In Brazil, a fight over offshore drilling tests Lula’s climate ambitions

Sao Paulo, Brazil – In the far north of Brazil, where the Amazon River collides with the sea, an environmental dilemma has awakened a national political debate.

There, the Brazilian government has been researching the possibility of offshore oil reserves that extend from the eastern state of Rio Grande do Norte all the way to Amapá, close to the border with French Guiana.

That region is known as the Equatorial Margin, and it represents hundreds of kilometres of coastal water.

But critics argue it also represents the government’s conflicting goals under Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula Da Silva.

During his third term as president, Lula has positioned Brazil as a champion in the fight against climate change. But he has also signalled support for fossil fuel development in regions like the Equatorial Margin, as a means of paying for climate-change policy.

“We want the oil because it will still be around for a long time. We need to use it to fund our energy transition, which will require a lot of money,” Lula said in February.

But at the start of his term in 2023, he struck a different stance. “Our goal is zero deforestation in the Amazon, zero greenhouse gas emissions,” he told Brazil’s Congress.

As the South American country prepares to host the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP30) later this year, those contradictions have come under even greater scrutiny.

Nicole Oliveira is one of the environmental leaders fighting the prospect of drilling in the Equatorial Margin, including the area at the mouth of the Amazon River, known as Foz do Amazonas.

Her organisation, the Arayara Institute, filed a lawsuit to block an auction scheduled for this week to sell oil exploration rights in the Equatorial Margin. She doubts the government’s rationale that fossil-fuel extraction will finance cleaner energy.

“There is no indication of any real willingness [from the government] to pursue an energy transition,” Oliveira said.

“On the contrary, there is growing pressure on environmental agencies to issue licenses and open up new areas in the Foz do Amazonas and across the entire Equatorial Margin.”

Last Thursday, the federal prosecutor’s office also filed a lawsuit to delay the auction, calling for further environmental assessments and community consultations before the project proceeds.

But on Tuesday, the auction proceeded, with oil exploration rights in the region getting scooped up by consortiums that included Chevron, Exxon and the state-owned petrol company Petrobras.

A drill ship operated by the state-run oil company Petrobras floats in the Guanabara Bay near Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, on May 20 [Pilar Olivares/Reuters]

A government reversal

The fate of the Equatorial Margin has exposed divisions even within Lula’s government.

In May 2023, the Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources (IBAMA) — the government’s main environmental regulator — denied a request from Petrobras to conduct exploratory drilling at the mouth of the Amazon River.

In its decision, the IBAMA cited environmental risks and a lack of assessments, given the site’s “socio-environmental sensitivity”.

But Petrobras continued to push for a licence to drill in the region. The situation escalated in February this year when IBAMA again rejected Petrobras’s request.

Lula responded by criticising the agency for holding up the process. He argued that the proceeds from any drilling would help the country and bolster its economy.

“We need to start thinking about Brazil’s needs. Is this good or bad for Brazil? Is this good or bad for Brazil’s economy?” Lula told Radio Clube do Para in February.

On May 19, the director of IBAMA, a politician named Rodrigo Agostinho, ultimately overruled his agency’s decision and gave Petrobras the green light to initiate drilling tests in the region.

Petrobras applauded the reversal. In a statement this month to Al Jazeera, it said it had conducted “detailed environmental studies” to ensure the safety of the proposed oil exploration.

It added that its efforts were “fully in line with the principles of climate justice, biodiversity protection, and the social development of the communities where it operates”.

“Petrobras strictly follows all legal and technical requirements established by environmental authorities,” Petrobras wrote.

It also argued that petroleum will continue to be a vital energy source decades into the future, even with the transition to low-carbon alternatives.

Roberto Ardenghy, the president of the Brazilian Petroleum and Gas Institute (IBP), an advocacy group, is among those who believe that further oil exploitation is necessary for Brazil’s continued growth and prosperity.

“It is justified — even from an energy and food security standpoint — that Brazil continues to search for oil in all of these sedimentary basins,” he said.

Ardenghy added that neighbouring countries like Guyana are already profiting from “significant discoveries” near the Equatorial Margin.

“Everything suggests there is strong potential for major oil reservoirs in that region. The National Petroleum Agency estimates there could be around 30 billion barrels of oil there. That’s why we’re making such a major effort,” he said.

Scarlet ibises flock to the shores near the mouth of the Amazon River.
A flock of scarlet ibis stands on the banks of a mangrove forest near the Foz do Amazonas in April 2017 [Ricardo Moraes/Reuters]

A ‘risk of accidents’

But critics have argued that the area where the Amazon River surges into the ocean comprises a delicate ecosystem, lush with mangroves and coral reefs.

There, the pink-bellied Guiana dolphin plies the salty waters alongside other aquatic mammals like sperm whales and manatees. Environmentalists fear exploratory drilling could further endanger these rare and threatened species.

Indigenous communities at the mouth of the river have also resisted Petrobras’s plans for oil exploration, citing the potential for damage to their ancestral fishing grounds.

In 2022, the Council of Chiefs of the Indigenous Peoples of Oiapoque (CCPIO) formally requested that the federal prosecutor’s office mediate a consultation process with Petrobras, which has not taken place to this date.

The federal prosecutor’s office, in announcing Thursday’s lawsuit, cited the risk to Indigenous peoples as part of its reasoning for seeking to delay the auction.

“The area is home to a vast number of traditional peoples and communities whose survival and way of life are directly tied to coastal ecosystems,” the office said.

However, in its statement to Al Jazeera, Petrobras maintains it had a “broad communication process” with local stakeholders. It added that its studies “did not identify any direct impact on traditional communities” resulting from the drilling.

But some experts nevertheless question the safety of oil exploration in the region, including Suely Araujo, who used to chair IBAMA from 2016 to 2018.

Now the public policy coordinator for the advocacy coalition Observatório do Clima, Araujo pointed to practical hurdles like the powerful waters that gush from the Amazon River into the ocean.

“The area is quite complex, with extremely strong currents. Petrobras has no previous exploration experience in a region with currents as strong as these,” Araujo said. “So it’s an area that increases the risk of accidents even during drilling.”

Still, she fears there is little political will within the Lula government to stop the oil exploration — and that awarding drilling licences could be a slippery slope.

“All the evidence is there for this licence to be approved soon,” she said, referring to the project planned near the river mouth.

“The problem is that if this licence gets approved — let’s say, the 47 new blocks in the Foz do Amazonas that are now up for auction — it will become very difficult for IBAMA to deny future licences, because it’s the same region.”

Oliveira, whose organisation is leading the legal fight against the exploration licences, echoed that sentiment. She said it is necessary to stop the drilling before it starts.

Iranians ‘told to evacuate’ as Israel steps up attacks on Tehran

Israel appears to be expanding its air strikes on Iran’s capital, five days after it launched a surprise attack on its foe’s military and nuclear programme.

The attacks on Tuesday targeting Tehran, as well as locations Israel branded military bases in western Iran, came as United States President Donald Trump posted an ominous message warning residents of the capital to evacuate.

“Iran can not have a nuclear weapon,” Trump wrote on Monday as he returned to Washington early from a Group of Seven (G7) summit in Canada. “Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran!”

Earlier, the Israeli military had called for some 330,000 residents of a neighbourhood in Tehran to evacuate.

Iran’s capital is one of the largest cities in the Middle East. Its population of about 10 million people is roughly equivalent to that of Israel. People have been fleeing since the hostilities began.

Israel says its sweeping assault on Iran’s top military leaders, nuclear scientists, uranium enrichment sites and ballistic missile programme is necessary to prevent its longtime adversary from getting any closer to building an atomic weapon. The strikes have killed at least 224 people since Friday.

Iran has retaliated by launching more than 370 missiles and hundreds of drones at Israel. So far, 24 people have been killed in Israel and more than 500 wounded.

Trump asks Tehran residents to ‘evacuate immediately’. But can they?

On Monday, Israel ordered Iranians to evacuate from the northern part of the capital, Tehran, days after launching its deadly strikes across Iran. The same day, it bombed the headquarters of the state TV channel IRIB during a live broadcast.

Experts say these moves form part of Israel’s “psychological warfare” against Iranians, many of whom have already left the capital amid a continuing barrage of Israeli attacks, which have killed more than 220 people in five days.

Israeli spokesperson Avichay Adraee issued an “urgent warning” on X on Monday, calling for an evacuation order for District 3, a leafy, affluent area in northern Tehran where many foreign embassies are located.

It came attached with a 3D map and a warning to residents that their presence there “endangers” their lives; a format strikingly similar to his warnings issued throughout Israel’s war on Gaza and its bombardment of Lebanon.

Later, another evacuation order came from Israel’s closest ally, the United States. “Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran!” US President Donald Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform on Monday.

But can a whole city – home to nearly 10 million people – simply pack up and leave? Let’s break it down for you:

How possible is it for all of Tehran’s residents to evacuate?

It would be difficult for all its residents to leave in a timeframe that would ensure their safety, according to Al Jazeera’s correspondent in Tehran, Maziar Motamedi.

One reason is that Iran’s capital has a large population of roughly 10 million, which is more people than in London or New York.

If you expand that area to the metropolitan area, which includes surrounding suburbs and towns, its population stands at approximately 14-15 million.

Heavy traffic congestion is already common in Tehran, especially during rush hour or public holidays, but many of the roads on Tuesday were at a standstill with traffic jams throughout the city as residents attempted to evacuate.

The traffic jams are reportedly worsening as the day progresses.

Tehran is also surrounded by mountainous terrain, and exit routes are limited to fewer than a dozen arteries that lead out of the city.

Al Jazeera’s Dorsa Jabbari spoke to some residents who had been attempting to leave Tehran, noting that a trip that usually takes seven to eight hours to reach an area by the Caspian Sea can now take between 18 and 24 hours to complete, due to traffic.

Are there any bomb shelters in Tehran?

No.

“There are no bomb shelters in Iran, there never have been, so people really don’t have anywhere to go”, Al Jazeera’s Jabbari explained.

“This was an unthinkable situation for most Iranians. They haven’t seen bombs dropping on Tehran since the Iran-Iraq War, and that ended 37 years ago,” she said.

A resident of the Zafaraniyeh neighbourhood in northern Tehran told Al Jazeera that officials had suggested that metro stations and some schools in the city could be prepared to accommodate people seeking shelter.

However, these structures were not designed to withstand the type of bombardment that Israel has been striking the capital with.

What is in District 3?

The area that the Israeli military has issued evacuation orders for is home to roughly 330,000 people and the sprawling headquarters of the Iranian state broadcaster IRIB, which Israel bombed on Monday after Israel’s Defence Minister Israel Katz said it was “on its way to disappear”.

It is also home to the busy Nelson Mandela Boulevard, which experiences regular traffic jams and is home to several foreign embassies.

The lush expanse of Mellat Park, the Enghelab Sports Complex with its popular outdoor swimming facilities, several hospitals and the sprawling Tehran International Exhibition Centre are also situated in the area.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has its Sarallah headquarters in the area, as do the police.

Al Jazeera’s Motamedi said several highways run through or along the periphery of the area marked in Israel’s evacuation orders, putting civilians using those roads at risk.

However, he said, wherever residents go, they have been at risk from the start with Israel’s bombs striking whenever and wherever they want.

A traffic jam forms as people in Tehran attempt to flee via an artery in the city’s west [Atta Kenare/AFP]

Have many Tehran residents have already left?

Yes.

Al Jazeera’s Tohid Asadi, reporting from Tehran, said a significant portion of the population has chosen to leave the city in response to the explosions and repeated warning messages by Israel.

He said there is a strong sense of anxiety and fear among residents, but there is also a distinct feeling of solidarity among those who remain in the capital.

He said when he spoke to people, particularly those living in the neighbourhoods that were targeted, there was a deep sense of anger.

Residents say they have no connection to the nuclear programme or military facilities, and that they are just citizens whose lives are now being directly affected by these events, he reported from the capital.

Where can residents evacuate to?

Trump has made it sound simple, but relocating large numbers of people to other parts of the country is not straightforward.

Many residents have family elsewhere in the country or are opting to stay in hotels.

However, Israel has targeted locations across the country, which means there is no safe place to head to.

Motamedi said that many people may look to head north of Tehran to less-targeted areas such as Rasht, Nur, Chalus, Bandar Anzali and Mahmudabad.

These areas are popular with holidaymakers, meaning that hotels and temporary accommodation may be available.

Others say they fear that an influx of displaced people could lead to shortages in those areas, so they are uncertain of where they could evacuate to.

Have we seen these types of evacuation orders before?

Yes.

Since Israel began its war on Gaza in October 2023, it has issued numerous evacuation orders similar to the ones issued for District 3 on Monday.

It has also issued the same type of evacuation order when it strikes in locations in Lebanon.

Jabbari said that although these strategies are similar, Iran has an entirely different geography and is also a sovereign state, so it is a war “on a much larger scale”.

What Israel is using is something called the Dahiyeh Doctrine, which is a strategy developed in 2006 when it was at war with Hezbollah, she said.

This strategy is when Israel uses excessive force to destroy areas in densely populated civilian neighbourhoods, with the pretext that it is attacking military targets, Jabbari explained.

Israel’s goal, she said, was to instil fear and panic, and force people to abandon their support for their political leadership.

Trump seeks ‘real end, not ceasefire’ as Israel-Iran conflict heats up

United States President Donald Trump says he is looking for a “real end” and not just a ceasefire, as Israel and Iran trade air attacks for a fifth straight day.

Trump made the comments to reporters on Air Force One on Tuesday after his early departure from the Group of Seven (G7) summit in Canada.

“I’m not looking for a ceasefire. We’re looking at better than a ceasefire,” he said, reiterating his stance that “Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.”

Earlier, in a post on his social media platform, Truth Social, Trump refuted the suggestion he had left the summit to work on a ceasefire in the conflict.

“I have not reached out to Iran for ‘Peace Talks’ in any way, shape, or form,” he said. “If they want to talk, they know how to reach me. They should have taken the deal that was on the table – Would have saved a lot of lives!!!”

A sixth round of US-Iran nuclear talks was to have been held on Sunday in Oman, but Iran cancelled its participation after Israel launched a surprise bombing campaign on its longtime adversary on Friday.

“The other side [the US] acted in a way that makes dialogue meaningless,” Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said on Saturday. “You cannot claim to negotiate and at the same time divide work by allowing the Zionist regime [Israel] to target Iran’s territory.”

Trump publicly opposed an Israeli strike on Iran in the weeks leading up to the attacks, saying he preferred diplomacy. But he has since branded them “excellent”, even framing the bombardment as an asset in any potential talks.

Before Israel’s offensive, Iran had rejected a US proposal that included zero uranium enrichment and was slated to offer a counterproposal in a bid to advance the negotiations.

Israel has said its attacks on Iran are necessary to prevent its longtime adversary from getting any closer to building a nuclear weapon. Iran has responded by launching hundreds of missiles and drones at Israel, killing more than 20 people.

‘Nobody’s slowed up’

Asked on Air Force One whether Israel would scale down its attacks on Iran, which health officials said have killed more than 220 people so far, Trump appeared to indicate that that was unlikely.

“You’re going to find out over the next two days,” he said. “Nobody’s slowed up so far.”

Trump said it was possible that he could send his Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff or Vice President JD Vance to meet Iranian officials but added that depended on how events played out.

‘Evacuate Tehran’

Trump had earlier caused alarm with a sudden warning on social media before leaving the G7 summit that “everyone should immediately evacuate” Iran’s capital, Tehran.

“Iran should have signed the ‘deal’ I told them to sign,” he said in the comment, posted to Truth Social. “What a shame, and waste of human life.”

Asked to comment on the thinking behind his warning to evacuate Tehran, Trump told reporters that he wanted “people to be safe”.

China accused Trump of “pouring oil” on the conflict with his remarks.

Are Gen Z lazy or just unlucky when it comes to money?

Gen Z are facing serious financial headwinds. Caught between soaring living costs and stagnant wages, many young adults find themselves moving back in with their parents just to stay afloat. Covering basic expenses – rent, bills, groceries – has become a growing challenge. So what does this mean for their financial future? How did it come to this? And is it fair for older generations to label them as lazy?

Presenter: Stefanie Dekker

Guests:

Jamie Lynch – Content creator

Israeli forces shoot dozens as Gaza aid site killings multiply

Israeli soldiers have killed dozens of Palestinians and wounded hundreds as they sought aid in Gaza, according to Palestinian officials.

The soldiers fired at the crowds on Tuesday morning as they gathered along the main eastern road in the southern city of Khan Younis. It was the latest in a string of killings since the Israel- and United States-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) launched operations to distribute food in the enclave three weeks ago.

The Palestinian Ministry of Health reported that at least 51 civilians were killed. However, the death toll is expected to rise as many of the injured are in a critical condition, according to medics at Nasser Hospital, where the casualties were being treated.

Gaza Civil Defence spokesman Mahmud Bassal added that more than 200 people were injured although reports concerning the number of casualties varied.

“Israeli drones fired at the citizens. Some minutes later, Israeli tanks fired several shells at the citizens, which led to a large number of martyrs and wounded,” the spokesman said, noting that the crowd had assembled in the hope of receiving flour.

Israel did not immediately comment on the incident.

‘Shredded to pieces’

Survivors described horrific scenes.

“Dozens of civilians, including children, were killed, and no one could help or save lives,” survivor Saeed Abu Liba, 38, told Al Jazeera.

Yousef Nofal, who called the event a “massacre”, said he saw many people lying motionless and bleeding on the ground. The soldiers continued to fire on people as they fled, he said.

“I survived by a miracle,” said Mohammed Abu Qeshfa, who mentioned both heavy gunfire and tank shelling.

Al Jazeera’s correspondent Tareq Abu Azzoum, reporting from Deir el-Balal in central Gaza, quoted medical sources at Nasser Hospital as saying many victims were “unidentifiable” because they had been “shredded to pieces” in the attack.

Palestinians injured by Israeli fire receive care at Khan Younis’s Nasser Hospital in the southern Gaza Strip on June 17, 2025 [AFP]

The incident on Tuesday is the latest in a string of killings around GHF food distribution centres.

The private organisation began distributing aid at the end of May after Israel partially lifted an almost three-month blockade of food and other essential items that has put Gaza’s 2.3 million people at risk of famine.

The United Nations and other major humanitarian groups have refused to work with the GHF, saying it cannot meet the level of need in Gaza and it breaks humanitarian principles by giving Israel control over aid access.

After previous shootings, which have been a near-daily occurrence since the aid centres opened, the military has said its soldiers had fired warning shots at what it called suspects approaching their positions although it did not say whether those shots struck anyone.

The death toll of more than 50 people made Tuesday the deadliest day around the GHF sites so far. Previously, that record was set on Monday, when 38 people were killed, mostly in the Rafah area south of Khan Younis.

Reports indicated more than 300 people have been killed and more than 2,000 wounded while trying to collect aid from the GHF.

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk has hit out at Israel over the killings of Palestinians near the aid delivery points.