"I cannot sit idly by in Atlanta, and not be concerned about what happens in Birmingham. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny."
-Martin Luther King, Letters from Birmingham City Jail (1963)
Today in Paris the world has come together for the UN Conference of the Parties on Climate Change (COP21).
As heads of state begin their opening statements after over 700,000 people hit the streets around the world yesterday for global climate marches, the Paris talks can now be considered the largest global convening of policy makers, scientists, advocacy network representatives and indigenous rights groups in world history.
After the terrorist attacks on November 13th, news reports of increased tension has played out in the media, dominated by instances of extremism arising out of a horrifically complex Syrian battleground and the history that lead to calamities in the entire region. The tragic overflow of millions of migrants into Europe and the Islamophobic reactions to a relatively small group of extremists represented by the Paris attackers, has become the convoluted and dangerous platform for increased militarisation and fear-mongering, in Paris and abroad. We know this is getting messier, but what we failed to recognise in Paris today is what the November attacks have to do with climate change and the impact of this event on COP21 is still unsure.
As increased offensives were launched in Syria, the relevance of the climate summit seemed, to some, like it may be lost amidst growing ideological tension and perceived terror threats. When the largest climate march to take place in Paris on Sunday was cancelled, over half a million restless marching feet were told to stay home for security reasons. And as the French government has rallied a forceful defence against ISIL or DAESH or (whatever we're calling them now) with support of NATO members, increased security at home within the French capital seems to a majority of people like an appropriate measure taken to preserve public safety.
What is being overlooked in this discussion, at its earliest stages, is the natural right of civic society to congregate over issues of great social concern, which climate change is now finally accepted to be. When hundreds of peaceful protesters defied the municipal ban on congregating yesterday, police found themselves provoked by the new and multifaceted face of the environmental justice movement, where civil disobedience is now as ripe with well rooted pacifists as it is with green fisted, and black-clad anti-capitalist agitators. Those who came in defiance to Place de la République created a human chain to stand up to the injustice of climate change, but the real issue of injustice they were rallying against was that they were told to not to be there at all. That they would be arrested, that what they were doing was illegal. Amidst the great hope that a binding treaty will rise out of these historic talks, the fear of being persecuted for acting in solidarity is being overlooked in Paris today.
Direct action of this nature is imperative in the fight against ecological oppression and injustice, and if the integrity of non-violent campaigns is to remain strong (and to succeed) how can a ban on marches be seen as anything other than a silencing of dissent? Regardless of what safety measures must be ensured to protect traumatised French civilians, the real or perceived threats after the November attacks must not be used as grounds for fear mongering or the undeniable legitimisation of new twists on a familiar ol' timey story of police-state oppression.
The will of the French government to halt people congregating on the sidelines (yet, centrally) to such an enormous event is strong, and shortsighted. It does not accept that people may choose, with collective autonomy, to gather around the most pressing issues and draw attention to them. It is this type of reaction to terrorism that risks breaking up the forceful drive of coalitions that want both peace and climate change to be seen as the top priority for world leaders who are at this moment, in this city, for these two weeks. It is also a stifling knee-jerk reaction to real threats, one that elicits fear and fails to reflect the real attitudes of the public. It is handicapping momentum, decreasing the visibility of a growing global movement. But, what appears most unjust is to try to halt the agency of a collective and justify doing so for the safety of that same group.
Like Martin Luther King made clear in Letters from Birmingham City Jail (1963), instances of civil disobedience occur to draw attention to injustices that may not be locally perceived or committed, and those who gather themselves do so cognizant of the interrelatedness of injustice in all communities and states. The wisdom of MLK when he notes that "whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly. Never again can we afford to live with the narrow, provincial "outside agitator" idea." stresses this and scolds any government that bans protests during crucial moments of global change because THAT is an infringement on the rights of all men and women. Today in Paris we can feel the ghosts of the the French Revolution and the echos of the Enlightenment alive and getting louder. The civil rights movement that still must demand racial equality from its elected officials is more pertinent now than ever. The guiding forces that sought the same legally embedded rights of racial non-discrimination to all people, have now evolved into the environmental justice movement, where we are all equal under the same biosphere.
Though the criticism of violent agitators is a legitimate one; "an emergency state is a police state!" chanted loudly during the confrontations at Place de la République yesterday, requires more than honourable mention, it must stand alone as a message to any government that denies its citizens their right to gather freely.