The BREAK—DOWN

In April this year, the Colombian city of Santa Marta hosted the first Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels. The conference was a landmark gathering which sought to shift the terms of the international climate debate away from technocratic squabbling to the far more pointed question of “How can we end fossil fuel use?”. Much of the impetus for that conference was led by then-Colombian president, Gustavo Petro, who, on the campaign trail in 2022, had pledged to wean Colombia off what he called “suicidal” fossil capital.
Yet, just a few months later, the Colombian left would lose a narrow presidential election to the far-right challenger, Abelardo de la Espriella. In this, Colombia is not alone. Latin America, once home to the Pink Tide of left-wing governments, has experienced a series of political defeats for the left alongside the rise of an emboldened political right, whose emblematic examples are the Trump-esque figures of Nayib Bukele in El Salvador and Javier Millei in Argentina.
How do we account for this shift in the politics of Latin America? And what does it mean for the climate movement, not just in Latin America but across the globe?
This week, we’re joined by Guillaume Long, a senior policy analyst at the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, DC. He previously held several cabinet positions in the government of Ecuador and most recently served as Ecuador’s permanent representative to the United Nations in Geneva. This episode was recorded in late June 2026

Our guest today is Laleh Khalili, a Professor of Gulf Studies at the University of Exeter and author of several books, including Sinews of War and Trade. In this episode, she breaks down the mess of the US-Israeli war on Iran, shifting relations among the region’s petro-states, the US as an empire in decline, and the future of global energy.

In Canada, intensive resource extraction has long been baked into the country’s political economy and, arguably, to nation-building itself. Resource booms and policy choices have opened landscapes and livelihoods to large-scale mining and fossil fuel extraction, producing harms that are inseparable from the country’s colonial history.
Today, as supply chains are restructured around critical minerals and trade regimes are overhauled, Canada faces urgent questions about sovereignty, consent, and justice: can extraction be reimagined in ways that respect Indigenous rights and ecological limits? Or will new geopolitical pressures and rising tensions with countries like the United States simply deepen old harms? 
To explore these questions, we spoke with Jess Dempsey, a professor at UBC, and Jamie Kneen of MiningWatch to get to grips with the state of Canada’s extractive industries. Later, we were joined by Tara Marsden, an independent consultant from the Lax Ganeda (Frog) Clan of the Gitksan peoples, who has spent 30 years advancing sustainable development and operationalizing free, prior and informed consent, and who spoke to us about how the history and shifting terrain of extraction in Canada has been shaped by the struggle for Indigenous sovereignty.

The ratification of NAFTA (the North American Free Trade Agreement) in 1994 transformed Mexico in profound ways. Over the next thirty years it deepened and expanded the resource frontier across the country, disproportionately benefiting national and global elites. Mining activity exploded, and with it the socio‑ecological violence that follows large‑scale extraction. Anti‑extractivist struggles cannot be ignored—especially as Morena, the self-proclaimed progressive political party that holds power in Mexico after breaking seven decades of political duopoly in 2018, tries to navigate competing pressures. 
Morena’s landmark program—the so-called “Fourth Transformation"—frames greater state involvement and control over strategic resources and royalties as a means to fund social programs and reclaim national sovereignty, though its policies and outcomes remain uncertain.
This episode offers a closer look at extractivism in Mexico, tracing developments from the colonial silver boom to state‑led industrialization and from neoliberal open‑pit expansion to present-day state-led extractivism. Darcy Tetreault and Sol Pérez Jiménez join us from Mexico to offer granular historical knowledge and field‑based evidence, mapping how policy and capital have reshaped labor, land and water regimes. We discuss the deepening of resource frontiers, the persistence of elite mining interests, and the complex, contested forms of resistance—from legal reforms to grassroots refusal and struggle for territorial autonomy.

The term “critical minerals" suddenly seems to be all over the headlines. Securing access to this group of commodities, from familiar metals like lithium and copper to more obscure “rare earth elements” like yttrium, appears to be a growing priority of world leaders—particularly for those who consider China, currently the world's main producer of most critical minerals, a threat.
But what exactly what makes these commodities so “critical” in the first place? Who defines them as such, and who benefits from that decision?
In fact, whether a mineral is “critical” depends on who you ask, and what their strategic priorities are—whether that's producing electric vehicles, fighter jets, or AI infrastructure.
Importantly, extracting these minerals has profound human and ecological impact. This is what makes their governance so challenging: because even in many green utopian visions of the future, with a world powered by renewables and running zero carbon transit, there’s no side-stepping either the need for these minerals, or some of the harms involved in their extraction. What, then, can be done?
How should we understand the sudden push to control critical mineral supply chains? What is their role in competing visions of the future? How might we reduce the harms of extraction—can there ever be a form of extraction that is genuinely just or “sustainable”? 
To answer these questions, in this episode we're joined by Thea Riofrancos and Emily Iona-Stewart.
Thea Riofrancos is Associate Professor of Political Science at Providence College and author of Extraction: The Frontiers of Green Capitalism.
Emily Iona-Stewart is Head of Policy and Advocacy at Global Witness.

Welcome to Continential Shift, a series from The Break—Down and Geopolitical Ecology, where we examine the global rush for critical minerals and the struggle for resource dominance on the North American continent.
The phrase "trade regimes" may sound dry, but these rules and agreements are a defining architecture of the global economy. They determine who gets to exploit a country’s resources, and who profits from it. They determine whether states can be sued by private investors and corporations, or whether domestic sovereignty—of the state, or of Indigenous peoples, for example—is protected.
In our first episode we’re joined by historian Quinn Slobodian and economist Isabel Estevez to unpack how longstanding trade rules, investor protections and liberalization have shaped how resources are extracted and governed in North America. 
After the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement entered limbo last week when negotiators failed to make the July 1st deadline for agreeing a new deal, those same rules and institutions are suddenly more shaky than they’ve been for years, raising big questions about how, and in whose interest, the global race to dominate critical minerals will be run.
Continental Shift is made possible by support from the Public Scholars Initiative at the University of British Columbia.