G1. Progressive Green

The U.S. Constitution did not resolve the Declaration’s grievances once independence was won. A "Short-lived American Democracy" is the fifth video in our America 250: A Revolutionary Perspective series.

The post What is America 250: A Short-lived American Democracy appeared first on CELDF - Community Rights Pioneers - Protecting Nature and Communities.

“AMERICA 250,” The official government celebration of the semiquincentinnial of the United States, is brought to you by the following corporate sponsors. That’s not a joke. 

The post Press Release: Challenging Propaganda, Activists Tell Real History of USA at 250 appeared first on CELDF - Community Rights Pioneers - Protecting Nature and Communities.

MEDIA ADVISORY

For Immediate Release

The Rocky Road to COP31–

Deep dive from experts on how UNFCCC Bonn climate talks leave gaping hole in climate action ahead of Türkiye

Bonn, Germany— Over the past two weeks, world governments have gathered in Bonn, Germany to take part in the 64th meeting of the Subsidiary Bodies (SB64) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). These negotiations have happened in a moment of paramount importance. The climate crisis is impacting communities all around the world and especially in the Global South. Emissions are soaring to record heights with no plateau in sight and food scarcity is increasing. Fossil fuelled economy and war is causing death and devastation in Palestine, Iran, West Asia, and around the world. Compounded crises caused by extractivism, colonialism, imperialism, patriarchy and racism are impacting the lives of millions daily.

For SB64 to deliver climate action that can truly protect people and the planet, governments would have needed to act with urgency and holding equity as a core principle. Instead, due to endless time waste and obstruction from Global North governments most responsible for the climate crisis, we witnessed unlimited inertia, lack of political will and excuses across the board by them – whether on Article 9.1 and climate finance, adaptation, just transition, and equity. 

Looking ahead, the road to the UNFCCC Conference of the Parties (COP31) in Türkiye later this year now looks rocky and riddled with potholes. So much needs to now be done to make up for the setbacks at Bonn. But what exactly, and do we have what it takes? 

Join policy experts of the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice (DCJ) to do an extensive deep dive into what SB64 did and didn’t deliver and how to restore faith in climate action in the months ahead. 

WHEN: Thursday 18 June 2026, 11:00-11:30 CEST (UTC + 2) 

WHERE: Nairobi 4, Main building, Inside the World Conference Center and webcast here

WITH: 

• Meena Raman, Third World Network
• Victor Menotti, Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice
• Moderated by Rachitaa Gupta, Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice

CONTACT: dcj.comms@demandclimatejustice.org

The post Media Advisory: The Rocky Road to COP31 appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

We are featuring our 2026 Mid-year Campaign in this month's newsletter. We gathered up a collection of some of the CELDF highlights so far in 2026 and generated a report entitled “Declaring Disruption”. Read all about it!

The post “Common Sense” Newsletter – June 2026: Forests, Racism, Turtles, Walls, and Truckers appeared first on CELDF - Community Rights Pioneers - Protecting Nature and Communities.

The following statement was delivered during the Arrangements for Intergovernmental Meetings (AIM) on June 17 2026 on behalf of the ENGO-DCJ and ENGO-CAN constituencies during the 64th meeting of the Subsidiary Bodies (SB64) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC):

Thank you. I am Teresa Rose Sebastian of Re-Earth, speaking on behalf of ENGO’s Climate Action Network and Demand Climate Justice Campaign.

We would like to express our disappointment that progress important for us and the people and communities we represent is being delayed over a few words. We remind Parties of the urgency of this work and we cannot accept any obstruction or delays to this process.

A lot of work still lies ahead to ensure COP 31 delivers the JT mechanism promised by Parties at COP30.  More ambitious options on governance, accountability and implementation support are needed. Space to translate what currently stand as bullet points into negotiating text is needed.

This includes and necessitates intersessional work, with full support for developing country and observer constituency participation, to push these negotiations forward and to swiftly deliver on the commitment that was made in COP30.

In terms of substance as we move forward, we urge Parties to consider the following:

Establishing the JT Mechanism at COP31 would send the right signal on the urgency and importance of just transitions.

This urgency will not be satisfied if the mechanism is merely a space for knowledge-sharing. It has to do more to truly enable the implementation of just and inclusive transitions. It needs to help identify gaps, monitor progress and challenges in the implementation of just transition pathways, and ensure that support effectively reaches those who need it most. It needs to ensure that the available support it provides or channels is aligned with the principles of equity and CBDR-RC.

Lastly, a just transition cannot be designed behind closed doors. The mechanism needs to include governance arrangements that guarantee meaningful inclusion and decision-making spaces for rightholders directly affected by transition processes. Those experiencing transitions on the ground need not only a voice, but also a seat at the table.

As civil society, we remain confident on the ability of Parties to reach the right agreement in Antalya, and encourage you all to deliver for those people most vulnerable to both climate crisis and actions. Save the ToR, but even more important, Save the BAM.

The post SB64 Intervention- June 17 Just Transition Work Programme appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

MEDIA ADVISORY

For Immediate Release

All eyes on Article 9.1

Bonn, Germany— Under Article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement, Global North countries most responsible for historical emissions and spurring the climate crisis are required to help provide the climate finance necessary for Global South countries to respond to climate change. Yet, year after year, Global North governments come to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and refuse to pay their climate debt while using every tactic in their obstructionist playbook to block any meaningful attempt to discuss, let alone implement, delivery of meaningful climate finance. As the 64th meeting of the Subsidiary Bodies of the UNFCCC (SB64) heads into its final stretch the story is no different. 

Finance remains entirely inadequate. Article 9.1 continues to be contested and diluted. But Global North countries must fulfil their obligations under Article 9.1 and provide public, grant-based, predictable and adequate finance to the Global South. Not as aid or charity, but as the fulfillment of a  a legal and moral obligation. In the final hours of these climate negotiations, climate finance remains a defining test of whether the climate regime is prepared to uphold the principles of equity and historical responsibility. 

Join members of the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice (DCJ) to hear about what’s currently happening in the Article 9.1 negotiations and what can be done to set us on a path towards a COP31 that delivers on climate finance obligations.  

WHEN: Wednesday 17 June 2026, 11:00-11:30 CEST (UTC + 2) 

WHERE: Nairobi 4, Main building, Inside the World Conference Center and webcast here

WITH: 

• Aleijn Reintegrado – Asian Peoples’ Movement on Debt and Development 
• Meena Raman – Third World Network
• Teresa Anderson – ActionAid
• Wanun Permpibul – Climate Watch Thailand
• Moderated by Rachitaa Gupta, Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice

CONTACT: dcj.comms@demandclimatejustice.org 

For more detail on DCJ’s demands across all topics on the agenda for Bonn, read  DCJ’s SB64 Position Paper: Advancing Climate Justice in an Age of Climate Crisis

The post Media Advisory: All eyes on Article 9.1 appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

Maryland county allows dense development over fire training area

By Pat Elder
June 16, 2026

This map shows PFAS contamination in surface waters downstream of the former Montgomery County Public Safety Training Academy in Rockville, Maryland, where firefighting foams containing PFAS were historically used during training exercises. The striped corridor marks the Maryland water-contact advisory area along Muddy Branch Creek, while sampling locations MB8 and MB9 document contamination extending through a residential watershed near the former training grounds.

NBC4 Washington recently reported that PFAS contamination has been discovered in a creek and pond system near the former Montgomery County Public Safety Training Academy in Rockville. The report included a map showing contaminated surface waters, sampling locations, and a water-contact advisory area. The contamination has been traced to historical firefighting activities at the former academy, where firefighting foams containing PFAS were used during training exercises for decades.

Maryland maintains a statewide firefighter training network through the Maryland Fire and Rescue Institute (MFRI), which operates six regional training centers serving every part of the state. In addition to these state-supported facilities, many counties operate their own fire academies and public safety training centers, including facilities in Montgomery, Carroll, Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Howard, Prince George's, and Washington counties. These facilities have trained generations of firefighters and emergency responders, often using live-fire exercises and, historically, firefighting foams containing PFAS.

Dozens of firefighter training grounds, burn pits, foam-training areas, airport fire-training facilities, and military fire-training sites have operated throughout Maryland over the last fifty years. These facilities routinely discharged aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), the same PFAS-laden foam responsible for widespread contamination at military bases throughout the state.

Military Poisons has documented PFAS contamination at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Joint Base Andrews, Fort Meade, Fort Detrick, Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Webster Field, the Naval Research Laboratory Chesapeake Bay Detachment, Forest Glen Annex, and several former military facilities throughout Maryland. At the same time, the organization has repeatedly warned that firefighter training academies, airports, and other non-military facilities have also created contamination patterns similar to those found on military bases.

The Maryland Department of the Environment has been reluctant to investigate, publicize, regulate, or clean up any of this. Maryland is behind many states in this regard.

Mongomery County planning documents provide disturbing details.

The former Montgomery County Public Safety Training Academy property consisted of approximately 44.84 acres at 9710 Great Seneca Highway in Rockville, Montgomery County, approved the disposition of essentially the entire site for private redevelopment as "The Elms at PSTA," (Public Safety Training Academy) a project containing roughly 630 residential units plus retail and open space. The academy closed in 2016, and the county subsequently sold or agreed to sell the property to the developer.

Montgomery County still owns land immediately adjacent to the former academy. Planning documents identify a 6.25-acre county-owned parcel south of the redevelopment site, currently occupied by the County Innovation Incubator and the National Cybersecurity Center of Excellence. The county also retained and received additional land associated with a potential future school site (Parcel V), which planning documents describe as approximately 6.5 acres.

‍Hundreds of homes are being built on property that served as Montgomery County's primary police and firefighter training facility for roughly forty years. The question that now demands an answer is whether Montgomery County or MDE investigated the property for PFAS contamination associated with historical firefighting activities before approving the redevelopment.

Given the well-established association between firefighter training facilities and PFAS contamination, it is difficult to understand how a comprehensive PFAS investigation was not publicly discussed before the site was approved for redevelopment. Firefighter training centers have been recognized nationwide as major PFAS source areas for years.

The planning documents note that a stream and approximately 3.35 acres of stream buffer run through the eastern portion of the former academy property and drain toward Muddy Branch.

The Maryland Department of the Environment recommends that all private well owners, regardless of location, have their well water tested at least once a year to ensure that their water is safe to drink and to include PFAS in that testing. The agency ought to be identifying well owners much further away and it ought to be providing these services. They dropped the ball.

‍It is important that the public be provided with the analytical results for each PFAS compound detected in the creek, pond, groundwater, and air. This is precisely the type of information the Maryland Department of the Environment has been hesitant to release at other severely contaminated PFAS sites around the state.

Although most PFAS compounds are not volatile, several compounds, especially PFOS, which is likely to dominate the chemical signature here, can attach to soil particles and become airborne. The carcinogens saturate the banks of the creek. When the water recedes, the toxins dry in the sun and are lifted by the wind into our lungs and into our homes as dust. The dust is a major PFAS pathway to small children. People living nearby should have their houses tested and they should change their air conditioner filters regularly. Sweeping and vacuuming ought to be traded for wet-mopping.

Since 2019, I have been writing about Maryland’s PFAS contamination associated with firefighter training activities. In 2021, when elevated PFAS levels were discovered in drinking water wells serving Westminster and Hampstead, I publicly questioned whether the Carroll County Public Fire Training Center was contributing to the contamination. At the time, I argued that Maryland should move beyond testing drinking water wells and begin identifying actual contamination sources through groundwater and surface-water investigations. My concern was that firefighter training facilities had used PFAS-containing foams for decades and were being overlooked as potential contributors to contamination. I sent all of my work to the Maryland Department of the Environment. They know the score.‍

The analytical data collected from Muddy Branch are essential for a host of reasons, but mostly because PFAS compounds can accumulate in fish. The EPA has reported that PFOS may bioaccumulate in fish up to 4,000 times the amount in the water. Streams and retention ponds near firefighter training facilities have been documented with PFOS concentrations in the hundreds and thousands of parts per trillion. Under such conditions, fish may contain PFAS concentrations in the hundreds of thousands or even millions of parts per trillion. One fish outside a fire training area in Michigan had 10 million parts per trillion in its filet.

‍The county health department must strive to identify those who have consumed fish from these waters. The county should also offer blood testing to individuals who may have been exposed to PFAS through consumption of the fish. The state will not do it.‍ ‍

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine has established guidance for PFAS blood levels and recommends clinical follow-up for individuals with more than 2 parts per billion of seven different PFAS compounds. Residents should not be forced to pay out of pocket to determine whether they have been exposed to chemicals released from a government-operated facility. But, government agencies may balk at the idea, so If people living in these nice new homes ought to know a PFAS skin prick test is available for $279 from Empower DX.‍ ‍

We must demand complete transparency. The state and the county should release the full analytical results for every PFAS compound detected at each sampling location, including surface water, groundwater, sediment, fish tissue, and any other environmental samples collected during the investigation. The public cannot adequately assess the risks posed by this contamination without access to the underlying data.

The contamination discovered near the former Montgomery County Public Safety Training Academy is not an isolated incident. It is the predictable consequence of decades of PFAS use at firefighter training facilities throughout Maryland. The question is no longer whether these facilities contaminated groundwater, streams, ponds, fish, and nearby communities. The question is how many sites remain uninvestigated, how many people have been exposed, and why state regulators failed to act sooner despite years of warnings.‍‍ ‍

——————————

I’ve written 80 articles on PFAS contamination emanating from fire training areas in Maryland. Here are two:

Bad News for Westminster (MD) and the Surrounding Region – February 2, 2021

Here, I identified the Carroll County Public Fire Training Center as a potential PFAS source and asked, "Where's the PFAS coming from in Westminster?"

https://patelder.weebly.com/westminster-md--pfas.html?utm_source=

——————————————————

Small Naval Facility in Southern Maryland Causes Massive PFAS Contamination - April 15, 2021

This article connected extremely high PFAS concentrations to a naval fire station and historical firefighting foam use.

https://www.militarypoisons.org/latest-news/small-naval-facility-in-southern-maryland-causes-massive-pfas-contamination?utm_source=‍ ‍

The following statement was delivered during the COP31 Presidency’s informal consultations with observers on June 16 2026 on behalf of the ENGO-DCJ constituency during the 64th meeting of the Subsidiary Bodies (SB64) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC):

Thank you Co-Chairs

I am speaking on behalf of the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice, ENGO DCJ.

As we move from COP30 to COP31, the central challenge before us is implementation. But there is no implementation without means of implementation. The commitments made in Belém must now be translated into concrete action that delivers justice for the communities already living at the front line of the ongoing climate crisis.

On climate finance, Article 9.1 must remain at the centre of this work. Developed countries have a legal obligation to provide public, grant-based, predictable and adequate climate finance to developing countries. Climate finance cannot be reduced to mobilisation targets, voluntary contributions or private investment. We are very concerned about the repeated attempts to erase the decisions and commitments in Belém on Adaptation and Adaptation finance including the commitment to triple the adaptation finance. Without finance for adaptation and loss and damage, our communities on the ground will continue to suffer.

On just transition, civil society condemns tactics from the Global North to weaken and delay the just transition mechanism: developed countries claim that all the bodies in the UN doing just transition work must be mapped before we can develop the mechanism and that the mechanism is not mandated to go beyond knowledge sharing. Developing countries, Indigenous Peoples, frontline workers, peasants, fisherfolk, Afro-descendants, fenceline communities, women and youth will feel the effects of these delay tactics first and foremost.  We urge the COP31 presidency to name just transition as a priority for intersessional work, and, given that negotiations for the JT mechanism are lacking in time, that intersessional work and negotiations are organised to ensure that the Just Transition Mechanism – or the BAM, as we like to call it – can be operationalised as swiftly as possible to deliver concrete actions for people and communities on the ground. Intersessional work is absolutely crucial at this point, and we don’t need Pre-COP or HoDs to be that place. We need it earlier and at negotiators’ level due to the detailed negotiations required. Crucially, civil society must be a strong and present participant in the intersessional work on just transition. 

We further urge you to support DCJ’s demands for the BAM. 

We emphasise that the BAM must be people-powered.

The BAM must give representation and decision-making power to UN observers and broader civil society in the mechanism’s governing structure as well as its knowledge-generation arm. The BAM must provide guidelines for the inclusion of all sectors in the processes of national and local transitions.

The BAM must align with and promote the principles of a just transition.

The just transition principles developed in COP30 already serve as strong signals to all actors on what just transition should mean. The BAM must be guided by these principles but also empower people and governments to further develop and expand these principles.

The BAM must enable just and equitable finance, technology transfer and capacity building.

There can be no equitable transition without provision of grant-based climate finance, technology transfer and capacity building from developed to developing countries.  The BAM must prioritise direct access to funding people, workers and communities. Technology transfer should also be grounded in justice and equity while also excluding false solutions.

The BAM must go beyond the energy transition.

The BAM must take a whole-of-economy approach and address the multidimensional nature of just transition, beyond the mitigation-centric focus on the energy workforce. Just transition cannot be limited to energy systems alone. It must address food systems, workers’ rights, public services, care economies, critical minerals and development pathways.

Lastly, the BAM must be fully operational by 2027.

We’re also deeply concerned with the presence of nature-based solutions and other false solutions throughout this space including in the JT, climate finance, adaptation, and also using the 1.5 degree overshoot narrative to push for more of these technofixes. False solutions commodify and exploit Mother Earth, promote land grabs from Indigenous Peoples and fail to address pollution at its source. Market-based mechanisms, which are pervasive within the UNFCCC, fail to address the fossil fuel extraction and capitalistic greed at the root of climate change while rewarding polluters by allowing them to claim carbon neutrality for business as usual. 

On agriculture, we urge Parties to prioritise agroecology and food sovereignty, including seed sovereignty, as proven solutions that strengthen resilience, livelihoods and biodiversity. Climate action in agriculture must address the harms of industrial agricultural systems and reject approaches that commodify land, food and ecosystems through climate smart agriculture, carbon markets and other market-based mechanisms. We therefore hope that the COP31 Presidency not only elevates agriculture and food security through the Action Agenda, but also injects renewed ambition, political will and urgency into the formal negotiations. 

The credibility of this process will be measured not by new initiatives and dialogues, but by whether it delivers accountability, finance and justice for the peoples and communities on the frontlines of the crisis.

Thank you.

The post SB64 Intervention- June 16 COP31 Presidency informal consultations appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

The following statement was delivered during Town Hall with the UNFCCC Executive Secretary and observers on June 16 2026 on behalf of the ENGO-DCJ constituency during the 64th meeting of the Subsidiary Bodies (SB64) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC):

My name is Rachitaa, and I’m making this intervention on behalf of Demand Climate Justice. 

Thank you for the opportunity to engage in this discussion with you today. As the climate crisis intensifies outside these halls, the urgency and equity with which progress is made within these halls must match the scale of the crisis. 

Unfortunately, by no measure is this the case. The integrity of the UNFCCC remains at stake, but more importantly so do hundreds of millions of lives and livelihoods. 

We’ve continued to witness the impacts of the Global North’s failure to do its fair share of climate action and pay its climate debt. And the fingerprints of the world’s largest polluting corporations are still all over the texts and negotiations. How many more years must we fail? 

We welcomed the Open Dialogue on transparency and inclusiveness, and appreciate the work invested into the dialogue, while acknowledging what has been said all along- this is one small step of many. We note that much was raised about conflicts of interest. Most Parties agreed it needed to be discussed further, even if the topic is complex. We call on the Secretariat to advance leadership on this issue and take additional steps to advance transparency and accountability now. Beginning with expanding the disclosure requirements and affirmation of alignment to all badge types, which there was no objection to in the room. We also look to you to further conversation with Parties, including the formal consultations that were suggested by some Parties. 

Big Polluters continue to hold the pen of climate action, all while space for equitable inclusion of civil society continues to shrink and the voices of those most impacted continue to be censored and excluded.

We would also like to share our concerns related to UNFCCC’s continued reliance on big technology corporations for its digital platform, given the role that such corporations have played in contributing to the climate crisis the world faces. 

On just transition, the priority now is operationalising the Just Transition Mechanism in a way that supports real transformation. The BAM must be people-powered. It must enable just and equitable finance, technology transfer, and capacity building. We insist The BAM must go beyond the energy transition and must be fully operational by 2027.

Finally, we understand that the COP30 presidency wrote to the secretariat advising that Article 9.1 should be on the agenda moving forward, and we strongly support this. The reality is that there is no climate action without climate finance, and no climate justice if the Global North is not paying their climate debt.

The post SB64 Intervention- June 16 Town Hall with the UNFCCC Executive Secretary appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

The following statement was delivered during the Arrangements for Intergovernmental Meetings (AIM) on June 15 2026 on behalf of the ENGO-DCJ and ENGO-CAN constituencies during the 64th meeting of the Subsidiary Bodies (SB64) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC):

On Saturday, for the first time in the thirty years of this climate regime, an Open Dialogue was held on integrity and transparency in this process, with an included focus on conflict of interest. It’s an important step that Presidencies, Parties and Observers came together to discuss these matters. At the same time, this step was long overdue, and it is only the beginning on a very long road.

The dialogue demonstrated that there is a wide recognition among the majority of actors gathered, including Parties, of the need to address conflicts of interest in the UNFCCC, even if that is a complex matter. 

This dialogue must be the start of a more formal and extensive process. A dedicated space is needed to discuss conflicts of interest, and come to an agreement on a comprehensive approach to address it, including through the development of conflict of interest policies to ensure that all engagement happens in a way that is fully aligned with the UNFCCC’s mandate and objectives.

We look forward to Parties formally recognising the outcomes of the dialogue and working to create space to continue the discussion on how to manage and protect against real or potential conflicts of interest, while enhancing engagement and inclusiveness. As part of this, and as an immediate step, we ask Parties to agree on the establishment of an Accountability Framework and to increase the transparency of Party and Party overflow badges by applying the same transparency and disclosure requirements as those for observers, and by making this mandatory.  

The UNFCCC needs to evolve to a space that is not only free from corporate capture but also transparent, inclusive, participatory and effective, including by changing the ways decisions are made.

That also means: 

• Formally recognizing a Disability Constituency, going beyond the current recognition of the informal disability observer group, as requested by Guatemala and supported by AGN and Kenya.
• Putting in place a unified, equitable UNFCCC visa system, and providing proactive and reactive visa support.
• Putting in place a zero tolerance policy for harassment, intimidation, and violence, including a focal point on these matters, as requested by Colombia, and in the mid-term clarifying and enhancing the “speak up” complaints mechanisms to ensure clarity on the process, follow-up, and monitoring of incidents.

The language on these critical matters in the draft text now does not reflect key demands that have been made in the room, and are not clear enough on the way forward.

Climate action will continue to fail to meaningfully address the climate crisis as long as polluting interests are granted unlimited access to policymaking processes and are allowed to unduly influence and weaken the critical work of the UNFCCC, and rights holders are excluded. 

We urge you to take these matters seriously and ensure that this year’s AIM conclusions kick off a clear process to finally curb the corporate capture of this space, while mandating deep process reform, as well as real policies to enhance public participation of rights holders, and protect their safety and security.

The post SB64 Intervention- June 15 Arrangements for Intergovernmental Meetings (AIM) appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

MEDIA ADVISORY

For Immediate Release

Will Bonn catalyse or catastrophise:

State of play during week two of UN Bonn climate negotiations

Bonn, Germany— There are only a few days remaining before the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) negotiations in Bonn, Germany officially come to a close. To catalyse the action needed to curb the climate crisis, governments must make every minute in the negotiating rooms count. Real action in this moment means:

1. Advancing a Belém Action Mechanism that is people-centred, incorporates Just Transition principles, goes beyond the energy sector and is operationalised by COP32. 
2. Following through with commitments from the Global North to deliver the climate finance needed to ensure Global South communities can meaningfully adapt and respond to climate change. 
3. Rejecting risky, unproven and harmful schemes like carbon markets in Article 6 and geo-engineering, which lock us into decades more of fossil fuels rather than curbing emissions. 
4. Laying the groundwork for the community-driven solutions that can truly transform all emissions-intensive industries, including the fossil fuel industry and industrial agriculture.
5. Addressing the links between fossil-fuelled violence and genocide, and acknowledging that the military industrial complex is sending emissions soaring while destroying land and communities already experiencing devastating impacts from the climate crisis.
6. Ending corporate capture of climate policy and holding the Global North accountable to doing their fair share of climate action. 

Join members of the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice (DCJ) to hear about the current state of play in the negotiations and what governments must do as the clock winds down to ensure that the UN Bonn climate talks catalyse climate action, not further catastrophise the climate crisis. 

WHEN: Tuesday 16 June 2026, 9:30-10:00 CEST (UTC + 2) 

WHERE: Nairobi 4, Main building, Inside the World Conference Center and webcast here

WITH: 

• Meena Raman, Third World Network
• Margaret Mullen, Re-Earth Initiative
• Chadli Sadorra, Asian Peoples’ Movement on Debt and Development
• Jax Bongon, IBON International 
• Moderated by Rachitaa Gupta, Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice

CONTACT: dcj.comms@demandclimatejustice.org

For more detail on DCJ’s demands across all topics on the agenda for Bonn, read  DCJ’s SB64 Position Paper: Advancing Climate Justice in an Age of Climate Crisis

The post Media Advisory: Will Bonn catalyse or catastrophise? appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

For Immediate Release

What UNFCCC’s WTO dialogue did—and did not—do-

Climate & Trade Justice Groups React

Bonn, Germany— Join climate and trade justice analysts and advocates with the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice (DCJ) at the UN Bonn Climate talks to hear more about the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change’s first ever trade and climate dialogue. The dialogue, which occurred on Saturday June 13, included officials from the World Trade Organization (WTO), UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and the International Trade Center (ITC). Kicking off a three-year forum mandated at COP30 in Belém, trade and climate officials discussed all things trade at a day-long dialogue focused on the relationship between their two multilateral regimes and changes needed for both.

WHEN: 15 June 2026, 12pm CEST (UTC + 2) 

WHERE: Nairobi 4, Main building, Inside Bonn’s World Conference Center, or webcast here

WHO

• Priscilla Papagiannis, Brazilian Network for Peoples’ Integration (REBRIP)
• Erika Lennon, Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL)
• Luc Tezenas, Resource Justice Network (RJN)
• Victor Menotti, Demand Climate Justice

CONTACT dcj.comms@demandclimatejustice.org

The post Media Advisory: What UNFCCC’s WTO dialogue did—and did not—do appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

Media Advisory

For Immediate Release

Delay, Distract, Destruct, Repeat–

Global North governments abandoning climate action at home and at UN climate talks

Bonn, Germany— The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) negotiations in Bonn, Germany (SB64) are headed into the final days. In these rooms, governments continue to construct the foundation of international climate collaboration in an era of climate crisis. The details of many of the essential building blocks are still being debated– including on climate finance, just transition, false solutions, historical responsibility, agriculture and a fossil fuel phase-out. 

Global North governments like the United States, United Kingdom, Japan and the European Union are historically most responsible for the climate crisis. The Global North should be the most invested in laying the groundwork to ensure we can build a strong and sustainable house of climate action. Instead, their extraction, colonialism, imperialism, patriarchy, racism and war-mongering has fuelled this planet to the brink of collapse, risking hundreds of millions of lives and livelihoods. According to the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR) enshrined in the UNFCCC, Global North governments should be leading the way to a climate just world by doing their fair share of climate action, delivering their climate debt, rapidly enacting just transitions and supporting Global South countries and communities in doing the same.  

Instead of acting like the climate champions they proclaim they are, Global North governments are ramping up a predictable yet inexcusable strategy of “Delay, Distract, Destruct, Repeat.” In the case of the United States, it hasn’t even officially shown up to the table, yet is still pulling the strings behind the scenes. Meanwhile the United Kingdom. Japan and the European Union are rolling back their already very weak climate commitments at home and reneging on all of their responsibilities in the global house of climate action. 

Join members of the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice (DCJ) to learn more about how Global North governments are destroying international collaboration here in Bonn and delaying climate action at home, and what can be done to hold them accountable. 

WHEN: Monday 15 June 2026, 11-11.30 CEST (UTC + 2) 

WHERE: Nairobi 4, Main building, Inside the World Conference Center and webcast here

WITH: 

• Leon Sealey-Huggins, War on Want
• Victor Menotti, Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice
• Tobias Holle, Shifting Advocacy
• Analyah Schlaeger dos Santos, ShiftUS, Global Afro Descendants
• Moderated by Nona Chai, Just Transition Alliance

CONTACT: dcj.comms@demandclimatejustice.org

For more detail on DCJ’s demands across all topics on the agenda for Bonn, read  DCJ’s SB64 Position Paper: Advancing Climate Justice in an Age of Climate Crisis

The post Media Advisory: Delay, Distract, Destruct, Repeat appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

MEDIA ADVISORY

For Immediate Release

Just or Bust:

Will Bonn deliver a truly just transition, or bust the phase-out with false solutions?

Bonn, Germany— Saturday marks the close of week one of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) negotiations in Bonn, Germany. With only one more week left to go, so much remains to accomplish before these negotiations– SB64 – can be considered a true success. 

In one room, governments are discussing the next steps for the Just Transition Mechanism, which was agreed at COP30 thanks to the sustained organising of civil society and movements. But importantly, the creation of a mechanism alone does not guarantee justice. A central question in Bonn is whether the Belém Action Mechanism (BAM) will be people-powered, align with just transition principles and become fully operational by 2027. 

In other rooms, governments– especially from Global North countries– are seeking to seed carbon markets in place of true climate finance and ramp up dangerous, risky technologies like geo-engineering in place of keeping fossil fuels in the ground. All of this equates to those who have done the most to cause the climate crisis orchestrating their great escape from accountability and liability. 

What are the differences between false solutions and real solutions that will advance a just transition and help address the climate crisis?And is progress so far at the Bonn climate negotiations meeting expectations? Join members of the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice (DCJ) as we close week one of the UN Bonn climate talks to hear more about the state of negotiations and what governments must make happen in week two.

WHEN: Saturday 13 June 2026, 11-11.30 CEST (UTC + 2) 

WHERE: Nairobi 4, Main building, Inside the World Conference Center and webcast here

WITH: 

• Nona Chai, Just Transition Alliance 
• Theresa Rose Sebastian, Re Earth Initiative
• Ranjana Giri, Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development
• Kaveri Choudhury, ETC group 
• Moderated by Rachitaa Gupta, Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice

CONTACT: dcj.comms@demandclimatejustice.org 

The post Media Advisory: Just or Bust appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

We invite you to watch this short “teaser” video of "Radical Visions Reconnecting Academia and Nature: A Community Truth, Reckoning and Right Relationship" from a two-day event in March 2026.

The post Radical Visions Reconnecting Academia and Nature: A Community Truth, Reckoning and Right Relationship appeared first on CELDF - Community Rights Pioneers - Protecting Nature and Communities.

Media Advisory

For Immediate Release

The Bonn Setback or Bonn Fast track?

Unpacking what it takes to advance climate justice at Bonn 

Bonn, Germany— The climate crisis is often described as a crisis of emissions but it is also far more. With week one of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change intersessional negotiations (SB64) in Bonn, Germany underway, governments are now getting deeper into the nuances of negotiations on critical topics such as just transition, climate finance, adaptation, carbon markets and more. 

SB64 convenes at a moment when it is impossible to ignore the US-Israel led imperialist wars and genocide  happening outside the halls of the UNFCCC and its impact around the world. Communities are not only confronting escalating climate impacts but also abuses of militarisation, debt crises, economic instability, shrinking civic space, rising authoritarianism and the continued concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a small number of states, corporations and financial actors. In this context climate negotiations are not politically neutral spaces but are shaped by the same neo-colonial, imperial, fossil fuel driven economic system  and the global inequalities that produced the climate crisis. Every major issue on the agenda for SB64– from  climate finance and adaptation to just transition,  mitigation and false solutions– reflects a broader struggle over rights, responsibility and the future of multilateralism.

Climate justice will not be delivered– at the UNFCCC or anywhere– through tiny tweaks to an unjust and failing global system. Real action requires the Global North to stop being the primary blockers of progress and instead get serious about delivering on its historical responsibility to do its fair share, protecting human rights and pay its long overdue climate debt. It requires transforming the structures that created the crisis and building pathways rooted in justice and equity to deliver on collective survival, dignity and liberation. The Bonn climate talks can either help deliver a setback or a fast track to climate justice. 

Join members of the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice (DCJ) as the Bonn climate talks kick off to hear more about what governments must deliver here in Bonn.

WHEN: Wednesday 10 June 2026, 11-11.30 CEST (UTC + 2) 

WHERE: Nairobi 4, Main building, Inside the World Conference Center and webcast here

WITH: 

• Meena Raman, Third World Network
• Leon Sealey-Huggins, War on Want
• Thomas Joseph Tsewenaldin, Indigenous Environmental Network
• Aleijn Reintegrado,  Asian Peoples’ Movement on Debt and Development
• Moderated by Rachitaa Gupta, Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice

CONTACT: dcj.comms@demandclimatejustice.org 

For more detail on DCJ’s demands across all topics on the agenda for Bonn, read  DCJ’s SB64 Position Paper– Advancing Climate Justice in an Age of Climate Crisis

The post Media Advisory: The Bonn Setback or Bonn Fast track? appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

Last month, Louisiana’s state legislature officially passed HB670. Soon the governor will sign the bill. This opens the door for a major expansion of the biomass industry. It makes it […]

The post Statement: Louisiana Passes Legislation to Bail Out Biomass first appeared on Dogwood Alliance.

*Read the full position paper with detailed analysis and demands for all key negotiating topics here*

Climate Justice in an Age of Genocide, Militarism and Climate Breakdown

SB64 (the 64th meeting of the Subsidiary Bodies of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, or UNFCCC, from June 8-18 in Bonn, Germany) convenes at a moment when the contradictions shaping the international climate regime have become impossible to ignore. Across the world, communities are confronting escalating climate impacts alongside deepening militarisation, debt crises, economic instability, shrinking civic space, rising authoritarianism and the continued concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a small number of states, corporations and financial actors. The climate crisis is unfolding not in isolation, but resulting from a global political order structured by histories and ongoing acts of colonisation, imperialism, racial capitalism, patriarchy, extractivism and the continued sacrifice of peoples and ecosystems in the pursuit of profit for a few.

DCJ joins social justice movements around the world standing in solidarity with the peoples currently resisting the imperial attacks by the nexus of the U.S.-Israel and its allies across the world, especially Palestine, Iran, Lebanon, Yemen, Haití, Cuba, Venezuela, Nigeria, Sudan and the Democratic Republic of Congo, among others. We stand in solidarity with peoples across the world who have been on the receiving end of imperial wars, invasions, attacks to their sovereignty and their right to self-determination. We condemn the subjection of civilians to warfare for territory, natural resources, or religious conflict anywhere and everywhere. We stand in strong opposition to the perpetuation of human and environmental suffering across the world.  We commit to a solidarity not based in words but in actions. There cannot be emancipation and liberation with ongoing imperial and colonial capitalism, which must be our first priority to dismantle.

This context matters because climate negotiations are not politically neutral spaces. They are shaped by the same global inequalities that produced the crisis. The countries and corporations most responsible for climate breakdown continue to hold disproportionate power over the terms of climate action, while the peoples and communities most affected continue to fight for their rights and justice. Every major issue on the agenda for SB64, from climate finance, adaptation, loss and damage to just transition, fossil fuel phase-out, mitigation and false solutions, reflects a broader struggle over rights, responsibility, redistribution and the future of multilateralism.

The ongoing genocide in Palestine, carried out by Israel with the military, political and economic backing of the United States and its allies, has laid bare the brutality and hypocrisy of the present international order. The destruction of Palestinian life, land, food systems, water infrastructure, energy systems, homes, hospitals, schools and places of worship is not only a humanitarian catastrophe. It is also a profound indictment of an international system that claims to uphold human rights, international law and multilateral cooperation while enabling impunity for occupation, apartheid and genocide. For climate justice movements, this moment demands political clarity: there can be no climate justice while genocide is normalised, while occupation is greenwashed, and while systems of militarism and fossil capitalism continue to destroy both peoples and ecosystems.

The relationship between militarism and climate breakdown is not incidental. Fossil fuels remain central to modern military power, geopolitical conflicts and domination, and global economic control. Military operations depend on oil, gas and petrochemical supply chains; fossil fuel revenues and infrastructure shape conflicts and geopolitical alliances; and the military-industrial complex absorbs vast public resources that could otherwise be directed towards climate finance, adaptation, public services and just transition. At the same time, war and occupation destroy the very systems that communities need to survive climate impacts: land, water, food, healthcare, housing, energy and social infrastructure.

This is why the climate crisis must be understood as part of a broader crisis of power imbalance. The same global system that drives emissions also drives war, displacement, debt, extraction and ecological destruction. It is a system that allows fossil fuel corporations to profit while communities lose homes and livelihoods; that allows governments to expand military budgets while claiming there is no money for climate finance; that allows financial institutions to enforce austerity while climate-vulnerable countries are forced to borrow to recover from disasters they did not cause.

The Global South continues to bear the brunt of this injustice. Countries and communities that contributed least to the climate crisis are facing the most severe impacts while being denied the resources necessary to respond. Many developing countries are trapped in cycles of debt servicing, austerity and extractive dependency that restrict their ability to invest in adaptation, public services, food sovereignty, energy transformation and resilient development. International financial institutions, unequal trade rules, intellectual property barriers and investor protections continue to constrain the policy space required for a just transition. In this context, calls for ambition that do not address finance, debt, technology and historical responsibility will become new forms of burden-shifting.

COP30 in Belém created important openings, but it did not resolve these contradictions. The establishment of the Just Transition Mechanism represented a significant victory for developing countries, workers, Indigenous Peoples, feminist movements, youth, frontline communities and climate justice organisations. It reflected years of organising to ensure that transition is not reduced to market-led technological substitution but understood as a question of justice, rights, livelihoods and systems transformation. The roadmap process on transitioning away from fossil fuels also opened a political space to confront the root cause of the climate crisis. Progress on adaptation and related implementation processes created additional possibilities for advancing rights-based and people-centred climate action.

Yet COP30 also demonstrated the continued resistance of developed countries to fulfilling their obligations. Finance remained inadequate. Article 9.1 continued to be contested and diluted. Adaptation and loss and damage remained underfunded. Fossil fuel interests and false solutions continued to shape climate action. Carbon markets, offsets, carbon capture, financialised nature schemes and other mechanisms continued to be promoted as substitutes for real emissions reductions, public finance and system change. The outcomes of Belém therefore created both opportunities and risks. SB64 is where many of these political battles now move from recognition to operationalisation.

This distinction is critical. The fight after Belém is no longer only about whether Parties acknowledge the need for climate finance, just transition, adaptation, loss and damage or fossil fuel phase-out. It is about how those commitments are interpreted, governed, financed and implemented. History shows that implementation is often where justice is diluted. Commitments secured through struggle can be narrowed through technical processes, weakened through procedural delays, captured by corporate interests or redirected towards market mechanisms. SB64 must therefore be approached as a political battleground over the future direction of climate action.

For DCJ, the demands ahead of SB64 are rooted in a clear understanding of climate justice. Developed countries must fulfil their obligations under Article 9.1 and provide public, grant-based, predictable and adequate finance to developing countries. Adaptation and loss and damage must be financed as matters of rights and reparative justice. The Just Transition Mechanism must be operationalised in ways that support systemic transformation across energy, food, care, labour, public services, critical minerals and development pathways. The transition away from fossil fuels must be rapid, equitable, anti-extractivist and grounded in the political vision emerging from Santa Marta. Article 6 and other false solutions must not be allowed to delay real action or create new markets for pollution and dispossession. Mitigation must remain anchored in equity, CBDR-RC and means of implementation rather than becoming another tool for shifting burdens onto developing countries.

SB64 must also defend the integrity of climate multilateralism itself. This means protecting civic space, ensuring meaningful participation of rights-holders and movements, and confronting corporate capture within the UNFCCC. It means recognising that fossil fuel corporations, big polluters and actors complicit in militarism, occupation and ecological destruction cannot be allowed to define climate solutions or climate action. It means understanding that climate governance will lose legitimacy if it continues to treat the demands of the most affected as negotiable while protecting the interests of those most responsible.

The climate crisis is often described as a crisis of emissions. It is that, but it is also far more. It is a crisis of colonial history, economic organisation, political power and moral accountability. Addressing it requires more than technical implementation. It requires reparations, redistribution, democratic participation, public finance, energy sovereignty, food sovereignty, gender justice, Indigenous sovereignty and the dismantling of the systems that have made both people and planet expendable.

This position paper sets out DCJ’s priorities for SB64 from that perspective. It is written in the understanding that climate justice will not be delivered through incremental adjustments to an unjust system. It will require confronting the structures that created the crisis and building pathways rooted in collective survival, dignity and liberation. Systems change, not climate change.

Climate Finance Work Programme and Article 9.1

Climate finance remains the defining test of whether the climate regime is prepared to uphold the principles of equity and historical responsibility agreed at Rio in the 1992 UNFCCC. Developed countries continue to fall far short of their obligations despite overwhelming evidence that sufficient resources exist to finance transformative climate action. The struggle over Article 9.1 is not merely a debate about financial flows. It is a struggle over responsibility itself.

As articulated in its official submission, DCJ rejects attempts to frame climate finance as aid, philanthropy or voluntary support. Climate finance is an obligation rooted in historical responsibility and climate debt. Developed countries must provide public, grant-based, predictable and adequate finance consistent with their commitments under the UNFCCC and Paris Agreement. Climate finance must also be understood within a broader framework of reparative justice that includes debt cancellation, reform of the international financial architecture and mechanisms to ensure that those who have profited most from climate destruction contribute proportionately to addressing its consequences.

Adaptation Finance and the Global Goal on Adaptation

Adaptation is a matter of survival for billions of people across the Global South. Yet adaptation finance remains dramatically inadequate despite rapidly growing needs. Communities are already confronting severe climate impacts while lacking access to the resources necessary to strengthen resilience and protect livelihoods.

DCJ calls for a substantial increase in public, grant-based adaptation finance and rejects efforts to rely on private finance and market mechanisms. Adaptation must be grounded in rights, participation, Indigenous knowledge, food sovereignty and community leadership. The continued development of the Global Goal on Adaptation must support implementation rather than becoming an exercise in technocratic measurement detached from lived realities.

Loss and Damage

The climate crisis is already causing irreversible harms that cannot be prevented through mitigation or adaptation alone. Communities are losing homes, livelihoods, ecosystems, cultures and territories as climate impacts intensify. COP27’s establishment of the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage (FRLD) represented an important political victory, but current levels of finance remain wholly inadequate compared to actual needs.

DCJ reiterates that loss and damage finance must be understood as reparative finance. It must be new, additional, grant-based and distinct from adaptation and mitigation finance. Polluter-pays mechanisms, including taxes on fossil fuel extraction, extreme wealth and corporate windfall profits, should be advanced as important sources of finance.

Operationalising the Just Transition Mechanism

The establishment of the Just Transition Mechanism at COP30 represented a significant achievement. However, the creation of a mechanism alone does not guarantee justice. A central question in Bonn is whether the way SB64 defines and designs the Mechanism will support transformative change or merely manage the social consequences of existing economic models.

DCJ rejects narrow approaches that reduce just transition to energy sector restructuring or workforce adjustment. Just transition must encompass food systems, care economies, public services, critical minerals, workers’ rights, Indigenous sovereignty and democratic control over resources. The Mechanism must be supported by adequate finance and meaningful participation by workers, Indigenous Peoples, peasants, fisherfolk, women, youth and frontline communities.

Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels

COP28’s commitment in Dubai to transition away from fossil fuels marked an important breakthrough, but implementation remains contested. The “roadmap” process initiated under the Brazilian COP30 Presidency (as opposed to any agreed mandate by all countries) must not become a vehicle for delaying action or reproducing extractivist development models under new forms.

Drawing on the political vision emerging from Santa Marta, DCJ calls for a transition rooted in justice, sovereignty, care and democratic control. The transition away from fossil fuels must not be used to justify new forms of extraction, including the expansion of critical mineral supply chains that sacrifice communities and ecosystems in the Global South. Climate justice requires confronting both fossil fuels and the systems of power that sustain them.

Article 6 and False Solutions

Climate justice movements continue to confront the expansion of false solutions that allow polluters to delay structural transformation while claiming climate leadership. Carbon markets, offsets, carbon capture technologies, geoengineering and the financialisation of nature all risk entrenching existing power structures while failing to address the root causes of climate breakdown.

The continued promotion of false solutions reflects the influence of fossil fuel interests and corporate actors within climate governance. SB64 must resist efforts to expand reliance in Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) on market-based approaches and instead prioritise real solutions rooted in public accountability, food sovereignty, Indigenous stewardship, community-controlled renewable energy and systemic transformation.

Mitigation Work Programme

The Mitigation Work Programme must remain firmly grounded in equity and CBDR-RC. Developing countries have repeatedly raised concerns regarding attempts to use the MWP as a vehicle for shifting mitigation burdens onto countries least responsible for the climate crisis while developed countries continue to evade obligations on finance and support.

Mitigation ambition cannot be separated from means of implementation. Climate finance, technology transfer, debt justice and policy space remain essential prerequisites for equitable climate action.

Cross-Cutting Priorities

Across all negotiating tracks, DCJ calls for climate action grounded in equity, historical responsibility, human rights, Indigenous sovereignty, feminist climate justice, democratic participation and protection from corporate capture. Climate governance must strengthen civic space, ensure meaningful participation by rights-holders and adopt robust conflict-of-interest policies that prevent fossil fuel interests and big polluters from shaping climate action.

The Challenge Before SB64

A central challenge facing SB64 is not the absence of solutions. Communities, movements and frontline peoples have long advanced pathways capable of addressing both climate breakdown and social injustice. The challenge is whether governments are prepared to confront the structures of power and privilege that continue to benefit from the crisis.

For DCJ, climate action must be rooted in reparative justice, international solidarity and systemic transformation. Anything less will preserve the unequal and unjust systems that created the climate crisis while leaving its underlying causes intact. SB64 must therefore advance implementation in ways that strengthen accountability, uphold historical responsibility and support the system change grounded in the peoples led solutions necessary to secure a just, equitable, healthy life and planet for all.

*Read the full position paper with detailed analysis and demands for all key negotiating topics here*

The post SB64 POSITION PAPER: Advancing Climate Justice in an Age of Crisis appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

Press contact: Hannah Lawrence, +436706504192, press@stay-grounded.org The World Cup is ‘flying us to the brink of climate collapse’, say campaigners as final preparations are made for the opening ceremony in Mexico City on Thursday. Stay Grounded has called out the mega-event which is predicted to be the most polluting in history, generating 7.7 million tonnes of CO2 from air…

Source

Join members of the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice as we explore how the Just Transition
Mechanism can support holistic and integrated transitions across sectors such as energy, food systems and land use.

Monday 8 June 2026

12:00-13:15

Room Berlin

The post Bonn SB64 side event: How can the Just Transition Mechanism support holistic transitions across sectors? appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.