 Thank you so much for joining us today. My name is Taylor Smith-Hams, and I'm an organizer with 350s US team. We are really excited to dig into a vital conversation about militarism, war, and the climate crisis with an incredible group of speakers. As most of you know, 350.org is a global climate advocacy organization dedicated to ending our dependence on fossil fuels by ushering in a fast and just transition to renewable energy. As we start 2024 with multiple wars raging around the world, we want to create space to highlight how militarism and war are key drivers of the climate crisis. Sprawling militaries like the US's massive network of bases around the world are enormous sources of emissions. War reduces international cooperation and takes away resources from vital investments like climate finance as countries double down on military spending. In short, militarism is antithetical to building a just and collective transition away from fossil fuels and toward a sustainable future. Yet, militarism is too often left out of our conversations and organizing within the climate movement. Today, we'll hear from an exciting lineup of speakers who will talk about the connections between militarism and the climate crisis from their own perspectives, draw connections between our struggles, and reflect on the critical role that we as climate activists play in ensuring that our collective resources are directed at nurturing life and freedom for all. Before we get started, we want to do a little grounding to center ourselves in the why we do this work. Don't forget to take a deep breath. And if you are feeling distracted, that's OK. Just try to gently nudge yourself back to this space. As we learn more about militarism and climate change, we felt it was important to show a short video of a dear comrade of many of ours, Bertha Kassaris. Bertha was an indigenous LENCA organizer, mother, and water defender from Honduras. After the US supported coup in that country in 2009, Honduras was opened up even further to corporate plunder. And Bertha and her community resisted the building of a dam on the Guacarque River, a river sacred to the LENCA people. For this work, she was assassinated in her home on March 3rd, 2016. The video clip we will show you is Bertha's call to us all, just one year prior to her assassination as she received the Goldman Environmental Prize in 2015. The video is in Spanish with English subtitles. Gracias. Buenas noches, gracias la familia Goldman. En nuestras cosmovisiones somos seres surgidos de la tierra, el agua y el maíz. De los ríos somos custodios ancestrales del pueblo LENCA, resguardados además por los espíritus de las niñas, que nos enseñan que dar la vida de múltiple formas por la defensa de los ríos es dar la vida para el bien de la humanidad y de este planeta. El copín, caminando con pueblos por su emancipación, ratifica el compromiso de seguir defendiendo el agua, los ríos y nuestros bienes comunes y de la naturaleza, así como nuestros derechos como pueblos. Despertemos, despertemos humanidad. Ya no hay tiempo. Nuestras conciencias, nuestras conciencias serán sacudidas por el hecho de estar solo contemplando la autodestrucción basada en la depredación capitalista, racista y patriarcal. El río Hualcarque nos ha llamado, así como los demás que están seriamente amenazados en todo el mundo. Debemos sacudir. La madre tierra militarizada, cercada, envenenada, donde se violan sistemáticamente derechos elementales, nos exige actuar. Construyamos entonces sociedades capaces de coexistir de manera justa, digna y por la vida. Juntémonos y sigamos con esperanza defendiendo y cuidando la sangre de la tierra y de sus espíritus. Dedico a este premio, a todas las rebeldías, a mi madre, al pueblo lenca, a Río Blanco, al Copín, a las y los mártires por la defensa de los bienes de la naturaleza. Muchas gracias. Thank you. Now I want to introduce our moderator for today, Darna Noor. Darna is a fossil fuels and climate reporter at the Guardian. She was previously climate producer and reporter at the Boston Globe. Earlier, she worked as a staff writer at Gizmodo's Climate Vertical Earther, where she also co-produced a season of the podcast Drilled about the fossil fuel industry's influence on education. Before that, she led the climate team at the Real News Network. Her writing has also appeared in publications, including in these times, Jacobin Magazine and Truth Out, and was also featured in two books, The World We Need and Future on Fire. Welcome, Darna. Thanks so much, Taylor, for that very kind introduction. I'm so honored to be here today with a sustained panel to talk about something that I agree with you, Taylor. We don't hear enough about in the climate space, militarism. The US military, we know, uses more fossil fuel than any other institution on Earth. And as our first panelist found in a groundbreaking study in 2019, it's also the single largest greenhouse gas emitter in the world. And it's not just the US. The world's military has produced at least 5.5% of greenhouse gas emissions, which is more than the total footprint of Japan according to one 2022 estimate. Despite this, the terms war and military often go unmentioned in the climate conversation, including in international climate negotiations, even though militarism underpins the entire fossil fuel economy, and even though militaries are often sources of extreme environmental injustice, something we'll surely hear more about today. So without further ado, I'll introduce our first speaker today. Dr. Nita Crawford is the Montague Burton Professor of International Relations at Oxford University. She also co-directs The Costs of War Project based at Brown University. Most recent book, The Pentagon Climate Change and War, won the American Book Award in 2023. And Nita is also a member of both the British Academy and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. And I'll mention too that Dr. Crawford's work really helped open my eyes to the massive role of the US military in the climate crisis. So thanks so much for joining us today. It's a pleasure. Thank you, Darna, and also Taylor as well as the organizers, all the organizers. 350's work has been really important for understanding and acting for many people, so I'm glad to be here. Okay, so I have just 10 minutes and I'm gonna talk fast. Let me know if you can't interpret the speed at which I go. Okay, so the dominant narrative in understanding climate change is that industrialization, the industrial revolution and industrial agriculture led to increases in greenhouse gas emissions. But I wanna suggest that that's sort of, yes, that's true, but there's more to it if we look at the role of the United States military and other militaries in industrialization. And then secondly, another dominant narrative is that climate change leads to conflict. So I'm gonna make about six arguments today in very rapid succession. The first one, I think is the most important, that war and military industrialization have been significant contributors to global warming. And they contribute to global warming in several ways. First, the direct emissions from operations, including war. Secondly, from training and from installations. And then there's the indirect contribution of purchased energy for bases and installations. And then there's military industrialization, which if you look at the US military's emissions, you double that and you have the entire picture because military industrial emissions are about the same size as in any one year in the US as military emissions. So that's the indirect way, but there's another indirect way, which is that military activity shapes an economy. And it shapes the economy through mobilization of society in hot wars and cold wars. And in particular, this mobilization shapes not just the pace and the scale of activity, but the kind of activity. So I'll just give you one example. In the Cold War, the United States in 1954, 55, decided it would have an interstate highway system. The interstate highway system was meant to do two things. One, facilitate the transportation of fuel and goods during wartime mobilization across the United States from the industrial heartland out to the coasts. And then secondly, to facilitate the exiting of mass numbers of people in case of nuclear war. So those people would be escaping the inner cities and moving out to the suburbs or hinterlands to escape any Soviet weapons, which would come their way. Now, of course, this fosters a certain kind of suburbanization and economic development in the United States as just one example of the way that war has shaped our environment and the anticipation of war in this case. So another way that war affects emissions is of course the destruction of urban centers, but also the deliberate and inadvertent destruction of farmland and forests and of wetlands. And that kind of destruction, of course, reduces the capacity for sequestration. The last thing I wanna talk about in terms of indirect wartime emissions is the way that when a society is utterly destroyed, it can be rebuilt in a number of ways. And most of the ways that are rebuilt are very carbon intensive. And so with nearly 40 to 50% of Gaza being destroyed, it will be rebuilt, Ukraine will be rebuilt. The question is, will it be rebuilt in a greenway or the sort of usual standard way, which is fairly carbon intensive, including cement production? Okay, that was the first thing I want to talk about. The ways that war and military mobilization, industrialization have played into increasing emissions. The second thing I wanna talk about is the emissions of particular militaries. And I'll focus on the United States, that's the country I know the best. As was already mentioned, the US is the single largest, the US DOD is the single largest energy user in the US. And its military emissions as an institution are the single largest of any institutional emitter besides countries. So if you compare the United States emissions in 2022 from the military, they are larger than many countries emissions added, especially the poorer countries, which don't have significant emissions of greenhouse gases. And they're comparable to Sweden's in that year, the entire country of Sweden's emissions or Portugal. So the emissions are significant as part of the United States economy. It's about 1% of the US economy for military emissions, but when you add the military industrial emissions, it moves up to a little bit more than 2.5%, nearly 3% of total emissions of the United States. So now to understand this historically, I think it's important to do that, you need to think about the ways that the emissions track military activity. So US military emissions track war, cold war, mobilization and the scale, the overall size of the standing military. So the number of bases and the kinds of activities that are our US militaries engaged in. So the average annual emissions from 1975 to 1991 were 103 million metric tons CO2 equivalent. In the period from 1992 to 2000, that is just before the 9-11 attacks, there were 75 million metric tons CO2 equivalent. And then following the 9-11 attacks until 2022, they're averaging 70 million metric tons CO2 equivalent. So there were some peaks there though. In 1975, did the end of Vietnam War, it was 109 million metric tons in 1991. It was during the Gulf War, it was 110 million metric tons. And then during the peak of activity, military activity during the post 9-11 wars, it was 85 million metric tons CO2 equivalent. Now, you've noticed, if you're following what I'm saying, that emissions have declined. The question is why? And they have declined with a transition that many economies have made from coal. So the US military is still the only part of the US government that's burning coal. But the overall transition away from coal is important in understanding that story. The United States also transitioned to all of its submarines and aircraft carriers being nuclear powered. And then it decreased following the Cold War, the number of bases, they went from about 2,000 overseas bases to 1,000 or so. And now we're about 750 overseas bases. Now, you could ask yourself, well, is renewable energy part of the story? And really it's only responsible for about 1% of the reduction that I'm describing. So the services, each of them, proposes to cut their emissions. And they have emission reduction goals that were recently articulated to 2021. So for example, the army has said it will reduce its emissions by 50% by 2020, I'm sorry, 2030. And this is from a 2005 baseline in their document though, they don't say what their baseline number of emissions was, but I do know that they've already reduced about 42% between 2010 and 2019. So what I'm saying is that emission reduction goal is not ambitious. They're almost already there if they've not already met it. The Navy and the Air Force also have emission reduction goals, which I could talk about later in Q&A if you're interested. But keep in mind that the Air Force is among all the services, the largest emitter because aircraft are very thirsty and highly emitting of CO2 and other greenhouse gases. Okay, now the third point. The DOD assumes that conflict will increase as climate change wreaks havoc on our lives. They, like the National Security Council, suggest three things. One, that there'll be increasing geopolitical tension in general. Secondly, that there'll be unilateral efforts to deploy geoengineering, which could be destabilizing. And then thirdly, that there'll be increased tension at borders as nations take steps to secure their interests and resources. And they're also anticipating a huge flow of migrants to the United States and these economic migrants or climate change migrants will take stuff away from Americans who are already there. So then they also talk about two others, sort of regions of instability. One is Central Africa. And of course, you know, Central Africa has not contributed the most greenhouse gases, but they are very vulnerable. And also the island nations that are vulnerable to sea level rise. Okay, so they see climate change as causing instability and war. And at one event where I was in Dubai recently, they said, the DOD just said, we're just gonna take that for granted. And then we're gonna talk from there. Okay, but fourth point. Conflict is not necessarily a result of climate change. Increasing tension is not necessarily a consequences of immiseration. What we could see is responses to climate change which are dependent on governmental capacity, aid, trade agreements and diplomatic activity. Conflict does not necessarily come to a neighborhood near you because global warming is coming to a neighborhood near you. Okay, fifth point. There is room for military emissions reductions. Okay, I described these goals and they tell you that they're ambitious, but they aren't. There's a lot of room to reduce military emissions, not just for the United States, but for other countries. And this can be done by, for instance, doing another round of base realignment enclosure, which would address what the DOD itself says is a 20% or so excess capacity that they have at their bases. And we could also rethink the existing installations and missions overseas and spend less effort, for instance, patrolling the Persian Gulf as we use less oil from the Persian Gulf. Need to end that time if you could wrap it up quickly. Last point, fifth point, final point is we don't need to ask the DOD to lead the energy transition. Okay, it's too inefficient to ask them to do that. We have everything we need in the civilian sector for making the energy transition. Thank you. Well, thank you so much. And definitely looking forward to hearing more from Nita in our Q&A portion. But second, I wanna introduce our next speaker, Zaki Mamdu, who is an organizer, a campaigner, an activism and human rights coordinator from Johannesburg, South Africa. He currently serves as the coordinator of the Stop E-COP campaign and is involved in numerous other social and climate justice campaigns, organizations and movements. Thanks again for being with us today. Thanks so much, Donna. Let me also just thank the 350 US team for putting together this incredibly important discussion, which I think is coming at a critical moment for the climate justice movement as we begin and continue to explore these issues and root them in our collective struggle for climate justice. So I hope to think, well, I hope my contributions would add some value to this conversation and to build on some of what a lot of the other speakers I'm sure will speak to and what Dr. Nita has already begun delving into. And I think, look, for me, what I'd like to see is an attempt to try and understand the very real implications of war and militarism on climate, as well as the ways in which militarism conflict and conquest are situated at the very core of the crisis of climate collapse that we find ourselves in. And I think in order to do this, we must turn our gaze to the colonial and post-colonial world. And here we must assess the deliberate undoing of the natural world alongside the kind of primitive accumulation and brutality, which has ushered in the capital scene as it were and capital scene as a term which sets itself apart from the one that is commonly used, the Anthropocene, which blames the climate crisis on human activity generally, whereas the capital scene asserts the fact that this is an era in which advanced capitalism in its current form both produces and reproduces the conditions and the modes of production which threaten the existence of life on this planet in itself. Now, as the last remaining project of European settler colonialism and as the front on which Western imperialism and US imperialism in particular is showing its ugly teeth in this current moment, I think it is fitting that we begin this discussion with our gaze locked on Gaza and the rest of occupied Palestine. We have seen the nightmarish brutality of Israel's medieval siege on Gaza involving relentless bombing of the strip as well as blocking access to food, water, fuel, medical supplies, et cetera, et cetera. And in fact, the article that came out in the Guardian yesterday references a study which holds that in the first 60 days of the siege alone, the occupation forces have emitted over 281,000 metric tons of carbon, which is already far higher than the annual emissions of many countries in the global south. And of course, and it's stated quite plainly in the article itself that this is a conservative underestimation and does not account for the emissions of the entire industrial and supply chain which feeds the Israeli death machine. So of course, some experts placed their estimations far higher. And I saw one analyst that estimated that the occupation forces have emitted over 1.2 million metric tons of CO2, which means that in less than a hundred days, the Israeli military has released more CO2 than the entire global fashion industry does in space over here. Now, beyond the emissions of the military apparatus and machinery itself, the actual bombing and destruction of infrastructure coupled with the ground invasion and displacement of about 85% of the population in Gaza has resulted in the complete disruption of normal life. And in turn, this has led to the collapse of waste management systems, including water treatment, water pumps, sanitation, desalination facilities. It's resulted in sewage flowing through the streets, seeping into the land, flowing into the seas, spreading waterborne illnesses like typhoid, cholera, hepatitis. And while obviously having a devastating impact on ocean ecosystems. Now, added to this, of course, is the destruction of tens of thousands of buildings in Gaza with the strip level almost entirely to a landscape of debris. Now, this alongside the usage of chemical weapons such as white phosphorus has been incredibly polluting to both the air and water and has created a toxic environment that all Gazans are unavoidably exposed to as all people have to breathe. Now, even before this current escalation in this moment since the offensive on October 7th, and in fact, it's been reported that since 1967, the Israeli occupation forces and settler militias have illegally uprooted more than 800,000 olive trees across occupied Palestinian territories. Now, these olive trees are not only a second part of land stewardship practices, but are also a vital carbon sink. Each olive tree plays a role in absorbing CO2 in preventing soil erosion and of course, in bolstering food security. So this sort of damage to Palestinian land is then also further compounded by Israeli bands on imports of things like steel pipes, which of course are vital for wastewater treatment and the lack of this kind of infrastructure has meant that huge amounts of sewage have been seeping into the Mediterranean Sea for many years already. So I think, look, there's many more examples that can be drawn out here, but the point that I want to get to is that if you look at occupied Palestine, what you find is an environmental crisis that has been deliberately manufactured by the machinery of war. And you have a people who find themselves incredibly vulnerable to the worsening crisis of climate, precisely because of the war that Israel has waged on them. And their ability to mitigate and then to develop mechanisms to offset the worst impacts of the climate crisis have also been completely and deliberately undermined while the resources and infrastructure they would need to meet the crisis have in very real terms, either been destroyed or stolen. And this is as part of a calculated and deliberate attempt to wipe the Palestinian people, their culture, their knowledge, their land and their history of the map entirely. So to emphasize here, they have not aimlessly wandered and found themselves by some act of random chance to be in what we would call as people within the climate justice space, what we would call frontline communities. They're not simply living as vulnerable people who stand to face the worst impacts of the climate crisis just because they happen to be on the front lines. No, the front lines themselves have been manufactured. The Palestinian people have been made to live in it. It has been imposed onto them by the oppressor. Now, I think this is an important distinction for us to make when we draw out the links between war, imperialism, conflict and conquest and the realities of climate collapse because in many ways what we have described in Palestine is also the reality in the broader post-colonial world. We often talk about how the climate crisis stands to impact the poorest, the most vulnerable and most marginalized members of our global society. And of course, specifically those in the global South and in diaspora communities. But what we must never fail to forget in this discussion is the fact that the most vulnerable and marginalized are not simply the most vulnerable and marginalized by some sorts of innate natural phenomenon. They were not destined to be vulnerable. The position that they find themselves in is one that has been imposed onto them. It is by design. And so the colonial systems and methodologies of exploitation, of extraction, oppression, suffocation and violence, which over centuries and decades have destroyed indigenous societies, have enslaved and murdered millions of people and entrenched the lasting legacies of inequality, exclusion, poverty and violence and strife are the very same systems and methodologies which have destroyed ecosystems across the global South in pursuit of profit and through the extraction of fossil fuels and other natural resources which have been used historically and up until now to spur the economic and military might of empire. So let's take the DRC here, for example. And here you have- I think we actually are at time if maybe you can get into that more during the Q&A. Sure. Thanks. Thanks so much for grounding us, reminding us of the horrors, of course, that are continually facing the Palestinian people and so many other communities around the globe. Certainly a lot more to get into in the Q&A. But I wanna introduce our third speaker, Ramon Mahia. Ramon is from Dallas, Texas at the age of 18 to support his family. He enlisted in the Marine Corps and in 2003 participated in the initial invasion of Iraq. This experience led to self-reflection, converting to Islam and becoming an outspoken advocate and organizer against U.S. wars and the growing militarization of our communities. Ramon is a member of About FACE, Veterans Against the War and the Anti-Militarism National Organizer for Grassroots Global Justice. Thanks for being here, Ramon. Thank you so much to everyone who's attending and participating in this panel and to the organizers of this event and to my fellow panelists. 21 years ago, this March, I stood in Northern Kuwait. I looked towards the horizon as the sun melted into the desert. I can still feel the warmth of its rays but also the coldness of that night that it enveloped me. In that moment, I only selfishly thought of myself of what I would see, what I would do. We were told that our actions were to free the Iraqi people from tyranny but all I saw was enormous human, social and economic and environmental toll that war and occupation brought. The so-called U.S. war on terror has cost of lives of millions of human beings around the world. Men, women, children, entire families evaporated from this earth. In the years after leaving the Marines, as I sought to process my experience to really come to terms with what I had contributed to and attempt to not only bask in self-pity and remorse but to truly redress the wrongs and the harms that I had participated in. I joined about face veterans against the war. You know, at the time it was known as the Iraq veterans against the war to use my knowledge and experience to expose the truth about these conflicts overseas and the growing militarization of our communities here at home. In a few years back, a reporter asked me once, how did you go from being an Iraq war veteran to a climate justice activist? And while I fumbled my answer back then a bit, what is clear is that there are a few activities on earth that are as ecologically destructive as war and militarism. War comes, excuse me. When the war comes, a severe contamination of water that we drink to our thirst soil, which sustains us and the air that fills our lungs. You know, every sector of society is impacted. In Iraq, I witnessed the havoc that it has on people in the land affects that people face until this day. And I'm sorry because it's not my intention to cry but to raise the seriousness that war and militarism has on people in our land. If we are to achieve environmental justice, just transition, we have to confront the climate crisis, then we must address militarization. Today, we see US politicians and fossil fuel companies and the military itself deploy false solutions in efforts to of greening the military but an institution that willingly engages in human and ecological destruction to achieve his mission will never be ready to handle climate change. As my comrades Zaki was mentioning, the Iraqi, I mean, not the Iraqi, but as of October 7th, the Israeli occupying forces have killed over 23,000 Palestinians. Over 59,000 are wounded and maimed. 7,000 more are missing, believed to be dead or under the rebel, a genocide is occurring and it is all our responsibilities to demand of Congress, of Biden to act on a permanent ceasefire now to end all military aid to Israel. Aid to Israel equals the occupation and killing of Palestinians. If you consider yourself a climate and environmental justice activist then you must also consider yourself an anti-war and anti-militarist organizer. You know, while workers in the U.S. are struggling to get an increase in the minimum wage while Congress continues to fund Israel just like they did during the Iraq war, it's fattening the pockets of weapons manufactured executives of shareholders, shareholders that include members of Congress themselves. You know, a permanent ceasefire means not a penny more of our money to aid Israel and genocide and to line the pockets of weapons of manufacturers and profiteers. You know, in the shadow of the Iraq war, a grassroots global justice alliance was founded by U.S.-based grassroots organizations and groups coming together to build a frontline internationalists left the alliance of working poor people to engage in a long-term process of relationship building and political alignment. And in 2011, we developed, or the organization, the alliance developed a framework for its members of no war and no warming build an economy for the people in the planet. This proposal suggested that not only on an international level, but at the national level and at the local level that it was necessary to starve the war machine from its funds to move funds away from the U.S. military towards an economy that allowed life to prosper, right? Because we understood that we needed to define the alternatives to neoliberalism, to capitalist imperialism, right? But the experience on the ground of these frontline communities in those years was that they were facing very real issues. Their lights were being shut off, their water was being shut off, they were being arrested for, or houses were being closed on, you know, people's impacts, direct impacts were needing to be addressed. And while as we start to engage now in this moment as the divests from harm, the divest from militarism and the invest in life and care continues to be lifted up, it's important that we connect with that, that we no longer support that our taxpayers go to fund war abroad and at home, that they fund people's needs and not the genocide and not the weapons and not the wars that continues to plague all our communities around the world. You know, we need to define like how in this moment we able to relate and what's the entry point for our communities? You know, what is the long-term fight that speaks to this moment of divesting from harm and investing in care? This past October, I was also honored to travel to Guahan. It's an island of people that are slowly recovering from typhoon devastation, including power shortages and limited access to water and increasing US militarization of the Pacific region has led organizations to come together in an attempt to draft the People's Declaration for Peace, Unity and Climate Justice in the Pacific. You know, they see how vital it is for us to address climate change and militarism that this was the first time that a unified and formal demands were made in the region against the US military, right? These are indigenous communities that have been harmed for centuries by military and colonial occupation, eroding cultural practices and self-sufficiency and leaving them vulnerable to climate catastrophes. You know, we must radically transform our world. So I invite you all to like lift up the slogan of no war nor warming and commit ourselves to divesting from war-fueling policies, accelerating the climate destruction and invest in a life-affirming regenerative way of living. Let us enter peace, injustice, accountability and reparations in collective care to support real climate solutions because ensuring the survival of people in the land demands it. Thank you. Wow, Ramon. Thank you so, so much as always for sharing your story and all of that perspective. I want to welcome our final speaker, Ash Nicole Lamont, who comes from the Absentee Sonny tribe of Oklahoma and the Ogallala and Sikangu Nokoda nations. They are a lifelong Oklahoman living on the front line of the climate crisis and fossil fuel extraction before joining Honor the Earth as National Campaign Director. Ash organized various frontline fights in their community in addition to working with national and international environmental justice and indigenous justice organizations where they supported indigenous-led initiatives and fights across Turtle Island. Their expertise is the intersection between political economy, environment and race with a keen interest in indigenous rights and sovereignty and following the money trail, which we'll hear more about. And they've received numerous awards for their work in Indian country, including the Obama administration's young women in powering communities and their work has been featured in various documentaries including VICE's United States of Oil and Gas. Thank you so much for being with us today, Ash. Hi, everyone. We choppy, wet, dewy, machi, yoppy. I'm really happy to be here today calling in from Osage territory in so-called Oklahoma. Yeah, and I'm just really, really honored to be the last panelist and I'm really grateful to follow on the trail of my brother Ramon because a lot of what he was talking about I'm really gonna dive into and really kind of zoom back and really share some of the impacts of militarism and colonialism, specifically settler colonialism and the impacts against indigenous people. And one thing I think that it's really important especially in this moment is really to highlight the importance of indigenous solidarity with our Palestinian relatives because a lot of what they're currently facing is parallel to a lot of what our indigenous communities here on Turtle Island have faced and continue to face. What is happening and what we see is really this creation of what we call a false civic identity. And that's like calling itself Israel, really trying to do that work of replacing and erasing the actual indigenous people there, erasing their bodies, erasing their histories, erasing their culture and displacing them and replacing them with their selves and their false civic identity. And we saw that happen pretty successfully here in the United States as an absentee Shawnee person. I don't belong in Oklahoma, but my ancestors were forcibly removed and relocated from their sacred homelands in the places that we believe that our creator put us on to protect and defend and to steward. And I think that that's a really important point to touch on because we see that happening not only here in Turtle Island but being our history of settler colonialism and the occupation of indigenous people on our own lands by the so-called United States of America. But we see that happening globally. And what we really believe here on Earth is that indigenous people really do represent that last barrier between protection of the land and honestly protection of all of our collective futures and all out unfettered resource extraction which we consider to be the new form of settler colonialism. And one quote that I really love to just always highlight is a quote that one of my elders, Ponca elder Casey Camp Hornick likes to say is that they used to come at us with their cannons and bayonets but now they come at us with their pipelines and multinational corporations. And so it's really important, I think, to really tie the intersections between colonialism, indigenous sovereignty and indigenous peoples worldwide, militarism and protection of the environment. Because many reports have come out that demonstrate how indigenous people globally actually protect 80% of the world's biodiversity. And so we truly are that last barrier. And there is also a direct connection between violence to the land and violence to indigenous bodies, particularly our women, our young ones and our two-spirit relatives. And that's why we have a national campaign for missing and murdered indigenous women and people. And this is what happened to Bertha. This is what's happening in Palestine. This is what happened to Torquegita at Cop City just last year in so-called Atlanta. This is the violence that we saw at Standing Rock and at line three. And so I think that another thing that I really want to draw on is that this connection between violence against indigenous bodies who are trying to protect and defend the land isn't just happening overseas. It's happening right here in our own backyards. And I'm actually the granddaughter of someone who was murdered by the United States government for protecting the land. And his name is Buddy Lamont and he is the Oglala Lakota who has murdered at the end of the occupation of Winnidney in 1973. And so this is something that we've experienced since Settlers arrived on our land and this is what we're seeing globally and worldwide. And so I want to dive into really quickly and then I know I'm going to go ahead and check after this so that we can dive into the Q and A. But one of the campaigns that we're really highlighting and trying to draw upon is stopping green colonialism. Ramona was talking about fossil solutions like carbon capture and carbon pricing. But one of the things that we're really wanting to dive into is green colonialism, which is environmental projects that we see neoliberals and right wingers and a lot in the mainstream environmental justice movement quite frankly putting forth which is like mining for lithium, cobalt, copper and other things like that. And this is really problematic because these are also false solutions to the climate crisis because it involves extraction. And we know that all extraction involves the displacement and the harm of indigenous bodies and indigenous lands. And so this also involves, you know, extraction of natural resources, land grabs, displacement and imposition of colonial conservation without respecting indigenous knowledge, our needs, our rights, our sovereignty or free prior and informed consent. But it's, you know, it's being justified because it's considered green energy. You know, these minerals are needed for solar panels. They're needed for our phones. They're needed for electric vehicles. But honestly, they're still harming indigenous people and there is a better way forward. And for a true just transition like Ramona is talking about, we must enter indigenous rights. I mean, we must enter indigenous sovereignty. And this is, you know, not just here but also in Palestine, Sudan, all over the globe. And, you know, it's really our position that false solutions, they don't combat the climate crisis. All they do is kick the canner problems down the road for future generations to face. It's our position also that environmental justice, you know, must prioritize land back. And we believe that that's our solution because once indigenous lands are back in indigenous hands and we can return to that right relationship with Winti Maka, our grandmother Earth and really show the way forward and return to stewarding the land like we're supposed to. So I just wanted to drop in really quick some examples of green colonialism that's happening right here in so-called Turtle Island. So the Talan Mine is a projected project that's gonna be mining for nickel, copper and cobalt that will be impacting the Anishinaabe people of Minnesota. Oak Flat is another one that's in so-called Arizona. It's a copper mine that the multinational company, Rio Tinto, who has an egregious record against indigenous people worldwide is trying to build in a place that's sacred to the San Carlos Apache, the Tejano Odom people and others. And then Thacker Pass is the Lithium Mine and the Paiute people and so-called Nevada fighting. And we're actually seeing the military going in and bulldozing elders' homes and displacing them in real time just happening last year. And here right here in Oklahoma, there's a refinery, it's gonna be the first cobalt and nickel refinery in so-called United States called West Twin Elements. And that's actually gonna be impacting the Apache, Kiowa, Comanche and other communities here in Southwest Oklahoma. And so we really believe that these just transitions must center indigenous voices and leadership, must divest from the military, must divest from colonialism and really return to that right relationship if we are gonna have a future for us to fight about. And so I just wanna say Nyaue and Wopi Law for having me on this panel and I look forward to the Q&A check. Thank you so, so much, Ash. And much to be said in our Q&A about the need for a just transition that center is not only a transition away from fossil fuels, but also a transition to more just forms of energy extraction and production. So I'm gonna move into some questions for our panel today, but of course we'd also love to hear from the audience. So please drop your questions in the Q&A box or in the chat. I'm gonna post my first question to Nita, but panelists, feel free to respond to questions that I post to other panelists when I call on you as well. So Nita, I wanna talk about your latest book a bit and broadly how you document that war and mobilization for war have catalyzed deforestation, industrialization and increasing fossil fuel use in the US and elsewhere as well. Why exactly is it that mobilization for militarization tends to increase emissions? What's that relationship between mobilization for war and mobilization for increased fossil fuel usage and extraction? Right, so there's several parts to this, but just think about how military spending and military industrialization are capital intensive. They're requiring of a kind of economic or industrialization that needs a lot of resources. For instance, take an aircraft or a tank made of particular materials, aircraft tungsten and molybdenum and other lightweight materials for the military that aren't necessarily required for civilian aircraft. So in other words, military requirements are more carbon intensive than civilian requirements. And then in terms of deforestation, what we know is that militaries attack not just the adversary, but they sometimes attack civilians and they attack not just infrastructure, but also the natural, the built as well as the natural environment as part of the strategy of war. So in the United States, the so-called United States in the South or in the Civil War, the US military burnt the forests of the Confederacy. And this was deliberate and burnt the fields. And as a strategy of a miseration, this is part of it. So in general though, what we see is military spending is correlated with higher emissions. And this is because it has effects across the economy leading to more use of carbon intensive technology and I think you're muted. Thanks so much, that's really edifying and thanks for grounding us in that history a bit. Zaki, I wanna sort of bring it to the present day, because just this week, the head of the biggest oil lobby in the US, the American Petroleum Institute, told CNN that he thinks that Israel's war in Gaza will threaten energy security by inhibiting the flow of oil out of the region. Talk a little bit about the sort of relationship between the war in Gaza and the climate crisis and also maybe tell us a bit about what the international climate movement's response has been to that war and what it should be. Look, I think I've given a fair amount of information in the beginning, which I wouldn't repeat in relation to exactly how that the genocidal mission of Israel and its bombardment and siege on Gaza has proven completely devastating, one for the immediate environmental conditions of cousins and people across occupied Palestine, but also through the really enormous emissions of the Israeli occupation forces and of the allies and specifically the imperialist US military machinery and how those emissions themselves are really huge and of course have this very direct contribution into the collapse of our climate. I think when it comes to the climate justice movements, I am glad and inspired to see that many in the climate justice movements and across the globe and specifically those within post-colonial contexts who have an experience with apartheid or with settler colonialism or with dispossession and violence of these forms are coming out in really radical shows of solidarity to demand as a, to demand is an initial need is for a ceasefire, of course, but going further than that to say, well, we can arrive climate justice without total liberation of all people from all forms of oppression and exploitation. And, you know, we see it in, for example, Fridays for Future Minas statement, which came out quite early on when this escalation of Israel's assault on Gaza began where they reminded the climate justice movement that climate justice is a banner under which vulnerable, marginalized and oppressed peoples of the world should rally and unite. And it is not a climate justice differentiates itself from any narrow form of environmentalism because it is fundamentally about people and their very word justice centers people within all of those discussions, demands, deliberations, et cetera. And so, yeah, so I've been inspired to see that. And of course, we'd like to see more of it. We'd like to see the deepening of those intersections and routes within the climate justice movement and more people coming out to advocate and to wage struggle for the total liberation of all oppressed peoples across the globe and of course within occupied Palestine. Absolutely, and I'd love to come back to you a little later to talk a little bit about how that sort of international movement of solidarity could extend to other conflicts and other oppressed people across the globe. But first, I'll turn back to Ramon. You mentioned this phrase starving the war machine, divesting from the military, investing in human flourishing, essentially. But what exactly does that look like? Do we start by, for instance, shrinking the budget? Do we start by closing bases? What does it mean to starve the war machine in practical terms? Yes, thank you. So, I mean, action on climate change is gonna, demands that we shudder vast sections of the military and machine if not all of it, right? There are, on one hand, there are over 790 US military bases across 80 plus countries and colonies, US colonies around the world. We know that the military is the largest consumer of fossil fuels and the worst emitter of greenhouse gases and that makes it an important client of oil and gas corporations. It's no coincidence that these industries continue to back politicians that push for more war, that fund think tanks that push a deeper and a greater militarism. So, on one hand, it's really confronting the reality that this network, this humongous network of military bases across the world is unsustainable and that, yes, they need to be shut down. There's beyond the issues related to sovereignty, these bases are also oftentimes the main source of pollution for the communities that they occupy. So, that's on one hand, but we must not create a binary between the police forces that are across the world and specifically here in Turtle Island and the military. It's no coincidences that police budgets around the country mirror that of the US military at the federal level. The 1033 program is a police military nexus of self-dealing to legitimize bloated budgets. So, on one hand, while the military is a broad destroying land and people's lives, the police is here destroying the communities here as well. So, it means our communities are inquisitive enough and our visionaries in that we were able to identify a new way, a new way of being, right? And for the moment, closing US military bases and addressing the increasing police militarization here on Turtle Island is something that gets us a start. Absolutely. Ash, I'll turn to you next, because as you mentioned, fossil fuels of course are often obtained via violence so often, but so often, so are components of the green economy. As you mentioned, things like lithium, things like rare earth minerals. So, talk a little bit about this term, just transition and talk about what a transition away from fossil fuels would look like if it does not rely on militarism, rely on increased colonialism, rely on sort of extractive modes of interconnection between people. Yeah, no, I think that that's a great segue from what some of the things that Ramon and some of the previous panelists were touching on. And I'm glad that people are bringing up Copt City because I think that that is just like such a very important focal point that a lot of people are not really paying attention to, but is definitely a place that is highlighting that intersection or that relationship between police and the military because it's going to be a place where they are training police and military warfare against citizens here who are fighting against climate crisis and racism and other things like that. And I think that talking about this just transition really does require us to face some really tough questions and face some really tough realities because as the science points to, we don't have time to sit here and accept piecemeal solutions to the climate crisis that neoliberals and the mainstream environmental justice movement, i.e. the white environmental justice movement and climate justice movement is trying to give us. And some of the things that we talk about at Honor the Earth and in indigenous communities who are fighting for just transition is the need to really frame things in the terms of colonization and indigeneity. And it really does require this divestment not only from the military, from capitalism, from colonization, but also from power. It really requires those who have that power in these colonial systems who are power wielders, who have access to those spaces and have access to different resources to divest from that power and to divest from colonization and to ensure that indigenous communities, black communities, migrant communities, those who are most impacted and oppressed are the ones who are actually, the ones driving forth the solutions and in charge of the resources to make these things happen. And I know that like talking about the just transition and talking about specifics is kind of nebulous at this time and point because we haven't seen that happen. We're still fighting the fossil fuel industry and then now we're still fighting, now we're starting to fight green colonialism. But some of the visions that we've definitely conjured up and really lean on is this return to the right relationship with Mother Earth. And that is something that we believe indigenous people all over the globe have the roadmap for because we've been on these lands since time immemorial and we have creation stories that tie us to these lands and we have ceremonies that reaffirm that relationship that our ancestors have and that our future generations will have with the lands that we're on and that we protect. And so we believe that this just transition must first and foremost be about land back and that isn't pretty. And we're seeing that happen in Palestine. We believe wholeheartedly that Palestinian people have the right to return and that also includes them getting their land back and that means by any means necessary. And so we believe that worldwide that first and foremost indigenous people must have their lands back in their hands and then after that, we can start talking more about specifics because we know that different indigenous communities have different visions for what moving forward looks like but it definitely won't be colonial it won't have this extractive quality to it. It won't be something that benefits only a few while harming and leaving behind entire people because that's what EV that's electric vehicles do that's what solar panels do unfortunately and they do harm indigenous people worldwide. And so we believe first and foremost that solution must center land back for indigenous peoples. Thank you so much. I'll open it up to all our panelists now. And I wanna ask a sort of related question it's something that all of you have touched on but we sometimes hear this refrain that we don't have time to focus on these broader issues like imperialism, like militarism because the climate crisis is such a major existential threat. We hear from some officials from some sort of policy wonks that the answer should be to green military operations to power bases with solar find carbon-free alternatives to jet fuel. So I'm wondering how you all think through this question of greening military operations how large a role that should play and why essentially all of you are saying that that cannot possibly be the only response. I'll jump in. What we know is that the military has done a really good job advertising how green they're getting but it's not actually shown up in terms of a reduction in fuel use. And what really reduces fuel use is reduced activities because most of the profile of military emissions is operational, not installations that get solar panels. And I don't think we can expect them to lead. There's a saying that Audre Lorde has. I think it's the title of an essay. The master's tools will never dismantle the master's house. And so I think that we can't expect this institution which has the mission of the US military in particular but all military. So first of all, defending borders and secondly, projecting power in the service of a foreign policy to put greening at the top of their priority list. And I think it's extremely inefficient to have them be the leaders. But I also think it's really important to address something that Ashley said and Ashley with all due respect. And I mean this, I don't believe it's by any means necessary. I believe that democracy and deliberation and conversation and negotiation and respect for the other of the route to change. Again, the master's tools will never dismantle the master's house. And so I am disturbed by violence of all kinds everywhere and I'm really glad people brought up the militarization of policing or the militarization that I saw on Standing Rock or that occurred at line three or that is certainly evident at Cop City, the militarization of and the violence towards activists. I don't want to respond in kind though. I don't think it's by any means necessary. We'll love to hear from others on the panel too or Ashley if you have a response as well. Yeah, no, I just think that I just wanna, I guess, with all due respect, I wanna go ahead and stand on what I said because I think that settler colonialism is the violence and that's the original violence. And so we can't really say that when Indigenous people or oppressed people or people who are experiencing genocide are responding to that or defending themselves, their lands, their bodies or their families. I don't think that we can consider that violence and exactly what Joy is saying here in Turtle Island, state violence is the violence. And so that's what we see happening at Cop City. That's what my Lakota relatives experienced at Standing Rock. That's what my grandpa experienced at Wounded Knee. And so I'm not saying that I'm advocating for violence and of course I also wish that there was a place where democracy or negotiation could solve such problems but in the meantime, since that's not the reality, I think that I'm standing in total solidarity with my relatives all across the globe, including in Palestine who are doing whatever they can to make sure that they defend their lands and that their people can experience that right of return that all Indigenous people deserve. I'm gonna start to open it up to audience questions. We're hearing from quite a few people who are asking where to learn about the other sort of roots of violence that are sort of taking place in other parts of the world, where to learn more about the sort of current fights on the front lines of the climate crisis and colonialism. So I guess I just sort of broadly wanna ask if folks want to talk about any other sort of military operations, wars that are going on around the globe and how the climate justice movement has or has not responded to those. Zaki, I know that this is something that you started to mention in your introduction. So maybe we could start with you. What is the sort of response to militarization broadly been from the international climate movement and are there any specific wars or conflicts that need to be lifted up in that movement? Yeah, look, I mean, there definitely are. There's conflict and wars and imperial powers that work across the globe that the climate justice movement needs to confront head on. I think Luka can necessarily speak for the US context, which I think a lot of this discussion is somewhat rooted in. But I know that in my own country, South Africa, which by the way is a sub-imperial force on the African continent, our SA&DF, the South African National Defense Force, our military is routinely deployed to protect the interests of fossil fuel corporations and of mining capital in other places across the continent. And we see that in the DRC, we see that in Mozambique and it's, you know, so it's the military on the one hand and we also have these, I don't know, paramilitary mercenary private armies, private army mercenary groups, which are also deployed to protect these interests and which play a role in the fueling conflict and the violence that is subjected onto, you know, ordinary people and civilians. I'm also glad that Comrade Ramon spoke to the ways in which the police are, you know, similarly responsible and rooted in this because also in South Africa, and we've seen it with the Madagascar in 2012, where the South African police services were deployed to squash a mine worker strike in Marikana and ended up using live ammunition and brutally murdering and massacring 34 striking mine workers. And so I think it's just in this, what it boils down to is the ways in which a bourgeois state, which carries the, well, a state is supposed to carry the mandate of meeting the needs of the people, but a bourgeois state is beholden to the interests of capital and in that is incapable of genuinely and truly furthering the liberation of people. It is incapable of furthering a just transition. When you talk about a just transition, we need to talk about ownership. We cannot leave it to industry to set the terms and to lead the just transition as it were because there would be nothing just about that because industry carries the sole and primary mandates of extracting a profit. And the way in which it does that is through the gross exploitation of workers and the destruction of communities. And so I suppose I'm muddling different points here as my ADD brain, but yeah, regardless, I think those are important things to look at is the ways in which those military forces and the groups which supposedly have legitimate use to violence and force are in fact furthering the interests of capital as opposed to protecting the wellbeing of people and planets, but also when you're talking about a just transition, having a key conversation about ownership and how resources are managed and who they benefit. I don't know if that answered the question even, Dalana, but I hand it back to you. I think it did. I'm curious to hear from others, but I'll just throw out another question that we're getting from the audience as well, which is a couple of people have asked about the role of unions both in the US and abroad in sort of working to dismantle the global military industrial complex. I'll personally throw out a report that came out from Climate and Community and the Transnational Institute late last year, which highlighted a number of different examples that could be repeated. For instance, in the 1970s, workers at the UK's Lucas Aerospace Factory created a plan when facing cuts to production to ships to producing needed goods like heat pumps and medical equipment. So I think that there are precedents out there, but I'm curious to hear from the panel on this question of the role that unions can play. And additionally, on our previous question about the other conflicts that the International Environmental Justice Movement should be looking to. So I think there's really good work done by Miriam Pemberton on transition. She's got a book that came out whose name I can't remember. Recently on just transitions in the United States, several examples. And then there's the work of Heidi Peltier at the Costa Ward Project who looks at how many more jobs you would get if you transitioned away from high levels of military spending. But, and then I also wanted to get back to the question about other conflicts. If we think about Ukraine, that war has of course led to the destruction of vast areas of land because of the inundation caused by the blowing up of a dam. And then, but in addition, it's been calculated by Leonard DeClerc that there was 150 million metric tons CO2 equivalent that we can attribute to the war and the subsequent rebuilding and actual rebuilding that's ongoing in the last 18 months. So, Ukraine is an ongoing conflict that has also led to the loss of 110,000 trees as the Russians built a highway in Crimea which they've occupied since 2014. It's a devastating environmental conflict. The Russians are also occupying in Ukraine 10 national parks. We'd love to hear from others on the panel as well. Yeah, I think, you know, unions play an important role. We saw, you know, the mass mobilizations of labor against the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. And more recently, we've seen organizers out of the San Francisco and the Bay Area, particularly the Arab Research and Organizing Center, a member of GDJ, engage in a block, the boat coalition successfully blockading ZIM Shipping Line that it's an Israeli shipping line that transfers not only different kinds of supplies, but also weapons. You know, they built an alliance with the longshore workers of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union, the local 10, and they honored the community's pickets and, you know, they were able to block the boat and not only block the boat in Oakland, but also coordinate with others along the western coast all the way up to Canada, to indigenous communities there that have been fighting the pipelines were also helpful in wanting to block the boat. So I think unions play an important role in making sure that the transferring of not only military equipment, but even human beings, people, soldiers, military personnel to actually go out and wage war, right? The shipping and the transferring of military equipment and human beings is something that can be stopped. And unions are very much vital, especially in our ports. So not only on the west coast, but on the east coast and in the south here in Texas, you know, Corpus Christi and Houston are some of the largest ports that are able to ship a lot of this cargo. So, you know, block the boat went down as one of the most significant BDS victories for Palestine within US history. So let's continue doing that. Let's continue to collaborate with our, with workers and the unions in order to stop the shipment of weapons to kill human beings around the world. We've gotten a couple of different questions from the audience about whether or not there are laws binding the military, similar to laws, you know, that bind other industries, that would force reduction in emissions. Some have, for instance, asked about what the military's role is in the Paris Climate Agreement, which I'll just mention is not really law because it's not binding. But I'd love to hear from the panel about the role that military emissions play in those international negotiations because, you know, the military, the US military and other militaries have been able to sustain their polluting behaviors for a really long time with little accountability. And we know that no country is actually required to provide data on military emissions in climate talks. So talk a little bit about the role that militarization has played in these international climate talks and how much talk of war there really is in international climate negotiations. Well, I can start on that. When the United States was thinking about its position at Kyoto in the late 1990s, the Kyoto Protocol was being negotiated, the US military sent a memo to the Clinton administration saying that it wanted military emissions exempted from reporting. The administration essentially agreed with that. The chief negotiator, Stuart Eisenstein, went to Kyoto and got other countries to go along with the almost total, but there are some exceptions, omission of military emissions reporting. Why did they want to keep emissions out of the national country reports? It was because they were concerned that any reporting would lead to a call for reduced fuel use. And the argument in the memo was that even a 10% reduction in fuel use would lead to a decreased ability of the United States to fight in wind wars and to dominate the globe militarily. So since then, the United States military has not reported its emissions until quite recently. There is a Biden administration law that says there has to be across the board reductions of the emissions in the US government. But there is, if you read deeply into the Biden administration order on this, executive order, there is an exemption that's possible for national security reasons. So for national security reasons, you don't necessarily have to reduce. And what I've described, though, is the United States military leading other countries in omitting reporting of emissions. And at the Dubai meeting and also in Glasgow, and there was a move by lots of non-governmental organizations to include military missions in reporting. And I think that this may bear fruit. Can I, I just wanted to add on quickly on that, if we have time. Yeah, let's go to you, Ramon. And then I'll wrap up with one final question from the audience just to get final thoughts from all of you. Yes. Yeah, these international climate conversations, particularly with the COP and the UNFCCC, my first experience with the COP process was in Glasgow, in Scotland, and then in Egypt as well. We didn't go to Dubai because we honored the Palestinian BDS call to Boycott because of the UAE's support of Israeli genocide. But what I found was that there is no conversation besides side conversations and side events and in civil society that are wanting to have a conversation about the growing military, right? Because what we understand is that there's no serious response to the climate crisis or that no serious response to the climate crisis is compatible with a growing military. How can we have, without having the military's impact on people, the environment, and the climate address the mitigated, how are not only us here in Turtle Island, but global South nations, those most impacted expected to engage with these international proceedings meaningfully. They exclude point to critique of the military from these conversations and are seen as a threat. We organized actions within the blue zone, within the COP process and pointed that US militarism is the number one polluter killer colonizer and we were reprimanded and said that we couldn't have critiqued the party member of the United States, right? So these, more than anything, these international conferences are trade shows for continuing to elicit false solutions and not only within Guahan when I attended for the Making Waves conference where there was an alternative COP space is that more and more people are questioning the validity of the COP process. We have to be there because power is there and we have to impose power at every terrain but we also have to develop alternatives to some of these conferences because they're not gonna be a solution for our people. Thank you so much and thank you to all of you for such a region vibrant discussion. It's such an honor to get to speak with all of you today. We're hearing a lot of questions from the audience about what next steps should be taken, what the sort of big priorities should be for those in the environmental justice movement. And so with that, I'm gonna throw it over to Niko from 350 to talk a little bit more about upcoming actions and upcoming sort of points to. Thank you, Darna. And first off, thank you to our speakers as well. Ashley, Ramon, Nita, Laki, Darna, this was an amazing, amazing panel and I think you see from all the chat all the amazing responses and the questions that people brought up. Thank you to our audience for joining in and for staying over time. We know we are over time. I just wanted to say one more appreciations to our amazing interpreters, Amber and Hannah, our ASL interpreters and Andres and Adriana, our Spanish interpreters and to our incredible MC, Taylor and all of our staff working behind the scenes. Unfortunately, we don't have time to do like last remarks from everyone, but just to let folks know, we will be sending out all the links that were in the chat as well as links from the different speakers and their organizations and the recording in the next three days. And then one of the things that we wanna put in and we're gonna drop it in the chat and I'm gonna ask Candice now, drop it in the chat. 350 US team has been working with several 350 leaders in active Islamic country and trying to build an international solidarity working group and to discuss issues of why internationalism is important, issues of why military is important and these different interconnections. So there is a link that Taylor just dropped in and if you click on that link, we'll also send it when we send out the recording. You can get plugged into further work around internationalism. We will be having a webinar around that in February, so please stay tuned. And with that, I just wanna thank everyone again and we will all be in touch. Thank you all. Thank you all so much.