed upon. 

    Walk leads the way past his parents’ house, a shaggy behemoth of a dog barking gruffly in the yard. (“He’s half wolf,” he explains. “My sister’s ex-boyfriend paid thousands of dollars for him.”) On through a grove of trees, branches still bare in early spring, thick with bramble bushes. The air is damp with light rain spitting from a sudden cloud, but grainy in a way that you can feel in the back of your throat. From the muddy riverbank you can see an enormous chute protruding from one of the mountainsides that frames the valley, black coal pouring out of it to be carted off by a constant parade of trucks. Clouds of taupe dust billow off the trucks as they pull in and out of the mine entrance, and swirl in eddies over the ragged asphalt.

    Not much more than the length of a city block stretches between the coal chute and the Walks’ front door. Coal has been mined in the valley for the past two hundred-odd years — and the Walks and their kin have been here almost as long. But the Black Eagle mine is new, having opened in 2018, and a stream of anthracite, dust, and rock pours out of the mountain and more or less directly onto the front doorstep. Walk’s grandfather already has black lung from years spent working in another mine up the road; his mother Shelia wakes up and wipes a layer of silica dust that collects on the kitchen counters overnight, even with every window shut. Natasha’s baby was born premature.

    Junior Walk, pictured here, stands in front of the Black Eagle coal mine that opened next to his parents’ house in 2018. Grist / Eve Andrews

    Walk is 32 years old and has been fighting against coal companies in the valley his entire adult life. There was a time when he was traveling around to every state in the lower 48 (by his own count) to speak on behalf of Coal River Mountain Watch, the tiny grassroots organization where he works. He would go to summits and conferences and university halls and talk about mountaintop removal mining and contaminated creeks and poisonous air and sky-high rates of cancer, and the power of real, on-the-ground, flesh-and-blood activism to fight back against all that. 

    But today, if you suggest that Walk is a homegrown hero of the “youth climate movement,” he bristles. For two reasons: One, he’s been paying his own bills for half his life, which he’d argue places him squarely outside of the “youth” category. And two, he’s tired of being lauded as a savior in the war on coal, especially because he’s seen the way that war goes when the environmental movement’s attention turns elsewhere.

    At the start of this millennium, the Coal River Valley that runs through southern West Virginia’s Boone and Raleigh counties was the site of a vibrant anti-coal movement. A few ambitious and adventurous environmental activists decided that if they wanted to put a sword in the heart of the looming climate crisis, there was no better place to start than deep inside the dragon’s lair.

    The legend pretty much writes itself. Coal companies were tearing down biodiverse forests and blowing up mountains to excavate many millions of tons of climate-warming black gold, leaving impoverished and sickened communities and destroyed ecosystems in their wake. To fight back against them, hundreds of activists traveled from all over the world to West Virginia, forming blockades, camping out in trees, and chaining themselves to equipment.

    And somewhere along the way, the movement lost its momentum. Over the course of a decade, the spotlight on West Virginia’s coal country faded, even as new surface mines continued to grow like a fungus. A new threat had appeared: fracking, and all the frenzied new fossil fuel development that came with it. The activists slowly packed up and trickled back home or joined protests against oil and gas pipelines. The coal industry remained, its grip weakened by lawsuits, bankruptcies, and the growth of cheap natural gas, but very much alive. 

    Illustrated map showing a section of route 3 in West Virginia and the towns Sylvester, Eunice, and Rock Creek. A small silhouette of West Virginia is in the bottom left corner to give a sense of location
    Grist / Amelia Bates

    This is an American environmental story for the 21st century, with all the trappings — the fickle attentions of fame and the media, the seemingly never-ending battle between humans and corporations — all tied up in the tale of a man trying to protect his home. The battle against coal expansion and mountaintop mining continues, but without the media attention or the funding that came with it back when the well-known climate scientist James Hansen came to town. But it’s hard for someone like Walk to abandon his fight against the coal company, when the stakes are no less than the home he hopes to live in forever.


    To learn how civil disobedience in the name of climate change made its way to Walk’s hometown, I found Mike Roselle, the 68-year-old veteran activist who co-founded the eco-activist collective Earth First! and orchestrated Greenpeace’s first American ventures into organized civil disobedience in the latter half of the 1980s. He organized his way across most of the Mountain West to land in the hollowed-out mining town of Rock Creek, West Virginia, down the road from the Family Dollar and the Exxon and over a clattering wooden bridge, on a plot of land with three cabins tucked between the Coal River and a grove of trees.

    Mike Roselle and his cat on his property in Rock Creek, West Virginia. Grist / Eve Andrews

    Roselle has been fixing up the property himself for about 15 years. He first started working on it when he rented it to house the young anarchists and activists who had migrated up to the valley to join the anti-mountaintop removal cause. 

    The middle cabin where he and his roommate Cat Dees, another transplant brought here by the movement, reside is humbly decorated, with a wood-burning stove and rows of mason jars lining the kitchen walls. He has grown old here; when I meet him he is tall and thin, with bone-white hair and ice-blue eyes, and he steps slowly and carefully around the cabins to describe the work he’s done: an entire rebuild of this wall of this one, full rewiring, installation of the warm, gold-hued kitchen. 

    Earth First!, when it got started in the 1980s, operated by the motto “No Compromise in Defense of Mother Earth.” It garnered the attention of environmentalists and loggers alike for protests in which activists locked themselves to trees and logging equipment, occupying forest lands they sought to protect for months at a time. But in 2005, Hurricane Katrina, and all the urgency it portended for climate change, turned Roselle’s attention from forests to coal. He started Climate Ground Zero in Montana, where he struggled to organize direct actions against coal development; he couldn’t get a dozen people to show up to block a coal train. It was in 2005 that he met Julia Bonds, known as Judy, the Goldman Prize-winning founder of Coal River Mountain Watch. 

    a woman with short hair and a red jacket holds a paper in one hand as she speaks into a microphone
    Environmental activist Judy Bonds speaks at a 2009 rally to end mountaintop removal mining on Coal River Mountain. Bob Bird / AP Photo

    The legend — if you believe Roselle himself, who loves to spin a yarn — is that Bonds caught him and his friends sneaking off into the woods to smoke a joint at a conference for forest conservation activists, they invited her to join them, and the rest is history. That was how Roselle first learned about how all across southern West Virginia, coal companies were using explosives to blow the tops off mountains to lay bare the coal underneath, turning lush forest to surface mines. Over a million acres of forest had been lost, countless biodiverse ecosystems destroyed, any number of streams polluted with the resulting waste and rubble bulldozed into valleys, and, of course, the coal played a key role in pushing carbon emissions to the limits of livable levels. Bonds insisted that it had to be seen to be believed, and invited Roselle to the Coal River Valley that very spring.

    “They organized a trip to pick ramps, which I learned was kind of a traditional spring outing for many families, and everybody gets together and has a good time,” he recalled. “So we went up to Cherry Pond Mountain, which was everybody’s favorite gathering spot, and picked ramps. And then Judy says, ‘Well, I hope you like this place because next time you come here, it won’t be here. Massey Energy is committed to blow it up.’”

    Bonds wanted him to take the Redwood Summer model pioneered in California by Earth First! leader Judy Barri, and replicate it to block mountaintop removal mining in West Virginia. In June 1990, Barri had organized a training camp for young activists, largely college students, to teach them how to use their bodies to protect the redwood forest in Humboldt County, California. They took part in tree sits, where they’d camp out in the canopy, or chain themselves to the enormous trunks. They would lie spread-eagled on the ground in front of logging equipment and gather en masse to blockade the dock in Eureka, California, where timber would be loaded for export. 

    Roselle started spending more and more time in Appalachia, collaborating on actions and blockades with the Tennessee-based anti-mountaintop removal organization Mountain Justice. He eventually made Rock Creek the home of Climate Ground Zero in 2008, in large part to support the efforts of Coal River Mountain Watch. That year, Bonds and the rest of the Coal River Mountain Watch cohort learned that Massey Energy had acquired a permit to construct a road up to Coal River Mountain to start mining. The moment had come. Roselle pulled up a few YouTube videos of footage from Redwood Summer, and everyone agreed: We want to do this. They organized a blockade of the road, and then another, and then another.

    That was the year Junior Walk turned 18 years old, and his life began to change.

    a man in a button up shirt walks by a sign
    A young Junior Walk speaks during a news conference in Charleston about legislation to ban injecting wastewater from processing coal on Tuesday, Feb. 22, 2011. Tum Huber / AP Photo

    When Walk graduated from high school in 2008, he had been accepted to the Art Institute up in Pittsburgh. He quickly realized that neither he nor his family had any chance of pulling together the tuition money, so he abandoned all college plans and got a job at the Elk Run Coal Processing Plant in Sylvester, another town in the valley, alongside his dad. 

    Elk Run is notable for two reasons: It was the first non-union mine established by the coal baron A.T. Massey, a cannon fired in the United Mine Workers of America conflict in the 1980s. Supporters of the union set fire to the plant more than once. 

    It’s also the site of one of three massive coal waste impoundments in the Big Coal River watershed. The liquid slurry left over from treated coal, after it’s processed into its lightest form for shipment, gets poured into a hollow that’s dammed up by the solid waste. These black lakes of toxic sludge, hundreds of feet deep and contained by not much more than a wall of mud and rock, are a looming threat to the communities that lie beneath them, nestled at the foot of the mountain.

    Aerial view of a coal mining "sludge dam"; tree covered mountains surround a cleared area that leads to a dam filled with gray sludge
    The coal waste impoundment at the Elk Run processing plant Lyntha Scott Eiler; Courtesy of the American Folklife Center, Library of Congress (AFC 1999/008: CRF-LE-C038-03)

    Walk performed odd maintenance jobs at Elk Run. One of them entailed wading thigh-deep through the coal waste slurry as it got pumped out into the impoundment. He couldn’t avoid the thought that he might die either from drowning in slurry or chemical exposure-induced cancer, so he quit only to find that there weren’t a whole lot of options: Dairy Queen, Dollar General, and that was about it. Within the year, he’d taken another job working security on a strip mine, where he’d sit for hours every day and watch bulldozers and excavators rip chunks out of the mountain, hungry for the coal beneath.

    “Within the first week of me working up there, I just started feeling miserable about it, watching that machinery tear down that mountain,” Walk says, recalling the dust and noise that plagued his own childhood. 

    Walk had known Judy Bonds his whole life; he went to school with her grandson, and she worked at the gas station with his grandma. After a few weeks on his security job, he went down to the Coal River Mountain Watch office and had a heart-to-heart with Bonds about what he was seeing. Soon after, he started volunteering for Coal River Mountain Watch, writing their newsletter on a clunky desktop computer he’d built himself.

    Pins from Coal River Mountain Watch campaigns over the years. Grist / Eve Andrews

    “I would load that into the passenger seat of my car and drive it to work with me, and I’d run an extension cord out to the box on the power pole,” he recalls, gleefully. “And I’d sit there getting paid as a security guard while popping out articles for the Mountain Watch newsletter.”

    By the start of 2010, Bonds had given Walk a staff job at Coal River Mountain Watch, where he took on a wide variety of roles to suit a tiny organization with intermittent funding and a fairly daunting mission. That meant scouting sites for blockades and protests, recruiting and training activists, and planning and participating in the actions. He traveled around the country — frequently with Larry Gibson, a prominent local anti-mountaintop removal activist — giving talks at college campuses and environmental conferences: “I would try to convince everybody that I could that it was a good idea to chain themselves to some big yellow piece of equipment.”

    At the time, a growing slate of celebrities was making the trek down to the valley. Grammy-award-winning country singer Kathy Mattea, a native of Charleston, the state capital, met with Judy Bonds and marched up Blair Mountain to protest its likely destruction. The actress Daryl Hannah published a rambling op-ed about her experience getting arrested with James Hansen while protesting mountaintop removal around the Coal River. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. narrated a documentary on the subject. 

    Walk, meanwhile, played a part in recruiting the valley’s cadre of foot soldiers. Members of other groups, like Mountain Justice and Climate Ground Zero, lent a hand in organizing and manpower. The population of the entire Coal River Valley numbers in the low thousands, and at the peak of the movement around 2009 there were a couple hundred activists from out of town who had come to join the cause. 

    Some culture clash was inevitable. Shelia Walk, Junior’s mother, says that the fact that the Coal River Valley is so secluded makes an influx of anything new and different all the more noticeable: “Anyone that’s coming around with pink hair, everybody’s like — gasp!” Early on in Climate Ground Zero’s tenure in Rock Creek, one organizer’s dog killed a local’s prize fighting chicken.

    Locals leave messages outside their homes for environmental activists leading a march of several hundred people through Boone and Logan counties in Southern West Virginia to protest mountain top removal. Andrew Lichtenstein / Corbis via Getty Images

    There were moments of more peaceful integration. In the late 1990s, Gibson had gotten a few dozen acres on top of Kayford Mountain put into a land trust, and he’d built cabins and set up a gathering area where activists could get together to socialize, plan actions, or just enjoy nature. Shelia Walk and a few other women in the community regularly came up to the mountain to cook for them, including for a Fourth of July event well-attended by both locals and activists. John Paul Webber, the 6-foot-5-inch Gadsden-flag-tattooed proprietor of the gun-and-pawn shop in Whitesville, got shit-faced one night and rode his four-wheeler up Kayford. Walk initially thought that Webber had shown up just to wreak havoc, but they hit it off and today are “first-tier” friends.

    Webber’s was one of the friendlier drunken ambushes of Kayford. Many residents of the Coal River Valley have bought their homes and fed their children thanks to the only real industry within 100 miles, and if you ask them about the anti-mountaintop removal movement you might hear a very different perspective: God put coal in the mountain so we could take it out. The way many locals saw it, the anti-mountaintop-removal movement posed a threat to their livelihoods — a belief eagerly fueled by the coal companies. Early in his activist career, Walk was never seen with his father because of the risk that would pose to his job at the coal processing plant. 

    The activists’ victories mounted. They demonstrated at then-Governor Joe Manchin’s office and mansion in Charleston as well as in Washington, D.C., securing more and more national attention. They successfully blocked or delayed numerous permits to fill streams with mountaintop removal waste. Activists thwarted blasting on the Bee Tree mine site with the then-longest tree-sit in West Virginia history. In 2010, Coal River Mountain Watch scored a huge coup in a years-long battle to get Marsh Fork Elementary moved outside of the danger zone of the coal silo and the slurry impoundment, and rallied together the money to construct a new school several miles up the road, including a long-disputed donation from Massey Energy. Walk calls this the greatest victory of his activist career.

    The coal companies started to pay more attention, and their employees and the families of their employees did too. Sneers in the grocery store grew to hollered threats out of truck windows and worse. Walk has had a gun pulled on him more times than he can count. 

    Aerial view of a mountaintop removal site with a large crane in the middle and tree covered mountains in the distance
    An aerial view of Catenary Coal’s surface mine, on Cabin Creek near Kayford Mountain. Lyntha Scott Eiler; Courtesy of the American Folklife Center, Library of Congress (AFC 1999/008: CRF-LE-C050-11)

    Many locals still see the activists as an invasion of outsiders, even though the movement’s leaders were almost entirely born and bred in the valley, describing them as paid by outside organizations to come in to cause trouble. Cliff Lester, a retired coal miner at the Catenary mine who now runs a pay lake stocked with trout and catfish at the south end of the valley, recalled that the activists “made life a living hell” for those who worked in the coal industry at the time. 

    “I don’t know if they didn’t understand or if they just didn’t really care,” he says. “They just look at it as destroying mountains, but in reality, we took the coal out that was needed for electricity, for building buildings. And over the years, I’ve seen the coal industry go down extremely. We couldn’t get permits. A lot of people lost their homes, lost their jobs, their vehicles, everything.” 

    Those lost jobs, however, have less to do with the effectiveness of the activists and more to do with the economic realities. The mechanization of coal removal and processing had eliminated the need for thousands of human jobs, and looming competition from cheap natural gas in fueling power plants made coal a less desirable commodity. 

    But the strength of the anti-mountaintop removal movement in the Coal River Valley was the fact that it was spearheaded by people who had deep roots in the community, who love their home so much that they will be shunned by their own neighbors to defend it. “You get a handful of very committed people, people who something inside of them just snaps one day and they decide, you know, screw it, I’m going to devote my life to being a nemesis to the coal industry,” Walk says. “I mean, that’s what happened to me.” 

    Small group of people on folding chairs addressing a crowd sitting in the bleachers of a school gymnasium
    A 1998 Coal River Mountain Watch meeting at Marsh Fork Elementary School, then called Pettus Elementary, on threats that nearby coal infrastructure posed to the school. Lyntha Scott Eiler; Courtesy of the American Folklife Center, Library of Congress (AFC 1999/008: CRF-LE-C243-05)

    It also happened to Judy Bonds, whose coal miner father died of black lung, and who then co-founded Coal River Mountain Watch to fight back against the coal dust pollution in the creeks her grandson played in and the coal waste impoundments that threatened to drown the only community she’d ever known. It happened to Debbie Jarrell, co-director of Coal River Mountain Watch today, whose family name is sprinkled all up and down Route 3: Charles B. Jarrell General Store, Jarrell Backwoods Towing, Perry Jarrell Road, Jarrell’s Ridge. Jarrell first joined the cause around 2005 because her granddaughter was a student at Marsh Fork Elementary, and she kept getting sick. It happened to Larry Gibson, who was so sickened by how mountaintop removal mining had transformed the home that he and his ancestors had grown up in that he walked the length of West Virginia north-to-south to warn fellow mountaineers about the threat.

    Small white convenience store with black awning and ice and soda machines out front, with a small gas pump to the left and trees in the background
    The Charles B. Jarrell General Store is the oldest operating store in the Coal River Valley. Lyntha Scott Eiler; Courtesy of the American Folklife Center, Library of Congress (AFC 1999/008: CRF-LE-C147-01)

    In January 2011, when Junior Walk had been working as a full-time organizer for just about a year, Judy Bonds died of cancer, her disease believed to be brought about by airborne dust from mountaintop removal in the region. By the end of 2012, Larry Gibson would be felled by a heart attack. 


    It was around that time that a hydraulic fracturing boom in the Marcellus Shale birthed a crop of new gas wells all across northern West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. Natural gas-powered electricity was a cheaper and ostensibly cleaner alternative to coal-fired, but the magnitude of the threat it posed to the climate and the environment became clear: explosions and flares on wells and pipelines, methane leaks, the mysterious cocktail of fracking chemicals that seeped into water tables and tributaries. 

    In 2014, oil production in the United States jumped by 16 percent to 8.7 million barrels per day, the largest single-year increase in a century, largely due to the fracking boom in the Bakken shale region of North Dakota and Montana. The dangers of oil infrastructure seized public attention in 2010, with the Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, and continued to make headlines throughout the decade: the Enbridge pipeline leak into the Kalamazoo River, the largest inland oil spill in history; the deadly derailment of an oil train in Lac-Mégantic, Québec; the Refugio oil spill on California’s Gaviota coast. Meanwhile, coal production in West Virginia had been in steep decline pretty much since 2009.

    Back in Raleigh County, things had started to fall apart within the activist community. The deaths of Bonds and Gibson had been a huge blow. Mike Roselle and the younger activists were increasingly at odds over the organization’s hierarchical structure and the ostensible need for increasingly radical tactics, which eventually lead to the youth contingent storming the house in Rock Creek and announcing that they were forming their own movement: RAMPS, Radical Action for Mountains’ and Peoples’ Survival. (Walk is a co-founder of this organization, but no longer involved.) Plans to lobby for a wind farm on top of Coal River Mountain, already a bit of a pipe dream, faded to an increasingly small likelihood.

    Relics of Coal River Mountain Watch’s various campaigns, displayed in the office in Naoma, West Virginia. Grist / Eve Andrews

    If you ask Vernon Haltom, the executive director of Coal River Mountain Watch, when the anti-mountaintop removal movement in the Coal River Valley started to lose steam, he’d pin it to 2015. “Some of the big coal companies declared bankruptcy that year,” he explained over the phone. “And then a lot of the press, even some of our allied groups, declared victory, that mountaintop removal was essentially over. And they don’t really get involved with us anymore because we kept saying, ‘No, it’s not, it’s still ongoing.’”

    Walk watched as most of his friends trickled off to new battles, primarily against projects such as the Mountain Valley Pipeline. “I can’t really be mad about it,” he says, “because they did what they could, and some of them gave years out of their lives and so much effort to invest in this fight here to help my community, you know what I mean? And so I can’t really feel any other way except grateful for the time that they did spend here.”

    But he isn’t interested in joining the pipeline fight. “As long as they want to work against the coal industry and make that their main effort, I’ll be right there working shoulder to shoulder with them,” he says. “But if they’re doing all this other stuff against natural gas and all that, yeah, that’s great. But that’s not where I’m going to put my effort because this is my fight, this is my community and it’s what I do.”

    Junior Walk holds up a 3-D printed model he made of the topography of the Big Coal River watershed. Grist / Eve Andrews

    I first met Walk at the Coal River Mountain Watch office, which occupies a simple brick building that used to house a diner on the main street of Naoma, roughly halfway between his parents’ home and Mike Roselle’s. It’s filled with relics of the organization’s 24 years: Bonds’ Goldman Prize, framed newspaper cutouts, photos of protests on the steps of the state capitol in Charleston. Walk is the organization’s only current employee outside of its directors. The office is unheated on this cool April morning. I ask Walk to tell me about what he does these days.

    His mission: to catch coal companies in the act of breaking environmental laws, no easy feat. He has spent years intimately learning the land that he’s committed to protect. He’s memorized a whole network of old logging roads, forged back trails on foot up thistle-thick slopes. He’ll go out there with a camera and a drone and take pictures of damaged hillsides or a digging site’s spread onto unpermitted land, and take his findings back to try to goad the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection into doing something about it, also no easy task. Haltom will make use of a small plane from Southwings, another conservation organization, to fly over mountaintop removal projects and document new developments. 

    On May 15, for example, Haltom and Walk got word that the Little Marsh Fork, which runs into the Coal River, was running pitch-black. Heavy rains had overflowed a stockpile at the processing plant. Haltom had to call the DEP inspector out of church, and Walk ran out to capture the inky water via drone.

    “The whole point of it is to make them spend as much money as we possibly can to make it less economically feasible for them to keep mining that coal,” Walk says. “Paying fines, going back on to the site to fix stuff like slips in the hillside or whatever. It’s death by a thousand paper cuts.” 

    It may surprise those involved in the climate movement today to learn that mountaintop removal mining is not only legal but active. Walk describes new blasts into the mountain as a near-daily occurrence. Later that day he drives me up to a surface mine in a rattling Subaru — a professor he met through his activism traded it to him for a hunting rifle — with the patient resignation of someone who has given the same tour a thousand times. 

    The Subaru climbs up a dirt road through budding forest, all umber and olive with splashes of violet and sun-yellow. Then suddenly, under a brilliant sky streaked with fast-moving clouds, everything is gray. A surface mine is just coal and rock as far as the eye can see, small heaps of it graduating into foothills. You can see the soft round heads of the surrounding mountains several miles off. We can’t stop the car and get out to walk around because Walk’s vehicle is well-known to any employees of the coal company that might be on site.

    He smokes a cigarette on the drive home, and we go to talk to his mother, Shelia.


    The nightmare of the Black Eagle mine, next to the Walk family home in Eunice, both mother and son agree, started with the noise. In 2020, Alpha Natural Resources put in an exhaust fan so loud that you couldn’t talk to someone standing two feet away without yelling.

    The Black Eagle coal mine in Pettus, West Virginia, has been the subject of numerous noise and dust complaints by residents of the neighboring community of Eunice. Grist / Eve Andrews

    “I’d call the DEP and I’d be like, hold on, let me open the back door and you’ll hear what my problem is,” Shelia recalls. “And they would say, ‘Oh man.’ Yeah, imagine me sitting here!”

    It took months of filing reports to the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, but eventually Alpha Natural Resources moved the exhaust fan. That still left the dust — not just coal dust, which Shelia’s lived with all her life on Route 3, but silica dust. One morning this past February, Shelia went to make coffee and found every surface of the kitchen coated in a light white powder. She initially assumed her husband had somehow exploded a bottle of baby powder while taking care of their grandson, but gradually realized what she was looking at. “And if it’s sitting in our kitchen like this, we have breathed it. Oh, my Lord. And it’s scary because that’s what causes cancer.”

    Alpha Natural Resources had bought out the couple dozen residents of the village of Pettus, immediately next to Eunice, to knock down their homes and make more space for the Black Eagle mine. Shelia had expected the residents of Eunice would be offered a buyout, too, but it never happened. When she first learned that the mine would be put in, she had no intention of ever leaving her lifelong home. But she’s had enough; living next to an operating coal mine makes her miserable. In June, she and her husband bought a new home with a big garden on a hillside in Horse Creek, about 10 miles away.

    A drawing in the Coal River Mountain Watch office in Naoma, West Virginia. Grist / Eve Andrews

    Shelia’s neighbors are fed up too, and have joined her in community meetings to demand action from the Department of Environmental Protection against Alpha Natural Resources, which might include a buyout, although that’s an uphill battle. Walk and Vernon Haltom have helped her and other people in Eunice by getting their documentations of dust and noise and other offenses filed with the DEP. I ask Shelia if she thought the anti-coal activist movement of the prior decade had influenced the town’s apparent disillusionment with the coal industry at all.

    “A lot of the older people had already realized what the coal company has done,” she says. “And I think that’s where my eyes were starting to open, when I was a young mother, from my grandparents and my dad and just listening to their stories. And once the so-called tree huggers come in, I think it started to open eyes for more people my age. After you hear it a couple times, you’re like, you know, that makes sense. 

    “And when the company decides they don’t need you no more, you ain’t gonna have nowhere to go hunting, nowhere to go fishing, nowhere to go swimming. And they just leave an empty, flattened place that nothing can grow or live on.”


    A couple of weeks before my trip to the Coal River Valley, an unaffiliated group of organizers announced something called the Coal Baron Blockade. It was a planned protest at the Grant Town Power Plant in Marion County, which burns gob — coal waste — bought from West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin’s family’s company, to the tune of a few hundred thousand in profit for Manchin himself every year. Prior to the event, I found it impossible to ascertain the protest’s lead organizer or its specific goals. 

    Protesters gather at the Grant Town, West Virginia power plant on April 9, 2022 for the Coal Baron Blockade. Eve Andrews / Grist

    I asked Walk if he knew anything about the Coal Baron Blockade. He said it was clear it was organized by out-of-staters, and they had reached out to him and a bunch of other West Virginia activists and asked him to be part of it. He didn’t see reason enough to make the time. 

    “If the weather’s nice, I need to be out with the drone and catching the coal companies doing illegal things, so that doesn’t leave a lot of time to drive plumb to Morgantown for a weekend when I’m not even on the clock.” He gestured to his Subaru. “You see what I’m driving? I’m not putting more miles on that thing.”

    If you ask Walk why he still does this, his answer is simple: He feels he owes it to his predecessors — Judy Bonds, Larry Gibson, Chuck Nelson — because they gave him a purpose, told him they were proud of him, gassed him up.

    “Not that I’m self-important enough to feel like I shoulder their legacy or anything like that, because that would be impossible for anybody,” Walk is quick to add. “But somebody’s got to be the voice out here saying, ‘No, that’s wrong, what the coal industry does is bad.’ And that’s just kind of my lot in life.”

    This story was originally published by Grist with the headline What happened to the ‘war on coal’ in West Virginia? on Jul 13, 2022.

    This post was originally published on Grist.

  • Listen to a reading of this article:

    Rise, like lions after slumber
    In unvanquishable number!
    Shake your chains to earth like dew
    Which in sleep had fallen on you:
    Ye are many—they are few!

     

    ~ Percy Bysshe Shelley

    The video footage coming out of Sri Lanka right now has been the recurring nightmare of every ruler throughout history.

    Thousands of protesters outraged by the deteriorating material conditions of the nation’s economic meltdown have stormed the presidential palace of Sri Lanka’s President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, and I guarantee you the aerial footage as they poured into the building en masse has made every government leader and plutocrat a little uncomfortable today.

    Just look at that. Look at all those people flooding in there. That is some truly awe-inspiring power. Imagine how terrifying it would be to find yourself on the receiving end of it.

    I don’t know enough about what’s going on in Sri Lanka yet to comment with any authority on what powers might be at play in this uprising, but I do know that every ruler throughout history has spent time envisioning what would happen if a crowd that size decided to storm their base of operation. If their numbers became too great to suppress, or if your forces who would be doing the suppressing joined the ranks of the people instead, the best-case scenario for you is that you’d have already fled the building by that point, as Rajapaksa had the good sense to do shortly before the building was stormed. If enough angry people get their hands on you, it won’t matter if they’re armed with rockets or pistols or their own bare hands; you are in for a violent end.

    If you’ve ever wondered why so much energy goes into keeping everyone propagandized in our society, this is why. If you’ve ever wondered why our rulers work so hard to keep us divided against each other, this is why. If you’ve ever wondered why we’re always being instructed to take our grievances to the voting booth even though we learn in election after election that it never changes the things that most desperately need to change, this is why.

    Our entire civilization is structured around preventing scenes like the one we’re seeing in Sri Lanka today. Our education systems, our political systems, our media, our online information. Religions that have been around for thousands of years because the powerful endorsed and promulgated them are full of passages extolling the virtues of obedience, poverty, meekness, and rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar’s. From the moment we are born our heads are filled with stories about why it’s good and right to consent to the status quo and why it would be wrong to take back what has been stolen from us by a predatory ruling class.

    This is why we’re always inundated with messaging about the importance of civility and politeness any time people realize that they can simply confront corrupt officials in restaurants or at their homes to push for what they want. The managers of the oligarchic empire which rules over us are terrified that we will one day notice that there are a whole lot more of us than there are of them, and that there’s really nothing they could do to stop us if we decided to replace them with a system which benefits ordinary people instead of an elite few.

    Things are getting worse and worse because the systems that are in place are designed to exploit and oppress rather than to uplift and help thrive. Those systems will protect their own ability to continue to exploit and oppress until the people use their numbers to replace them with something healthy. The people will never use their numbers to replace abusive systems with something healthy as long as they are successfully propagandized away from doing so.

    This is why our political and media institutions act the way they act and why our systems are set up in the way that they are: to keep us from realizing how easy it would be to shrug off the old mechanisms of oppression like a heavy coat on a warm day and build something new that works for all of us.

    Things will keep getting worse until we find a way to cut through the propaganda brain fog and rise like lions.

    ___________________

    My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, following me on FacebookTwitterSoundcloud or YouTube, or throwing some money into my tip jar on Ko-fiPatreon or Paypal. If you want to read more you can buy my books. The best way to make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for at my website or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. All works co-authored with my American husband Tim Foley.

    Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

    This post was originally published on Caitlin Johnstone.

  • Family of Alaa Abd El Fattah join wife of Karim Ennarah, under travel ban, in demanding more action from foreign secretary

    The family of a British national jailed in Egypt and the British wife of an Egyptian rights defender under a travel ban are demanding that Liz Truss do more to pressure her Egyptian counterpart when they meet this week.

    The foreign secretary is expected to meet Egypt’s foreign minister, Sameh Shoukry, in London after telling parliament in June that she would seek a meeting with him and raise the case of detained British-Egyptian activist Alaa Abd El Fattah. “We’re working very hard to secure his release,” she said.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Here’s what you need to know about the Priti Patel’s authoritarian public order bill.


    Video transcript

    Have you ever wanted to change the world? Want to take action against a multinational corporation that’s destroying the planet? Blockade an arms company? Protest against an environmentally devastating transport project like HS2? Or do you want to save a local green area from development by greedy capitalists? 

    Well, you can go straight to jail under new laws proposed by Priti Patel.

    Yes, that’s right, the home secretary is introducing yet more powers to stifle protest – powers that are a massive threat to our civil liberties.

    The police haven’t even had a chance to exercise their new powers in the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act and the government has introduced a new Public Order Bill.

    We’ve been here before. The bill is basically a rehash of some of the worse amendments to the PCSC act that were chucked out in the Lords. 

    New offences include locking on, going equipped to lock on, and obstructing national infrastructure. 

    There are new stop and search powers, including a suspicionless power for protest-related offences. This will be used to harass anyone who looks like a protester. But it will particularly impact marginalised communities who already bear the brunt of an institutionally racist police force. 

    Protest too much and you could receive a serious disruption prevention order. You don’t even need to commit an offence to get one. Restrictions can include not seeing certain people, not going to protests, and not using the internet for protest-related activities. Orders can even be enforced with electronic tagging. 

    But the government’s logic for introducing this new repressive legislation doesn’t even make sense.

    In the same speech, Priti Patel described protesters as “a mob” engaged in “disruptive and self-defeating tactics” whilst saying that she wants to free up police who are diverted away from the communities where they are needed most to prevent serious violence and neighbourhood crime”.  She cited the cost of policing XR and Just Stop Oil protests.

    MP Matt Vickers described protesters as ‘verging on domestic terrorism’ before labelling protest policing as a ‘waste of time’.

    There’s a massive contradiction here.

    Introduce a load of new offences and police powers, and guess what? The police will use them.

    This will mean more money spent on protest policing and bigger policing operations. Not to mention the amount of money it’ll cost to prosecute and imprison more activists. That’ll mean even less cops available to tackle the sort of crime the Tories claim they want the police fighting.

    Because protests aren’t going to stop. There have been 1000s of arrests on XR protests. That’s people who’ve already committed to risking arrest because we are living in a climate emergency. 

    And at some point, people will start fighting back in the class war masquerading as a cost of living crisis that’s currently being waged against us.

    This is what the government is really worried about. It is cracking down on dissent because it’s lost all legitimacy. It knows it won’t be long before people rise up and start fighting back.

    We will continue taking action. Not because it’s fun or because we want to get arrested. But because we don’t have a choice. Our planet is on fire, we can’t afford to pay the bills, and we want a future for our children. 

    So we all need to send a clear message to the government. New legislation will not stop us. We will resist these new powers. We will be ungovernable and we will fight back.

    By Emily Apple

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • ANALYSIS: By Aprila Wayar and Johnny Blades for The Diplomat

    A plan to create three new provinces in the Papua region highlights how Jakarta’s development approach has failed to resolve a long-running conflict.

    In April of this year, Indonesia’s Parliament approved a plan to create three new provinces in Papua, the easternmost region of the archipelago.

    Government officials have described the creation of the new administrative units as an effort to accelerate the development of the outlying region, which has long lagged behind the other more densely populated islands.

    But Papua’s problem isn’t a lack of development — it’s a lack of justice for West Papuans.

    In the plan to subdivide Indonesia’s two most sparsely populated provinces — Papua and West Papua — many people sense a kind of “end game” strategy by Indonesia’s government that is expected to worsen the long-running conflict in Papua, something countries in the region can ill afford to ignore.

    The province plan comes in the twilight of President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo’s second and final term in office, a term marked by an escalation of violence between fighters of the pro-independence West Papua National Liberation Army (TPNPB) and the Indonesian security forces.

    Jokowi has ordered huge military operations in the central regencies of Nduga, Puncak Jaya, Intan Jaya, Maybrat and regions near the border with Papua New Guinea (PNG).

    1960s armed wing
    The TPNPB is the armed wing of the Organisasi Papua Merdeka (OPM), or Free Papua Movement, which was created in the 1960s by so-called West Papuan freedom fighters.

    They opposed the Indonesian Army, which had begun occupying parts of West Papua after the Dutch withdrew in 1962, even before the United Nations Temporary Executive Authority had completed its period of mandated administration in 1963.

    After Papua officially joined Indonesia in a 1969 UN referendum that many Papuans view as flawed, the OPM grew rapidly in the late 1970s, with fighters joining its ranks across West Papua. Their operations mainly consisted of attacking Indonesian patrols.

    In 1984, when a West Papuan insurgent attack sparked large Indonesian military deployments in and around the capital Jayapura, the subsequent brutal sweep operations triggered a mass exodus of around 10,000 Papuan refugees to PNG.

    At the time, when questioned in Jakarta about the impacts of military operations in Papua, a leading Indonesian Foreign Ministry official shrugged it off and stated that the government was introducing colour television in Papua and was doing its best to accelerate development there.

    Nearly 40 years later, with the Papuan conflict reaching a new pitch of tension, the government’s narrative has barely changed.

    Conflict continues at the cost of mass displacement in Papua’s highlands. Human rights bodies have stated that intensified bursts of fighting between TPNPB guerrillas and the Indonesian army since late 2018 have displaced at least 60,000 Papuans.

    Figures hard to verify
    Exact figures remain difficult to verify because Jakarta still obstructs access to the region for foreign media and human rights workers. Since the Indonesian takeover of Papua in the 1960s, West Papua’s history has been marked by persistent human rights abuses.

    In recent years, the UN Human Rights Commissioner has repeatedly pressed for access to the region, without success.

    In April, Jokowi’s cabinet, including Home Affairs Minister Tito Karnavian, a former police chief, and fellow hardliner Defence Minister Prabowo Subianto, introduced a draft for a long-anticipated creation of three new provinces — Central Papua, South Papua, and Central Highlands Papua –– in addition to the two existing provinces of Papua and West Papua.

    This initiative has met with strong opposition from indigenous Papuans. Well before the recent cabinet decision, Papua’s provincial Governor Lukas Enembe warned against it, fearing new provinces could pave the way for more transmigrants and more problems for Papuans, although in recent days he has reportedly offered qualified support for dividing Papua based on customary territories.

    He was not alone in speaking up. On May 10, thousands of Papuans from the Papuan provinces and in major cities in other parts of Indonesia took to the streets to protest Jakarta’s creation of extra provinces.

    Protests were met head on by heavy security forces responses including the use of water cannons and detention. Papuans were frustrated because their views had not been incorporated in Jakarta’s decision making.

    As Emanuel Gobay, director of the Papua Legal Aid Institute, told The Diplomat, the region’s Special Autonomy Law, passed in 2001, requires the central government to conduct a public survey starting from the village level to the head of districts where the expansion will be carried out.

    “The central government has introduced the planned expansion policy on its own initiative, without any aspirations from the grassroots communities,” Gobay explained.

    Delineated history
    For years, the Indonesian government has characterised West Papua as being backward in terms of social and human development, claiming that it needs Indonesian help to advance.

    Certainly, poverty has been a problem in Papua, but that’s not unique across the republic. Yet, for decades Papua was effectively isolated by central government, often leaving the public in the dark about what has been going on there.

    The social media age has lifted the lid on Papua a little, stirring international attention intermittently. As part of Jakarta’s response, social media bots have been deployed across the internet, spreading state propaganda and targeting human rights workers, journalists, or anyone drawing attention to Papua.

    The bots say everything is good in Papua, look at all the development happening, 3G internet, roads. In a sense, it’s true that infrastructure development has increased in recent years.

    Compared to neighbouring PNG, Papua and West Papua provinces are well developed in terms of basic services and roads. But it’s not necessarily the sort of development that Papuans themselves want or need.

    The lack of a genuine self-determination process in the 1960s remains a core injustice that holds Papua back. Since then, thousands of indigenous Papuans have lost their lives in what is considered one of the most militarised zones in the wider region. Some research puts the death toll as high as 500,000.

    One of them was Theys Eluays, a tribal chief who became a figurehead for Papuan independence aspirations and a strong critic of the first plan to divide Papua into two provinces, until he was assassinated by members of the Kopassus special forces unit in 2001.

    Military elite have major interests
    Indonesia’s political elite and military establishment have extensive interests in Papua’s abundant natural resource wealth. The new provincial divisions would enable more opportunities for the exploitation of these resources, largely for the benefit of people other than Papuans themselves.

    The new provinces would be merely the latest in a series of delineations imposed on Papua by others, a process that runs from the marking of the western half of New Guinea as a Dutch colony in the 1880s, to the contentious transferal of control of the territory to Indonesia in the 1960s, to Jakarta’s subsequent reconfigurations of the province, especially after the enactment of the Special Autonomy Law in response to Papuan demands for independence.

    The plan for further subdivisions did not emerge overnight. It has been mooted for decades by Indonesia’s powerful Golkar party as a way to cement sovereign control of the restive eastern region. In the 1980s, proposals for dividing Irian Jaya, as it was then known, into as many as six provinces were fleshed out at national seminars on regional development and gained interest from elites in Jakarta.

    Even in these early seminar discussions, Papuan representatives warned that provincial splits could have a negative impact on local indigenous communities, whose interests were clearly not represented in provincial subdivision plans.

    Although the idea of provincial expansion in Irian Jaya ended up on President Suharto’s desk, it hadn’t got off the ground by the time he stepped down in 1998.

    During the subsequent tenure of President B.J. Habibie, Papuan tribal and civil community leaders were among the “Team of 100″ Papuans invited to the presidential palace for a dialogue, during which they asked for independence. Habibie told the Team to go home and rethink its request.

    During the term of President Abdurrahman Wahid, the spiritual leader of Nahdlatul Ulama, Indonesia’s largest Islamic organisation, West Papuans were granted the concession of being able to raise the banned Papuan nationalist Morning Star flag, on the condition that it be hoisted two inches beneath the flag of the Indonesian republic.

    The administration of the next president, Megawati Sukarnoputri, initiated a law that granted Papua Special Autonomy status and created a second province, West Papua (Papua Barat) — the first splitting of provinces.

    Local resentment
    Since Papua became a part of the Republic of Indonesia, Jakarta has introduced various laws aimed ostensibly at improving the welfare of indigenous Papuans. These have overwhelmingly been met with suspicion and skepticism by the Papuans.

    Special Autonomy is widely regarded by Papuans to have failed on the promise to empower them in their own homeland, where they instead continue to be victims of racism and human rights violations, and their indigenous culture is increasingly threatened.

    Due to large scale exploitation of Papua’s natural wealth, Papuans have been losing access to the forests, mountains, and rivers which were essential to their people’s way of life for centuries.

    International companies such as Freeport McMoRan, Rio Tinto, BP, Shell, and multinational oil palm players operate here in commercialising Papua’s mineral, gas, forestry and other resources. There is little consideration about the sustainability of indigenous customs, which has only added to the long list of Papuan grievances.

    Now that Jakarta is drawing more administrative lines through this cradle of native rainforest and immense biodiversity, Gobay expects new provinces to have three major impacts.

    “First, it will create an environment for more land grabbing. Either through the granting of mining permits to foreign exploration companies or through the construction of other additional government enterprises on customary land,” he said.

    “Secondly, marginalisation of Papuans on their own land would only increase,” he added.

    Thirdly, he expected a rise in human rights violations.

    The Papuan People’s Assembly (MRP), a cultural protection body born from the Special Autonomy Law, has filed for a judicial review of the provincial subdivision plan with Indonesia’s Constitutional Court, and asked the House of Representatives in Jakarta to postpone the New Autonomous Region Bill for Central Papua, South Papua, and Central Highlands Papua.

    The court is expected to hold a hearing in the next month.

    Minorities in their own land
    The provincial split is bound to accelerate the steady reconfiguration of Papua’s demographics.

    “If we make a rough estimate, almost 50 percent of the population of West Papua is not indigenous anymore,” said Cahyo Pamungkas of the Jakarta-based National Research and Innovation Agency.

    He noted that transmigrants from other parts of Indonesia not only dominated Papua’s local economy but also its regional politics. For instance, there remain only three native Papuan representatives out of 21 legislative members in Merauke district, where some 70 percent of the population are non-Papuans.

    Pamungkas also disputed the recent claims of Indonesia’s coordinating minister for legal, political and security affairs, Mahfud MD, that 82 percent of Papuans supported the proposed province splits.

    “The survey should have been opened to the public. Who were interviewed and how many respondents participated? What was the survey method?” he asked, adding that such misleading statements are likely to foster additional distrust in the government.

    So too can repeated arrests of young Papuans for exercising their democratic voice. Esther Haluk, a democratic rights activist from Papua, was arrested by security forces during the May 10 protests.

    “New provinces will pave the way for more new military bases, new facilities for security apparatus. More military, more opposition, more human rights violations. This is like reinstating the Suharto era all over again in Papua,” she said.

    Sectarian tensions
    Sectarian tensions between indigenous Papuans and Indonesian settlers remain a tinderbox, particularly since major anti-racism protests in 2019. A disturbing factor in the deadly unrest around those protests was the role of pro-Indonesian militias, recalling the violence-soaked last days of Timor-Leste prior to its independence in 2002.

    More transmigrants could pave way for more conflict in Papua, and more conflict could potentially justify more military deployment, which adds to the climate of persistent human rights abuses against Papuans.

    Haluk said newly arrived migrants are often favored by officials in being able to take up local privileges such as jobs within the public service and government, especially if they have relatives already in Papua. Many have also been able to buy land.

    “This is a real form of settler colonialism, a form of colonization that aims to replace the indigenous people of the colonised area with settlers from colonial society,” she said. “In this type of colonialism, indigenous people are not only threatened with losing their territory, but also their way of life and identity that’s been passed down to them from generation to generation.”

    Regional implications
    By exacerbating conflict in West Papua, the provinces plan could also prove problematic for neighbouring countries, none more so than PNG. Through no fault of its own, PNG has long been lumped with spillover problems from the conflict in West Papua, including the movement of arms and military actors across the two regions’ porous 750km border, refugees fleeing from Indonesian authorities, and the displacement of village communities in the border area.

    The covid-19 pandemic also showed that when things get bad on the western side of the border, the problem spreads to PNG, beyond the control of either government.

    PNG leaders have cordial exchanges with Indonesian counterparts but the Melanesian government is all too aware of the power imbalance when it comes to the elephant in the room, West Papua.

    PNG’s Petroleum Minister Kerenga Kua, who has previously travelled to Jakarta as a member of high-level government delegations, attested to the limited options available to PNG for addressing the West Papua crisis.

    “PNG has no capacity to raise the issue,” Kua said. “We can express our concern and our grief and disappointment over the manner in which the Indonesian government is administering its responsibilities over the people of West Papua.

    “However there’s nothing much else we can do, especially when larger powers in our region like Australia remain tight-lipped over the issue. Of what constructive value would it be for PNG to venture into that landscape without proper support?”

    He added: “So we are very guarded about what we say, because there’s no doubt about the concern that we have in this country.”

    Refugees there to stay
    Kua says many West Papuans who came across the border as refugees are there to stay: “We don’t complain about that. We just feel that this part of the country is theirs as much as the other side of the island is theirs.”

    PNG’s policy on West Papua, where it rarely exercises a voice, has left it looking weak on the issue. The most vocal of the leading political players in PNG, the governor of the National Capital District, Powes Parkop, says that for too long, PNG government policy on West Papua has been dictated by fear of Indonesia and assumptions that make it convenient for leaders to not do anything about it.

    While PNG hopes the West Papua problem will go away, Indonesia’s government is also burying its head in the sand by portraying West Papua’s problems as a development issue.

    “It’s a human rights issue and we should solve it at that level. It’s about the right to self-determination,” Parkop said.

    “PNG holds the key to the future peaceful resolution of Papua. If we rise above our fear and be bold and brave by having an open dialogue with the Indonesian government, I’m sure we’ll make progress.”

    Following upcoming elections in PNG, a new government will take power in early August. It’s unwise to bet on the result, but former Prime Minister Peter O’Neill is one of the contenders to take office, and he, more than incumbent James Marape, has been able to project PNG’s role as a regional leader among the Pacific Islands.

    He is also one of the few to have expressed strong concern about human rights abuses and violence against West Papuans.

    ‘Hope government will be brave’
    “I hope the new government will be brave enough and have a constructive dialogue with Indonesia’s government so we can find a long-lasting solution,” Parkop said.

    “As long as Indonesia and PNG continue to pretend it won’t go away, it will only get worse, and it is getting worse.”

    Parkop added that because of the huge economic potential of New Guinea, “the future can be brighter for both sides if the problem is confronted with honesty”.

    According to Kua, Indonesia’s government made a commitment to empowering Papuans to run their own territory within the structure of the Republic, a pledge which should be honored. Regional support would help encourage Indonesia in this direction.

    “Australia, New Zealand, PNG, those of us from the Pacific all have to stand united until some other wholesale answers are found to the plight of the people of West Papua,” he said. “The interim relief is to continue to press for increased delegated powers to (Papua). So they have more and more say about their own destiny.”

    The Papuan independence movement has managed to gain a foothold in the regional architecture, most notably with the admission of the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) to the Melanesian Spearhead Group regional bloc, whose founding aim is the decolonisation of all Melanesian peoples. But Indonesia’s successful diplomatic efforts in the region have provided a counterweight to regional calls for Papuan independence.

    However, 2019 saw a rare moment of regional unity when the Pacific Islands Forum, which is made up of 18 member countries, including French territories New Caledonia and French Polynesia, resolved to push Indonesia to allow the UN Human Rights Commissioner access to Papua to produce an independent report on the situation.

    Human rights unity stalled
    Then the pandemic came along and the matter stalled.

    “Following that, the Pacific Island states who are members of the ACP (African, Caribbean and Pacific bloc) supported the same resolution at (its) General Assembly in Kenya,” said Vanuatu’s opposition leader Ralph Regenvanu, who was foreign minister at the time of the Forum resolution. Since then, he said, there had been “nothing explicit.”

    Papua remains of great concern to Pacific Islanders, Regenvanu explained, noting that Indonesia’s plan for new provinces was set to cause “accelerated destruction of the natural environment and the social fabric, more dissipation of the political will.”

    The Papua conflict has fallen largely on deaf ears in both Canberra and Wellington, each of which is hesitant to jeopardise its relations with Indonesia. Australia’s new Prime Minister Anthony Albanese visited Jakarta soon after coming to power last month, showing that the country’s relationship with Indonesia is a priority.

    But as the conflict worsens in neighboring West Papua, Australia’s involvement in training and funding of Indonesian military and police forces who are accused of human rights violations in Papua grows ever more problematic.

    Under Albanese, Canberra is unlikely to spring any surprises on Jakarta regarding West Papua, but neither can it ignore the momentum for decolonisation in the Pacific without adding to the sense of betrayal Pacific Island countries feel towards Canberra over the question of climate change.

    Major self-determination questions are pressing on its doorstep, both in New Caledonia, where the messy culmination of the Noumea Accord means the territory’s future status is uncertain, and in Bougainville where 98 percent of people voted for independence from PNG in a non-binding referendum in 2019.

    Ratifying the referendum
    PNG’s next Parliament is due to decide whether to ratify the referendum result, and while political leaders don’t wish to trigger the break-up of PNG, they know that failure to respond to such an emphatic call by Bougainvilleans would spell trouble.

    While in Parkop’s view Bougainville and West Papua are not the same, there are lessons to be drawn from the two cases.

    “In the past PNG has been looking at (Bougainville) from the development perspective, and we have tried so many things: changed the constitution, gave them autonomy, gave them more money, and so on.

    “It did not solve the problem,” he said. “And now in PNG, it’s a reckoning time.”

    He added: “So the Indonesians have to come to terms with this. Otherwise if they only see this as a development issue, they will miss the entire story, and it can only get worse, whatever they do.”

    Much is riding on the Bougainville and New Caledonia questions, and fears that China could step in to back a new independent nation are part of the reason why Australia would prefer the status quo to remain in place, and probably the same for West Papua and Indonesia.

    The 2006 Lombok Treaty between Indonesia and Australia, which prohibits any interference in each nation’s sovereignty, makes it hard for Canberra to speak out. But it could also play into China’s hands if Australia and New Zealand keep ignoring the requests of Pacific Island nations about West Papua.

    Opportunities for resolution
    Means of resolving the Papua conflict exist, but they aren’t development or military-based approaches. And as far as Jakarta is concerned, independence is out of the question.

    Professor Bilveer Singh, an international relations specialist from the National Singapore University, told The Diplomat in 2019 that West Papuan independence was a pipe dream. Internal divisions among the Papuan independence movement are identified as a barrier.

    The head of the ULMWP, Benny Wenda, sought to address this with decisive leadership by declaring an interim government of West Papua last year, but the move was criticised by some key players in the movement.

    While Papua is unlikely to be another Timor-Leste, Singh wrote, an Aceh or Mindanao model with greater autonomy would be more achievable. Furthermore, Jakarta could allow Papuans to hoist their own colors under Indonesian sovereignty.

    Declaring tribal areas as conservation regions is an option, too. More significantly, Papua could also become a self-governing state in free association with Indonesia, like the Cook Islands and Niue are with New Zealand, or even follow the model of Chechnya in Russia.

    To be able to manage their own security and governance, and allow their culture to thrive, would answer a lot of Papuans’ grievances. A non-binding independence referendum, as PNG has allowed for Bougainville, would be a good starting point.

    If Papuans are as content with Indonesian rule as Jakarta claims, a referendum would be instructive.

    Meaningful dialogue necessary
    At the very least, in a bid to stop the conflict, meaningful dialogue is necessary. Jokowi has reportedly given approval for Indonesia’s national human rights body to host a dialogue with pro-independence factions, including those residing abroad.

    Leaders of the TPNPB and ULMWP have indicated they are interested in a dialogue only on condition that it is brokered by a foreign, neutral third party mandated by the UN.

    The Papuans aren’t in a position to dictate such terms, unless international pressure weighs into the equation. They are however also highly unlikely to stop resisting Indonesian rule while their sense of injustice remains.

    “The Papuan conflict is not about colour television or 3G internet, it’s about indigenous dignity and a stand against militarism,” Haluk said.

    As well as drawing new lines on the map, the plan for more provinces in Papua draws a new line in the sand, beyond which the conflict in Indonesia’s easternmost region will become much more intractable.

    No amount of development will stop this until Jakarta shifts its thinking on how to address the region’s core problem. The opposite of poverty isn’t wealth, it’s justice.

    Co-authors and journalists Aprila Wayar (West Papua) and Johnny Blades (Aotearoa New Zealand) are contributors to The Diplomat. Republished with permission by the authors.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Award-winning founder of green development centre was arrested on tax evasion charges in February

    The US government has said it is “deeply concerned” by the sentencing of the Vietnamese environmental advocate and activist Nguy Thi Khanh and called on Vietnam to release her.

    Khanh, Vietnam’s first recipient of the prestigious Goldman environmental prize, was reported in February to have been arrested on tax evasion charges. The founder of the Green Innovation and Development Centre was detained in January.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Human rights committee including peers says public order bill lacks nuance and targets peaceful protests

    MPs and peers have accused ministers of creating a “hostile environment” for peaceful protests with its proposals for new policing powers.

    The draft public order bill includes a new offence of “locking on”, which relates to demonstrators attaching themselves to something so they cannot be removed. It carries a maximum sentence of up to 51 weeks in prison.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • On November 13, 2018, a group of nearly 200 activists gathered outside Representative Nancy Pelosi’s office, just south of the Capitol Building, and knocked on the door. Without waiting for an answer, they entered and began chanting and singing protest songs. 

    The crowd was made up of representatives of the roughly year-old Sunrise Movement, and the sit-in at the Minority Leader’s office served as a bit of a coming-out party. One by one, the activists, mostly high school and college students, gave Pelosi’s staff letters demanding a Green New Deal and massive investment of cash into clean energy and initiatives for environmental justice. They were joined by Congresswoman-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez; 50 members of the group were eventually arrested.

    Sunrise Movement activists stage an influential sit-in in Representative Nancy Pelosi’s office in 2018.

    The event was one of just hundreds of demonstrations that took place during the most active period of climate protest in United States history. Following the inauguration of President Donald Trump — who entered office pledging to roll back dozens of environmental regulations — and the release of yet-another terrifying United Nations climate report, global warming activism exploded across the country. In April 2017, millions protested in a nationwide “March for Science”; the following year, schoolchildren and teenagers across the world, inspired by Swedish activist Greta Thunberg, began skipping school to protest the climate crisis. Meanwhile, youth-led groups like the Zero Hour and Sunrise led walk-outs, marches, and sit-ins — inspiring thousands of young people to take to the streets. 

    But over the past couple of years, the volume of such activism seems to have been turned down. Massive marches and demonstrations have given way to smaller gatherings in Washington, D.C. and New York; some activists have shifted from sit-ins and chanting to working for think tanks or environmental NGOs. Even as heat waves and droughts roast the country — and the United Nations climate reports become more and more dire — the nation seems focused on the pandemic, inflation, and the war in Ukraine. For the time being, activists are making fewer headlines. 

    For many, the past year feels like a betrayal: They rallied around President Joe Biden, despite reservations about his progressive credentials, and have seen few results. Climate legislation has stalled in the Senate, with the midterms threatening the Democrats’ slim majority. Liv Schroeder, a communications director for Zero Hour, said that the last year had demonstrated, more than anything else, that “party alignment does not guarantee climate action.”

    a large group of people march in the street holding a large yellow banner that says biden no compromises no excuses
    Hundreds of young climate activists march to the White House in June 2021 to demand that U.S. President Joe Biden work to pass the Green New Deal into law. Similar rallies used to attract thousands of protestors. Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images

    Activists are now struggling to figure out what comes next. Should they focus on mass protests ahead of the upcoming midterm elections, or pressure Congress to get things done as the months tick down? After the legislative failure of the past 18 months, will it even be possible to motivate young voters? 

    “I feel upset and terrified and angry,” said Lauren Maunus, the legislative director of the Sunrise Movement. “All of the promises that were made have not been delivered to us.”


    It is not surprising that, over the past two years, climate protests seem to have died down. COVID-19 threw the movement off-balance, forcing protests, marches, and strikes online. The murder of George Floyd galvanized hundreds of thousands of protestors — including many of the same young people who had previously been marching for the climate — but the focus was rightfully on racial justice, not the overheating planet. 

    Part of the change was also the presence of a Democrat in the White House. Dana Fisher, a professor of sociology at the University of Maryland, College Park, who studies activism and social movements, says that when a supportive party comes into power, many protest groups struggle to shift from “outsider” tactics — marching in the streets and holding sit-ins — to “insider” tactics, like lobbying members of Congress and helping to craft policy. Movements can also splinter, as traditional lobby groups eschew protest to focus on the inside track, leaving activists on their own. 

    “It’s absolutely harder to get people in the streets when you have a Democrat in power,” Fisher said. “You end up with all these left-leaning groups who are tentative to push too hard when they have a Democrat in the White House, and especially when you have a Democratic majority in the Congress.” 

    And early in 2021, with Trump out of office and President Joe Biden’s initial, $3.5 trillion climate and spending plan – known as Build Back Better – in the works, there seemed to be less reason to protest and agitate for change. Biden’s early climate promises were quickly fulfilled: He rejoined the Paris Agreement on climate change and set a goal to cut U.S. carbon emissions by 50 to 52 percent by 2030. 

    But as the legislative process began, activists began to get “increasingly twitchy,” as Fisher described it. The Build Back Better plan was whittled down to just half its original size, to $1.75 trillion, and had no guarantee of passing a Senate with the slimmest of Democratic majority. Despite calling the package a “minimum bandaid” for the climate crisis, Sunrise members lobbied their representatives to hold off on passing the bipartisan infrastructure bill until the much bigger package made it through Congress. When that didn’t work, and Democratic Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia continued to withhold his support for Build Back Better, activists chanted outside his houseboat and arranged a 14-day hunger strike outside of the White House – a rare demonstration after a year of relative quiet. 

    a protester wearing a joe manchin cutout mask holds puppets dressed like Chuck Schumer and Joe Biden
    A demonstrator wears a photograph of Senator Joe Manchin while playing a political puppet-master in Washington, D.C. in October 2021. Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images

    Protest, however, is a blunt instrument — and unlikely to move a longtime senator heavily financially supported by the fossil fuel industry. On December 19, Manchin appeared on Fox News to formally withdraw his support from the package. “I cannot vote to continue with this legislation,” he said. “I’ve tried everything humanly possible.” 

    In March 2022, Audrey Lin, a campaign manager for Sunrise, wrote an open letter to the members of the organization. “We were able to keep the pressure up on Democrats, and we changed the narrative around the stakes for climate legislation,” she wrote, “but in the end, it wasn’t enough.”


    Over the past few months, as Democrats have discussed passing a climate-only reconciliation bill, the climate movement that made a name for itself with million-person marches has remained outwardly quiet. Several protests occurred around the country for the week of Earth Day, but they drew crowds of hundreds, not thousands. And inside-the-beltway efforts to force Biden’s hand have fallen by the wayside. When I spoke to activists for this story, few seemed enthusiastic or optimistic about the possibility of a $300 to $500 billion bill — some form of the climate portion of Build Back Better — passing Congress. Manchin’s name hardly came up. 

    Part of the issue is that the movement’s tactics don’t translate well to the current situation: a recalcitrant senator spending time in backroom negotiations, a country distracted by war, inflation, and gun violence. Protesting, at its best, can create the conditions necessary for policy to pass; the work of creating — and compromising — on that policy, however, is often left to other groups.

    Marcela Mulholland, the political director for the progressive think tank Data for Progress and a former Sunrise Movement member, argues that criticisms of demonstration-based activist groups ignore what they accomplished — and what they intended to accomplish. “No one at Sunrise is claiming to be a technocrat,” she said. “This is a group of young people who are scared of climate change, and they are doing moral protests to raise the salience of the issue.” When I asked her whether Sunrise should be doing more to encourage the passage of a climate-only bill, she said, “‘Climate compromise’ — it doesn’t have the same ring to it. You’re not going to put that on a T-shirt.” 

    Youth activists participate in a “No Climate, No Deal” rally in Lafayette Square in Washington, D.C. in 2021. Caroline Brehman / CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

    Many activists, somewhat battered by the last 18 months, are refocusing on the upcoming elections. “We have been doubling down as a movement, trying to elect people in office who are going to fight” for the climate, Maunus, the Sunrise legislative director, told Grist. Sunrise has zeroed in on races in Texas, supporting the progressive candidates Jessica Cisneros and Greg Casar. They are also working to ensure that the “Squad” of Ilhan Omar, Ocasio-Cortez, and other progressive representatives stay in power. 

    Zero Hour, Schroeder said, is also working on rebuilding and mobilizing for the upcoming elections: planning protests and working to elect climate-friendly candidates. “I’m hoping we’re going to see a lot of change in Congress.” 

    But it’s hard to imagine that — after the disappointments of the last two years — climate activists and young people will come out for the midterm elections with the same level of strength and enthusiasm. Saad Amer, a climate activist and the co-founder of the voting rights project Plus1Vote, says that many young people are becoming disillusioned and frustrated with the political process. “Voters are actively asking: ‘What is there for me?’” he said. “‘I marched for Black Lives Matter, why haven’t we passed the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act? I marched for climate justice, where is Build Back Better?’” 

    Still, Amer points out, protests and actions are continuing to happen, even if there is less media coverage and attention for them. “I know because I’m still organizing them,” he said. 

    Saad Amer (center with bullhorn) participates in a “March to the Polls” protest in 2021. Reagan Petrehn

    Fisher, who has spent 20 years studying climate policy and social movements, is also disillusioned. In a recent paper, she argued that without a truly massive social movement — some political scientists have argued that it will take approximately 3.5 percent of a country’s population — it is unlikely that we will see more substantive action on climate change. The surge of activism over the past few years, she says, was substantial — but not nearly enough. “It’s really unfathomable to think that anything is going to change anytime soon,” she said. “Until something really motivates a huge critical mass of Americans.”

    Will that happen? There are signs, perhaps. Heat waves, droughts, and wildfires are becoming increasingly impossible to ignore — even for Republicans in Congress. Living in the American West has become an unending series of weather disasters, some of which turn the sky orange and the landscape black. Even in the best case scenarios for climate change, the world will continue warming by at least another half of a degree Celsius. That will mean even more disasters, more protests, and more anger.

    Many of the activists who devoted their lives to climate change for the past few years are tired and frustrated. “It’s definitely extremely demoralizing,” Mulholland said. “But the thing with climate change is that we just don’t have the luxury of giving up. As long as climate change continues being a problem, there will be young people who are pissed about it.” 

    This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Where have all the climate activists gone? on Jun 16, 2022.

    This post was originally published on Grist.

  • Last fall, a company called Summit Carbon Solutions started holding meetings in towns around the Midwest. Its goal was to introduce residents to a 2,000-mile, $4.5 billion pipeline called the Midwest Carbon Express, which would carry carbon dioxide from ethanol refineries in Iowa to North Dakota, where the gas would be injected underground rather than released into the atmosphere. Ultimately, Summit hoped landowners would sign contracts called “voluntary easements,” allowing the company to bury its pipeline on their property. 

    While hundreds signed up immediately, others were more cautious, hoping for more information or a better price. Now, those holdouts are facing another prospect: the use of eminent domain, the legal tool that allows the seizure of private land for public good. It’s a tactic that’s long been tapped for other pipeline projects in the Midwest, and Summit has filed preliminary permits that could allow the company to request permission to use eminent domain in the future.

    That doesn’t sit well with many landowners along the pipeline’s route. In town hall meetings and public hearings over the past few months, a growing number of people have come out against the proposal and potential legal tactic, complicating Summit’s plans to build the largest carbon dioxide pipeline network in the country. 

    Opposition to the project – and other recently proposed carbon pipelines – is nothing new. Residents and activists have raised concerns about safety hazards, a sentiment echoed in May by the Biden administration. Environmental groups, meanwhile, have pointed out the dubious climate benefits of carbon pipelines and resulting carbon capture and storage, or CCS, saying it will lock in additional fossil fuel use and divert resources from the transition to renewable energy.

    Iowa carbon pipeline protest
    Landowners and activists gather on the steps of the Iowa Statehouse on April 19, calling for passage of legislation to ban eminent domain for carbon pipelines. Courtesy of John Aspray, Food & Water Watch

    But eminent domain has become an issue around which an “unlikely alliance” of farmers, ranchers, Indigenous tribes, scientists, and environmentalists have rallied, said Mahmud Fitil, an organizer with the Great Plains Action Society, an Indigenous activist network. The legal tactic was used to complete previous oil pipeline projects like the Dakota Access Pipeline, which “left a bad taste in a lot of people’s mouths,” Fitil said. Now, rural conservatives and environmental groups are fighting the same battle against carbon pipelines.

    “You would never find these groups of people gathering together for any reason,” Fitil told Grist. “And they’re coming together in opposition to this carbon pipeline.”

    Eminent domain is enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, allowing governments to seize private property as long as they compensate the owners. In states like Iowa, this right extends to private companies, too. Although it’s historically been used to construct infrastructure like highways and natural gas lines, some environmental advocates believe eminent domain could be an important tool in the renewable energy transition, allowing electric transmission lines to be built quickly to transport solar, wind, and hydropower energy across the country. 

    Using it, though, requires utilities and private companies to prove that a project is in the “public interest” — and many people in the Midwest don’t feel that carbon pipelines fit that description, said Don Kass, a farmer and chairman of the Plymouth County Board of Supervisors in northwest Iowa. 

    “I do not consider this to be a public utility … [just] because somebody’s making money on it, and people see that there’s some advantage,” Kass said. He’s not against pipelines in general, but believes it should be up to each individual landowner to decide whether to sell their land or not for the price that they’re being offered. 

    Although carbon pipelines would cross multiple states, the greatest concerns about eminent domain have so far come from Iowa, where three pipeline companies announced projects last year that would collect carbon dioxide from ethanol plants around the state. But strong relationships between politicians, lobbyists, and pipeline companies have made fighting the projects an uphill battle, organizers say. A bill that would have prevented the state from granting eminent domain rights to private projects like carbon pipelines stalled in the Iowa legislature earlier this year, despite bipartisan support

    In response to these legislative setbacks, organizers have taken a more grassroots approach. According to Food and Water Watch, a national nonprofit that’s organizing against the carbon pipelines, 32 out of 52 counties that would be impacted by the proposed pipeline projects have filed objections with the Iowa Utilities Board. The board will ultimately decide whether to grant Summit and the other companies, Navigator Ventures and Wolf Carbon Solutions, a permit to use eminent domain. (So far, only Summit and Navigator have applied for permits with the board, and none have officially requested to use eminent domain).

    The groups rallying behind their opposition to eminent domain all have different reasonings, said Emma Schmit, a senior organizer for the Iowa chapter of Food & Water Watch. Some worry about the pipelines’ impact on climate change and the environment as well as potential safety hazards, and think fighting eminent domain will prevent the projects from being built. Rural conservatives, meanwhile, believe in the right to protect their private property. “They don’t want to be seeing these private corporations, Wall Street-backed industry, taking our land for their own use,” Schmit said. 

    Landowners in Iowa also remember their previous experiences with the Dakota Access Pipeline. The project was completed in 2017 despite pushback from farmers, who worried about the impact its construction would have on agriculture. Their concerns were validated earlier this year: A study from Iowa State University found that crews building the pipeline compacted the soil so much that crop yields along its route dropped by as much as 25 percent. 

    “During our first meeting on this issue, we made a point to say that we’re all affected by this, we all have different reasons for caring about this issue,” Schmit said. “But no matter what your view on this is, we can all agree that it’s bad, and we have to stop it. And we can only stop it when we come together.” 

    This diversity of viewpoints can sometimes cause friction. The property rights argument can be “controversial,” Fitil said, “particularly amongst Indigenous people, given that all the land is stolen in this nation from the rightful owners, the Indigenous folks that made this land home long before European contact.” But organizers nevertheless felt it was important to have a unified strategy, and have managed to convince some Indigenous leaders to join in their opposition. Schmit said the failure to bring landowners, tribes, and environmentalists together was one of the reasons they lost the fight against the Dakota Access Pipeline.

    Ethanol refinery Midwest
    An ethanol refinery in Chancellor, South Dakota. Proposed carbon pipelines would connect ethanol producers across the Midwest to underground carbon dioxide storage sites in North Dakota. AP Photo/Stephen Groves

    Proponents of the CO2 pipelines have made the case that the projects will support Iowa’s powerful ethanol industry, which buys 57 percent of the state’s corn and produces 27 percent of the country’s ethanol. Companies also have a financial incentive to sequester carbon thanks to federal tax credits like 45Q — which Mother Jones estimated would earn Summit $7.2 billion over 12 years — and state programs like California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard, which allows ethanol plants and carbon pipeline companies to sell the carbon they’re saving as credits to polluters. The federal government has also supported carbon capture as a way to reduce carbon emissions, while Congress established a low-interest loan program for CO2 pipelines last year. 

    Summit told Grist its priority is getting landowners to sign voluntary easements, rather than using eminent domain. About 30 percent of landowners along the proposed Midwest Carbon Express route have already made deals with the company. 

    “Opposition groups continue to raise this topic in order to distract from the fact that they want to eliminate the ethanol industry and undermine production agriculture,” Summit said in a statement through a spokesperson. “Fundamentally, the Summit Carbon Solutions project comes down to the future of these two industries, which are both so critical to our economy.” The other two pipeline companies with proposed projects in Iowa, Navigator Ventures and Wolf Carbon Solutions, did not respond to requests for comment from Grist. 

    Schmit said this early in the process, activists are still “throwing everything possible at the wall” and seeing what sticks. Organizers have hung banners off of freeway overpasses, rallied in front of the Iowa State Capitol, set up billboards in rural areas, and held meetings in communities where pipelines are expected to cross. Reaching residents along the pipeline’s proposed route has been difficult, though, because Summit has sued to stop the Iowa Utilities Board from releasing the full list of landowners that will be potentially impacted by the project, said Wally Taylor, an attorney for the Sierra Club in Iowa.

    Taylor emphasized that even if eminent domain is granted, landowners can still band together at the county level and demand concessions from the company, including greater compensation — which might ultimately discourage the pipelines from being built. After the Iowa Utilities Board granted a permit allowing the Dakota Access Pipeline to use eminent domain, he said, many people gave up and granted voluntary easements. Activists said they have learned from that mistake. 

    “They said, ‘Well, there’s nothing we could do, we’ll just go ahead and take our money,’” Taylor said. “But we’re really trying to convince the landowners that if they hold out, they can stop this.” 

    This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Across the Midwest, an ‘unlikely alliance’ forms to stop carbon pipelines on Jun 13, 2022.

    This post was originally published on Grist.

  • Asia Pacific Report newsdesk

    A protest action by Papuan students which took place in the South Sulawesi provincial capital of Makassar, which was opposing the creation of new autonomous regions in Papua, ended in a clash with a social movement.

    Several people were injured and rushed to the nearest hospital.

    Action coordinator Boci explained that the incident began with the protesters planning to hold a rally in front of the Mandala Monument. When they began marching towards the rally point, they were blocked by the Ormas (the Indonesian Muslim Brigade).

    “Since early morning there were plain clothed police with the ormas. Then when we moved off to the rally site we were blocked by the Ormas BMI, then we were assaulted, pelted with stones, beaten with pieces of wood, kicked, until three people were bleeding and I was hit and my fingers injured”, said Boci in a statement to CNN Indonesia.

    The protesters then stood their ground in front of the Papuan student dormitory, said Boci, after which the police conducted negotiations and the BMI members retreated and moved away from the dormitory.

    “Although we were provoked our action still continued. After that the police arrived but we continued to hold our ground in front of the dormitory and read out our action demands near the dormitory,” he explained.

    As a result of the attack by the BMI, Boci said that five students suffered injuries and were bleeding.

    Five students injured
    “Yes, five students suffered injuries and are currently still receiving medical treatment”, he said.

    Earlier, an Ormas in Makassar was involved in a class with several Papuan students in front of the Papuan student dormitory on Jalan Lanto Daeng Pasewang.

    The clash occurred when the Papuan students were protesting against the creation of new autonomous regions (DOB) in Papua in front of the dormitory.

    The Ormas then tried to break up the student protest. The Papuan students refused to accept this and pelted several of the Ormas members with stones.

    Makassar metropolitan district police operational division head Assistant Superintendent Darminto said that those who had been injured were receiving medical treatment at the Labuang Baji Hospital.

    Translated by James Balowski for IndoLeft News. The original title of the article was Kronologi Aksi Mahasiswa Tolak DOB Papua Berujung Bentrok di Makassar.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • By Thierry Lepani and Miriam Zarriga in Mt Hagen, Papua New Guinea

    The ugly side of Papua New Guinean elections has shown its face in the Western Highlands capital Mt Hagen with unknown suspects sabotaging one of the busiest airports in the country to protest against the appointment of electoral officials.

    Using the cover of darkness yesterday, the suspects poured oil on the Kagamuga International Airport tarmac to disrupt flights, prompting the provincial police commander to describe it as an “act of terrorism”.

    Chief Superintendent Joe Puri said the incident showed what people were capable of when they were frustrated.

    “However, it does not give anyone the right to hold the whole province to ransom,” he said.

    “Three different factions of supporters of candidates are suspected of being involved in this latest sabotage of the airport.

    “The persons responsible gained access through the back fence near the Mt Hagen golf course and got onto the tarmac where litres of engine oil was poured onto the tarmac.”

    This started in protest over the appointment of the Hagen Open Returning Officer, with two factions contesting the appointment of the official in court.

    Commercial flights cancelled
    Commercial flights were cancelled yesterday following a protest over the electoral official’s appointment.

    The protesting locals wanted Willie Ropa to be reinstated as Returning Officer for the Hagen Open electorate.

    Ropa’s appointment was disputed in court by Hagen MP William Duma, who challenged the decision of the Electoral Commission in light of two conflicting gazette notices over the appointment of two ROs for Hagen — Ropa and Amos Noifa.

    This incident and others in just three weeks of campaigning and nominations should not be taken lightly, as the instances will only grow if nothing is done quickly by the authorities.

    Just over the weekend, the Returning Officer for Kompiam-Ambum Open, Enga Province, was shot and had to be hospitalised.

    Last week, the convoy of a sitting Member of Parliament (Okapa MP Saki Soloma) was stopped and attacked leading to several vehicles being torched and destroyed.

    At the same time, former Nipa-Kutubu MP and now a candidate for Southern Highlands Provincial, Philemon Embel also narrowly escaped an assassination attempt on his life when his vehicle was shot at in the province.

    While these incidents have taken place mainly in the Highlands region, it is no secret the syndrome of violence can quickly spread to other centres in the country.

    Last month Police Commissioner David Manning called on the nation to help deliver a free, fair and safe election. Police are now maintaining a 24 hour presence around the airport.

    Thierry Lepani and Miriam Zarriga are PNG Post-Courier reporters. Republished with permission.

  • COMMENTARY: By Yamin Kogoya

    A flurry of peaceful rallies and protests erupted in West Papua and Indonesia on Friday, June 3.

    Papuan People’s Petition (PRP), the National Committee for West Papua (Komite Nasional Papua Barat-KNPB) and civil society groups and youth from West Papua marched in protest of Jakarta’s plan to create more provinces.

    Thousands of protesters marched through the major cities and towns in each of West Papua’s seven regions, including Jayapura, Wamena, Paniai, Sorong, Timika/Mimika, Yahukimo, Lanny Jaya, Nabire, and Merauke.

    As part of the massive demonstration, protests were organised in Indonesia’s major cities of West Java, Central Jakarta, Jogjakarta, Bandung, Semarang, Surabaya, and Bali.

    Demonstrators said Papuans wanted an independence referendum, not new provinces or special autonomy.

    According to Markus Haluk, one of the key coordinators of the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP), almost all Papuans took to the streets to show Jakarta and those who want to wipe out the Papuan people that they do not need special autonomy or new provinces.

    Above is a text image that captures the spirit of the demonstrators. A young man is shown being beaten on the head and blood running down his face during a demonstration in Jayapura city of Papua on Friday.

    The text urges Indonesia’s president Jokowi to be tagged on social media networks and calls for solidarity action.

    Numerous protesters were arrested and beaten by Indonesian police during the demonstration.

    Security forces brutalised demonstrators in the cities of Sorong, Jayapura, Yahukimo, Merauke, and elsewhere where demonstrations were held.

    An elderly mother is seen been beaten on the head during the demonstration in Sorong. Tweet: West Papua Sun

    People who are beaten and arrested are treated inhumanely and are not followed up with proper care, nor justice, in one of Asia-Pacific’s most heavily militarised areas.

    Among those injured in Sorong, these people have been named Aves Susim (25), Sriyani Wanene (30), Mama Rita Tenau (50), Betty Kosamah (22), Agus Edoway (25), Kamat (27), Subi Taplo (23), Amanda Yumte (23), Jack Asmuru (20), and Sonya Korain (22).

    Root of the protests in the 1960s
    The protests and rallies are not merely random riots, or protests against government corruption or even pay raises. The campaign is part of decades-old protests that have been carried out against what the Papuans consider to be an Indonesian invasion since the 1960s.

    The Indonesian government claims West Papua’s fate was sealed with Indonesia after a United Nations-organised 1969 referendum, known as the Pepera or Act of Free Choice, something Papuans consider a sham and an Act of No Choice.

    In spite of Indonesia’s claim, the Indonesian invasion of West Papua began in 1963, long before the so-called Act of Free Choice in 1969.

    It was well documented that the 1025 Papuan elders who voted for Indonesian occupancy in 1969 were handpicked at gunpoint.

    In the six years between 1963 and 1969, Indonesian security forces tortured and beat these elders into submission before the vote in 1969 began.

    Friday’s protesters were not merely protesting against Jakarta’s draconian policy of drawing yet another arbitrary line through Papuan ancestral territory, but also against Indonesia’s illegal occupation.

    The Papuans accuse Jakarta of imposing laws, policies, and programmes that affect Papuans living in West Papua, while it is illegally occupying the territory.

    Papuans will protest indefinitely until the root cause is addressed. On the other hand, the Indonesian government seems to care little about what the Papuans actually want or think.

    Markus Haluk said Indonesia did not view Papuans as human beings equal to that of Indonesians, and this mades them believe that what Papuans want and think, or how Jakarta’s policy may affect Papuans, had no value.

    Jakarta, he continued, will do whatever it wants, however, it wishes, and whenever it wishes in regard to West Papua.
    In light of this sharp perceptual contrast, the relationship between Papuans and the Indonesian government has almost reached a dead end.

    Fatal disconnect
    The Lowy Institute, Australia’s leading think-tank, published an article entitled What is at stake with new provinces in West Papua? on 28 April 2022 that identifies some of the most critical terminology regarding this dead-end protracted conflict — one of which is “fatal disconnect”.

    The conclusion of the article stated, “On a general level, this means that there is a fatal disconnect between how the Indonesian government view their treatment of the region, and how the people actually affected by such treatment see the arrangement.”

    It is this fatal disconnect that has brought these two states — Papua and Indonesia — to a point of no return. Two states are engaged in a relationship that has been disconnected since the very beginning, which has led to so many fatalities.

    The author of the article, Eduard Lazarus, a Jakarta-based journalist and editor covering media and social movements, wrote:

    That so many indigenous West Papuans expressed their disdain against renewing the Special Autonomy status … is a sign that something has gone horribly wrong.

    The tragedy of this irreconcilable relationship is that Jakarta does not reflect on its actions and is willfully ignorant of how its rhetoric and behaviour in dealing with West Papua has caused such human tragedy and devastation spanning generations.

    The way that Jakarta’s leaders talk about their “rescue” plans for West Papua displays this fatal disconnect.

    Indonesian Vice-President’s plans for West Papua

    Indonesia’s Vice-President Ma’ruf Amin
    Indonesia’s Vice-President Ma’ruf Amin. Image: File

    KOMPAS.com reported on June 2 that Vice-President Ma’ruf Amin had asked Indonesian security forces to use a “humanist approach” in Papua rather than violence.

    Ma’ruf expressed this view also in a virtual speech made at the Declaration of Papua Peace event organised by the Papuan Indigenous Peoples Institute on June 6.

    In a press release, Ma’ruf said he had instructed the combined military and police officials to use a humanist approach, prioritise dialogical efforts, and refrain from violence.

    Ma’ruf believes that conducive security conditions are essential to Papua’s development, and that the government aims to promote peace and unity in Papua through various policies and regulations.

    The Papua Special Autonomy Law, he continued, regulates the transfer of power from provinces to regencies and cities, as well as increasing the percentage of Papua Special Autonomy Funds transferred to 2.25 percent of the National General Allocation Fund.

    Additionally, according to the Vice-President, the government is drafting a presidential regulation regarding a Papuan Development Acceleration Master Plan (RIPPP) and establishing the Papuan Special Autonomy Development Acceleration Steering Agency (BP3OKP) directly headed by Ma’ruf himself.

    He also underscored the importance of a collaboration between all parties, including indigenous Papuans. Ma’ruf believes that Papua’s development will speed up soon since the traditional leaders and all members of the Indigenous Papuan Council are willing to work together and actively participate in building the Land of Papua.

    Indonesia’s new military commander

    General Andika Perkasa
    General Andika Perkasa. Image: File

    Recently, Indonesia’s newly appointed Commander of Armed Forces, General Andika Perkasa, proposed a novel, humanistic approach to handling political conflict in West Papua.

    Instead of removing armed combatants with gunfire, he has vowed to use “territorial development operations” to resolve the conflict. In these operations, personnel will conduct medical, educational, and infrastructure-building missions to establish a rapport with Papuan communities in an effort to steer them away from the independence movement.

    In order to accomplish Perkasa’s plans, the military will have to station a large number of troops in West Papua in addition to the troops currently present.

    When listening to these two countries’ top leaders, they appear full of optimism in the words and new plans they describe.

    But the reality behind these words is something else entirely. There is, as concluded by Eduard Lazarus, a fatal disconnect between West Papuan and Jakarta’s policymakers, but Jakarta is unable to recognise it.

    Jakarta seems to suffer from cognitive dissonance or cognitive disconnect when dealing with West Papua — a lack of harmony between its heart, words, and actions.

    Cognitive dissonance is, by definition, a behavioural dysfunction with inconsistency in which the personal beliefs held, what has been said, and what has been done contradict each other.

    Yunus Wonda
    Vice-chair of Papuan People’s Representative Council Yunus Wonda. Image: File

    This contradiction, according to Yunus Wonda, deputy chair of the Papuan People’s Representative Council, occurs when the government changes the law and modifies and amends it as they see fit.

    What is written, what is practised, and what is in the heart do not match. Papuans suffer greatly because of this, according to Yunus Wonda.

    Mismanagement of a fatalistic nature
    Jakarta continues to mismanage West Papua with fatalistic inconsistent policies, which, according to the article, “might already have soured” to an irreparable degree.

    The humanist approach now appears to be another code in Indonesia’s gift package, delivered to the Papuans as a Trojan horse.

    The words of Indonesia’s Vice-President and the head of its Armed Forces are like a band aid with a different colour trying to cover an old wound that has barely healed.

    According to Wonda, the creation of new provinces is like trying to put the smoke out while the fire is still burning.

    Jakarta had already tried to bandage those old wounds with the so-called “Special Autonomy” 20 years ago. The Autonomy gift was granted not out of goodwill, but out of fear of Papuan demands for independence.

    However, Jakarta ended up making a big mess of it.

    The same rhetoric is also seen here in the statement of the Vice-President. Even though the semantic choices and construction themselves seem so appealing, this language does not translate into reality in the field.

    This is the problem — something has gone very wrong, and Jakarta isn’t willing to find out what it is. Instead, it keeps imposing its will on West Papua.

    Jakarta keeps preaching the gospel of development, prosperity, peace, and security but does not ask what Papuans want.

    The 2001 Special Autonomy Law was supposed to allow Papuans to have greater power over their fate, which included 79 articles designed to protect their land and culture.

    Furthermore, under this law, one important institution, the Papuan People’s Assembly (Majelis Rakyat Papua-MRP), together with provincial governments and the Papuan People’s Representative Council (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Papua-DPRP), was given the authority to deal with matters that are most important to them, such as land, population control, cultural identity, and symbols.

    Section B of the introduction part of the Special Autonomy law contains the following significant provisions:

    That the Papua community is God’s creation and is a part of a civilised people, who hold high human rights, religious values, democracy, law and cultural values in the adat (customary) law community and who have the right to fairly enjoy the results of development.

    Three weeks after these words were written into law, popular independence leader Theys H. Eluay was killed by Indonesian special forces (Kopassus). Ryamizard Ryacudu, then-army chief-of-staff, who in 2014 became Jokowi’s first Defence Minister, later called the killers “heroes” (Tempo.co, August 19, 2003).

    In 2003, the Megawati Soekarnoputri government divided the province into two, violating a provision of the Special Autonomy Law, which was based on the idea that Papua remains a single territory. As prescribed by law, any division would need to be approved by the Papuan provincial legislature and MRP.

    Over the 20 years since the Autonomy gift was granted, Jakarta has violated and undermined any legal and political framework it agreed to or established to engage with Papuans.

    Governor Lukas Enembe
    Governor Lukas Enembe … not enough resources to run the five new provinces being created in West Papua. Image: West Papua Today

    Papuan Indigenous leaders reject Jakarta’s band aid
    On May 27, Governor Lukas Enembe of the settler province of Papua, told Reuters there were not enough resources to run new provinces and that Papuans were not properly consulted.

    As the governor, direct representative of the central government, Enembe was not even consulted about the creation of new provinces.

    Yunus Wonda and Timotius Murid, two Indigenous Papuan leaders entrusted to safeguard the Papuan people and their culture and customary land under two important institutions — the Papuan People’s Assembly (Majelis Rakyat Papua-MRP) and People’s Representative Council (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Papua-DPRP) — were not consulted about the plans.

    Making matters worse, Jakarta stripped them of any powers they had under the previous autonomous status, which set the precedent for Jakarta to amend the previous autonomous status law in 2021.

    This amendment enables Jakarta to create new provinces.

    The aspirations and wishes of the Papuan people were supposed to be channelled through these two institutions and the provincial government, but Jakarta promptly shut down all avenues that would enable Papuans to have their voices heard.

    Governor Enembe faces constant threats, terrorism
    Governor Enembe has also been terrorised and intimidated by unknown parties over the past couple of years. He said, “I am an elected governor of Indonesia, but I am facing these constant threats and terror. What about my people? They are not safe.”

    This is an existential war between the state of Papua and the state of Indonesia. We need to ask not only what is at stake with the new provinces in West Papua, but also, what is at stake in West Papua under Indonesia’s settler-colonial rule?

    Four critical existential issues facing West Papua
    There are four main components of Papuan culture at stake in West Papua under Indonesia’s settler-colonial rule:

    1. Papuan humans
    2. Papuan languages
    3. Papuan oral cultural knowledge system
    4. Papuan ancestral land and ecology

    Papua’s identity was supposed to be protected by the Special Autonomy Law 2001.

    However, Jakarta has shown no interest or intention in protecting these four existential components. Indonesia continues to amend, create, and pass laws to create more settler-colonial provincial spaces that threaten Papuans.

    The end goal isn’t to provide welfare to Papuans or protect them, but to create settlers’ colonial areas so that new settlers — whether it be soldiers, criminal thugs, opportunists, poor improvised Indonesian immigrants, or colonial administrators — can fill those new spaces.

    Jakarta is, unfortunately, turning these newly created spaces into new battlegrounds between clans, tribes, highlanders, coastal people, Papua province, West Papua province, families, and friends, as well as between Papuans and immigrants.

    Media outlets in Indonesia are manipulating public opinion by portraying one leader as a proponent of Jakarta’s plan and the other as its opponent, further fuelling tension between leaders in Papua.

    Yamin Kogoya is a West Papuan academic who has a Master of Applied Anthropology and Participatory Development from the Australian National University and who contributes to Asia Pacific Report. From the Lani tribe in the Papuan Highlands, he is currently living in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Asia Pacific Report newsdesk

    Indonesian police have been accused of beating two Papuan students with rattan sticks – severely injuring them — while 20 other students have been injured and the Morning Star flag seized in a crackdown on separate protests yesterday across the two Melanesian provinces of Papua and West Papua.

    The protesters were blocked by police during a long march in the provincial capital of Jayapura opposing planned new autonomous regions in Papua.

    The police have denied the rattan beating claims.

    Papuan human rights activist Younes Douw said almost 3000 students and indigenous Papuans (OAP) took to the streets for the action.

    “Around 650 students took to the streets today. Added to by the Papuan community of around 2000 people,” Douw told CNN Indonesia.

    Douw said that the actions yesterday were held at several different points in Jayapura such as Yahukimo, Waena and Abepura.

    Almost every single gathering point, however, was blockaded by police.

    Police blockade
    “Like this morning there was a police blockade from Waena on the way to Abepura,” he said.

    Douw said that two students were injured because of the repressive actions by police.

    The two were named as Jayapura Science and Technology University (USTJ) student David Goo and Cendrawasih University (Unas) student Yebet Tegei.

    Both suffered serious head injuries.

    “They were beaten using rattan sticks,” Douw said.

    Jayapura district police chief Assistant Superintendent Victor Mackbon denied the reports from the students.

    “It’s a hoax. So please, if indeed they exist, they [should] report it. But if they don’t exist, that means it’s not true,” Mackbon told CNN Indonesia.

    Demonstration banned
    The police had earlier banned the demonstration against new autonomous regions being organised by the Papua People’s Petition (PRP).

    The Papua Legal Aid Foundation (LBH) said that by last night at least 20 people had been injured as a result of police violence in in breaking up the protests.

    “In Sorong, 10 people were injured. In Jayapura, 10 were also injured,” LBH Papua chair Emanuel Gobay told Kompas.com.

    “The injuries were a consequence of the repressive approach by police against demonstrators when they broke up the rallies,” he said.

    Police also arrested several people during the protests.

    “In Nabire, 23 people were arrested then released later in the afternoon.

    “Two people were also arrested in Jayapura and released later,” Gobay said.

    When this article was published, however, local police were still denying that any protesters had been injured.

    Tear gas fired at Papuan protesters by Indonesian police
    Tear gas fired at protesters as police break up a demonstration in Sorong, West Papua. Image: ILN/Kompas

    Fires, flag seized in Sorong
    In Sorong, police broke up a demonstration against the autonomous regions at the Sorong city Regional House of Representatives (DPRD) office, reports Kompas.com.

    Earlier, the demonstrators had asked DPRD Speaker Petronela Kambuaya to meet with them but there was no response.

    The demonstrators then became angry and set fire to tyres on the DPRD grounds and police fired teargas into the rally.

    Sorong district police operations division head Police Commander Moch Nur Makmur said that the action taken was following procedure.

    “We had already appealed to the korlap [protest field coordinator], saying that if there were fires we would break up [the rally], but they (the protesters) started it all so we took firm action and broke it up,” said commander Makmur.

    Police also seized a Morning Star independence flag during the protest. The flag was grabbed when the demonstrators were holding a long march from the Remu traffic lights to the Sorong DPRD.

    Makmur said that when police saw somebody carrying the Morning Star flag, they seized it.

    “The flag was removed immediately, officers were quick to seize the flag,” he said.

    Translated by James Balowski for IndoLeft News. The original title of the article was Demo Tolak DOB Diadang Aparat di Papua, Mahasiswa Luka Dipukul Rotan.

  • It is the professional responsibility of journalists to highlight any conflict or bias that could tilt their objectivity. You see it in The Washington Post whenever there’s a story about Jeff Bezos; somewhere in the body of the piece there is a parenthetical (“he’s my boss, owns this paper”) to inoculate the writer against accusations that they’re trying to get away with something. In that spirit, let me be as plain as I can be: My bias is that I love Gabe Kapler.

    My love affair with Kapler began when he was traded to my beloved Red Sox midseason in 2004 to shore up the defense. He hit nearly .300 and led the team in outfield assists thanks to the cannon dangling from his shoulder… and on October 27, on a night the moon turned red, Kapler was one of nine players on the field when the Red Sox won the World Series for the first time in 86 years.

    If you don’t follow baseball, though, Kapler’s name may have only recently crossed your screen. Today, he’s the San Francisco Giants manager who announced that he will be shunning the national anthem until something is done about the gun carnage in the U.S.

    Kapler informed the media of his intentions during a dugout press gaggle on Friday, where he told reporters, “I don’t plan on coming out for the anthem going forward… until I feel better about the direction of our country. That’ll be the step. I don’t expect it to move the needle necessarily. It’s just something that I feel strongly enough about to take that step.”

    Kapler channeled his feelings into an evocative blog post later that day:

    Every time I place my hand over my heart and remove my hat, I’m participating in a self congratulatory glorification of the ONLY country where these mass shootings take place. On Wednesday, I walked out onto the field, I listened to the announcement as we honored the victims in Uvalde. I bowed my head. I stood for the national anthem. Metallica riffed on City Connect guitars.

    My brain said drop to a knee; my body didn’t listen. I wanted to walk back inside; instead I froze. I felt like a coward. I didn’t want to call attention to myself. I didn’t want to take away from the victims or their families. There was a baseball game, a rock band, the lights, the pageantry. I knew that thousands of people were using this game to escape the horrors of the world for just a little bit. I knew that thousands more wouldn’t understand the gesture and would take it as an offense to the military, to veterans, to themselves.

    But I am not okay with the state of this country. I wish I hadn’t let my discomfort compromise my integrity. I wish that I could have demonstrated what I learned from my dad, that when you’re dissatisfied with your country, you let it be known through protest. The home of the brave should encourage this.

    Kapler’s stand wobbled almost immediately, however, when confronted with the monolithic patriotism of Memorial Day. White Sox manager and baseball Ent Tony La Russa had already criticized Kapler’s intentions with the same boilerplate militaristic rah-rah NFL players have been hearing since Colin Kaepernick took a knee. “I would never not stand up for the anthem or the flag,” said La Russa. “Maybe just because I’m older, and I’ve been around veterans more than the average person. You need to understand what the veterans think when they hear the anthem, or they see the flag and the cost they paid and their families paid.”

    On Memorial Day, Kapler posted a new blog regarding the day’s game: “Today, I’ll be standing for the anthem. While I believe strongly in the right to protest and the importance of doing so, I also believe strongly in honoring and mourning our country’s service men and women who fought and died for that right.”

    Kapler and the Giants are playing Philly tonight; we shall see where he is when the anthem begins. I reserve final judgment on this until then, but I do confess to disappointment. Kapler probably should have looked at the calendar if Memorial Day was a concern. If this was just some long-weekend grandstanding, I will be pretty grossed out… but I hope Kapler will follow through on his word, now that we have passed the most flag-happy day of the year this side of the Fourth of July.

    Kapler’s on-again, off-again activism this weekend probably feels like thin gruel to fans of Kaepernick. The former 49ers quarterback hasn’t played a snap since the 2016 season after leading a league-wide protest against police violence, motivated by the murders of Alton Sterling, Philando Castile, the shooting of Charles Kinsey, and the acquittal of the officers who killed Freddie Gray.

    For all intents and purposes, Kaepernick lost his livelihood because of his peaceful public protests (though the Las Vegas Raiders and Seattle Seahawks are giving him an active look, finally). In this, he shares a special status with Muhammad Ali, who lost the best years of his fighting career when he heroically refused to be drafted into the Vietnam War.

    Athletes like Althea Gibson, Bill Russell, Tommie Smith and John Carlos, Jim Brown, Billie Jean King, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Martina Navratilova, Arthur Ashe and others joined Ali in an era of athlete social activism, and all of them paid a price for it. That — and the massive amount of money athletes can earn from corporate sponsorship today, so long as they make no waves (see: Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods) — is much of the reason why modern athlete activism seems so tepid compared to what came before.

    It feels like that may be changing, thankfully. Kaepernick has been the most visible athlete to take a costly stand on racial and social issues, but you cannot overlook people like pro soccer player Megan Rapinoe, whose fiery advocacy for equal pay for women’s soccer players recently won the day. Pro basketball player Brittney Griner has been an outspoken advocate for LGBTQ rights, and participated in several anthem protests as well. (Griner is currently incarcerated in Russia after being arrested on remarkably overblown drug charges.) The list does not match the hero’s roll call from the prior generation, but it seems to be growing every day.

    This is potentially significant. These athletes are, for the most part, swimming upstream against very strong currents. They face conservative league ownership and the hyper-conservative corporate megastructure (which is also a license to print money) that has grown around professional sports. Much of the public pushback against athlete activism comes from conservative fans, who facetiously lament the poisoning of their leisure time with politics as they shout “Stick to sports!” at any athlete or sports journalist who leaves their lane and swerves left.

    The anthem is politics. The military fly-overs are politics. The soldiers in dress uniform carrying flags onto the field before the game are politics… all politics blessed by the game’s powers-that-be. You don’t hear “Stick to sports” in regard to this deeply embedded indoctrinating bombast. Make a statement about police violence, racism, sexism and equal pay, homophobia or the horrors of an unjust war, though, and it gets loud real quick.

    “Screaming STICK TO SPORTS is just a cowardly way of voicing, in a highly political manner, that you cannot abide even the mildest of exposure to other political ideas — even just other people — whose very existence you resent,” Drew Magary wrote for Deadspin back in 2019. “You are siding with leaders who prefer their transgressions remain discreet and you are indulging in an easy sop; a way to butter up alt-right mouthbreathers by promising, often insincerely, to keep politics to a minimum, in particular politics that make them uncomfortable. It is an obvious way of demonstrating your conflicting political ideology by being like CAN’T WE ALL JUST ENJOY SOME GOLF?”

    Enter Gabe Kapler to the fray… maybe. I’ll be watching tonight to see if he matches action with words when it comes to guns and the anthem. Warriors coach Steve Kerr has his back, as does Celtics coach Ime Udoka. I have his back, too, and I hope he follows through. Big-time sports are a massive social influencer, and we need all the help we can get.