Search Climate Insights Directory

The document defines a Green foreign policy as a holistic approach that prioritizes human rights, democracy, and environmental sustainability over narrow economic interests. It advocates for the reform of international organizations like the UN and the Bretton Woods Institutions to increase transparency and representation for the Global South. The framework emphasizes the strengthening of international law, specifically the International Criminal Court, and supports restrictive weapons export policies and UN-mandated military interventions. It also calls for a development agenda that links environmental sustainability with social inclusion and conflict prevention through the 'Responsibilities to Protect' (R2P) framework.

The author critiques current foreign policy as anachronistic and dominated by neoliberal interests, calling for a 'Green Foreign Policy' (GFP) that transcends ecology to include human development, social integration, and the rights of all living beings. The text advocates for the creation of a Global Government with direct citizen participation to replace the perceived democratic deficit in international organisations like the UN, World Bank, and IMF. It positions the EU as a potential driver for this paradigm shift, moving from top-down advocacy to a model of human empowerment and collective consciousness.

The author critiques the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) for focusing on income poverty and development aid rather than structural inequality and the link between social and environmental dimensions. While noting progress in poverty reduction and water access, the text highlights that global inequality is rising and environmental degradation is accelerating due to the consumption patterns of an expanding global middle class. The author asserts that industrialised countries, particularly the European Union, must assume global responsibility by meeting the 0.7% GNI official development assistance target and drastically reducing their per capita CO2 emissions to allow the Global South scope for sustainable development.

The document examines the challenges European Green parties face in reconciling non-violence with the need to protect human rights in conflict zones. It argues for a shift in EU foreign policy from reactive crisis management to a proactive, multilateral approach that prioritizes ecological justice, nuclear disarmament, and the empowerment of civil society. Specific analyses cover the conflicts in Ukraine, Syria, and the Maghreb, as well as the strategic importance of South East Asia.

The author contends that increasing security measures and restricting liberties in response to terrorist attacks in Paris and elsewhere is ineffective and risks further marginalizing religious groups. The text highlights the rise of far-right movements like Pegida in Germany and the AfD, as well as the growth of populist discourse in Austria, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Denmark. It argues that structural issues—such as the 'apartheid' between French cities and banlieues, youth unemployment, and resource tensions—drive instability. The document advocates for a strategy based on education, equal rights for minorities, and the reinforcement of universal values of freedom and solidarity to combat extremism.

The author contends that the crisis of globalized liberalism has erased the differences between traditional productivist parties, leaving ecology as the only force proposing necessary systemic transformations. The text criticizes the French Green party (EELV) for subordinating itself to the Socialist Party (PS), which it claims led to electoral decline and a failure to influence government policy. To recover, the author advocates for a 'Green New Deal' implemented through 'contractual autonomy'—where alliances are based on specific programmatic agreements rather than 'left-right' labels—and a return to a 'cooperative' structure that integrates party militants and civil society. This strategy is proposed as a means to resist the rise of national-populism and prepare for the 2017 national elections.

The author contends that while concerns about double standards in terrorism and the targeting of Islam by publications like Charlie Hebdo are legitimate, the solution lies in upholding liberal values and the rule of law. The text argues that Islamic fanaticism fuels anti-immigrant bigotry and that the 'Je Suis Charlie' movement represented a genuine expression of solidarity and a defense of civil liberties. It concludes that the state must protect citizens from terrorism without succumbing to authoritarian 'national security state' measures, emphasizing the need for minority participation and transparency.

The author diagnoses a crisis in political ecology caused by the Greens' alignment with the productivist Left, specifically the Socialist Party (PS), which led to electoral losses in 2014. The text proposes ten theses to rebuild the movement, emphasizing a return to 'contractual autonomy'—where alliances are based on specific policy content rather than 'Left/Right' labels—and the adoption of a 'cooperative' organizational model to engage civil society and prepare for the 2017 elections.

The author compares current anti-Muslim sentiment in Germany to the antisemitism of the 1920s and 30s, citing figures like Heinz Buschkowsky and Alice Schwarzer as contributors to a climate of demonization. The text asserts that this rhetoric fuels violence, such as attacks on mosques, and supports movements like Pegida. It concludes by demanding that politicians recognize Islamophobia as racism and that media outlets stop publishing anti-Muslim content.

The author draws parallels between the antisemitic propaganda of the 1920s and 30s and contemporary Islamophobia in Germany, specifically citing the rhetoric used against Muslims in the Neukölln district of Berlin and by groups like Pegida. The text highlights a rise in violence, including the burning of mosques in Germany and Sweden, and calls for political leaders and media editors to recognize Islamophobia as a form of racism. It promotes the Salaam-Schalom Initiative as a model for peaceful coexistence between Jewish, Muslim, and migrant communities.

The author compares current anti-Muslim rhetoric in Germany, including statements by public figures and the activities of the Pegida movement, to the anti-Semitic propaganda used during the Third Reich. The text asserts that the demonization of Muslims and migrants as 'others' leads to real-world violence, such as attacks on mosques. It advocates for politicians to recognize Islamophobia as racism and for media editors to stop publishing anti-Muslim content to ensure peaceful co-existence.

The author argues that the border fence at the Evros river, praised by Prime Minister Antonis Samaras, has not stopped migration but merely shifted flows toward the sea, leading to increased arrivals on Greek islands and more deaths at sea. The text frames this as part of a wider European trend where leaders in the UK, France, and Germany adopt right-wing rhetoric to counter populist parties, which the author claims ultimately strengthens the far-right.

The briefing examines the rapid rise of Podemos in Spain, analyzing its positions on corruption, inequality, democracy, and European policy, while highlighting its influence on traditional left-wing parties and the strategic challenge it poses to ecological parties in Southern Europe.

The authors call for a comprehensive overhaul of the UK's constitutional and democratic framework to address a 'crisis of democracy' characterized by voter disillusionment and inadequate representation. Proposed reforms include the adoption of proportional representation for both houses of parliament and local elections, the creation of a written constitution with a citizens bill of rights, and the establishment of directly-elected regional assemblies. The text emphasizes the need to protect local governments from corporate influence and opposes the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) on the grounds that it would undermine local democratic decision-making and public services.

The author contends that the TTIP and CETA trade agreements allow corporations to bypass national courts and sue EU governments in the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) via the ISDS clause. The text highlights 2014 updates to LCIA rules that allegedly make it easier for corporations to sue taxpayers, limit the ability of governments to challenge arbitrator impartiality, and allow for corporate class action suits. The author warns that these mechanisms could be used to block environmental protections, such as bans on fracking, or prevent the reversal of public service privatisations, effectively placing corporate interests above democratic law.

The document criticizes the Polish government's reliance on fossil fuels and its lack of a transition strategy, warning that a delayed response will lead to economic 'shock therapy'. It proposes a tripartite commission comprising environmentalists, labor unions, and green businesses to overcome political gridlock and ensure a 'just transition' that protects workers' rights while reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

The author contends that shorter UNFCCC commitment periods (five years) are superior to longer ones (ten years) because they prevent the 'locking in' of under-ambitious emissions targets. While the EU has advocated for a ten-year period to provide investment security and align with its 2030 Energy Package, the author argues this package lacks sufficient ambition and could freeze global climate aspirations. The text also notes that the US supports shorter periods due to domestic political volatility and the likelihood that a long-term legally binding agreement would be rejected by the US Congress.

The author contends that the climate crisis and poverty are linked, requiring a radical shift toward social justice and sustainability. Using Portugal as an example, the text highlights how renewable energy can drive GDP growth and job creation, while criticizing austerity measures and the lack of public awareness in Portugal, where only 6% of the population views climate change as a serious problem.

The author contends that 'corporate capture' of the UN and EU has prioritised profit over climate action, leading to ineffective market-based policies and rising emissions. The text advocates for a binding international agreement based on scientific evidence and historical responsibility, rather than political compromise. It calls for the abandonment of coal—which accounted for 43% of CO2 emissions from fuel combustion in 2012—and the adoption of 'energy sovereignty' through decentralized, democratically controlled renewable energy. The author argues that the EU should lead by replacing market mechanisms like the EU-Emissions Trading Scheme with regulation, taxation, and subsidies to achieve necessary emission cuts.

The author describes a shift in the climate movement following the failure of the 2009 Copenhagen summit, noting the emergence of a 'green, circular economy' and decentralized energy projects. It urges Green parties to represent these citizen-led demands—specifically the abandonment of fossil fuels and the increase of renewable energy—during the run-up to COP 21 in Paris to ensure that alternative, sustainable models become the political norm.