In an interview with Nature, Dinam Toxa, executive coordinator of APEB (Indigenous Expression in Brazil), says that the demands of indigenous people in every country must be met to stop the progress of climate change. Bound.
The lawyer is participating in the United Nations COP30 climate change conference, which started on Monday (10) in Belém. This edition is expected to be the largest participation of indigenous people in the history of the summits.
At the beginning of the conference, Toxa gave an interview at Espaço Folha, in Belém, in which he discussed the indigenous peoples’ struggle in climate defense and his expectations for the outcome of COP30.
How was the indigenous movement preparing for COP30?
Since the announcement of Belém as the venue for COP30, we have generated proposals to contribute to the debate on the negotiations, mainly. But the focus is always on demarcation of indigenous lands as a strategic policy to contain the climate crisis.
So, in a very organized way, we were able not only to build understandings, but also to build important influences with the indigenous movement in order to make clear and unified proposals.
Aviv was present in other editions of the conference. How are you progressing the dialogue and what do you expect from this COP in the Amazon region?
I believe that the Amazon COP truly represents a historical milestone and has a very important symbolism. The world is discussing the biome, but the world needs to understand what is happening in the Amazon region in the face of mining and oil exploration.
In addition, we also highlight other Brazilian biomes that should be included on the climate negotiation agenda, including the Caatinga, Atlantic Forest, Cerrado, Pantanal and Pampas.
In April, the indigenous movement launched a proposal for a Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), the Paris Agreement term representing each country’s climate goals. What are the main demands?
The Brazilian indigenous movement built on our National Dialogue Conference proposal, in which we put forward seven axes, with the demarcation of indigenous lands as a main demand. We also discuss a just energy transition with the end of fossil fuel exploration.
We also discuss the role of indigenous traditional knowledge in nature conservation, direct climate financing for organizations and the debate on the protection of indigenous leaders, who are threatened and killed for protecting their lands.
How does the demarcation of indigenous lands contribute to biome conservation?
Today, indigenous peoples protect 82% of the world’s biodiversity. So, our way of life, our worldview, makes our relationship with our lands one of protection and care.
First, it is for our survival. Therefore, if we protect our lands, it generates a humanitarian benefit. Protected areas actually address climate change.
How important is climate finance for indigenous peoples in their land management and for the protection of Brazilian biomes?
There are several financing initiatives underway. In Glasgow, a commitment of US$1.7 billion in climate finance for indigenous peoples was announced at COP26. Unfortunately, this funding did not arrive.
But despite this, we continue to do what we have always done, which is to protect our lands. The goal of funding is to enhance the work we already do naturally, because it is for our survival.
So the “Pledge” announced in Glasgow reflects the positive point, the declaration, and the funders’ view of those fighting climate change: indigenous peoples and traditional communities.
We have now reached an even more important point than COP26 in terms of climate. It is necessary to create more effective procedures and measures and reinforce the actions of those who have already proven that they are doing so very effectively. The answer is us.
Indigenous peoples demand that their voices be heard and that they be given decision-making power. Should the UN change the format of the climate conference?
We believe that the COP was not successful in terms of not achieving the goals, because the negotiators are technical people, have no experience in the region and are unable to visualize the impact of climate change in practice.
They look at influences via satellite, through books, through bibliographies, and they do readings. The indigenous people watch the rivers change, and the rainy season is different. Fires that occur change water flows and pollute areas. Experiences that no negotiator sitting in negotiations has, in this technical and political field.
So, bringing indigenous peoples and other sectors into the negotiations is (essential) so that they can visualize the experience that we have in practice. It is essential to put the right people in place, those who are going through this process of climate change in practice, in the negotiations and the climate targets that are being set, because we are the ones paying the bill for the climate crisis.
Recently, the federal government allowed petroleum research on the tropical rim of Amapa. How does the indigenous movement see this action coming from the same government that chairs the COP30?
Brazil lives in a very contradictory context. We understand that it has a very strong relationship with the actions of the National Congress, but it also has the political decision of President Lula, the executive. So, at the same time he’s giving a global leadership speech on climate, he’s talking about oil drilling in Foz do Amazonas.
It’s a contradiction. We have said that in all places. The government cannot be a global environmental leader by allowing mining and oil exploration in the Amazon. Therefore, we understand that talking is one thing and practical is another.
What would a just energy transition look like for indigenous peoples?
To be fair, the energy transition must have popular participation. Today, the ones responsible for this discussion about the energy transition are big corporations. In fact, Petrobras in Brazil says it is a pioneer. conflict.
The energy transition must give people access to this energy. We have seen many communities that do not even have access to energy affected by large projects.
So discussing the energy transition means ending fossil energy exploration first. And consider clean energy alternatives that generate less impact on residents and that have access to these policies.
At this COP, as well as at other COPs that have taken place, there is a significant presence of companies with a history of influencing indigenous peoples. How do you evaluate this situation?
Unfortunately, this is the reality. The oil industry has had a very strong presence at the last three COPs, which were in countries (Egypt, UAE and Azerbaijan) that depend on oil and exert significant pressure on companies that generate impacts from CO2 emissions and contribute to global warming.
The oil industry was the largest delegation to the COPs. If it were a country, it would be the largest delegation. We understand that the conference is a democratic space, with pros and cons, but there can be no disparity in participation.
About The Author
