As the Brazilian government prepares to host COP30 in the city of Belém do Pará, during November 10-21, a massive, highly militarized and violent police operation is happening in Rio de Janeiro. On October 28, over 2,500 officers and soldiers launched a raid in the favela complexes of Complexo do Alemão and Complexo da Penha, targeting the criminal network Comando Vermelho. The attack resulted in at least 128 deaths, including 4 police officers.
This operation is not only the most lethal in the city’s modern history, but also illustrates a troubling contradiction: while Brazil seeks to position itself as a global environmental leader, it simultaneously continues to invest vast resources in militarized security interventions. These operations reflect a broader logic of militarization in Brazil’s security policy: deploying large-scale armed interventions into low-income communities that treat the citizens living in these areas as enemies of the state. Guided by a “counter-insurgency” approach, these interventions treat urban communities as battlefields, rather than prioritizing public safety or adopting prevention-oriented strategies.
Fernando Frasão/Agência Brasil
Residents reported indiscriminate gunfire, bodies left in the streets, and civilians trapped in the crossfire. Historically, these operations provide no real increase in public safety and fail to effectively dismantle criminal networks, as the true leaders of these organizations do not operate from the favelas. The governor of Rio framed the operation as a success after saying he was “at war” with criminal groups, while human rights organizations denounced the raid as a “state-sponsored massacre” under the narrative of the “war on drugs” in Latin America.
There is also an important connection to be made here: Brazil’s military and specialized police units have received training from Israeli instructors and acquired Israeli-made weapons, drones, and armored vehicles. These interventions are also supported by surveillance technologies exported from Israel, with systems that have been labeled “battle-tested” through their deployment on Palestinians. The transfer of these tools and tactics underscores a troubling link between the methods used to control and repress Palestinian populations and the strategies applied in Brazilian favelas.
While this incident grabbed global headlines, we should be questioning, once again, the scale of investment behind such operations, and how might those funds serve alternative aims? What could be achieved if even a fraction of these funds were redirected toward climate resilience, affordable housing, education, and public health?
The COP30, to be held in Belém, represents a moment of global significance: a time when governments, businesses, and civil society will exchange commitments around climate change, adaptation, and financing. Brazil, as host, will be under the spotlight — not just for its Amazon policy, but for how it addresses domestic inequality, human rights, and environmental justice. Some key points to think about are:
-
Demilitarization of security: shift away from war-zone policing in communities towards community-led prevention, mediation, social services, and restorative justice.
-
Reallocation of budgets: redirect funds from security deployments into climate adaptation (particularly in vulnerable urban and rural communities), affordable housing and basic services, and education programmes that empower marginalized youth.
-
Linking environment and social justice: recognize that climate vulnerability and social exclusion are deeply intertwined. Favelas, Indigenous territories, coastal zones — they suffer multiple layers of crisis. Investing in their resilience demands more than policing.
- Accountability: international forums should push Brazil not only on emissions and deforestation, but also on human security, police accountability, and social equity.
As Brazil hosts COP30, it stands at a crossroads: will it invest in control and repression, or will it channel its resources toward care, prevention, equity, and climate resilience? For the international community, the lesson is clear: true climate leadership must include demilitarization and a reallocation of public resources toward human and planetary well-being. This means adopting the principles of human security, ensuring that every person’s basic needs, rights, and safety are protected, and common security, which recognises that security for one group cannot come at the expense of another.
True and sustainable security requires investing in nonviolent strategies, the rule of law, economic and environmental protections, fair and transparent elections, and robust regional and global governance. Without addressing these structural conditions, the militarized approach merely reproduces inequality and violence, leaving communities exposed rather than protected.

