The global transition toward renewable energy is often presented as a necessary pathway for addressing the climate crisis and moving beyond the fossil fuel era. However, a fundamental question remains: Does the green transition genuinely represent a break from historical logics of domination and extraction, or does it risk reproducing the same unequal relations of the past in a new form?
Historical experience demonstrates that colonialism was never limited solely to the occupation of territories and the direct administration of colonies. In many cases, domination was exercised through the control of resources, the unequal organization of the global economy, the extraction of raw materials, and the imposition of development models by centers of power upon peripheral regions. In the contemporary world, some scholars argue that these same logics are being reproduced through new forms, including the extraction of critical minerals, green energy projects, the control of supply chains, and global climate policies.
Within this framework, concepts such as “Green Colonialism,” “Green Extractivism,” and “Ecological Unequal Exchange” seek to explain how even projects designed to address climate change may, when embedded within unequal global capitalist structures, result in the transfer of environmental and social costs to countries of the Global South.
This interview with Dr. Hamza Hamouchene, researcher, writer, and activist in the fields of political ecology, climate justice, resource extraction, and the political economy of North Africa, examines these fundamental questions. Hamouchene’s work focuses on the connections between environmental crises, colonial structures, unequal development, and social struggles in the Global South. Accordingly, this conversation explores a broad range of issues, including the transformation of imperialism in the era of green transition; green colonialism and the reproduction of colonial patterns through renewable energy projects; North Africa’s role as Europe’s energy frontier; extractivism in the process of decarbonization; Western Sahara and the relationship between green energy and occupation; border control and migration imperialism; climate justice, energy democracy, food sovereignty, and alternative development models.
From his perspective, the central issue is not merely a change in the source of energy; rather, the fundamental question is: Energy for whom, produced by whom, and at what cost? Because if global structures of power, ownership, and inequality remain unchanged, the green transition may not mark the end of extractive logic, but rather its continuation in a new form.
Interview Details
- Interviewer: Mahdi Baeidi Nejad | PhD Student in International Relations, University of Isfahan
- Interviewee: Dr. Hamza Hamouchene | Researcher, environmental justice activist, and Director of the North Africa Programme at the Transnational Institute (TNI)
- Date of Interview: Monday, 11 May 2026
- Main Topics:
- Imperialism in the Green Era
- Green Colonialism and Green Extractivism
- North Africa: Europe’s Energy Frontier and the Reconstruction of Dependency in the Renewable Energy Era
- Extractivism and Decarbonization: Technological Transformation or the Continuation of Accumulation Logic?
- Western Sahara: Green Energy, Occupation, and the Question of Resource Sovereignty
- Border Imperialism: Migration Control and the Management of Global Inequality
- Climate Justice: A Just Transition Beyond Changing Energy Sources
- Epistemic Power: The Role of Development Narratives and Greenwashing in Legitimizing Extraction
- Energy Democracy, Food Sovereignty, and Alternative Development Models
- Global Crisis, the Decline of Hegemony, and the Future of the Global South
Note: In order to preserve academic independence and diversity of perspectives, it should be emphasized that the opinions expressed in this interview reflect solely the personal views of the interviewee and do not necessarily imply endorsement or adoption of a position by the Human Rights Institute of the University of Isfahan.
Interview Summary
Topic 1: Imperialism in the Green Era
- Question: How should imperialism be conceptualized in the context of the contemporary transition toward green energy? Does imperialism today operate less through formal occupation and territorial control, and more through economic, environmental, infrastructural, and epistemic forms of domination?
In response to this question, Dr. Hamouchene emphasizes that imperialism cannot be reduced solely to the period of formal colonialism, military occupation, or direct administration of territories. From his perspective, imperialism has historically taken different forms and has transformed according to changing political, economic, and global conditions.
According to him, in certain historical periods, imperialism appeared through direct occupation, military domination, settler colonialism, or overt forms of violence. However, in other periods, it operated through mechanisms such as economic coercion, unequal trade, debt, institutional dependency, and control over resources. Therefore, imperialism should not be understood as a fixed structure, but rather as an ongoing process of domination, the reconfiguration of power relations, the control of resources, and the integration of peripheral regions into the service of capital accumulation.
From his perspective, in the era of green capitalism and energy transition, imperialism has increasingly acquired environmental and infrastructural dimensions. This transformation does not mean the disappearance of military and political forms of domination; rather, it signifies the incorporation of new forms of control into existing structures of power.
To explain this situation, he refers to the concept of “ecological unequal exchange.” This concept refers to the asymmetric transfer of ecological goods, environmental services, raw materials, and the costs of environmental degradation from one part of the world to another.
According to this perspective, within the structure of global capitalism, peripheral regions—often referred to as the Global South—provide the land, minerals, energy, labour, and ecological capacities required by economic centers of power. In contrast, a significant share of the benefits generated through these processes accumulates in wealthier countries and the main centers of capital.
According to Dr. Hamouchene’s analysis, this situation results in the unequal distribution of both the benefits and the costs of the environmental crisis. Wealthy countries and dominant social classes benefit from resource extraction, energy consumption, and industrial production, while poorer communities, rural populations, workers, and peripheral countries face consequences such as pollution, water scarcity, land degradation, exposure to toxic substances, and increased vulnerability to climate change.
Within this framework, he employs the concept of “environmental imperialism,” referring to a condition in which the economic, political, and social structures of peripheral countries are organized in ways that serve the biophysical and material needs of centers of power.
From his perspective, the primary objective of this process is to facilitate easier access for capital to resources. This logic is deeply intertwined with the structure of capitalism, as capitalism externalizes a significant portion of its costs: onto nature, local communities, unpaid care work, colonized populations, and peripheral economies.
He emphasizes that within this system, nature assumes two contradictory roles. On the one hand, it is treated as a commodity—something to be owned, extracted, priced, and incorporated into the process of capital accumulation. On the other hand, it functions as a space where the costs and consequences of this accumulation are displaced; a place where pollution, destruction, and environmental damages are transferred.
For Hamouchene, the central issue is that if the green transition continues within the same capitalist framework and unequal global relations, it may reproduce the very logic of extraction rather than overcome it. In other words, changing the source of energy does not necessarily mean changing the structures of power.
If the systems of production, ownership, and consumption remain based on endless accumulation, resource extraction, and the transfer of costs to peripheral regions, renewable energy technologies may also become instruments serving the same historical patterns of inequality.
In conclusion, Hamouchene argues that the fundamental question regarding the energy transition is not merely about the source from which energy is produced; rather, it is necessary to ask: Who controls resources? Who benefits from them? And which communities bear the costs of this transformation?
From his perspective, without changes in structures of power, ownership, and North–South relations, the green transition may represent not the end of imperialism, but rather its new form.
Topic 2: Green Colonialism and Green Extractivism
- Question: What is meant by the concept of “green colonialism,” and how can renewable energy projects reproduce historical patterns of colonialism, resource extraction, dispossession, and unequal exchange?
In response to this question, Dr. Hamouchene explains that the concept of “green colonialism” or “green neocolonialism” refers to the continuation of historical relations of domination, exploitation, and plunder during an era increasingly defined by the language of environmental protection and sustainability. From his perspective, this concept demonstrates how the environmental, energy, and resource priorities of wealthy countries can be pursued at the expense of neglecting the same needs and concerns in countries of the Global South.
According to him, in recent years, researchers and activists from the Global South have developed various concepts to describe this process. One such concept is “green extractivism,” which illustrates how traditional models of resource extraction are being reproduced through the language of sustainable development and energy transition. Another concept is “green grabbing,” referring to the appropriation of land, water, and natural resources in the name of environmental conservation, renewable energy development, or combating climate change.
Hamouchene also refers to the concept of “decarbonization through dispossession,” which draws inspiration from David Harvey’s idea of “accumulation by dispossession.” This concept refers to processes through which the transition toward a low-carbon economy itself advances through the appropriation of resources and the exclusion of local communities.
From Hamouchene’s perspective, the emergence of these concepts stems from the fact that many renewable energy projects, despite their environmental objectives, can reproduce the same social and ecological injustices associated with oil extraction, mining, and industrial agriculture.
In this regard, he explains that large-scale projects such as solar power plants, wind farms, environmental conservation initiatives, and green hydrogen projects usually require vast areas of land. These lands are often described in official narratives as “empty,” “unused,” or “low-value” spaces, while in reality they are places where local communities, pastoralists, farmers, Indigenous communities, and other groups live and maintain deep economic, cultural, and historical relationships with the land.
According to his argument, the main problem emerges when green energy projects are implemented without genuine participation from local populations, democratic consultation, and guarantees that communities will benefit socially and economically. Under such circumstances, local communities may be deprived of their lands and resources in the name of combating the climate crisis.
Hamouchene emphasizes that, in many cases, land and water resources in countries of the Global South are being utilized for the production of green electricity or green hydrogen, with the energy generated ultimately exported to wealthier countries, particularly in Europe. In this situation, the language of climate justice may itself become a tool for legitimizing new forms of extraction.
He argues that such processes cannot be considered a genuine energy transition; rather, in many cases, they represent a form of energy expansion. This is because fossil fuels continue to constitute the dominant foundation of the global energy system, while renewable energy sources are being added to this system without fundamentally transforming the capitalist patterns of production and consumption. In other words, the technology changes, but the logic of capital accumulation remains unchanged.
He further addresses the issue of critical minerals. The green transition requires enormous quantities of materials such as lithium, cobalt, nickel, copper, graphite, and rare earth elements. These resources are essential for the production of electric vehicles, batteries, solar panels, wind turbines, digital technologies, and even military equipment.
From Hamouchene’s perspective, a significant proportion of the extraction of these materials will take place in countries of the Global South, including the Democratic Republic of Congo, Indonesia, Bolivia, Chile, Argentina, Zambia, and Myanmar. Without a fundamental transformation in the global political economy, the green transition may lead to the creation of new “sacrifice zones”—regions that bear the environmental and social costs of the global transition.
Hamza Hamouchene argues that the fundamental problem does not lie in renewable energy technologies themselves. The problem arises when these technologies are placed within the same framework that previously organized the extraction of oil, gas, and natural resources: a framework based on private ownership, resource exports, capital accumulation, and the transfer of costs to peripheral communities.
Therefore, if the energy transition proceeds without transforming global power relations, it may not bring an end to extractivism; instead, it may create a greener version of the same logic. In other words, the central question is not whether energy is clean or polluting; rather, the question is: Who controls clean energy? Who benefits from it? And who bears the costs of its production?
From Hamouchene’s perspective, without answering these questions, the “green transition” may reproduce colonial patterns rather than dismantle them—this time through a new vocabulary.
Topic 3: North Africa; Europe’s Energy Frontier and the Reconstruction of Dependency in the Renewable Energy Era
- Question: North Africa is increasingly presented as Europe’s energy frontier, particularly in the fields of solar energy and green hydrogen. How does this model of energy transition reshape dependency relations between the Global North and the Global South?
In response to this question, Hamza Hamouchene highlights that North Africa has long been defined as a strategic energy region for Europe. According to him, this situation is not limited to renewable energy but is rooted in a long history of energy relations between the two regions. From his perspective, fossil fuels continue to constitute an important part of the energy relationship between Europe and North Africa even today.
During periods such as the war in Ukraine and global energy market crises, European countries seeking to reduce dependence on certain energy suppliers have increasingly turned their attention toward countries such as Algeria, Libya, and Egypt as energy providers. Therefore, the green transition does not necessarily represent an immediate end to previous energy relations; rather, in many cases, older structures are being reconstructed in new forms.
Hamouchene explains that, alongside Europe’s growing commitment to climate targets, North Africa has increasingly been presented as a suitable region for the development of renewable energy projects. This trend has resulted in the emergence of large-scale export-oriented projects in areas such as solar energy, green electricity, and green hydrogen.
However, he argues that the fundamental problem arises when the renewable energy sector is organized in the same way as the fossil fuel sector: based on resource exports and dependence on foreign capital. In many of these projects, Western investments and Persian Gulf countries’ capital have entered the renewable energy sector, while the primary objective remains the production of energy for export to Europe rather than addressing the domestic energy needs of communities in the region.
To illustrate this issue, Hamza Hamouchene refers to two important examples: the TuNur project in Tunisia and the Xlinks project in Morocco. The TuNur project involved plans to develop large-scale solar power plants in southern Tunisia and transmit the electricity generated to Italy, Europe, and even the United Kingdom. The project was promoted by its supporters as an example of a mutually beneficial partnership.
However, Hamouchene argues that this narrative overlooks a fundamental issue: Tunisia itself faces serious energy challenges and remains heavily dependent on imported gas for a significant portion of its electricity production. Under such circumstances, establishing massive solar power plants primarily for exporting energy abroad, before meeting the energy needs of Tunisian citizens, may reproduce existing forms of dependency.
He argues that the primary priority should be the production of clean, affordable, and accessible energy for domestic populations, rather than transforming countries into exporters of green energy for foreign markets.
Hamouchene considers the Xlinks project in Morocco another example of the same logic. This project involves the development of solar and wind energy infrastructure in southern Morocco and the transmission of electricity to the United Kingdom through a long undersea cable. Although the project is technologically advanced and highly ambitious, he argues that the fundamental question remains: Is this energy being produced first to strengthen Morocco’s energy sovereignty, or to respond to the needs of European markets?
He emphasizes that Morocco itself remains dependent on imported fossil fuels for electricity generation. Therefore, renewable energy development can only be considered just when it prioritizes domestic needs, reducing energy poverty, and strengthening national energy independence.
Hamouchene further addresses the issue of green hydrogen. Green hydrogen is produced by using renewable electricity to split water molecules and generate hydrogen. In recent years, it has been presented as a potential solution for difficult-to-decarbonize sectors, including steel, cement, fertilizer production, and certain industrial processes.
However, he argues that the role of green hydrogen has been exaggerated within official narratives. Producing green hydrogen for export requires extensive land areas, massive renewable energy infrastructure, desalinated water, transmission networks, and export facilities.
From his perspective, this issue is particularly significant in water-scarce regions such as North Africa. Using limited water resources for the production of export-oriented hydrogen, rather than for drinking water supplies or supporting local agriculture, raises serious questions regarding environmental justice.
Such a model may simultaneously intensify several interconnected crises: increasing pressure on water resources, intensifying competition over land, deepening economic dependency, and transferring industrial added value to countries of the Global North.
In Hamouchene’s analysis, this represents the same pattern historically observed under colonialism: cheap resources are transferred from the Global South to the Global North, while technology, capital, and the primary economic value remain concentrated in centers of power. In other words, capital moves freely, but people do not; resources are extracted, while local needs are not prioritized.
Hamza Hamouchene emphasizes that this situation represents an example of green neocolonialism—a model in which the language of combating climate change may serve to reproduce historical patterns of inequality.
Therefore, the central question regarding North Africa’s energy transition is not whether solar energy or green hydrogen should be developed. Rather, the fundamental question is: For whom and for what purpose is this transformation being undertaken?
If green energy, instead of strengthening the energy sovereignty of local communities, merely results in the export of new resources and the creation of new dependencies, then it would not constitute a just transition, but rather the reconstruction of old relations in a new form.
Topic 4: Extractivism and Decarbonization: Technological Transformation or the Continuation of the Logic of Accumulation?
- Question: How is extractivism being reshaped within renewable energy systems and contemporary decarbonization strategies? Does the transition toward clean energy genuinely create a break from previous extractive models, or does it reproduce a new logic of extraction?
In response to this question, Hamza Hamouchene emphasizes that understanding the relationship between energy transition and extractivism requires first distinguishing between two concepts: “extraction” and “extractivism.” From his perspective, extraction itself is not inherently negative, as all human societies require some form of interaction with and utilization of nature in order to survive. The fundamental issue is not extraction itself, but rather the way it is organized.
According to Hamouchene, extraction becomes extractivism when it is placed in the service of capital accumulation; meaning that natural resources are extracted on a large scale, primarily exported to global markets, their main value is created outside the regions where they are extracted, and their social and environmental costs remain with local communities.
He argues that extractivism is a development model with deep roots in colonial history. This model transforms peripheral countries into suppliers of raw materials for economic centers of power, creates dependency, and prevents the emergence of independent development pathways.
From his perspective, extractivism is not limited only to oil, gas, and mining. This logic can also be observed in the agricultural sector. For example, some North African countries export products such as fruits, vegetables, tomatoes, citrus fruits, and flowers to European markets, while simultaneously remaining dependent on imports for essential food products such as wheat and grains. This situation creates a form of agricultural extractivism, because land and water resources are used for the production of export-oriented goods, while the food sovereignty of local populations is weakened.
According to Hamouchene, the same logic is now being reproduced in the field of renewable energy. In this context, he argues that extractivism is taking on a new form and appearing under the concept of “green extractivism.”
One of its important examples is the production of green hydrogen for export. From his perspective, green hydrogen production requires extensive use of land, energy, and water resources. If its primary purpose is to supply foreign markets, it may become a form of transferring the natural resources of the Global South to the Global North.
Hamouchene also describes this process as a form of virtual water export, because green hydrogen production requires significant amounts of water. In regions already facing water scarcity, the use of limited water resources for producing export-oriented fuel can generate serious social and environmental consequences.
The role of critical minerals in the energy transition is also central to Hamouchene’s analysis. Technologies associated with the green transition—from electric vehicles and batteries to solar panels, wind turbines, and digital infrastructure—require materials such as lithium, cobalt, copper, nickel, graphite, and rare earth elements.
From his perspective, a large proportion of these resources are located in countries of the Global South, and their extraction is often accompanied by environmental degradation, displacement of local communities, and unequal labour conditions.
Therefore, if the current capitalist model—based on increasing consumption, mass production, and permanent demand for greater energy supplies—remains unchanged, the green transition may generate a new wave of resource extraction in the Global South. Under such circumstances, wealthy countries may preserve their high-consumption lifestyles, while transferring the environmental and social costs to other regions.
Dr. Hamouchene further emphasizes that a genuine energy transition requires deeper transformations in patterns of production and consumption. Countries of the Global North must place reducing consumption at the center of their policies—not in the sense of reducing people’s well-being, but by decreasing unnecessary, luxury-oriented, and highly energy-intensive production and consumption.
In his view, solutions such as expanding public transportation instead of relying on private vehicles, reducing unnecessary production, and transforming consumption patterns are essential components of climate justice.
His final argument in this section is that decarbonization should not be limited merely to technological change. If the economic and political logic that created the climate crisis remains unchanged, renewable energy may also become incorporated into the same unequal structures of the past.
In other words, the central question is not only how the world can produce energy in a cleaner way; rather, it is what kind of economy, for what type of society, and with what relationship between humans, nature, and power should be constructed.
Without transforming the logic of capital accumulation, the green transition may not represent the end of extractivism, but rather a new phase of it.
Topic 5: Western Sahara: Green Energy, Occupation, and the Question of Resource Sovereignty
- Question: How does the case of Western Sahara challenge dominant narratives of green development, particularly when renewable energy projects become connected to occupation, territorial sovereignty, and resource extraction?
In response to this question, Dr. Hamza Hamouchene highlights that Western Sahara represents a clear example of the connection between green energy, territorial disputes, and the continuation of new forms of colonialism. This case demonstrates that even projects presented through the language of sustainable development and combating the climate crisis can, under certain conditions, become instruments for consolidating occupation and controlling resources.
He recalls that Western Sahara has been under Moroccan control since the 1970s, and that this control is not limited to political and military dimensions, but has also expanded into economic and environmental spheres. He explains that the region possesses significant natural resources, including extensive phosphate reserves, which play an important role in the global fertilizer industry. Morocco is one of the world’s largest producers and exporters of phosphate, and Western Sahara has been integrated into this extractive structure.
From Hamouchene’s perspective, exploitation of Western Sahara’s resources is not limited to phosphate. Export-oriented agriculture, activities related to fossil fuels, and, in recent years, renewable energy projects have also become parts of this extractive economy.
He argues that the development of green energy in this region, without addressing questions of sovereignty and the rights of local populations, may contribute to the consolidation of the existing situation. Some solar power plants and wind farms in Western Sahara have been developed with the participation of foreign companies, including European firms, and part of the energy generated contributes to economic activities that reinforce Morocco’s control over the territory.
According to Hamouchene’s perspective, such projects are not merely economic activities; rather, they can contribute to the creation of “new realities on the ground.” In other words, through the creation of infrastructure, investment flows, and economic linkages, these projects may consolidate the existing political situation and strengthen claims of sovereignty.
Therefore, one of the central questions in this context is how green energy projects can become instruments of political legitimization. Governments may present themselves as pioneers of clean energy and climate action, thereby creating a positive image of their policies, while issues related to occupation, dispossession, and control over resources remain unresolved.
He considers this situation a form of greenwashing—a process through which a government or corporation emphasizes its environmental achievements while concealing the political, social, and inequality-related dimensions associated with its projects.
From Dr. Hamouchene’s perspective, the fundamental question concerning green development is: Development for whom, and for what purpose?
If renewable energy projects primarily benefit political elites, foreign investors, and dominant economic structures, while local communities are deprived of their land, resources, and right to participate in decision-making, such development cannot have a genuinely emancipatory character.
He emphasizes that green development can only be considered just when it is based on democratic participation, respect for the rights of local communities, and genuine sovereignty of people over their own resources. Otherwise, green energy may reproduce colonial patterns rather than dismantle them, merely using a new language.
Therefore, the energy transition cannot be examined separately from questions of power, sovereignty, and historical justice. Clean energy is not automatically just; its justice depends on who owns the resources, who makes decisions, and who benefits from the outcomes.
Topic 6: Border Imperialism: Migration Control and the Management of Global Inequality
- Question: To what extent do migration controls and border security infrastructures function as extensions of imperial power in North Africa and the Mediterranean region?
In response to this question, Dr. Hamza Hamouchene emphasizes that borders should not be understood merely as security mechanisms designed to regulate the movement of people. In the contemporary world, borders perform broader functions: they regulate labour, discipline populations, extract economic value, and contribute to maintaining global inequalities between the Global North and the Global South.
According to him, “border imperialism” represents one of the important dimensions of power in the present era. Within this framework, border control is not limited to preventing the movement of individuals; rather, it forms part of a broader system that determines who has access to mobility, employment opportunities, and improved living conditions, and who remains in a position of vulnerability.
His analysis suggests that migrants moving from countries of the Global South toward Europe often encounter violence, repression, risks of death, detention, and inhumane conditions. The migration journey itself becomes an instrument of pressure and control, because even after reaching Europe, many migrants—due to their precarious legal status—are forced to accept low-paid employment and exploitative working conditions.
Hamouchene argues that this situation also serves the economies of the Global North. Contrary to narratives that portray migrants merely as a threat to labour markets, many European economies are, in practice, dependent on migrant labour, particularly in sectors requiring inexpensive, flexible, and legally vulnerable workers. From this perspective, border regimes do not simply prevent human mobility; they function as mechanisms for producing and controlling a cheap labour force.
Dr. Hamouchene further addresses the issue of elite migration and brain drain. From his perspective, global borders are structured in ways that restrict the movement of some groups while facilitating the movement of others. While poor and low-skilled migrants often face severe border restrictions, highly skilled professionals—including doctors, engineers, researchers, and specialists—are more easily absorbed by countries of the Global North.
This process creates a form of value transfer from the Global South to the Global North, because peripheral countries bear the costs of educating and training these individuals, while wealthier countries benefit from their expertise and labour.
According to Hamouchene, migration must also be understood in relation to the factors that produce it. People do not migrate simply because they desire to live in Europe; rather, many are driven by conditions rooted in historical structures of underdevelopment, colonialism, war, economic instability, sanctions, and unequal global relations. In other words, migration is not merely an issue of individual movement; it is also the outcome of power relations that have historically shaped relations between the center and the periphery.
Hamouchene identifies another dimension of this issue in the externalization of European borders. He argues that, in recent years, Europe has extended its borders beyond its own geographical territory. Within this framework, North African countries such as Libya, Morocco, Tunisia, and other states in the region have increasingly taken on the role of protecting Europe’s borders.
These countries control migration routes, restrict the movement of migrants, implement return policies, and prevent many individuals from reaching European borders. As a result, Europe’s border no longer exists only within European territory; rather, it is enforced along the Mediterranean coastline and even beyond it.
According to Hamouchene, this situation has several significant consequences:
It criminalizes migration, places poor and vulnerable populations at greater risk, maintains labour forces in controlled and inexpensive conditions, and preserves unequal relations between the Global North and the Global South.
Ultimately, at the conclusion of this section, Hamouchene argues that border control constitutes part of the broader logic of contemporary imperialism—a logic that distributes resources, capital, and labour unequally across different regions of the world. From his perspective, borders are not merely lines drawn on maps; they are instruments for managing human mobility and maintaining global hierarchies.
In other words, just as resources move from the Global South to the Global North, the movement of people is also regulated within the existing global order: capital moves freely, while human beings encounter barriers, restrictions, and border violence.
Topic 7: Climate Justice: A Just Transition Beyond Changing Energy Sources
- Question: How can climate policies be designed in a way that prevents the reproduction of inequalities embedded within existing economic and imperial structures? What principles should guide a genuinely just transition?
In response to this question, Hamza Hamouchene argues that a “just transition” should not be limited merely to changing the source of energy—that is, replacing fossil fuels with renewable energy. A genuine transition must be a transformative and emancipatory project; one aimed at moving beyond an economic system that simultaneously places pressure on both human societies and nature.
He believes that the climate crisis is not merely a technical or environmental issue, but one rooted in political and economic structures. Climate change is the outcome of decades of development based on fossil capitalism, unlimited resource consumption, and unequal relations between different regions of the world. Therefore, any solution that ignores these structures of power cannot lead to genuine climate justice.
From his perspective, a just transition must be based on several fundamental principles:
First: Climate Justice Is a Class Issue
Hamouchene emphasizes that the climate crisis must also be analyzed through the lens of class relations and power structures. The central questions in this regard are:
Who owns resources?
Who makes decisions regarding their use?
Who benefits from economic gains?
And who bears the costs of environmental destruction?
According to Dr. Hamza Hamouchene’s argument, the climate crisis is not experienced equally by all societies. Wealthy groups and large corporations contribute disproportionately to pollution, while poorer communities, workers, rural populations, and peripheral societies are more exposed to its consequences. Therefore, climate justice cannot be achieved without addressing questions of ownership, resource distribution, and economic relations.
Second: A Just Transition Must Be Feminist
Hamouchene argues that any genuinely just climate policy must also consider the gendered dimensions of the crisis. From his perspective, women in many societies are among the first victims of environmental degradation, land dispossession, natural resource crises, and austerity policies.
He emphasizes that care work, social reproduction, and responsibilities that are often unequally placed upon women must be placed at the center of transition policies. Therefore, climate justice without gender justice remains incomplete.
Third: A Just Transition Must Be Anti-Racist
Climate justice and climate policies must not result in the transfer of environmental costs to non-white communities, countries of the Global South, and historically colonized regions. He warns that the creation of “sacrifice zones” in poorer countries to satisfy the energy and industrial demands of wealthy states represents a continuation of historical colonial logic—even when justified through the language of environmental protection and climate action.
Fourth: A Just Transition Must Be Democratic
Hamouchene emphasizes that democracy in the climate sphere should not be limited merely to elections. From his perspective, climate justice requires economic and social democracy. This means that workers must have a role in decisions regarding the future of energy, local communities must be genuinely involved in development projects, and public ownership and social control over resources must be strengthened.
According to him, a project imposed upon communities without their participation—even if it carries the label of “green”—cannot be considered just.
Fifth: Climate Justice Goes Beyond Energy
Hamouchene argues that the climate crisis cannot be reduced solely to the question of energy. Climate justice is interconnected with issues such as land, food, foreign debt, national sovereignty, employment, industrialization, and decolonization.
From his perspective, the climate crisis is a product of “fossil capitalism,” and therefore, a genuine solution must also challenge the underlying economic logic of production and consumption.
Sixth: A Just Transition Must Be Sovereign and Anti-Imperialist
Ultimately, Hamouchene emphasizes that countries of the Global South must be able to determine their own development paths according to their domestic needs and capacities. From his perspective, this requires the creation of more independent economies, the development of industrial capacities, the strengthening of technological capabilities, and the reduction of dependence on externally imposed models.
He highlights the importance of self-centered or endogenous economies—economies that prioritize the needs of their own societies rather than merely functioning as suppliers of resources for global markets.
However, Hamouchene stresses that such transformation cannot be achieved by a single country alone. Climate justice requires regional and global cooperation among countries of the Global South; cooperation based on resistance to colonialism, unequal capitalism, racism, and various forms of domination.
Therefore, a just transition is not merely an environmental project; it is a project aimed at redefining the relationship between humans, nature, economy, and power.
Topic 8: Epistemic Power: The Role of Development Narratives and Greenwashing in Legitimizing Extraction
- Question: To what extent does the control of narratives play a role in legitimizing contemporary forms of extraction and domination, particularly in areas such as development, energy transition, sustainability, and green growth?
In response to this question, Dr. Hamza Hamouchene emphasizes that domination in the contemporary world is exercised not only through control over resources, land, production chains, and economic systems, but also through epistemic and discursive forms. From his perspective, power does not only determine what is extracted and who benefits from it; it also seeks to control the language, concepts, and frameworks through which these processes are understood and justified.
He argues that one of the most important arenas of power is the control of knowledge and narratives. In areas such as climate change, energy transition, and sustainable development, many dominant narratives are produced by international financial institutions, development organizations, governments, and major corporations.
He refers to the role of institutions such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and development organizations, which shape particular frameworks regarding development, energy, and the environment through reports, conferences, educational programs, and the production of specialized knowledge.
From Hamouchene’s perspective, these institutions are not neutral. Their analyses often overlook fundamental questions:
Who controls resources?
Who decides the direction of development?
Who benefits from economic projects?
And which groups bear their social and environmental costs?
According to him, many dominant narratives surrounding green transition and sustainable development marginalize issues related to class, race, colonial history, neocolonial dependency, and unequal power relations.
Within this framework, proposed solutions often have a top-down character. Instead of emerging from workers, local communities, farmers, and groups directly affected by projects, they are designed and presented by experts, consultants, and specialized institutions.
Dr. Hamouchene argues that many of these solutions are based on concepts such as privatization, economic liberalization, public–private partnerships, carbon markets, carbon credits, and the commodification of land, water, energy, and even nature itself. According to Hamouchene’s analysis, these approaches often do not resolve environmental crises; rather, they redefine them within the logic of the market.
He particularly criticizes the concept of public–private partnerships. From his perspective, although this term appears to suggest cooperation between the state and private sector, in practice it often means the privatization of benefits and the socialization of costs. In other words, private companies gain profits from projects, while economic, social, and environmental risks remain with governments and citizens.
From Dr. Hamouchene’s perspective, this issue represents an example of how epistemic power operates: first, a particular linguistic and conceptual framework is created in which a specific policy is presented as natural, necessary, and inevitable. For example, a project that may result in land dispossession, extensive water consumption, or increased economic dependency can be presented as “green development,” “energy modernization,” or “climate action.”
Under such circumstances, the language of development becomes not merely a tool for describing reality, but a mechanism for shaping and producing reality itself.
Nevertheless, Hamouchene emphasizes that alternative narratives are also possible. From his perspective, social movements, local communities, workers, farmers, and groups resisting extractive projects are themselves producers of knowledge.
For example, communities resisting land appropriation, water extraction, green hydrogen projects, or the privatization of resources are not simply opposing development; rather, they are advancing alternative visions concerning justice, sovereignty, and the relationship between humans and nature.
According to his perspective, confronting green colonialism requires several fundamental actions, including:
- understanding the mechanisms of capital and how they operate;
- exposing the economic and political actors behind development projects;
- identifying the role of domestic elites in reproducing dependency;
- and developing strategies of resistance based on justice and popular sovereignty.
Ultimately, at the conclusion of this section, Dr. Hamouchene argues that the struggle against new forms of domination is not merely a struggle over resources; it is also a struggle over defining the future. Power is most effective when it does not only control a society’s resources, but also shapes that society’s understanding of development, progress, and desirable futures.
In other words, confronting green colonialism requires more than changing energy policies; it requires the creation of new narratives about development, justice, and the relationship between humans and nature—narratives that emerge from the experiences of communities rather than solely from global centers of power.
Topic 9: Energy Democracy, Food Sovereignty, and Alternative Development Models
- Question: What alternative models exist to the externally dependent energy transition pathways in North Africa? How can energy democracy, food sovereignty, and independent development offer a different trajectory?
In response to this question, Dr. Hamza Hamouchene emphasizes that discussions about alternatives must be pursued across short-term, medium-term, and long-term horizons. The long-term vision should involve moving beyond a system based on unlimited resource extraction, economic dependency, and environmental destruction, toward a social-ecological or eco-socialist model—a model in which environmental protection, social justice, and human dignity occupy a central place in decision-making.
According to Hamouchene, capitalism cannot solve the climate crisis because this system itself, through its logic of expanding production and consumption, has been one of the primary drivers behind the emergence of the crisis. He notes that despite decades of climate negotiations, greenhouse gas emissions have continued to rise, while the interests of major corporations and fossil fuel industries have repeatedly influenced and constrained climate policies.
However, he emphasizes that even before achieving a broader structural transformation, specific practical measures can contribute to creating a more just transition.
First: Returning Essential Resources to the Public Sphere
Hamouchene identifies confronting the privatization of essential resources as the first step. Energy, water, and food should not be treated merely as commodities within markets; rather, they should be recognized as public rights and fundamental needs of societies.
Accordingly, he emphasizes the importance of public ownership, national control over strategic resources, cooperatives, and public forms of cooperation among institutions. From his perspective, placing essential resources under the logic of private profit often results in social needs being marginalized in favour of investors’ economic interests.
Second: Democratizing the Energy Transition
Hamouchene argues that an energy transition without genuine public participation cannot be considered just. From his perspective, local communities and workers must be placed at the center of decision-making regarding energy projects.
For example, if a solar power plant or wind farm is established near rural communities or pastoral areas, local populations should participate in decision-making processes, benefit economically from the projects, receive employment opportunities, and play a genuine role in their management.
According to him, a project imposed upon communities without their participation—even if it is labelled “green”—can generate social resistance and injustice.
Third: Decolonization and Liberation from Dependency
Hamouchene emphasizes the importance of the concept of delinking, associated with the thought of Samir Amin. From his perspective, delinking does not mean isolation or severing connections with the world; rather, it means rejecting a subordinate position within the global economy.
Countries should be able to build economies organized around their domestic needs, local capacities, and social priorities. This requires developing domestic markets, strengthening industrial capabilities, transferring technology, building research capacities, and enhancing domestic productive power.
He argues that countries of the Global South should not remain merely exporters of raw materials and importers of technology.
Fourth: Industrialization and Moving Up the Value Chain
One of Hamouchene’s main criticisms of current energy transition models is that many countries of the Global South remain confined to the stage of resource extraction. For example, a country may extract lithium, copper, or other critical minerals, while the production of batteries, advanced technologies, and industrial value-added activities takes place elsewhere.
From his perspective, genuine development requires moving upward within global value chains. This means that countries must develop production technologies, train specialized human resources, establish domestic industries, and move beyond the mere export of raw materials.
He refers to examples of countries that have attempted to restrict raw material exports in order to develop domestic processing industries and increase the value generated within their own economies.
Fifth: Debt Cancellation and Challenging Dependency Mechanisms
Hamouchene argues that foreign debt represents one of the major instruments of domination in the contemporary world. From his perspective, debt can limit governments’ ability to independently invest, develop infrastructure, and implement social policies.
Therefore, he emphasizes the necessity of cancelling unjust debts and reforming international financial systems. He also argues that free trade agreements and intellectual property regimes that prevent the industrial development of countries of the Global South require fundamental reconsideration.
Sixth: Reducing Consumption in the Global North
Hamouchene emphasizes that climate justice cannot be achieved without transforming consumption patterns in wealthy countries. From his perspective, if countries of the Global North continue their extremely high levels of energy consumption, mass production, and energy-intensive lifestyles, pressure for resource extraction in the Global South will continue.
Therefore, reducing consumption should not be understood as reducing people’s quality of life; rather, it should mean reducing unnecessary, luxury-oriented, and environmentally destructive forms of consumption.
At the conclusion of this section, Dr. Hamouchene argues that the genuine alternative to current energy transition models is neither isolation nor deeper dependency, but rather independent development and equal cooperation. From his perspective, energy democracy, food sovereignty, industrialization, public ownership, technology transfer, and South–South cooperation are essential elements of a pathway that can move countries of the Global South beyond their role as suppliers of resources for others.
In other words, the central issue is not merely changing the source of energy; it is transforming the power relations that determine how energy is produced, who owns it, and who benefits from it.
Topic 10: Imperialism, Crisis, and the Future of the Global South
- Question: If climate change, energy transition, and geopolitical competition are increasingly converging, does the current situation intensify imperial dynamics, or can it create opportunities for structural transformation?
In response to this question, Dr. Hamza Hamouchene emphasizes that the current global situation contains two contradictory trends simultaneously: on the one hand, the intensification of imperial dynamics; and on the other hand, the emergence of opportunities for rethinking and structural transformation.
From his perspective, the relative decline of the hegemonic power of the United States does not necessarily mean a reduction in its violence or interventionism. On the contrary, he argues that the weakening of the United States’ dominant position in certain areas has pushed the country toward greater reliance on instruments such as militarization, sanctions, warfare, and geopolitical pressure.
Hamouchene refers to examples including wars, the Palestinian crisis, pressure against certain independent states, and restrictions imposed on political opponents. In his view, these developments demonstrate the efforts of dominant powers to preserve their position amid a changing global order.
At the same time, he argues that geopolitical and economic competition over strategic resources and technologies has intensified. Critical minerals, renewable energy production chains, digital technologies, and military infrastructures have become new arenas of competition among major powers.
He explains that China has gained a significant position in many areas related to the energy transition, including the production of solar panels, batteries, electric vehicles, the processing of critical minerals, and technologies associated with hydrogen. In contrast, the United States and the European Union are attempting to preserve their positions through new industrial policies, economic protectionism, the creation of “friend-shored” supply chains, and control over access to strategic resources.
According to Hamouchene, this competition demonstrates that the green transition is not merely an environmental issue; rather, it has become one of the major arenas of power competition in the twenty-first century.
However, Hamouchene emphasizes that these developments should not be analyzed solely through the lens of competition between states. From his perspective, the central issue concerns the role of people and social forces in shaping the future. Dominant economic classes are willing to impose significant costs on societies in order to preserve capital accumulation and their positions of power.
This dynamic is not only visible in wars and political crises; it can also be observed in areas such as inaction in response to the climate crisis, inequality in access to vaccines during the pandemic, austerity policies, the deaths of migrants along border routes, and the refusal to provide compensation for climate-related damages to vulnerable countries.
Dr. Hamouchene believes that today’s crises demonstrate that the fundamental issue is not merely a change of governments or a redistribution of power among states, but rather the transformation of structures that produce and reproduce inequality.
At the same time, he argues that the weakening of U.S. hegemony may also create certain opportunities. In other words, the world appears to be moving toward a form of multipolarity, although this process remains complex, contradictory, and uncertain.
He refers to BRICS, South–South cooperation, and regional efforts to establish more autonomous relations, but warns that these initiatives are not inherently emancipatory. From his perspective, not all states operating within a multipolar order necessarily represent the interests of their populations, and some may themselves pursue authoritarian or unequal policies.
Therefore, the central objective should not simply be replacing one hegemonic power with another. According to Dr. Hamouchene, the ultimate goal should be the construction of a genuine emancipatory project for the Global South—a project based on sovereignty, social justice, democracy, decolonization, opposition to imperialism, and resistance against all forms of domination and discrimination.
Hamouchene emphasizes that states remain important, but independent social forces have become increasingly significant. Trade unions, student movements, civil society organizations, farmers, workers, and local communities must be able to pressure governments to move beyond political rhetoric and toward genuine transformation.
From his perspective, the historical experience of Bandung, decolonization movements, and past efforts to establish a new international economic order offers important lessons for the present. These experiences achieved significant accomplishments while also facing failures and limitations; nevertheless, they continue to provide valuable resources for imagining alternative futures.
In conclusion, he argues that the current crisis may either lead to another phase of intensified domination and extraction, or become the starting point for a historical transformation. The choice between these two paths depends on the ability of societies and social movements to create alternatives that challenge not only imperialism, but also the underlying logics of capitalism, colonialism, and environmental destruction.
In other words, the future of the Global South does not lie in replacing one dominant power with another; rather, it lies in building an order in which development, sovereignty, and climate justice are defined through public participation and respect for nature.
Policy Recommendations
- Designing the Energy Transition Based on Climate Justice and Local Community Participation: Green transition policies should move beyond a purely technological approach and incorporate their social, economic, and political dimensions. Renewable energy projects should be implemented through genuine participation of local communities, respect for property rights, and guarantees that local populations directly benefit from these initiatives. Without public participation, green projects may create new forms of dispossession and transfer environmental costs onto vulnerable groups instead of reducing inequality.
- Developing Energy Sovereignty Rather Than Turning Global South Countries into Exporters of Green Resources: Countries of the Global South should prioritize meeting domestic needs, reducing energy poverty, and achieving energy independence rather than focusing primarily on exporting green energy to foreign markets. Renewable energy development should serve public welfare, strengthen domestic infrastructure, and reduce dependency. Otherwise, clean energy may reproduce historical patterns of raw material exports and economic dependency in a new form.
- Creating Domestic Value Chains in Green Technologies and Critical Minerals: Countries possessing mineral and energy resources should move beyond their role as mere suppliers of raw materials to the global economy and develop industrial and technological capacities. The extraction of lithium, copper, cobalt, and other resources required for the energy transition must be accompanied by domestic processing industries, technology transfer, human resource development, and the creation of local added value. Without such transformation, the green transition may reinforce the historical dependency of Global South countries on industrial centers of the world economy.
- Strengthening Public Governance over Essential Resources Such as Energy, Water, and Food: Fundamental resources should not be managed merely as economic commodities and instruments of private profit. Instead, they should be recognized as public rights and essential components of human security. Policies concerning energy, water, and agriculture should be based on public ownership, cooperatives, social participation, and protection of the interests of future generations. This approach can prevent the privatization of benefits and the socialization of environmental costs.
- Establishing International Frameworks to Counter Green Colonialism and Ensure Historical Responsibility: The global climate governance system should address not only carbon reduction, but also historical inequalities and the responsibilities of industrialized countries. Developed countries should prevent the transfer of energy transition costs onto the Global South and play a greater role in climate finance, technology transfer, and compensation for environmental damages. Climate justice can only be achieved when the green transition does not become a mechanism for reproducing past unequal relations.
Conclusion
The interview with Hamza Hamouchene demonstrates that the climate crisis and the global transition toward renewable energy cannot be understood merely as technological or environmental transformations. From his perspective, the green transition is unfolding within the same historical structures of power, capital, and global inequality. If these structures remain unchanged, even clean energy technologies may become instruments for reproducing colonial and extractive relations.
The concept of “green colonialism” in Hamouchene’s analysis refers to how the language of sustainable development, clean energy, and climate action can, under certain circumstances, function as a cover for the continuation of older patterns of land appropriation, resource extraction, and the transfer of environmental costs to countries of the Global South. Therefore, the central issue is not renewable energy itself, but rather the political and economic structures that determine who controls resources and who benefits from them.
One of the central themes of this interview is the critique of an energy transition model that defines North Africa and other regions of the Global South merely as suppliers of land, energy, water, and minerals for wealthy economies. From the interviewee’s perspective, projects such as green hydrogen production, the extraction of critical minerals, and export-oriented energy infrastructures may create new forms of dependency if they are implemented without the participation of local communities and without strengthening national energy sovereignty.
At the same time, this conversation emphasizes that climate justice is not merely a matter of reducing carbon emissions; rather, it is fundamentally connected to questions of ownership, power, development, class, gender, race, and sovereignty. According to Hamouchene, a genuinely just transition must be democratic, anti-colonial, anti-racist, and based on meaningful participation by communities. It is a transition in which energy, water, and food are not treated merely as commodities, but recognized as public rights.
Another dimension of the interview demonstrates that domination in today’s world is not exercised solely through control over material resources; it is also reproduced at the level of knowledge and narratives. Dominant narratives surrounding development, green growth, and sustainability, when produced without considering colonial histories and global inequalities, may legitimize the same power relations of the past through a new vocabulary.
From this perspective, the struggle for climate justice is simultaneously a struggle for the production of independent knowledge and alternative narratives about the future. According to Hamouchene, the way out of this situation is neither isolation nor further dependency, but rather the creation of a form of sovereign and autonomous integration—a model through which countries of the Global South can develop their industrial, technological, and economic capacities, achieve higher positions within global value chains, and move beyond the role of mere suppliers of raw materials.
Energy democracy, food sovereignty, public ownership, technology transfer, and South–South cooperation are among the key elements of this pathway.
Ultimately, this interview demonstrates that the central struggle in the era of climate crisis is not only about the type of energy that will define the future, but also about the kind of society and global order that this energy will serve.
The fundamental question is:
Will the green transition lead to a more just world, or will it merely reproduce new forms of extraction and inequality?
From Hamouchene’s perspective, the answer depends on the ability of societies, social movements, and countries of the Global South to create an alternative model—one in which climate justice, sovereignty, democracy, and the protection of nature are not secondary considerations, but the foundations of the future global order.
