Indigenous Climate Defenders Face Deadly Persecution in the Philippines

In a tragic start to 2026, an aerial military operation in Occidental Mindoro’s Barangay Cabacao left five civilians dead, including three Mangyan-Iraya indigenous children and two student researchers. The New Year’s Day attack by the Armed Forces of the Philippines also displaced 188 families and led to the disappearance of 24-year-old Chantal Anicoche, according to a new report on state violence against indigenous communities.

While authorities from the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC) framed the bombardment as a legitimate counterinsurgency operation against the New People’s Army, regional analysts point to a more complex reality. Cabacao is situated in a mineral-rich region where indigenous groups have consistently opposed environmentally destructive mining operations, including projects linked to Agusan Petroleum.

The incident highlights a troubling pattern in the Philippines, where “red-tagging” – the systematic labeling of indigenous peoples, activists, and environmental defenders as communists or terrorists – has become an entrenched practice. This strategy, legally bolstered by the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020, creates conditions that justify surveillance, harassment, and deadly force against targeted groups.

A recent report from Asia Centre, titled “Climate Disinformation in the Philippines: Legitimizing Attacks on Indigenous Peoples,” reveals how climate disinformation has become a critical amplifier of this repression. The report documents how misleading environmental narratives are strategically deployed to reinforce red-tagging, portraying indigenous resistance to extractive projects as both anti-development and a threat to national security.

“What we’re seeing is not just misinformation about climate issues, but a deliberate strategy that transforms legitimate environmental defense into a perceived security threat,” said a spokesperson for Asia Centre. “This creates a justification for military intervention in resource-rich territories.”

The consequences have been devastating. The Philippines ranks as the deadliest country in Asia for environmental defenders and fifth globally. Between 2012 and 2023, 298 environmental defenders were killed nationwide, including 17 in 2023 alone. Indigenous peoples, who comprise a significant portion of those killed, face disproportionate targeting.

The situation is especially troubling given the Philippines’ vulnerability to climate change. Ranked first globally for natural hazard risk in 2025, the country’s forest-dwelling indigenous communities already experience socioeconomic marginalization and heightened exposure to climate-related displacement, food insecurity, and livelihood loss.

The Asia Centre report identifies four key forms of disinformation driving violence against indigenous communities: fabrication of indigenous consent for development projects, greenwashing of extractive operations, promotion of false climate solutions, and deflection of state and corporate accountability.

These mechanisms work in tandem with red-tagging to facilitate military coercion under the guise of development and climate action. By portraying extractive projects as “sustainable” while labeling indigenous opposition as “terrorism,” authorities create a narrative that justifies forced displacement from ancestral lands.

Additionally, conspiracy theories that scapegoat indigenous peoples and activists legitimize legal persecution under counterterrorism frameworks. By framing resistance as a national security threat, these narratives foster impunity for enforced disappearances and killings.

“Climate disinformation is not incidental but instrumental,” the report states. “It’s a strategic tool that strengthens red-tagging, aligns state violence with corporate interests, and normalizes the militarization of indigenous territories.”

The Philippine government’s “Whole-of-Nation” approach exemplifies this convergence. While presented as a holistic security framework, critics argue it has institutionalized military presence in resource-rich indigenous lands. Climate disinformation sustains this model by providing ideological justification – casting extractive development as climate action and indigenous resistance as terrorism.

In this context, red-tagging functions not only as a security practice but as a form of climate disinformation itself. It operates as a coordinated system that delegitimizes indigenous claims, protects extractive industries, and enables state violence.

The Cabacao massacre thus represents not an isolated incident but the predictable outcome of a system where disinformation, militarization, and economic interests converge at the expense of indigenous communities and environmental protection.

Addressing this violence requires dismantling the narratives that sustain it, according to rights advocates. As long as climate disinformation continues to frame indigenous peoples as enemies of development and security, it will remain a powerful tool for justifying their displacement, criminalization, and deaths.