Breaking Green

When "Protecting Nature" Harms Its True Guardians with Anuradha Mittal

• Global Justice Ecology Project / Host Steve Taylor • Season 4 • Episode 8

Share episode

Send us a text

What if conservation efforts meant to protect our planet were actually causing significant harm to the very people who have safeguarded these lands for generations? 

On this episode of Breaking Green, we speak with founder and executive director of the Oakland Institute, Anuradha Mittal. Anuradha is an internationally renowned expert on issues of human rights, agriculture, development and conservation policies. Under Anuradha’s leadership, the Oakland Institute has unveiled land investment deals in the developing world to expose a disturbing pattern of lack of transparency, fairness and accountability. Anuradha has authored and edited numerous books and reports. Her articles and opinion pieces have been published in widely circulated newspapers and she is frequently interviewed on CNN, BBC World, CBC, ABC, Al Jazeera and National Public Radio. 

Join us as we discuss the Oakland Institute’s new report, “From Abuse to Power,” which exposes the severe human rights abuses reportedly inflicted upon Indigenous communities by “EcoGuards” — funded by prominent NGOs like the World Wildlife Fund.

We explore the deeply rooted colonial and racist undertones of the conservation industry, particularly in Africa. Discover how powerful international institutions and donor countries perpetuate a model that expels Indigenous Peoples from their ancestral lands. The conversation contrasts Western views that see humanity as a threat to nature with Indigenous perspectives that emphasize harmony with the environment.

Find Oakland Institute’s report “From Abuse to Power” here.


This podcast is produced by Global Justice Ecology Project.

Breaking Green is made possible by tax deductible donations from people like you. Please help us lift up the voices of those working to protect forests, defend human rights and expose false solutions.  

Donate securely online here

Or simply text GIVE to 716-257-4187



Steve Taylor:

Welcome to Breaking Green, a podcast by Global Justice Ecology Project. On Breaking Green, we will talk with activists and experts to examine the intertwined issues of social, ecological and economic injustice. We will also explore some of the more outrageous proposals to address climate and environmental crises that are falsely being sold as green. I am your host, steve Taylor. There are famous and well-known international conservation NGOs, such as the World Wildlife Fund, that claim to preserve wilderness and protected areas around the world, but in 2019, the world of conservation was rocked by reports of scandalous human rights abuses carried out against indigenous communities. Now, a report by the Oakland Institute describes shocking abuses in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Steve Taylor:

On this episode of Breaking Green, we will talk with founder and executive director of the Oakland Institute, Anyarada Mitall. Anyarada is an internationally renowned expert on issues of human rights, agriculture, development and conservation policies. Under Anyarada's leadership, the Oakland Institute has unveiled land investment deals in the developing world to expose a disturbing pattern of lack of transparency, fairness and accountability. Anyarada has authored and edited numerous books and reports. Her articles and opinion pieces have been published in widely circulated newspapers and she is frequently interviewed on CNN, bbc World, cbc, abc, al Jazeera and National Public Radio. Anyarada Mittal, thank you for joining us on Breaking Green.

Anuradha Mittal:

Well, thank you for having me.

Steve Taylor:

So, Anuradha, you are the executive director of the Oakland Institute. It is based in Oakland, California, but before we get into some specific campaigns by the Oakland Institute, as executive director could you tell us a bit about your organization?

Anuradha Mittal:

Institute. As executive director, could you tell us a bit about your organization? Sure, the Oakland Institute, as you said, is based in Oakland, california. We are an independent policy think tank that works on issues related to development, human rights, agriculture, land grabs, indigenous and human rights.

Steve Taylor:

Reports by your institution are highly regarded. Your most recent report is titled From Abuse to Power. The report's executive summary starts by saying that in 2019, the world of international conservation was rocked by human rights abuses carried out against local communities by security forces in protected areas managed by the World Wildlife Fund in Asia and Africa. It then goes on to detail claims of human rights abuses in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Could you tell us a little bit about what's going on in the Democratic Republic of Congo?

Anuradha Mittal:

in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Anuradha Mittal:

Well, a new report From Abuse to Power is about ending fortress conservation in the Democratic Republic of Congo. This report basically exposes how conservation is deeply tied to the extractive industry extraction of natural resources, which has basically led to the abuse of indigenous peoples in the eastern part of the country. And this is something which is not new, because throughout decades of environmental conservation in DRC government and NGOs, they have failed to tackle the issue of land grabbing, violence, human rights abuses of the indigenous communities. The scandal that you're talking about that rocked the world of conservation, was a couple of years ago to three years ago, when the reports came out that showed that security forces, eco-guards, were involved in so-called environmental protection and conservation, and NGOs that were running these parks, such as the World Wildlife Fund Wildlife Conservation Society, were responsible for absolutely horrendous violence and atrocities against the indigenous communities. And at the same time, these eco-guards, security forces, enjoyed impunity for these crimes. They were receiving funding that was being provided by the German and the US government for their training, for their material support.

Steve Taylor:

That is shocking. So EcoGuards, can we put a name to that?

Anuradha Mittal:

Well, World Wildlife Fund and Wildlife Conservation Society. They provide funding for people that you would think when you hear of EcoGuards. These are people who are protecting the environment, protecting the ecological systems, but these are guards which have been trained and, in the name of protection and conservation, they're attacking indigenous communities. The crimes against humanity that have been committed, which are reported in, From Abuse to Power, our report these crimes have been committed in the name of conservation, while the funding agencies look the other way.

Steve Taylor:

So, just to be clear, the report details human rights abuses that would include torture, murder, gang rape, shelling of villages, even some reports of decapitation. It would be, I think, shocking or it is shocking to hear first that the WWF is reportedly involved in that, and then also, you mentioned US taxpayers and German taxpayers, and are there some US federal agencies involved as well? I mean, that's very surprising to hear.

Anuradha Mittal:

Well, definitely USAID and you know and agencies were involved.

Anuradha Mittal:

Because again, we have a very top-down, neocolonial approach to conservation, where we can feel good about dedicating the taxpayers' dollars to go to countries like the DRC or Kenya or Tanzania to promote conservation.

Anuradha Mittal:

But what we do not realize is that, just as we did here in the United States creating places like the Yellowstone Park by evicting the indigenous, or the Yosemite Park, the same idea of a national park protected area is being created by expelling, by forcibly displacing the indigenous who have lived in these areas, who have protected these areas. So, in the case of DRC, the communities that we're talking about and these horrific atrocities that you just described, that range from killings, from gang rapes, you know, burning down of the whole community, these are indigenous communities who were living in these areas, who have protected the biodiversity. But once a protected area has been created, which really started during the colonial times, these people have to be expelled. The people who have protected the indigenous, who have stewarded the land, suddenly become poachers and they have to be thrown out by any means necessary. So this is really the challenge that we have with fortress conservation, which continues to be this colonial, top-down, very racist in its approach, way of conservation, which is based on abuses of human rights for the indigenous.

Steve Taylor:

So let's put a face on that. And so in the DRC, who are the indigenous peoples being displaced?

Anuradha Mittal:

Well, there's several indigenous communities, but let's put a face, as you said. Let's talk about the Batwa community Now. They were expelled from the Cahuci-Biega National Park. The atrocities that they had to live through we're talking about almost the threat of the extinction. You know the homes burned down, expelled from the forest, and this is not just their homes, this is their whole life system. You know their medicines, their spiritual place, that's where they know how to be, and they were expelled in the most violent ways that almost very few are left.

Anuradha Mittal:

They took their case to the African Commission on Human and People's Rights, alleging violence, rape, murder, arson, burning down of their villages. That has victimized the people, and that these are really crimes against humanity. Now the good news is that this July July 24, the African Commission recognizes the rights of the Batwa to their land and it ordered the DRC government to return the land to its rightful owners, which is the Batwa, instead of creating this protected area to compensate them and ensure their full protection. So it is a huge win on one hand, however, as our report makes it clear, that this decision is historic, but the actual implementation would require a very drastic change, a complete, radical change in approach to conservation, which will require not just the government of DRC but the whole conservation industry, the Western donors, the Western conservation groups, to change how they approach biodiversity and people and think about protecting communities.

Steve Taylor:

So you mentioned an industry. I think you use that term industry but what's the rationale by these governments and international organizations for removing people? But what is their motive? I mean, they have the rationale, they say it's conservation, but are there other motives involved?

Anuradha Mittal:

That's a great question. Now let's first talk about the conservation industry. What we mean by that is that you have powerful international institutions, powerful donor countries. It could be the World Bank, or it could be countries such as Germany or the United States of America. Given the concern as they express for conservation, they provide grants and funding to large Western and international conservation groups. These might include World Wildlife Fund, this might be the IUCN, or it could be even governments, for instance the government of DRC, and the euphemism that is used throughout this funding is that this is for conservation, this is for protection of the environment, and then these agencies will launch programs in these countries which are run by, you know, international actors could be the Nature Conservancy, could be World Wildlife Fund. And you know they're doing trainings, they're hiring locals.

Anuradha Mittal:

On paper, it all sounds wonderful. They're being trained to fight the poachers. You know we see images of these beautiful animals, such as elephants with tusks and others, being killed. So we really appreciate that these poachers are being tackled. We have real appreciation for these eco-guards. But what we don't understand is that this whole industry is based on promoting that same old model of conservation that we have seen before the colonial powers all over Africa were creating these protected areas or national parks, just as they had done in places like the United States. So you have Serengeti in Tanzania or you have the Virunga Park in the DRC. The idea of these parks was to create protected areas, and because the human, the locals, the natives were seen as being dangerous, were seen as not compatible with these protected areas, they were expelled. Now this is this racist rationale that those who had protected these areas have to be expelled, and so this whole cycle just continues, despite these countries in Africa now being free and independent, whether it's Kenya, whether it's Tanzania or whether it is the DRC.

Steve Taylor:

That's a very interesting point. We had someone from Survival International talking about this myth of people-less wilderness. We had this idea that there's these people coming in and raiding these areas and being poachers, ignoring the fact that people have lived there for thousands of years. So could you give us a little bit of perspective about that process, about how the indigenous are being removed and they had been caretakers of the land and the problem really is not them but they're being removed, often opening up those same areas to extractive industries sometimes.

Anuradha Mittal:

Well, I think that's a great question. First of all, I think we need to address the whole issue of the clash of two cultures. So there is one, the Western culture, the viewpoint that humanity is dangerous to nature and to the environment. And if you look at the climate crisis, you and I would agree to that, the kind of harm humanity has caused, the kind of consumption in the West, the dependence on fossil fuel, the wars mongering that we do. Of course, we've been disastrous for the nature worldview where humanity has lived in harmony, respecting not just its rights but also its responsibility to the rights of the nature. And that is the indigenous worldview, and that's why some of the richest areas in biodiversity are areas which have been stewarded by the local communities, by the indigenous. But when these two visions clash, what you have is this whole colonial mindset, step in which necessitates that the locals, the indigenous, have to be expelled because they cannot manage. You know, this Western idea of science that these areas have to be managed scientifically and controlled and therefore better taken care of, has come in.

Anuradha Mittal:

The other thing, what we don't realize, is that this is riding on power. It's not that the Western system of conservation, which is based on privatized, militarized protection of areas, killings, rapes. It is operational just because it has power. It has been funded by the rich donor countries, it has been promoted by powerful international institutions such as the World Bank, and so there's a real inequity when it comes to power.

Anuradha Mittal:

But also, the important part of the question that you asked is what happens when the people are displaced? What happens that those who have stewarded the lands, what really happens to that In the case of DRC, when the locals, when the indigenous have been violently displaced and killed, those areas are now have become playgrounds for the militias for the neighboring countries Uganda and Rwanda. And it's a struggle for extracting, extracting minerals that have been used by the Western corporations, whether it's electric cars, whether it's cell phones, the blood minerals that are fueling that they are being extracted in these protected areas. And this is what our report exposes from abuse to power. So, on one hand, you have fortress conservation, which is evicting, killing the indigenous, but it's not really protecting the areas. What it's really doing is creating a funnel for the extraction of these minerals to happen, which, by the way, has led to such bloody wars in eastern DRC that over a million people are displaced.

Steve Taylor:

And the military situation in the DRC is just for a person like me. Situation in the DRC is just for a person like me. It's just so hard to unravel with the bordering countries and even organizations like M23. But what is clear from the report is that the indigenous people are getting the worst deal and they are being removed from their lands. The lands really are not being protected and they're rich in gold and cobalt. So there's a lot going on there and it doesn't seem that the priority is really the indigenous people and preserving what they have learned to live with and preserve learn to live with and preserve. It's really a shocking report and we will put information up on the Breaking Green show description.

Anuradha Mittal:

Yeah, I mean, I think, steve, you summed it really well. It's basically a lose-lose for the government of DRC, for the country and for its people. So, on one hand, the indigenous facing the worst atrocities that one could possibly imagine, but at the other hand, it is extraction and exploitation of the resources and fueling war and militias and you mentioned M23. And it's a pity that, in violation of its own laws, united States continues to provide support to countries like Uganda and Rwanda who are causing this warfare. And it's a struggle. It is a struggle to control these rich minerals, as you mentioned, cobalt and others, but the devastation that has been caused in the Eastern DRC, the number of millions of people displaced. It is the rape capital of the world in terms of the violence that the women are facing. And so this whole myth of conservation, together with extraction, there is no protection of the environment, there is no protection of humanity, there is no protection of the indigenous in this whole colonial model of conservation in the DRC.

Steve Taylor:

So let's turn to a brighter point. The Oakland Institute recently had a major victory. Could you tell us about that?

Anuradha Mittal:

Definitely so. Tanzania, like other countries in sub-Saharan Africa, have been told that one way to boost their economy is to boost tourism. Tanzania is a country which is visited heavily by Western tourists. The largest number of tourists to the country are actually from the United States of America. We all have heard and seen, you know this incredible footage from Serengeti, the Gorongoro crater, the Gorongoro conservation area, kilimanjaro. Books have been written about it. So the Tanzanian government has been encouraged, whether it is the UNESCO which declares Gorongoro Conservation Area as the World Heritage Site, or IUCN, or the World Bank or USAID, that you should really focus on promoting tourism, and right now it is very focused on the northern part of the country, and so you should do the same in the southern part of the country. And so you should do the same in the southern part of the country.

Anuradha Mittal:

In December 22, we were approached by the communities and I should mention, steve, that almost all of our work starts at the request of communities. Communities were directly impacted, being forcibly displaced, who wake up to find, you know, their homes, their fields being destroyed. So we were approached by the communities, villagers in the southern part of the country, basically saying that the expansion of Ruaha National Park from one million hectares to two million hectares was leading to the forcible displacement. And as we started doing research into that, we discovered that Ruaha's expansion was happening through a project called Regrow, which was being financed by the World Bank. So in April 2023, we shared our findings with the World Bank that their funding of this project was leading to very serious violence, very serious violence. There were allegations of rapes, of killings, restrictions of livelihoods that were putting poor pastoralists and farmers in very dire straits, misery and a lot of violence from the Tanapa rangers, which are the park rangers. Unfortunately, the World Bank chose to ignore our findings and did nothing about it, and at that point, we filed a request for inspection with the inspection panel of the World Bank. Now this is supposed to be an independent mechanism of the World Bank to ensure no harm is done by the financing of the World Bank. It's been a long struggle. As I said, this started in April of last year. Since then, the inspection panel has been to Tanzania a few times. The first time it went was in July, august, and that's the first and the only time when it met with members of the impacted communities, spoke to them and their report, which called for. A full-on investigation was approved, after many delays, in November of last year.

Anuradha Mittal:

In the meanwhile, we have continued with the advocacy, we continued with reaching out to the offices of the executive directors of the bank to expose absolutely horrific abuses that the bank has been financing and which is against its own safeguards. So, for instance, world Bank's financing of a project requires that, if there will be displacement, that there is a resettlement policy, that the government has shared these plans with the World Bank and they approved. None of this had happened. Well, the communities have been forced to move because their cattle is being seized, they have to pay fines, people have been killed, people have been beaten, there have been rapes.

Anuradha Mittal:

So to get to it this project finally, we had to escalate and I have to mention the resilience and the courage of the communities because for them to speak out, given the fear of retribution, given the fear of being arrested, given the fear of your cattle, everything taken away by the forest rangers, they have continued to demand their rights to land and, as a result of this work, the bank was forced to suspend its financing of the project in April of this year, so one year after we went to the World Bank to expose how its financing had not just caused harm.

Anuradha Mittal:

It had caused harm in terms of killings and rapes and destruction of lives and livelihoods. They suspended the financing. I should mention to the listeners that the inspection panel has finally completed its inspection, which the request was put in in April of last year, and next week they will be submitting the report to the board of the bank. The communities are asking for a copy of the report at the same time and we will see if it's really a transparent process, if it's really an independent process which can share with the community what its findings are. And we will continue to advocate for the bank to not just suspend but end the project, cancel the rest of the monies that are left to give to the Tanzanian government and hold it accountable and at the same time, the bank should be held accountable for and pay reparations to the communities who have suffered so much.

Steve Taylor:

Well, a lot has been done in a year and there has been a tremendous amount of media coverage about Oakland Institute's advocacy, what's going on with those indigenous communities and what can only be seen as a very, very real victory.

Anuradha Mittal:

Yeah, I mean, I don't think it could be really— Thank you. Well, as I said, these are hard struggles. These are very hard struggles, and what we saw happening in the southern part of Tanzania is no different than what the Maasai communities are facing in the northern part of the country and, unfortunately, fortress conservation is destroying lives of communities all over the world and especially in Africa. It's humbling for us at the Oakland Institute to get to work with these communities. We are humbled when they reach out and ask for our support so we can do research, we can support their cases in national courts, at the East African Court of Justice or at the World Bank. These are long marathon races, but it is humbling and a matter of pride for us to work with the most amazing, courageous communities who refuse to give up.

Steve Taylor:

Well, thank you for that. Now you mentioned a long race. It's a slog. It keeps going. You mentioned fortress conservation and the conservation industry and the harm that's being done to indigenous peoples. What are your thoughts on the 30-30 proposal?

Anuradha Mittal:

Well, 30 by 30,. You know, on paper sounds and looks very good. You know, the idea is that to protect planet and to put 30% of the area as protected areas by 2030. Now, again on paper, it sounds very good that finally the international community is considering and to protect at least 30% of the planet through the UN's Convention on Biological Diversity. Now, the problem with that is, as we have seen, that most of the areas which are protected right now are protected basically because of the indigenous communities, are protected basically because of the indigenous communities.

Anuradha Mittal:

And if this continues, this whole notion of protected areas mean minus the people, this very Western neocolonial approach, it would result in the largest land grab ever. It would result in the indigenous communities being expelled. Of course, when you look at the terms of the convention itself, you know it does not say that the indigenous have to be expelled. In fact, it does say that the indigenous communities can live together in harmony with nature. Because you know, you don't need to be a rocket scientist, it is obvious, there's enough scientific research that shows that the indigenous have stewarded the lands, the traditional practices have protected the areas.

Anuradha Mittal:

It is really the Western extractive industry which is causing this destruction. But when you look in Tanzania, when areas such as the Gorongoro conservation area have been created as a multiple purpose use area, unfortunately this conservation, the way the West defines it, the way the colonial powers have defined it, that trumps the rights of the indigenous. So we are horrified at the idea of moving forward. It has been driven by Western institutions Again. The old fashioned NGO sector, conservation industry, you know, is being promoted and it is very scary what it means for the rights of the indigenous, what it means for the rights of those who have actually protected this planet.

Steve Taylor:

Yes, it's often very counterintuitive for people who are interested in the environment but maybe not following news closely that a UN proposal to set aside land to be so-called protected is actually opening it up in a way and doing harm. So it's so important for organizations like yours, and actually GJEP and Survival International and others, to help spread that message. But, as you said, it's the indigenous people who are showing great courage and standing up against this and I think they had some success in being heard a bit in the last global climate conference per se, but not as much as they really deserved.

Anuradha Mittal:

Well, steve, I think this is not an issue of that people don't know, they're unaware, they're ignorant. If only they understood, then things would be different. We have to understand that there is a vested interest. There's a lot of money involved here. There's a lot of money involved to continue to prop up those in power, to maintain their power, and that happens by disempowering the other. So the struggle that we are seeing around the protection of the environment, we would have already learned.

Anuradha Mittal:

Again, when I, you know, I live in California I go to the big trees. When you enter this park, the first thing you see is this giant redwood tree, which is called the father of the forest, which had been there while the indigenous lived in those areas, had been there while the indigenous lived in those areas, but when it was so-called discovered by the white man, the first thing they did was to cut down the tree. And here we are talking about how we are going to preserve and protect the planet, the parts of planet which are preserved and protected because the indigenous, the local communities, have protected them the environment, causing climate crisis to now take on the privilege to now protect the environment, and doing so by displacing the indigenous, if there's such a concern for protecting the environment, the first thing Western countries would do is to really set targets and goals and get rid of their fossil fuel use and the rest. Here we are talking about United States of America, which does not even include emissions of carbon, emissions from the Department of Defense, which is the largest emitter of greenhouse gases.

Anuradha Mittal:

So instead of cleaning up our own backyard, what we are very keen on doing is to go into places like African countries and dictate how conservation will happen. We could not even imagine the Maasai or the Batwa coming into, you know, london or New York and deciding how these areas should be protected. So it is this colonial, racist mindset which allows us to think that we can still dictate how conservation happens. We can still dictate how we will protect the environment. And because we do not respect the traditional knowledge, the indigenous knowledge, we don't even respect the indigenous, that we look the other way. As our report shows happened in DRC that the you know this industry conservation NGOs looked the other way while the Batwa and other indigenous communities. Their homes were burned, their women were raped, the kind of torture they went through.

Steve Taylor:

Yes, and what was? And thank you for that point well taken. What was very surprising to read was that the United States Fish and Wildlife Service was somehow involved in this. I mean that that is. How did that happen?

Anuradha Mittal:

Well, that's the funding. People within US agencies, like the agency you mentioned, feel they're doing good by providing funding, but no due diligence is done because their whole operational method is the same how to protect. You know, we still have national parks all over the United States where people can go and pay their fees and walk down. You don't see anyone there. You know, I come from India, where I think forests. You know there are forest communities that live in the forest. So this whole idea of created places where nobody lives, they're protected, they're sacred, while we go and destroy the rest of the world is honestly quite upside down and backwards.

Steve Taylor:

Yeah, there's this mythology that's being, or has been, created and used of the people-less wilderness, when there have been thousands and thousands of years of indigenous people having had lived in that environment and helped create it to what it was right when it was so-called discovered. Very, very interesting. Yes, go ahead.

Anuradha Mittal:

Yeah and Steve. One more point I wanted to make which I think is very important for listeners to understand that this is really not about conservation. As you see in this report, this is about opening up areas in national parks for extraction, so these areas are being mined. Nothing is being protected. If you look at the case of Tanzania, it is the same the amount of hunting that is happening. This is not about protecting wildlife or that there are too many Maasai and other indigenous that there is a problem of. You know, as the myth that has been spread, that the Maasai have grown in population. It's a threat to wilderness. It's a threat to their lives.

Anuradha Mittal:

If you look at hunting, that industry is growing. This has nothing to do with the protection of wildlife. Really, this is about the tourist who goes there, who wants to feel like the strong man holding the gun with their foot on the lion's head. Imagine if the Maasai were roaming their lands, instead of wearing a camouflage, with the bright red, purple, shuka, with the cattle who are in the midst of zebras and giraffe. You know this harmony. You would look stupid wearing a camouflage, you know attire with a gun and trying to look like very big and strong for killing an animal, because you know they all live in harmony and the cows graze with them. So this is really about promoting an industry and the destruction of the environment instead of conservation and protection.

Steve Taylor:

Anuradha Mittal. Is there anything else you'd like to discuss?

Anuradha Mittal:

I would say to the listeners we all care about conservation and protection of the environment In the northern part of the world. We also are the ones who travel on safari. Think about, when we travel to other countries, how we really connect with the communities. Who is the tour operator? Think about the land rights. More important, picture yourself going to Yosemite, yellowstone or one of the national parks in the United States, and how do you envision the same say on the African continent? United States, as I said, sends the largest number of tourists to Tanzania. I would urge the listeners to learn more, and there's a lot you can learn on our website at oaklandinstituteorg.

Steve Taylor:

Thank you so much for joining us today. Anyarada Mittal.

Anuradha Mittal:

It's been wonderful to be here. Thank you so much for having me, Steve.

Steve Taylor:

You have been listening to Breaking Green, a Global Justice Ecology Project podcast. To learn more about Global Justice Ecology Project, visit globaljusticeecologyorg. Breaking Green is made possible by tax-deductible donations by people like you. Please help us lift up the voices of those working to protect forests, defend human rights and expose false solutions. Simply text GIVE G-I-V-E to 17162574187. That's 17162574187.