Received: November 15, 2022
Accepted: June 29, 2023
This article reflects on the Anthropocene against the backdrop of armed conflict. To this end, it analyses two mining projects: one in southwestern Antioquia in Colombia and the other in the Luhwindja Chiefdom in the Democratic Republic of Congo. After examining the post-agreement and post-war political contexts of each country, this paper describes the extraction projects implemented in the territories, as well as the forms of resistance of the local populations. It also depicts the reconstruction of the territory as a place for cognitive production, affective participation, and discursive imagination. The very concept of territory is re-signified, beyond its geographical definition, as a territory of life.
Keywords: Anthropocene, armed conflict, extractivism, popular resistance, territory.
Este artículo ofrece una aproximación al Antropoceno en el contexto del conflicto armado. Para ello, se centra en dos proyectos mineros ubicados en el suroeste de Antioquia (Colombia) y Luhwindja (República Democrática del Congo). Tras examinar los contextos políticos de posacuerdo y posguerra de cada país, se describen los proyectos de extracción que se llevan a cabo en cada territorio, así como las formas de resistencia de las poblaciones locales. También se hace una reconstrucción del territorio como espacio de producción cognitiva, participación afectiva e imaginación discursiva. En este sentido, se da un nuevo significado al concepto de territorio, trascendiendo su definición meramente geográfica para concebirlo como un territorio de vida.
Palabras clave: Antropoceno, conflicto armado, extractivismo, resistencia popular, territorio.
How can we approach ecological transition in contexts affected by armed conflicts and political transitions? This article addresses this question within the specific contexts of Colombia and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), two Southern countries undergoing, respectively, a “post-agreement” and “post-war” political transition
In contrast, our article considers the intertwining of the violence perpetrated between human beings and that inflicted on non-human living beings, while highlighting the resilience of the affected populations. This approach enables us to better understand how communities are impacted by Anthropocene-related changes. Their concerns stem not only from extractivist practices that threaten their livelihoods and harm the environment, but also from the need to constantly adapt their resistance strategies to these deteriorating conditions. The concept of territory thus emerges at the intersection of these different trends. Far from being reduced to its geographical dimension, it appears as a territory of life, where meanings and concrete struggles to inhabit the Earth converge. However, it does not erase the wounds from previous conflicts, which are a source of intense suffering and vulnerability.
From a methodological point of view, this article adopts a multi-site approach that allows communal knowledge production in response to situations with local meanings but linked to global extractivism processes. An ethnographic approach was also necessary to capture the discourse and construct the narrative about the relations between societies and their environment. In both cases, the research was based on extensive field visits, a series of life stories and semi-structured interviews with social leaders, and the documentary analysis of texts produced by grassroots organisations, including official policy and legal documents. This approach allowed us to capture social actors’ life perspectives and worldviews. The ethnographic approach adopted was proposed by
Legacy and current reality of armed conflicts
To understand the cases selected for this article, some contextualisation is necessary. Colombia and the DRC share the commonality of having faced war situations resulting in unprecedented humanitarian crises.
In the first case, an internal armed conflict ravaged the country for over half a century. Various peace processes have taken place in this region, with the most recent being the Havana Peace Talks (2012–2016), which led to a constitutionally binding peace agreement. However, violence has not ceased. While it decreased during the peace process, it sharply increased again during Iván Duque’s presidency (2018–2022), mainly against demobilised guerrilla members, human rights defenders, social leaders, and environmental activists
The second case is the multifaceted armed conflict that has mainly affected the eastern region of the DRC for nearly a quarter-century. This area shares borders with Rwanda, Burundi, and Uganda and is rich in natural resources, which has contributed to the ongoing conflict. Rising from the ashes of decolonisation and fuelled by the neocolonial practices of the former metropolis—which advocated and supported an authoritarian power—these conflicts are driven by two factors: On the one hand, Rwandan, Burundian, and Ugandan military forces that support rebellions within the region to destabilise it and appropriate its minerals resources; and, on the other hand, numerous local armed groups involved in mineral exploitation, often in collaboration with members of the national army or foreign armies. Recent studies indicate that approximately 80 armed groups are currently operating in the DRC and that their main source of income is gold mining and cocoa production (
This violence in Colombia and the DRC is intrinsically tied to the struggle over natural resources and the emergence of an “agrarian capitalism” (
The western environmental belt (WEB) in southwestern Antioquia (Colombia) threatened by a mining project: towards collective mobilisation
The expansion of the extractive model in Colombia began in the early 2000s as part of liberalisation policies promoted by international financial institutions, which led to a reorientation of the national economy towards export-led growth strategies. In addition to historical conflicts over land and territorial control among armed groups (
One of the largest mining projects in Antioquia is Quebradona, by the South African transnational corporation AngloGold Ashanti (AGA), located within the jurisdictions of Jericó, Támesis, Pueblorrico, and Caramanta. In 2011, the inhabitants of these municipalities became concerned when they noticed helicopters flying over the territory and studying its topography. Thus, what was initially an informal search for precious metal deposits (cateo) became a systematic and unauthorised exploration of private lands and other areas that directly affected springs and watercourses. These incursions into the territory were perceived by the community as alerts and led student, peasant, and indigenous organisations to mobilise. This initial mobilisation had two purposes: to understand the implications of large-scale industrial mining in the region and to prevent the fragile peasant economy from being transformed into a mining economy, which was contrary to their original vocation, culture, and way of life.
Despite neighbouring small mining municipalities, such as Titiribí and Marmato (Caldas), and experiencing a strong concentration of land due to coffee monoculture and livestock farming expansion, this region is characterised by a peasant culture. Furthermore, the hydrological configuration of southwestern Antioquia has fostered a close relationship between the inhabitants and the bodies of water that flow through the territory, which represent well-being, leisure, and enjoyment and carry spiritual significance (
The Luhwindja Chiefdom, in South Kivu (DRC), confronted with the consequences of mining: between landscape destruction and population displacement
Since the end of the dictatorship in the 1990s, DRC governments have prioritised the exploitation of the country’s mineral resources (
Thus, from the 2000s onwards, the populations of regions with high mining potential have seen an influx of transnational mining companies. Among them, Banro Corporation, a Canadian multinational, has acquired several mining concessions in eastern DRC for industrial gold mining. One of its mines, known as Twangiza Mining, is located in the Luhwindja Chiefdom, covering almost the entire surface area (180 km. out of 183 km.). Since 2011, the mine has been using heavy industrial machinery to reach the gold veins. To achieve this, machines raze hills, even mountains, without leaving anything in their path. More broadly, the mining modernisation programme has removed all social and moral constraints on the industrial extraction project. On the ground, Banro has engaged in land grabbing, population displacement, destruction of flora and fauna, violence against demonstrators, and profanation of sacred places
We will revisit the similarities and differences between these two case studies in the third section. Beyond this brief presentation, let us delve into the resistance movements that have been opposing mining projects “in the name” of their territories. This is what we will explore next.
Why opposing? The aims of resistance
In southwestern Antioquia, large-scale mining directly affects peasant frames of reference, which were conceived as sets of norms and values related to working the land, but also to preserving nature (
In addition to the impacts on the land, peasants argued that mining is alien to the “peasant vocation”, so becoming employees of the mine was untenable for many of them (
Deeply attached to the territory, a significant portion of the Luwhindja population opposed Banro’s exploitation. The failure to involve—or at least consult—the population in the granting of the “Twangiza” concession had generated conflicts between, on the one hand, the customary authorities who were complicit in this transfer and those who opposed it, and, on the other hand, between these customary authorities and the population. Part of this population chose to fight by all means against the exploitation. Their main goal, beyond the question of natural resources, was to enable the Luwhindja chieftaincy to maintain access to the territory. For a significant portion of the Luwhindja population, Banro had destroyed the chiefdom as such. As in the previous case, the issue at stake in the resistance was not only the serious social conflicts generated by the mining activity, but also, if not primarily, the associated ecological degradation. In the eyes of the population, mining activities have destroyed agricultural land, rivers, and forests
However, the specificity of this mining modernisation project does not end there. The establishment of the company was preceded by a long discursive process aimed at supporting the thesis of a division between natural resources and territories. This “discursive tactic” consisted of considering natural resources as autonomous elements within a given territory. Therefore, the question of the connection between these resources and the local populations, as well as the consequences of exploitation in terms of ecological degradation and impacts on the living conditions were not addressed. In this discourse, mining is seen as a simple “resource”, detached from any link with the other components of the territory. In turn, the exploitation of these “resources” is seen as a lever for creating wealth, which should solve the country’s economic problems and meet the social needs of the population. From this perspective, the policies put in place ignore the other components of the living world, such as water, forests, agricultural land, and all the flora and fauna. It is precisely against such a perspective that the acts of resistance in Luwhindja have been directed: they are intended to oppose a process of destruction that is already underway. The aim is nothing less than the reconstruction of the territory in the face of its annihilation, which can be called “reterritorialisation”. It is a question of rehabilitating the connections between the various non-human components of the territory, but also between human beings and their natural environment, in the awareness that the exploitation of one polarity necessarily impacts the other. More than a phenomenology of place, we are dealing with the existence of a global conception of the territory as a space of links between all the living components.
How to oppose? The modalities of resistance
The collaboration between social organisations and inhabitants took root in the municipalities of Jericó, Támesis, Pueblorrico, and Caramanta, where the first environmental committees (mesas ambientales) were established. These committees sought to initiate dialogues with mayors, municipal councils, and communal action committees (Juntas de Acción Comunal), which bring together various local actors. Peasant and environmental organisations such as the Asociación Agropecuaria de Caramanta (abbreviated ASAP in Spanish), the Agrupación de Caminantes de Támesis (abbreviated ACATA in Spanish), the Red de Acueductos Comunitarios de Támesis (abbreviated ACUATAMESIS in Spanish), or the Comité por la Defensa Ambiental del Territorio (abbreviated CODEATE in Spanish) played a key role in recruiting participants and creating a regional platform for the defence of the territory in the southwest. This collective effort led to the establishment of the Cinturón Occidental Ambiental (abbreviated COA in Spanish) in 2011. From its inception, COA’s objective was to move towards a non-instrumental understanding of the territory, placing “life” – in its broadest sense – at the centre
More than a decade of resistance in the southwest has managed, albeit temporarily, to slow down the “pressure on the neck” felt by the inhabitants of this territory during the exploration and environmental authorisation stages of the Quebradona project (
Mobilised populations began producing their own knowledge as soon as they perceived the risks weighing on the territory. In response to these risks, these collectives initiated “popular education” processes, particularly focusing on the environmental implications of the extraction projects. To do this, they started by exploring key mining-related aspects such as hydrogeology and biology, which enabled them to identify, among other things, the negative impacts on vegetation, biodiversity, and the hydrological structure of the mountains. In the case of southwestern Antioquia, the “sustainability schools” established by the Censat Agua Viva organisation and whose contents were approved by the participants themselves, have been fundamental in promoting the cross-fertilisation of experiences between different places at the national and international levels. The configuration of collective action has gone hand in hand with the search for the broadest possible alliances, engaging in dialogues with networks of lawyers and scientific experts, both national and international. This has indeed favoured the participation of citizens in the co-construction of advocacy strategies or political decisions, from which they are generally excluded.
Such a dynamic gave rise to what
Furthermore, the defence of peasant and indigenous cultures, together with their natural environment (including water and mountains), is rooted in a constant process of “affective recognition” of the territory. This finds expression in initiatives such as El abrazo de la montaña, which involves recognition walks aimed at weaving memories and collective identities in harmony with the territory. From the perspective of “socio-spatial” popular education, these walks highlight the interrelationships between the life trajectories of the inhabitants and the archaeological, historical, and cultural dimensions of the territory. Similarly, communication practices on social networks and the production of media materials reflect an ongoing effort to enhance the value of the region's heritage. The objective is to produce counter-narratives to the official definitions that reduce this sub-region to its mere economic role as a supplier of gold and other mining resources.
In this respect, it is important to underline the non-violent nature of the social mobilisations and/or protest actions, which typically involve road blockades by peasants and artistic marches in the municipalities. In a territory historically marked by armed conflicts and the constant stigmatisation and repression of social mobilisation (whether it be student, popular, or peasant mobilisations), it has become essential for all involved actors to protect the lives of participants, even in the face of continued intimidation practices. Therefore, understanding the affective dimension of a territory is crucial. The territory is not only seen as a source of material subsistence but also as a place for enjoyment and pleasure, where the care of nature is key to the preservation of life and human dignity. Serving as a fundamental lever of resistance, this affective dimension shapes how actors engage in legal or political activities to “defend the land”. It gives meaning to their advocacy and participation. Yet, what would happen if the extractivist project finally became a reality, even if enforced through repression?
The resistance in Luwhindja was sparked by the Banro company’s decision to relocate residents living at some distance from its facilities. The big challenge was determining how and where to relocate these households. To address this issue, the multinational resorted to a consultative structure, commonly referred to as a “community forum” in the DRC. Its purpose was to facilitate discussions with the local population regarding the practicalities of the relocation process and address community complaints during the negotiations with the company. However, such a structure did not previously exist in Luwhindja, which prompted Banro to collaborate with customary authorities in its creation. In 2009, a community forum was established in Luwhindja by the customary authority and funded by Banro.
Importantly, a community forum is a structure created by the local community to defend its own interests. However, one of the main contradictions in the Luwhindja community forum was that its decisions ran counter to the interests of a large part of the local population and showed serious irregularities
Territories: Between symbolic “re-signification” and practical contestations
In the backdrop of armed conflict, the two cases under analysis have many similarities, such as the presence of foreign multinationals aiming to extract minerals on a massive scale from specific territories, the persistence of peasant life marked by a radical asymmetry of positions and means of action, and a broadened conception of the territory versus an instrumental view that reduces it to a mere “resource”. Nonetheless, they also exhibit some differences. In Colombia, mining is still a project, and the local populations are mobilising to prevent its implementation. In contrast, in the DRC, mining has already taken place. In the Congolese case, resistance has a restorative focus, while, in the Colombian case, it has a preventive dimension. Regarding the networks of resistance, in Colombia, they connect various actors and have an international dimension, whereas, in the DRC, resistance is essentially peasant and local in nature. One of the most clear differences between both case studies, however, lies in the approach to violence. While the two territorial dynamics highlight the violence associated with global capitalism, often relayed or supported by local public authorities within the framework of the international division of labour, they also question the “proper use” of participatory processes:
Beyond these differences, it is the very concept of territory that these two case studies make it possible to enrich. For the inhabitants, it is not an ancestral entity that exists by nature. Nor does it denote a reality external to their way of life or their identity. On the contrary, the territory takes shape through processes of collective emergence, where inhabitants weave the threads of living relationships and maintain connections among the various components of the same place (including mountains, rivers, soils, animals, and humans). It emerges as a “theatre of shared experiences” between humans and their natural environment, while also functioning as a real “territory of life” that brings together social and biological life
The authors declare no conflicts of financial, professional, or personal interests.
The contributions presented in this article were collaboratively developed by all the authors.