Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

How the battle of Claremont Road changed the world: ‘The whole of alternative London turned up’

News Feed
Tuesday, November 26, 2024

Walking through Leyton, in east London, you could easily miss Claremont Road. It is hardly a road at all, but a stubby little side street between terrace houses that ends abruptly in a brick wall. But when it comes to the history of direct action, this could be one of the most significant sites in England. Thirty years ago, in November 1994, the scene here was very different: 700 police officers and bailiffs in riot gear marched into a significantly larger Claremont Road and waged battle against about 500 activists, who were dug in – some of them literally – against efforts to evict them.The activists occupied rooftop towers, treehouses, underground bunkers and even secret tunnels. It took three days to get them all out. In retrospect, the “Battle of Claremont Road”, as it came to be known, was an almost unbelievable event. “I talk about the three C’s that underpin this type of activism: creativity, courage and cheek,” says campaigner Camilla Berens, who was there. “It set the template for the next 20 or 30 years of how to do responsible disruption.”The reason for the battle, and the reason Claremont Road is now so short, lies behind that brick wall at its end: what is now the six-lane A12, also known as the M11 link road. The road had been planned since the 1960s, to connect east London to the north-east, but nothing happened for decades. In the interim, many of the condemned homes were vacated by residents and reoccupied by squatters and artists. (As a student, I squatted on Claremont Road for three years. I left in summer 1993.)Cars and shopping trolleys full of concrete were used to block the road. Photograph: Julia GuestBy the 1990s, the Conservative government was determined to make good on Margaret Thatcher’s promise to carry out “the biggest road-building programme since the Romans”. Resistance from locals and environmental groups was growing, though, against schemes such as the M3 extension at Twyford Down in Hampshire (which went ahead), and the proposed east London river crossing through Oxleas Wood, in south-east London (which did not).“The M11 link road was effectively the Cinderella of the three,” says veteran cycling campaigner Roger Geffen. Unlike Twyford Down and Oxleas Wood, the M11 scheme went through a poor urban neighbourhood, rather than an area of natural beauty, “but in a way, that’s what made it interesting,” he says. It was destroying the environment by uprooting trees and prioritising cars, but it was also destroying a community. This was the era of the Criminal Justice Act, targeting illegal raves, squatters and Travellers, which also passed in November 1994. The poll tax riots of 1990 had been another landmark. The Claremont Road protests were a “a joined-up mix of social and environmental motivations”.At the time, Geffen had just moved to London. “I didn’t have a green brain cell in my head,” he says, but he had just taken up cycling. Weaving through the traffic-clogged streets, he says, he realised: “What I was doing wasn’t crazy. I was overtaking a lot of people in little boxes, and that was far crazier than what I was doing.” He joined the London Cycling Campaign, which led him into anti-car activism.By the early 90s, the Department for Transport had begun repossessing and demolishing houses along the route of the M11 link road. In 1994, Claremont Road was the last street standing. “We realised that we needed to make a big focus of it,” says Geffen.Activists built webbing up on the rooftops to evade police. Photograph: Julia Guest“One of the first things we did was to barricade it and set up street furniture,” says John Drury, then a PhD student studying collective action. The street became something of a countercultural tourist attraction, with colourful murals and outdoor sculptures made of junk and a public cafe. Doug (not his real name), then an unemployed activist, says: “There was a real buzz, and it had a lot of energy, and everyone was really friendly, so I just started sticking around.”As the inevitable showdown approached, preparations became more rushed. “We had to just throw everything at it,” says Geffen. Some protesters built wooden observation towers on top of their houses. “So we thought, OK, what happens if we build an absolutely huge tower?” This became “Dolly”, a scaffolding structure 30 metres (100ft) high, rising out of the rooftops. It was named after Dolly Watson, a 92-year-old former actor who had lived on Claremont Road her entire life, and was among the last of the residents to leave. She once told a reporter: “They’re not dirty hippy squatters, they’re the grandchildren I never had.”Other ad-hoc battlements appeared: treehouses, connected to the houses across the street by webs of netting and walkways; roadblocks made out of cars and shopping trolleys filled with concrete. Some activists built underground bunkers in which to seal themselves – “very elaborate womb-like structures that involved lots of layers of mattresses, foam, metal and furniture,” Doug recalls. The idea was that whatever tool the police or bailiffs tried to use to get them out “would get gummed up”. The upper floors of several houses beneath the tower were knocked together to create a “rat run”, and the stairs up to them were removed, to make it harder for the police to reach the protesters.Volunteers had been monitoring police compounds for signs of activity. The callout came on 27 November. “‘It’s the one, it’s the big eviction. Claremont is going to be taken,’” recalls Berens, a journalist who reported on the events for the Guardian. “I think the whole of alternative London turned up. There was a massive party the night before.”The next morning, 28 November, an estimated 500 protesters were ready, remembers Neil Goodwin, a film-maker who recorded much of the siege: “The rooftops were packed; every bunker, every treehouse, on the nets, the landings, the walkways, up the tower – everyone was in situ.”“The police turned up in the early afternoon,” recalls Mark Green (not his real name), another participant. “There were hundreds of them and they swarmed into the street in stormtrooper gear with batons raised. They were expecting a full-on riot. Instead they just found a bunch of hippies and local residents sitting around.” A sound system on the tower cranked up the Prodigy album Music for the Jilted Generation.A 30ft tower was also built, with a sound system from which music blared out. Photograph: Julia GuestThings didn’t go as planned for the police. “They thought they were going to start by tackling the houses, and then they realised people had locked on to the road itself,” says Julia Guest, then an aspiring photographer. Activists had drilled holes into the asphalt, into which they had sunk lock-on bolts, which were covered over with sheets of metal with holes in them. The activists “lay down with their arms through the holes and locked their wrists on with handcuffs.”The police and bailiffs brought in mechanical diggers, cherrypickers, ladders, hammers and crowbars; and every occupant made themselves as difficult as possible to remove. “I was in the loft at number 42, which I’d covered in corrugated iron and filled with tyres,” says Goodwin. “They had to prise us open, like a sardine tin.”When the bailiffs eventually broke through that evening, Goodwin attached himself to part of the scaffolding tower with a bicycle D-lock, the keys of which he had chucked into a pile of tyres. “The bailiff pokes his head in, shines his torch around and goes: ‘OK, we’ll do this tomorrow.’ So they left, and I’m like: ‘I’m gonna be sitting here all night.’ So I said to people: ‘Could you see if you can find some D-lock keys?’” Luckily, they were just teetering over the edge of a gap in the floorboards.Everyone remembers being cold and hungry, especially the first night. Few people had warm clothes, let alone sleeping bags. “After it got dark, someone led me down through a loft to warm up a bit,” says Green. “We then went through a hole in a wall and exited through a wardrobe, which was surreal, into a room where people were watching themselves on the news on an old black-and-white portable TV.”By the second day, about half the protesters had been evicted. But, says Geffen: “The police were puzzled that people who they thought they’d evicted kept reappearing. Eventually, they got a metal detector out.” They discovered the activists had built a tunnel out of oil drums, running underneath the back gardens and into one of the houses on the next road. Supplies and people had been going back and forth the whole time. “When they found the tunnel, everyone on the tower and all the roofs just laughed at them.”The longer the protest went on, “the more brutal the police and bailiffs became”, says Berens. Green says he saw people shoved, grabbed and falling from heights (though no one was seriously injured). “It definitely felt like there was a political element to it.”The protesters “had a very strong commitment to non-violence”, says Geffen. “We needed to be acting in accordance with the values that we wanted to speak for. If we’re talking about environmental sustainability and sharing this Earth, and working in community, then violence doesn’t form part of that.”By the end of the second day, there was only one protester left: Doug. “I kept moving,” he says. “If you live on a scaffolding tower for a few days, you can get quite good at swinging around. And they didn’t really want to chase me around in a game of cat and mouse.” Doug’s persistence extended the protest by another full day. The police even brought in a “hostage negotiator” to try to coax him down. “He pretended he was my dad, and was just concerned for my welfare.” Doug was not swayed. “I grabbed some rope, a saw and a few planks of wood, and I used them to make myself what was basically a coffin, which I slept in.” The police finally got to him the next morning.A sign referring to Dolly Watson, a 92-year-old former actor who had lived on Claremont Road all her life. Photograph: Julia GuestIn the end, the police spent more than £1m evicting the protesters. The M11 link road still got built, of course. Nobody believed the campaign would stop it. “But what it did do,” says Drury, “was it turned the roads programme into a political thing. So, we won the moral argument, even if we didn’t win that battle.”When Labour came into power in 1997, it cut the major road schemes inherited from the Tories from 150 to 37, and pledged to focus on public transport. It felt like a victory for the anti-car campaigners, but it did not last. By 2000, New Labour was committing at least £30bn to building and improving roads, and forecasting that another 2,500 miles of road would need to be built.Several of the Claremont Road activists went straight on to form Reclaim the Streets in 1995, which performed guerrilla anti-car actions – such as blocking off public roads to hold impromptu “street parties” – across the UK and worldwide. It also paved the way for subsequent campaigns such as Plane Stupid, the Climate Action Camps, Extinction Rebellion and Just Stop Oil.The protest changed the lives of many of those who took part. “That was the day that I crossed the line,” says Berens. “Before that, I was a journalist looking in and reporting on it, but because it was such an impressive campaign, and the people were so amazing, I became a committed activist.”“It impacted me quite profoundly,” says Guest. She became a documentary film-maker focusing on human rights in Israel, Palestine and Iraq.Paul Morozzo, one of the key organisers alongside Geffen, is now campaign director at Greenpeace. Drury is a professor of social psychology at Sussex university. Doug is a lawyer dealing with civic issues.Green went on to design the famous Extinction Symbol, as used by Extinction Rebellion. He is less nostalgic about the event: “I found the overall experience cold, dirty and depressing,” he says. He doesn’t like to describe it as a “battle”. “That suggests an exchange of violence, whereas it was just a group of people passively occupying an area, with the only violence coming from the police.”But like a battle, the event took its toll. As well as committed activists, the area and the protest attracted many people with drug and mental health problems, not to mention locals who were either uprooted or forced to live on the edge of a six-lane road. “I naively hoped it would be a spark for a wider and longer-lasting societal change,” says Green. “Instead, things have just got much worse since then than we could ever have imagined.”Geffen received an MBE for services to cycling in 2015, and now heads Low Traffic Future. “What I’m now doing is still basically the same cause,” he says. “In the 1990s, transport, roads, cars were the central issue for the environmental movement, then we lost a lot of that momentum. Environmental campaigners have gone on to do some great things on energy … but transport is now the biggest-emitting sector of the UK economy, as well as being problematic in terms of air pollution, road safety, children’s ability to play in the streets and all the waste products of car culture.” He thinks the movement needs to focus again on transport.Another action like Claremont Road is unthinkable now, given how far legislation has tightened against protest, public disorder and squatting.“It breaks my heart,” says Guest, “because actions like that created a generation of people that have become acutely aware, and prepared to act on strong beliefs. That is, after all, the only way that anything that’s unjust gets changed. And if people are prevented from being able to freely connect with that sort of experience, then what sort of world is going to come next?”

Thirty years ago, more than 500 activists united to save a street – and their actions marked a major turning-point in the environmental movementWalking through Leyton, in east London, you could easily miss Claremont Road. It is hardly a road at all, but a stubby little side street between terrace houses that ends abruptly in a brick wall. But when it comes to the history of direct action, this could be one of the most significant sites in England. Thirty years ago, in November 1994, the scene here was very different: 700 police officers and bailiffs in riot gear marched into a significantly larger Claremont Road and waged battle against about 500 activists, who were dug in – some of them literally – against efforts to evict them.The activists occupied rooftop towers, treehouses, underground bunkers and even secret tunnels. It took three days to get them all out. In retrospect, the “Battle of Claremont Road”, as it came to be known, was an almost unbelievable event. “I talk about the three C’s that underpin this type of activism: creativity, courage and cheek,” says campaigner Camilla Berens, who was there. “It set the template for the next 20 or 30 years of how to do responsible disruption.” Continue reading...

Walking through Leyton, in east London, you could easily miss Claremont Road. It is hardly a road at all, but a stubby little side street between terrace houses that ends abruptly in a brick wall. But when it comes to the history of direct action, this could be one of the most significant sites in England. Thirty years ago, in November 1994, the scene here was very different: 700 police officers and bailiffs in riot gear marched into a significantly larger Claremont Road and waged battle against about 500 activists, who were dug in – some of them literally – against efforts to evict them.

The activists occupied rooftop towers, treehouses, underground bunkers and even secret tunnels. It took three days to get them all out. In retrospect, the “Battle of Claremont Road”, as it came to be known, was an almost unbelievable event. “I talk about the three C’s that underpin this type of activism: creativity, courage and cheek,” says campaigner Camilla Berens, who was there. “It set the template for the next 20 or 30 years of how to do responsible disruption.”

The reason for the battle, and the reason Claremont Road is now so short, lies behind that brick wall at its end: what is now the six-lane A12, also known as the M11 link road. The road had been planned since the 1960s, to connect east London to the north-east, but nothing happened for decades. In the interim, many of the condemned homes were vacated by residents and reoccupied by squatters and artists. (As a student, I squatted on Claremont Road for three years. I left in summer 1993.)

Cars and shopping trolleys full of concrete were used to block the road. Photograph: Julia Guest

By the 1990s, the Conservative government was determined to make good on Margaret Thatcher’s promise to carry out “the biggest road-building programme since the Romans”. Resistance from locals and environmental groups was growing, though, against schemes such as the M3 extension at Twyford Down in Hampshire (which went ahead), and the proposed east London river crossing through Oxleas Wood, in south-east London (which did not).

“The M11 link road was effectively the Cinderella of the three,” says veteran cycling campaigner Roger Geffen. Unlike Twyford Down and Oxleas Wood, the M11 scheme went through a poor urban neighbourhood, rather than an area of natural beauty, “but in a way, that’s what made it interesting,” he says. It was destroying the environment by uprooting trees and prioritising cars, but it was also destroying a community. This was the era of the Criminal Justice Act, targeting illegal raves, squatters and Travellers, which also passed in November 1994. The poll tax riots of 1990 had been another landmark. The Claremont Road protests were a “a joined-up mix of social and environmental motivations”.

At the time, Geffen had just moved to London. “I didn’t have a green brain cell in my head,” he says, but he had just taken up cycling. Weaving through the traffic-clogged streets, he says, he realised: “What I was doing wasn’t crazy. I was overtaking a lot of people in little boxes, and that was far crazier than what I was doing.” He joined the London Cycling Campaign, which led him into anti-car activism.

By the early 90s, the Department for Transport had begun repossessing and demolishing houses along the route of the M11 link road. In 1994, Claremont Road was the last street standing. “We realised that we needed to make a big focus of it,” says Geffen.

Activists built webbing up on the rooftops to evade police. Photograph: Julia Guest

“One of the first things we did was to barricade it and set up street furniture,” says John Drury, then a PhD student studying collective action. The street became something of a countercultural tourist attraction, with colourful murals and outdoor sculptures made of junk and a public cafe. Doug (not his real name), then an unemployed activist, says: “There was a real buzz, and it had a lot of energy, and everyone was really friendly, so I just started sticking around.”

As the inevitable showdown approached, preparations became more rushed. “We had to just throw everything at it,” says Geffen. Some protesters built wooden observation towers on top of their houses. “So we thought, OK, what happens if we build an absolutely huge tower?” This became “Dolly”, a scaffolding structure 30 metres (100ft) high, rising out of the rooftops. It was named after Dolly Watson, a 92-year-old former actor who had lived on Claremont Road her entire life, and was among the last of the residents to leave. She once told a reporter: “They’re not dirty hippy squatters, they’re the grandchildren I never had.”

Other ad-hoc battlements appeared: treehouses, connected to the houses across the street by webs of netting and walkways; roadblocks made out of cars and shopping trolleys filled with concrete. Some activists built underground bunkers in which to seal themselves – “very elaborate womb-like structures that involved lots of layers of mattresses, foam, metal and furniture,” Doug recalls. The idea was that whatever tool the police or bailiffs tried to use to get them out “would get gummed up”. The upper floors of several houses beneath the tower were knocked together to create a “rat run”, and the stairs up to them were removed, to make it harder for the police to reach the protesters.

Volunteers had been monitoring police compounds for signs of activity. The callout came on 27 November. “‘It’s the one, it’s the big eviction. Claremont is going to be taken,’” recalls Berens, a journalist who reported on the events for the Guardian. “I think the whole of alternative London turned up. There was a massive party the night before.”

The next morning, 28 November, an estimated 500 protesters were ready, remembers Neil Goodwin, a film-maker who recorded much of the siege: “The rooftops were packed; every bunker, every treehouse, on the nets, the landings, the walkways, up the tower – everyone was in situ.”

“The police turned up in the early afternoon,” recalls Mark Green (not his real name), another participant. “There were hundreds of them and they swarmed into the street in stormtrooper gear with batons raised. They were expecting a full-on riot. Instead they just found a bunch of hippies and local residents sitting around.” A sound system on the tower cranked up the Prodigy album Music for the Jilted Generation.

A 30ft tower was also built, with a sound system from which music blared out. Photograph: Julia Guest

Things didn’t go as planned for the police. “They thought they were going to start by tackling the houses, and then they realised people had locked on to the road itself,” says Julia Guest, then an aspiring photographer. Activists had drilled holes into the asphalt, into which they had sunk lock-on bolts, which were covered over with sheets of metal with holes in them. The activists “lay down with their arms through the holes and locked their wrists on with handcuffs.”

The police and bailiffs brought in mechanical diggers, cherrypickers, ladders, hammers and crowbars; and every occupant made themselves as difficult as possible to remove. “I was in the loft at number 42, which I’d covered in corrugated iron and filled with tyres,” says Goodwin. “They had to prise us open, like a sardine tin.”

When the bailiffs eventually broke through that evening, Goodwin attached himself to part of the scaffolding tower with a bicycle D-lock, the keys of which he had chucked into a pile of tyres. “The bailiff pokes his head in, shines his torch around and goes: ‘OK, we’ll do this tomorrow.’ So they left, and I’m like: ‘I’m gonna be sitting here all night.’ So I said to people: ‘Could you see if you can find some D-lock keys?’” Luckily, they were just teetering over the edge of a gap in the floorboards.

Everyone remembers being cold and hungry, especially the first night. Few people had warm clothes, let alone sleeping bags. “After it got dark, someone led me down through a loft to warm up a bit,” says Green. “We then went through a hole in a wall and exited through a wardrobe, which was surreal, into a room where people were watching themselves on the news on an old black-and-white portable TV.”

By the second day, about half the protesters had been evicted. But, says Geffen: “The police were puzzled that people who they thought they’d evicted kept reappearing. Eventually, they got a metal detector out.” They discovered the activists had built a tunnel out of oil drums, running underneath the back gardens and into one of the houses on the next road. Supplies and people had been going back and forth the whole time. “When they found the tunnel, everyone on the tower and all the roofs just laughed at them.”

The longer the protest went on, “the more brutal the police and bailiffs became”, says Berens. Green says he saw people shoved, grabbed and falling from heights (though no one was seriously injured). “It definitely felt like there was a political element to it.”

The protesters “had a very strong commitment to non-violence”, says Geffen. “We needed to be acting in accordance with the values that we wanted to speak for. If we’re talking about environmental sustainability and sharing this Earth, and working in community, then violence doesn’t form part of that.”

By the end of the second day, there was only one protester left: Doug. “I kept moving,” he says. “If you live on a scaffolding tower for a few days, you can get quite good at swinging around. And they didn’t really want to chase me around in a game of cat and mouse.” Doug’s persistence extended the protest by another full day. The police even brought in a “hostage negotiator” to try to coax him down. “He pretended he was my dad, and was just concerned for my welfare.” Doug was not swayed. “I grabbed some rope, a saw and a few planks of wood, and I used them to make myself what was basically a coffin, which I slept in.” The police finally got to him the next morning.

A sign referring to Dolly Watson, a 92-year-old former actor who had lived on Claremont Road all her life. Photograph: Julia Guest

In the end, the police spent more than £1m evicting the protesters. The M11 link road still got built, of course. Nobody believed the campaign would stop it. “But what it did do,” says Drury, “was it turned the roads programme into a political thing. So, we won the moral argument, even if we didn’t win that battle.”

When Labour came into power in 1997, it cut the major road schemes inherited from the Tories from 150 to 37, and pledged to focus on public transport. It felt like a victory for the anti-car campaigners, but it did not last. By 2000, New Labour was committing at least £30bn to building and improving roads, and forecasting that another 2,500 miles of road would need to be built.

Several of the Claremont Road activists went straight on to form Reclaim the Streets in 1995, which performed guerrilla anti-car actions – such as blocking off public roads to hold impromptu “street parties” – across the UK and worldwide. It also paved the way for subsequent campaigns such as Plane Stupid, the Climate Action Camps, Extinction Rebellion and Just Stop Oil.

The protest changed the lives of many of those who took part. “That was the day that I crossed the line,” says Berens. “Before that, I was a journalist looking in and reporting on it, but because it was such an impressive campaign, and the people were so amazing, I became a committed activist.”

“It impacted me quite profoundly,” says Guest. She became a documentary film-maker focusing on human rights in Israel, Palestine and Iraq.

Paul Morozzo, one of the key organisers alongside Geffen, is now campaign director at Greenpeace. Drury is a professor of social psychology at Sussex university. Doug is a lawyer dealing with civic issues.

Green went on to design the famous Extinction Symbol, as used by Extinction Rebellion. He is less nostalgic about the event: “I found the overall experience cold, dirty and depressing,” he says. He doesn’t like to describe it as a “battle”. “That suggests an exchange of violence, whereas it was just a group of people passively occupying an area, with the only violence coming from the police.”

But like a battle, the event took its toll. As well as committed activists, the area and the protest attracted many people with drug and mental health problems, not to mention locals who were either uprooted or forced to live on the edge of a six-lane road. “I naively hoped it would be a spark for a wider and longer-lasting societal change,” says Green. “Instead, things have just got much worse since then than we could ever have imagined.”

Geffen received an MBE for services to cycling in 2015, and now heads Low Traffic Future. “What I’m now doing is still basically the same cause,” he says. “In the 1990s, transport, roads, cars were the central issue for the environmental movement, then we lost a lot of that momentum. Environmental campaigners have gone on to do some great things on energy … but transport is now the biggest-emitting sector of the UK economy, as well as being problematic in terms of air pollution, road safety, children’s ability to play in the streets and all the waste products of car culture.” He thinks the movement needs to focus again on transport.

Another action like Claremont Road is unthinkable now, given how far legislation has tightened against protest, public disorder and squatting.

“It breaks my heart,” says Guest, “because actions like that created a generation of people that have become acutely aware, and prepared to act on strong beliefs. That is, after all, the only way that anything that’s unjust gets changed. And if people are prevented from being able to freely connect with that sort of experience, then what sort of world is going to come next?”

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

A Flotilla Kicks off the People's Summit for Activists at UN Climate Talks

As United Nation climate talks get underway in Belem, a different kind of conference is kicking off: the People’s Summit, a gathering of activists, organizers, environmentalists and Indigenous groups from around the world

BELEM, Brazil (AP) — As United Nations climate talks rolled on Wednesday at the elaborate new venues built for the summit, many of the activists eager to shape the talks took to the water.Carried by scores of boats large and small, a vast group whooped and laughed, smiled and wept. Some splashed canoe paddles through the bay where a northern section of the Amazon rainforest meets the Atlantic Ocean. Others hugged old friends. They pressed their foreheads together or held hands or stood solemnly in moments of prayer and reflection.They were there to celebrate a community from around the world at a gathering of activists, organizers, environmentalists and Indigenous groups, outside the halls where world leaders are discussing climate change for the next two weeks. Their joy came after a brief but tense moment the night before when protesters broke through security barricades at the main conference venue, slightly injuring two security guards, according to the U.N.Many emphasized the importance of making the voice of the people heard after years of these talks being held in countries where civil society is not free to demonstrate.“The Amazon for us is the space of life,” said Jhajayra Machoa, an A'l Kofan First Nation of Ecuador member of A Wisdom Keepers Delegation, who helped paddle one of the canoes. “We carry the feeling and emotions of everything lived in this place, and what we want is to remember. Remember where we are from and where we’re going and what we want." Pressing world leaders to keep those who suffer most in mind The people who are attending the Conference of the Parties, or COP30, have a wide range of hopes for the outcome. This year is different than in past years, because leaders aren't expected to sign one big agreement at the end of it; instead, organizers and analysts have said it's about getting specifics to execute on past promises to act on climate change. “When we’re bridging what’s happening in the mind, when we talk about policy, we need to bridge to the heart, and touch our spirit when we do the work,” said Whaia, another member of A Wisdom Keepers Delegation, a Ngāti Kahungunu woman from New Zealand. “It takes both arms, both branches of the tree to really be strong, to be able to find our resilience in this space.” Activists welcome greater freedom to speak out The ability to express thoughts and feelings freely is a welcome respite for many arriving in Brazil after several years of these talks being held in countries where governments imposed limitations on free speech and demonstrations. The evolution that needs to happen for the world to take action is "not in the halls of the U.N. COP, but it’s in the streets and it is with our people,” said Jacob Johns, an Akimel O'Otham and Hopi member of A Wisdom Keepers Delegation who witnessed the security breach. Now is the time to come together, respect each other and reevaluate the systems that govern the planet, said Pooven Moodley of the Earthrise Collective, which brings together activists from different traditions. For him, the canoes seen in Wednesday's gathering are a metaphor for the situation the world is in with climate change.“The current canoe we’re in is falling apart, it’s leaking, people are being pushed over, and ultimately we’re heading for a massive waterfall. So the question is, what do we do, because we’re in that reality,” Moodley said. “We have to continue to defend the territories and the ecosystems that we can, but while we do that, we launch a new canoe.”The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Oct. 2025

China made quiet border advances as ties warmed, Indian critics warn

Buffer zones meant to ease India-China tensions along their shared border have disproportionately restricted Indian forces from patrolling, former officials say.

NEW DELHI — In 2020, after Indian and Chinese soldiers brawled with stones and spiked rods in the thin Himalayan air along their countries’ contested border, nationalist fury gripped India.People smashed Chinese televisions and torched effigies of Chinese leader Xi Jinping. The Indian government banned dozens of Chinese apps and vowed it would not mend ties with its geopolitical rival until border issues were resolved.Five years later, India-China commerce has revived and direct flights between the countries have resumed. At a recent summit in Tianjin, China, Xi met his Indian counterpart, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and the leaders pledged to strengthen relations, with the Indian side touting “the maintenance of peace and tranquility along the border areas.”In New Delhi, however, and along the steep mountain passes that divide the countries, a chorus of critics contend that agreed-upon buffer zones meant to ease tensions have, in practice, disproportionately restricted Indian forces from patrolling in areas they once routinely accessed. With India’s quiet acquiescence, they allege, China has been able to effectively push the boundary lines in its favor.“Some of the buffer zones created are mostly in areas previously patrolled by us and on our side,” said a retired lieutenant general who has overseen these parts of the border. “We are supposed to try and get back our territory, but in the foreseeable future, it is a pipe dream,” he added, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive topic.Warnings about the shifting boundary lines — from former military officials and ambassadors, as well as sitting members of Parliament and border residents — have grown louder and more frequent. The claims are difficult to prove, since foreign journalists are denied access to the area. But the criticisms present a challenge to the Indian government, analysts said, as it mends ties with Beijing and seeks to rebalance its global relations amid an ongoing diplomatic feud with the United States.The Indian army referred questions from The Washington Post to the External Affairs Ministry, which did not respond to requests for comment. The Indian Defense Ministry, the Chinese Defense Ministry, and the Chinese Foreign Ministry did not respond to requests for comment. Chinese officials have urged India not to let the boundary question “define” the relationship.The Chinese strategy is “two steps forward, one step back,” said Jabin Jacob, an associate professor who teaches Chinese foreign policy at India’s Shiv Nadar University. “Then they still have one step in their possession.”A frozen boundaryIndia and China went to war over the border in 1962. More than half a century later, it remains undefined and bitterly disputed.The nuclear-armed neighbors still have drastically different interpretations of the de facto boundary — known as the Line of Actual Control, or LAC — and the soldiers deployed there have periodically come to blows.The most recent confrontation came in June 2020, in the border territory of Ladakh. At least 20 Indian and four Chinese soldiers were killed in the fighting, according to official counts. Tens of thousands of troops were rushed to forward positions, and, even after subsequent pullbacks, both sides have maintained a heightened military presence.Since the conflict, the two sides have struck a series of agreements to prevent flare-ups in the most contentious areas. The new protocols allowed some patrolling to resume, but also gave Chinese troops more favorable positions in several key spots, according to former officials, analysts and local leaders.“Around 450 square kilometers of land was converted into a buffer in my constituency alone,” Konchok Stanzin, an official in Chushul, one of the last villages on India’s eastern border, told The Post. “This land belonged to India but now our soldiers cannot set foot there.”As Indian forces have acceded to the new protocols, they have blocked pastoralists from grazing animals in areas where they once roamed freely. That has stirred anger in Ladakh, a restive Indian territory where locals have campaigned for greater political rights and environmental protections. Four people were killed in late September when police in the regional capital of Leh opened fire on people protesting for statehood, according to Human Rights Watch, and a political office belonging to Modi’s party was torched.In the aftermath, prominent environmental activist Sonam Wangchuk was arrested by Indian authorities under a national security law for allegedly inciting the violence, a claim he denies. Some of his supporters believe he was targeted, in part, for being outspoken about the loss of pasturelands and Chinese encroachment along the border.“It was not sitting well with government narratives that China is not taking our land,” said his wife, Gitanjali J. Angmo. “What Sonam has been fearing for a long time is that we can’t afford as a border state not to address the demands of the Ladakhis who have so far shown India love and passion.”Increasingly, the warnings from border communities are being echoed within the Indian establishment. A 2022 report by a senior police official in Ladakh said Indian forces no longer had a “presence” at 26 of 65 former patrolling points, highlighting what she called her country’s “play safe” strategy.“The Chinese absolutely have come in and established a position that is more advantageous to them than before,” said Ajai Shukla, a defense analyst and former military official, drawing on conversations with contacts on the ground. “The only question is, how much have we lost?”J.S. Bajwa, a former Indian lieutenant general, said “it is not just salami slicing,” referring to previous Chinese tactics that gradually changed the facts on the ground. “They actually took the whole belly of the pork,” he said.Strategic ‘opacity’The Indian government has been careful and sparing in its descriptions of the situation along the border.Last October, the government said it had reached an agreement with China to restore patrolling rights in two key areas, Depsang and Demchok, and that troops on both sides had pulled back slightly along all friction points. In December, however, Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar told Parliament that agreements in areas outside of Depsang and Demchok were “temporary and limited.”The MEA then said there had been a “resolution of the issues that emerged in 2020.” But when pressed by reporters and members of Parliament, Jaishankar and his colleagues have avoided stating categorically that patrolling rights have been restored at all friction points. Responding to similar border questions under the country’s right of information laws, the government has repeatedly called them “vague” and “speculative” and, therefore, not answerable.“The opacity is a way of dealing with the problem,” said Ashok Kanta, the Indian ambassador to China from 2014 to 2016. “If you don’t put it out in the public domain, then you don’t need to defend it publicly.”Some former military officials say Chinese troops have also lost access to previous patrolling points, while others reject the notion that India has surrendered any ground.“In all places, the Chinese have gone back to the original points they were at,” said Manoj Mukund Naravane, the army’s chief general during the 2020 conflict.A pragmatic truceIn late August, amid deteriorating U.S-India relations, Modi visited China for the first time since the clash in Ladakh. Videos of the countries’ two leaders engaging in a lighthearted exchange with Russian President Vladimir Putin rapidly went viral.India and China have since agreed to allow exchanges of scholars and journalists, cooperate on transboundary rivers, resume direct flights and reopen Indian access to a pilgrimage in Tibet. India has termed it a “gradual normalization of bilateral relations.”Rakesh Sharma, a former lieutenant general who served on the border from 2013 to 2015, said these are “logical” moves, mirroring China’s own increasingly relaxed posture. Some former officials argue that Jaishankar’s description of border measures as “temporary” signals India’s expectation that the issues will be addressed in future talks.“From the Indian side, the story is not over, but you have to live with Beijing next door, so you have to find some sort of an equilibrium,” said Manoj Kewalramani, a China studies fellow at the Takshashila Institution in Bangalore.“The danger,” Jacob warned, “is that this becomes permanent out of sheer inertia until the next crisis.”For now, analysts said, India has more pressing problems, like steep U.S. tariffs and sluggish manufacturing growth — and it needs Chinese investment.“We essentially cannot do without China,” said Manoj Joshi, distinguished fellow at the Observer Research Foundation.The hard reality, said Daniel Markey, a senior Stimson Center fellow focused on South Asia and China relations, is that “India does not have an easy, cheap, or effective solution to the broader threat posed by China militarily.”And it is that recognition, according to former Indian brigadier Deepak Sinha, driving the country’s current approach. “We remain intimidated and terrified of a conflict with China escalating,” he said. “It’s a fact of life.”Christian Shepherd in Singapore, Shams Irfan in Srinagar, Indian-administered Kashmir, and Supriya Kumar contributed to this report.

Jailed climate activist facing deportation from UK fights ‘crazy double punishment’

Marcus Decker is supported by climate experts, religious leaders and celebrities as he fights being first person in UK to be ‘deported for peaceful protest’A climate activist who is appealing against his deportation after serving one of the longest prison sentences in modern British history for peaceful protest has criticised his “crazy double punishment”.Marcus Decker was jailed for two years and seven months for a protest in which he climbed the Queen Elizabeth Bridge over the Dartford Crossing and unveiled a Just Stop Oil banner in October 2022. Continue reading...

A climate activist who is appealing against his deportation after serving one of the longest prison sentences in modern British history for peaceful protest has criticised his “crazy double punishment”.Marcus Decker was jailed for two years and seven months for a protest in which he climbed the Queen Elizabeth Bridge over the Dartford Crossing and unveiled a Just Stop Oil banner in October 2022.The 36-year-old German national, who was released from prison in February last year after serving 16 months, was sent a letter by the Home Office while in prison informing him of his automatic deportation. In his legal challenge, being heard at a tribunal in central London on Monday, Decker has the support of climate experts, religious leaders, celebrities and members of the public.“I would be the first person in this country to be deported for peaceful protest,” he said. “It’s such a crazy double punishment. I have my established life here with my partner, Holly, and the kids [he is stepfather to her two children], we’ve been living together for many years.“We’re in the middle of a multi[faceted] crisis. There’s an inequality crisis, the situation for immigrants has been getting so much worse since Labour has come in, and the climate crisis is getting worse by the day, which, of course, was the reason I took this action in the first place.“It sort of makes sense to be in this situation where I can communicate the values around care that made us take this action in the first place and that need to carry on in this society.”Decker, a teacher and musician, was released from prison in February 2024 after having served 16 months but still has an ankle tag, must report to the Home Office every other week and cannot leave the country. Because he began the appeal against deportation while in prison he served longer than his fellow protester, Morgan Trowland, despite Trowland having been given a longer three-year jail term.“I’m very sorry for those that were impacted by the harm that we caused directly on the day or on the two days,” said Decker. “The people that missed funerals or missed hospital appointments, who were stuck in traffic, that is real harm. But then at the same time whole countries are either on fire, or a third of Pakistan was underwater that year in 2022, London had for the first time experienced 40C heat. If you put it in the greater perspective, zoom out, then we have to keep trying different approaches to addressing these crises, to make change for the greater good.”Decker lauded the “incredible” support he has had in his fight against deportation, which has included a 10-page letter sent to the UK government by the UN special rapporteur on environmental defenders, Michel Forst, a letter signed by 22 Nobel prize laureates and support from 562 actors, musicians and other artists. Much of it is being presented in evidence at his appeal.Lord Hain, the former cabinet minister who was a leader of the anti-apartheid movement during the 1970s and 1980s, said: “It is difficult to see how the further step of deportation can be justified. That seems to me to cross a line and become unnecessarily punitive.”The former chief scientific adviser to the UK government, Sir David King, described the action by Decker and Trowland as a “reasonable and proportionate response in light of the escalating climate crisis”, while the actor Juliet Stevenson said Decker was a father figure to Holly Cullen-Davies’s children, and that his removal “would do them untold harm and cause unnecessary anguish and abandonment”.The former archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, said: “Deportation will reinforce the growing perception that environmental activism at the moment attracts excessively punitive sentencing and assimilates activists to terrorists.”The tribunal’s decision is expected at a later date. The Home Office has been approached for comment.

California’s pro-housing laws have failed to raise new home numbers

New housing starts were around 100,000 a year when Newsom took office in 2019; they still hover around that number today.

California YIMBY, an organization founded eight years ago to promote housing construction in response to an ever-increasing gap between demand and supply, held a victory party in San Francisco recently. “Welcome to the most victorious of California YIMBY’s victory parties,” Brian Hanlon, founder and CEO of the organization, told attendees. Its acronym (Yes In My Backyard) symbolizes its years-long battle with NIMBYs (Not in My Backyard), people and groups who have long thwarted housing projects by pressuring local governments that control land use. YIMBY’s party marked the passage of several pro-housing legislative measures this year, two of which have long been sought by housing advocates. Assembly Bill 130 exempts many urban housing projects from the California Environmental Quality Act, while Senate Bill 79 makes it easier to building high-density housing near transit stations in large cities. “2025 was a year,” Hanlon gleefully declared. The celebratory atmosphere was understandable because this year’s legislative actions capped a half-decade of ever-mounting state government activism on housing that followed Gov. Gavin Newsom’s 2017 campaign pledge to build 3.5 million new units of housing if elected. That goal was wildly unrealistic, as Newsom should have known, but he did push hard for legislation to remove barriers to housing development. His housing agency also ramped up pressure on local governments to remove arbitrary hurdles that YIMBY-influenced officials had erected and to meet quotas for identifying land that could be used for housing. However, the celebration omitted one salient factor: Pro-housing legislative and administrative actions have failed to markedly increase housing production. New housing starts were around 100,000 a year when Newsom took office in 2019, and they are about that number today, with the net increase even lower. As the Housing and Community Development Department admits in its statewide housing plan, “Not enough housing being built: During the last ten years, housing production averaged fewer than 80,000 new homes each year, and ongoing production continues to fall far below the projected need of 180,000 additional homes annually.” The Census Bureau calculates that since Newsom took office, new housing permits in California ranged from a high of 120,780 units in 2022 to a low of 101,546 last year. Newsom’s own budget agrees with the Census Bureau’s data for the same period and projects future construction through 2028 at 100,000 to 104,000 units a year. Those are the numbers. But how data on housing is collected and collated has been a somewhat murky process, and opponents of housing projects often challenge how they comport with quotas the state imposes on local communities. Fortunately, the Census Bureau has unveiled a new statistical tool that should go a long way toward having complete data that includes not only conventional single- and multi-family projects, but alternative forms of housing such as backyard granny flats, officially known as Accessory Dwelling Units; basements or garages that are transformed into apartments; single-family homes converted into duplexes or apartments; mobile homes or office buildings that become housing. The tool uses several sources of data but is heavily reliant on the Postal Service, which maintains a constantly updated roster of addresses that includes all housing types. More accurate data should make it easier to overcome conflicts and may even reveal that California’s pro-housing actions have had positive effects that current methodology misses. “The housing crisis has persisted in part because we haven’t been able to measure our progress accurately,” an article about the new tool published by the Niskanen Center, a think tank, concludes. “With the Census Bureau’s Address Count Listing File data, that excuse is gone. Now the question is whether policymakers will use this powerful new tool to finally build the housing America needs.”

Britain's Prince William Calls for Optimism on Environment at EarthShot Prize Event

RIO DE JANEIRO (Reuters) -Britain's Prince William expressed optimism on Wednesday about tackling global environmental challenges at a star-studded...

RIO DE JANEIRO (Reuters) -Britain's Prince William expressed optimism on Wednesday about tackling global environmental challenges at a star-studded event in Rio de Janeiro for the fifth edition of his EarthShot Prize.William's first visit to Latin America comes shortly before Brazil hosts the UN climate summit COP30 next week."I understand that some might feel discouraged in these uncertain times," William said during the ceremony for the award, founded in 2020 and inspired by a visit to Namibia."I understand that there is still so much to be done. But this is no time for complacency, and the optimism I felt in 2020 remains ardent today."Named in homage to John F. Kennedy's "moonshot" goal, the award was intended to foster significant environmental progress within a decade that has now reached its midpoint.The prize, which aims to find innovations to combat climate change, and tackle other green issues, awards five winners 1 million pounds ($1.3 million) each to drive their projects.Pop stars Kylie Minogue and Shawn Mendes, Brazilian musicians Gilberto Gil, Seu Jorge and Anitta, along with former Formula One world champion Sebastian Vettel, were among those who appeared or performed at the ceremony.British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and London Mayor Sadiq Khan also attended.William will attend the UN climate summit in place of his father, King Charles. On his trip, he announced initiatives for Indigenous communities and environmental activists, and visited landmarks in Rio.(Reporting by Andre Romani in Sao Paulo and Michael Holden in London; Editing by Clarence Fernandez)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.Photos You Should See – Oct. 2025

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.