Category World News

Hundreds of people have joined an Indigenous-led protest on the second day of the UN climate summit in the Brazilian city of Belem, highlighting tensions with the Brazilian government’s claim that the meeting is open to Indigenous voices.

Dozens of Indigenous protesters forced their way into the 30th annual United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP30) on Tuesday evening after hundreds of people participated in a march to the venue.

“We can’t eat money,” said Gilmar, an Indigenous leader from the Tupinamba community near the lower reaches of the Tapajos River in Brazil, who uses only one name, referring to the emphasis on climate finance at many of the meetings during the ongoing summit.

“We want our lands free from agribusiness, oil exploration, illegal miners and illegal loggers.”

A spokesperson from the UN, which is responsible for security inside the venue, said in a statement that “a group of protesters breached security barriers at the main entrance to the COP, causing minor injuries to two security staff, and minor damage to the venue”.

The protest came as Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has highlighted Indigenous communities as key players in this year’s COP30 negotiations, even as several industries continue to further encroach on the Amazon rainforest during his presidency.

Lula told a leaders summit last week that participants at the COP30 would be “inspired by Indigenous peoples and traditional communities – for whom sustainability has always been synonymous with their way of life”.

However, Indigenous participants taking part in rolling protests in and around the climate change meeting say that more needs to be done, both by Lula’s left-leaning government at home and around the world.

A joint statement ahead of the summit from Indigenous Peoples of the Amazon Basin and all Biomes of Brazil emphasised the importance of protecting Indigenous territories in the Amazon.

As “a carbon sink of approximately 340 million tons” of carbon dioxide, the world’s largest rainforest, “represents one of the most effective mitigation and adaptation strategies”, the statement said.

The statement also called for Indigenous territories to be excluded from mining and other activities, including “in particular, the Amazon, Congo, and Borneo-Mekong-Southeast Asia basins”.

Leo Cerda, one of the organisers of the Yaku Mama protest flotilla, which arrived at the summit after sailing 3,000km (1,864 miles) down the Amazon river, told Al Jazeera that Indigenous peoples are trying to secure nature not just for themselves but for humanity.

“Most states want our resources, but they don’t want to guarantee the rights of Indigenous peoples,” Cerda said.

As the flotilla sailed towards COP30, Brazil’s state-run oil company, Petrobras, received a licence to begin exploratory offshore oil drilling near the mouth of the Amazon River.

“You cannot make climate policies without indigenous people at the negotiation table.”

This Indigenous activist flotilla just sailed the entire length of the Amazon River to take their message to the #COP30 climate conference. pic.twitter.com/55YjlZgJct

Cerda also said it was important for Indigenous people to be present at the conference, considering the fossil fuel industry has also participated in the meetings for several decades.

According to The Guardian newspaper, some 5,350 fossil fuel lobbyists participated in UN climate summits over the past four years.

Representatives from 195 countries are participating in this year’s summit, with the notable absence of the United States. Under President Donald Trump, the US has fought against action on climate change, further cementing its role as the world’s largest historical emitter of fossil fuels.

Most recently, Trump has torpedoed negotiations to address emissions from the shipping industry.

Islamabad, Pakistan – At about 12:30pm (07:30 GMT) on Tuesday, Khalid Khan, a 25-year-old lawyer, was waiting for his lunch with his friend, Fawad Khan, at the cafeteria of Islamabad’s District Judicial Complex.

Suddenly, a loud boom shook the cafeteria and the entire judicial complex.

“I first thought that the roof would collapse on me,” Khalid told Al Jazeera outside the complex, two hours later.

The complex had been hit by a suicide attack. According to official figures, at least 12 people were killed and more than 30 were injured, several of them critically, when the bomber blew himself up at the entrance of the court complex.

Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif blamed “India-backed proxies” operating from Afghanistan for carrying out the attack.

India, where a car explosion on Monday evening killed at least 13 people, said it “unequivocally” rejects the “baseless and unfounded allegations being made by an obviously delirious Pakistani leadership”.

In a statement issued on Tuesday evening, Randhir Jaiswal, the spokesperson for India’s Ministry of External Affairs, said Islamabad was attempting to “deflect the attention of its own public from the ongoing military-inspired constitutional subversion and power-grab unfolding within the country”, appearing to refer to the 27th constitutional amendment being debated in Pakistan’s National Assembly.

“The international community is well aware of the reality, and will not be misled by Pakistan’s desperate diversionary ploys,” Jaiswal added.

The constitutional amendment has led to criticism from activists, sitting judges and opposition parties for granting lifelong immunity from criminal prosecution for the country’s senior-most military officers, and for setting up a parallel Federal Constitutional Court, which many fear could undermine the Supreme Court.

But on Tuesday, it was the District Judicial Complex in Islamabad that was shaken, as the impact blast there reverberated across South Asia.

The sound of the explosion was heard in nearby residential areas and office buildings. Soon after, videos of the incident went viral on social media, showing flames and plumes of smoke rising from a charred vehicle near a security barrier at the compound’s entrance.

In other clips, lawyers were seen rushing out to help those on the road as security personnel surrounded the premises.

Witnesses said, at the time of the blast, nearly 2,000 people were inside the complex, including judges, lawyers, litigants and court staff.

They described an explosion so powerful that windows in several courtrooms were shattered, and body parts were strewn across the site, including the head of the suicide bomber.

With different gates for entry and exit, and the main gate closed immediately after the blast, police initially instructed people to stay inside before allowing them to leave about 25 minutes later.

Muhammad Shehzad Butt, a 52-year-old lawyer, was among them. He said he had been heading towards the cafeteria when the explosion occurred.

“It was utter pandemonium, and in the panic, most of the people were trying to exit the complex, causing havoc at the gate, while many others tried to get back inside the building,” he told Al Jazeera outside the complex.

After the attack, authorities cordoned off the area, placing barriers to keep the media from entering or approaching the site where the suicide bomber detonated the explosives.

A large number of journalists gathered outside the compound, hoping to capture visuals, but officials initially denied them access.

By then, most litigants had left, though some lawyers lingered nearby, speaking with reporters and YouTube vloggers recording their accounts.

Butt, the lawyer, said when he arrived at court in the morning, security checks appeared routine but thorough. However, he heard from colleagues that there was an additional layer of screening that day.

This was corroborated by Khalid, the lawyer from Quetta who has worked in Islamabad for the past five years.

“This morning, when Fawad and I reached the court premises, we had to wait slightly longer as there was extra checking at the entrance. There was no concern, but we just felt that maybe some VIP might be visiting the court or some delegation,” he said.

Despite the dozen people killed, including one lawyer, both Khalid and Fawad, who is originally from Swat, said they felt no fear about returning to work the next day.

One of the most notable absences at this week’s United Nations Climate Change Conference reflects the leadership of one of the largest greenhouse gas emitters in the world: the United States.

The administration of President Donald Trump has declined to send any top-level officials to Belem, Brazil, for this year’s edition of the annual event, known as COP30.

But in Trump’s absence, state and local officials have arrived to reaffirm the US commitment to climate change policies — and to take shots at the Republican leader.

On Tuesday, one of those politicians took centre stage: California Governor Gavin Newsom, Trump’s longtime sparring partner in the Democratic Party. He is widely speculated to be a contender for the 2028 presidential elections.

Appearing on a series of panels, Newsom denounced the Trump administration’s lack of representation at COP30 as an abdication of duty.

“I  come here with humility, coming from the United States. I’m very mindful that the Trump administration has abandoned any sense of duty, responsibility or leadership as it relates to the issues that bring us all here together,” Newsom said at a ministerial meeting.

“It’s an abomination. It’s a disgrace. But rather than complaining about it, we’re trying to do something about it.”

He pitched his leadership as a contrast to Trump’s and sought to position California’s efforts as having bipartisan appeal.

In touting California as an innovator in clean energy initiatives, Newsom cited Republican leaders from the state, including Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon, as spearheading efforts to reduce water and air pollution.

“I’m here because I don’t want the United States of America to be a footnote at this conference, and I want you to know that we recognise our responsibility, and we recognise our opportunity,” Newsom told the COP30 audience.

A political pivot

Newsom’s comments come at a critical juncture in his political career: Limited to two terms as governor, he is slated to exit office after the 2026 midterm elections.

The Democratic leader has spent his final years as California’s governor building an increasingly national and international profile. In 2023, for instance, he travelled to China, also on the premise of forging international bonds to tackle climate change.

And during the 2024 presidential race, he emerged as a gadfly to challenge Republican policies. He faced Republican presidential candidate Ron DeSantis in a televised Fox News debate and served as a prominent surrogate for the scuttled campaign of then-President Joe Biden, who exited the race over concerns about his age.

Trump, the victor in the 2024 race, has repeatedly taken aim at Newsom since his inauguration in January.

The two politicians have clashed over wildfire suppression, immigration policies and Trump’s decision to deploy federal troops to US cities. Trump even gave the California governor one of his trademark nicknames — “Newscum” — and mused in June that it would be a “great thing” if the Democrat were arrested.

Newsom, meanwhile, took aim at Trump’s international and domestic policies at Tuesday’s climate conference.

By failing to send representation to COP30, Newsom argued that the US had created an opening for China, the country’s economic and political rival, to exert greater power on the global stage.

“ China is here. Only one country’s not here: United States of America,” Newsom said.

While Trump has used tariffs on foreign imports as a tool to combat China’s growing sway, Newsom maintained that, by stepping away from climate initiatives and clean energy technology, the US was losing ground economically.

“This is not about electric power. This is about economic power. And we, in the state of California, are not going to cede that race to China,” Newsom said.

Trump’s climate policies

Trump has been vocal in his opposition to emission-lowering policies, going so far as to claim that climate change is a “hoax” and a “con job”, a position that disregards the scientific consensus linking fossil fuel usage to long-term effects on the global climate.

At September’s UN General Assembly, for instance, Trump asserted that countries around the world had been “devastated” by the “fake energy catastrophe”.

He also berated world leaders for attempting to impose policies that capped carbon emissions.

“All these predictions made by the United Nations and many others, often for bad reasons, were wrong,” he said.

“They were made by stupid people that have cost their countries fortunes and given those same countries no chance for success. If you don’t get away from this green scam, your country is going to fail.”

Trump had campaigned for re-election with the slogan, “Drill, baby, drill”, and since returning to the White House, he has sought to make good on his pledge to open federal lands to oil and gas exploration.

On Tuesday, while Newsom appeared in Brazil, The Washington Post newspaper revealed that the Trump administration is weighing a draft proposal to allow offshore drilling along the California coastline.

Such activity has largely tapered off in recent decades, due to high-profile oil spills, and California prohibits new oil rigs within state waters, but that area is limited to the waters within three miles – or about 4.8km – of the shore.

Democrats, including US Representative Mike Levin, have sought to pass legislation to protect the state’s coastline from further drilling, but to no avail. But Newsom on Tuesday said that Trump’s proposal was “dead on arrival”.

He also questioned why news of the drilling proposal broke during the COP30 meeting.

“He intentionally aligned that to the opening of COP,” Newsom said.

He pointed out that offshore drilling faces bipartisan opposition in Trump’s adopted home of Florida, where his Mar-a-Lago resort sits on the edge of the Atlantic Ocean.

“ I also think it remarkable that he didn’t promote it in his backyard at Mar-a-Lago. He didn’t promote it off the coast of Florida,” Newsom said, signalling a double standard. “That says everything about Donald Trump.”

Connecting with voters

Newsom’s broadside against Trump briefly reached beyond his opposition to the Republican president’s pro-fossil fuel policies.

When asked about Trump’s repeated air strikes against maritime vessels alleged to be drug-smuggling boats, Newsom delivered a fiery invective.

“What happened to due process? What happened to the rule of law?” Newsom asked. “I believe in the rule of law. I don’t believe in the rule of Don. That’s what we’re up against in the United States of America. I don’t want to lose my republic.”

Since September 2, the Trump administration has carried out at least 19 known air strikes in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean, killing approximately 75 people.

No evidence has been provided publicly to justify the bombing campaign, and the identities of the deceased remain unknown.

Legal experts have denounced the attacks as a form of extrajudicial killing, and leaders at the United Nations have called for an end to the military campaign as a violation of the UN Charter.

The Trump administration has defended the violence as necessary to interrupt drug trafficking into the US. It has also moved to label cartels in Latin America as “international terrorist organisations” and “enemy combatants”.

But Newsom argued that such actions were unacceptable, and called on the international community to stand up to Trump.

“Our politics needs to change, and I hope our international partners understand that,” he said. “It’s chilling to me to see those scenes of the United States of America blowing up boats with no transparency, no advice and consent with the United States Congress.”

At another COP30 event, entitled “America Is All In”, Newsom doubled down on his call for political change in the US, underscoring that Trump’s power is “temporary”.

“ He’s an invasive species. He’s a wrecking ball president,” Newsom said.

When pressed for solutions that would connect with voters, the California governor encouraged world leaders to find a unifying approach, particularly when it comes to combatting climate change scepticism.

Emission-lowering goals — like limiting global temperature increases to 1.5 degrees Celsius — felt abstract to most of his constituents, Newsom argued.

“I think we have to use different language,” he said. “The vast majority of my audience doesn’t know what Celsius is.  You’re talking 1.5 degrees Celsius. How many more degrees is that in Fahrenheit? We talk about greenhouse gas emissions. Where are they? Do they float in the sky, or where do they land?

“We don’t understand. We have to use better metaphors. We have to change our language.”