Africa

Lhuan-dre Pretorius becomes the youngest centurion in South African Test history as he makes a brilliant 153 on debut at the age of 19 years and 93 days.

Lhuan-dre Pretorius becomes the youngest centurion in South African Test history as he makes a brilliant 153 on debut at the age of 19 years and 93 days.

Critics of the agreement have questioned whether it is thorough enough and will be able to bring peace.

Find out the format, fixtures, kick-off times, venues and favourites for the 2024 Women's Africa Cup of Nations finals in Morocco.

High inflation and a cost-of-living crisis means many Malawians, like Suzanna Kathumba, face tough choices.

High inflation and a cost-of-living crisis means many Malawians, like Suzanna Kathumba, face tough choices.

It is unclear if the dozens of armed groups in eastern DRC will accept a ceasefire.

The deal has been hailed by President Trump as "a great day" but there are potential pitfalls.

Ghada Waly, the Executive Director of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime addresses the high-level debate of the General Assembly at the United Nations Headquarters. Credit: UN Photo/Loey Felipe

By Oritro Karim
UNITED NATIONS, Jun 27 2025 (IPS)

Since 1989, the United Nations (UN) has recognized June 26 as the International Day Against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking in an effort to raise awareness around the global drug problem and foster a more compassionate world, free of drug abuse. Through this year’s campaign, “Break the Cycle. #StopOrganizedCrime”, the UN underscores the importance of addressing the root causes of global drug abuse and illegal drug trading, and investing in reliable systems that prioritize prevention, education, and health.

Concurrently, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) released its annual World Drug Report, in which it analyzed the current trends in global drug abuse amid a “new era of global instability”. In the report, UNODC emphasizes the wide ranging implications of drug use on the economy, the environment, global security, and human society.

According to the report, roughly 316 million people used drugs (excluding tobacco and alcohol) around the world in 2023. UNODC also estimates that nearly half a million people around the world die annually as a result of drug use disorders, indicating a “global health crisis”. Roughly 28 million years of life are lost annually from disabilities and premature deaths due to addiction. Furthermore, there is an overwhelming lack of healthcare and education resources for individuals with drug use disorders, as only one in twelve people are estimated to have received treatment in 2023.

Cocaine has been described as the world’s fastest growing illicit drug in terms of global usage, production, and seizures. In 2023, approximately 3,708 tons of cocaine were produced, marking a 34 percent increase from the previous year. Roughly 2,275 tons were seized in 2023, a 68 percent increase from 2019’s figures. Additionally, global usage of cocaine has inflated to 25 million users in 2023.

As nations began to implement harsher crackdowns on drug production, the use and transportation of synthetic drugs, such as fentanyl and methamphetamine, has reached record-highs, accounting for nearly half of all global drug seizures. Drug trafficking groups have found ways to chemically conceal these drugs, making distribution much easier.

UNODC Executive Director Ghada Fathi Waly states that organized drug trafficking groups around the world continue to exploit global crises, disproportionately targeting the most vulnerable communities. With worldwide synthetic drug consumption having surged in recent years, the UNODC forecasts that civilians displaced by armed conflicts face heightened risks of drug abuse and addiction.

Although the cocaine market was once contained in Latin America, trade has extended through to Asia, Africa, and Western Europe, with Western Balkans having greater shares in the market. This is a testament to the influence of organized crime groups in areas facing instability, natural disasters, and economic challenges.

According to the report, since the end of the Assad regime in Syria and the subsequent political transition, nationwide use of fenethylline — also known as captagon, a cheap, synthetic stimulant — has soared. Although the transitional government of Syria has stated that there is zero tolerance for captagon trade and consumption, UNODC warns that Syria will remain a significant hub for drug production.

Angela Me, the Chief of Research and Analysis at UNODC, states that captagon use in the Arabian peninsula was spurred by regional violence, with members of terrorist organizations using it on battlefields to stay alert. Due to its highly addictive properties, as well as its severe impacts on physical and mental health, the drug has seen widespread consumption over the past several years.

“These groups have been managing Captagon for a long time, and production is not going to stop in a matter of days or weeks,” said Me. “We see a lot of large shipments going from Syria through, for example, Jordan. There are probably still stocks of the substance being shipped out, but we’re looking at where the production may be shifting to. We’re also seeing that the trafficking is expanding regionally, and we’ve discovered labs in Libya.”

Global drug trafficking is estimated to generate billions of dollars per year. National budgets to combat drug trafficking, in terms of law enforcement and prosecution, cost governments millions to billions annually as well. Healthcare systems, which are often underfunded for addiction-related treatments, are overwhelmed by the vast scale of needs. Furthermore, damages related to theft, vandalism, violence, and lost productivity in the workplace have significant impacts on gross domestic products.

Additionally, increased rates of deforestation and pollution are linked with global drug cultivation. Additional adverse environmental impacts include ecosystem damage from drug waste, which yields notable costs in environmental restoration efforts.

It is imperative for governments, policymakers, and other stakeholders to invest in programs that disrupt illicit drug trafficking groups and promote increased security, especially along borders, which are critical hubs for transporting concealed substances. Furthermore, cooperation at an international level is instrumental for the transfer of information and promoting a joint and multifaceted approach.

“We must invest in prevention and address the root causes of the drug trade at every point of the illicit supply chain. And we must strengthen responses, by leveraging technology, strengthening cross-border cooperation, providing alternative livelihoods, and taking judicial action that targets key actors driving these networks,” said Waly. “Through a comprehensive, coordinated approach, we can dismantle criminal organizations, bolster global security, and protect our communities.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Embroiled in a row over a minister's sacking, the president says he has the right to drop people in the government.

This marks the second wave of arrests within two weeks targeting the police's Crime Intelligence unit.

Just days after the death of her husband, Blessing Illivieda joined a Nigeria training camp to honour his memory through the game they both loved.

Just days after the death of her husband, Blessing Illivieda joined a Nigeria training camp to honour his memory through the game they both loved.

Just days after the death of her husband, Blessing Illivieda joined a Nigeria training camp to honour his memory through the game they both loved.

By Naïma Abdellaoui
GENEVA, Jun 27 2025 (IPS)

In an era defined by the gig economy and pervasive job insecurity, advocating for permanent contracts within the United Nations might seem anachronistic, even counterintuitive.

Yet, clinging to a culture of short-term, precarious contracts is not just detrimental to staff well-being; it’s a strategic and financial misstep that undermines the UN’s core mission.

Simultaneously, while internal restructuring under the banner of “UN 2.0” or “UN80” absorbs significant energy, the world burns with geopolitical fires demanding urgent, credible multilateral action. It’s time to re-focus: prioritize quality hires with stability AND make multilateralism genuinely effective, starting where it matters most – preventing mass atrocities.

The False Economy of Job Insecurity

The argument for limiting permanent contracts often hinges on perceived flexibility and cost savings. However, the reality is starkly different:

1. The High Cost of Turnover: Constantly recruiting, onboarding, and training staff for short-term roles is immensely expensive. Studies consistently show replacing an employee can cost 50-200% of their annual salary. For complex UN roles requiring deep institutional knowledge, context-specific understanding, and intricate diplomatic networks, these costs are amplified exponentially. Permanent staff represent a long-term investment whose value compounds over time.

2. Loss of Institutional Memory & Expertise: The UN tackles the world’s most complex challenges – climate change, pandemics, conflict resolution. Success requires deep historical understanding, nuanced relationships, and specialized expertise. A revolving door of staff erodes this vital institutional memory. Permanent contracts foster the accumulation and retention of irreplaceable knowledge critical for navigating protracted crises.

3. Diminished Loyalty & Engagement: Job insecurity breeds anxiety and disengagement. Staff on short-term contracts, constantly worried about renewal, are less likely to invest fully in long-term projects, challenge inefficient practices, or build the deep cross-departmental collaborations essential for UN effectiveness. Permanent status fosters commitment, psychological safety, and the courage to speak truth to power – vital assets for any organization, especially this one.

4. Quality Over Contract Length: The focus should shift decisively from “how long”someone is hired to “how well” they are selected and perform. Rigorous recruitment processes aimed at securing the best talent, coupled with robust performance management and accountability mechanisms, are the true guarantors of efficiency and effectiveness.

Permanent contracts for highly qualified, competitively selected, high-performing staff provide the stability needed for excellence, not complacency. It’s penny-wise and pound-foolish to sacrifice long-term capability for illusory short-term budget flexibility.

UN80 Reforms: A Distraction from Existential Challenges?

While streamlining processes and modernizing tools under initiatives like UN80 has merit, it risks becoming a consuming internal exercise that diverts attention from the UN’s fundamental crisis: the erosion of effective multilateralism in the face of escalating global turmoil.

The world confronts a resurgence of conflict, climate catastrophe accelerating faster than responses, democratic backsliding, and a fragmenting international order. Yet, the UN Security Council, the body charged with maintaining peace and security, remains paralyzed by the very tool meant to ensure great power buy-in: the veto.

The ghost of the League of Nations haunts us – an institution fatally weakened by its inability to act decisively against aggression because powerful members could simply block consensus.

Reform Must Prioritize Action, Especially Against Genocide

True UN reform cannot be confined to internal restructuring. It must courageously address the structural flaws that prevent the organization from fulfilling its primary mandate:

1. Veto Restraint on Atrocity Crimes: The most urgent starting point is suspending the use of the veto in Security Council resolutions aimed at preventing or stopping genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity.

When a permanent member wields its veto to shield perpetrators of these most heinous crimes, it betrays the UN’s foundational purpose and renders collective security a mockery. This specific, targeted reform is not about abolishing the veto wholesale but about preventing its most morally indefensible application. It is a litmus test for the credibility of UN reform.

2. Effectiveness Over Bureaucracy: Reforms must demonstrably enhance the UN’s ability to deliver tangible results on the ground – mediating conflicts effectively, delivering humanitarian aid unhindered, holding human rights abusers accountable, and implementing climate agreements with urgency. This requires empowering agencies, improving coordination, and ensuring mandates are matched with resources and political backing.

3. Reinvigorating Multilateralism: The UN must become a platform that fosters genuine dialogue and compromise, not just a stage for grandstanding. Reform should seek ways to better integrate emerging powers, strengthen the role of the General Assembly where feasible, and rebuild trust among member states around shared principles of the Charter.

Conclusion

Advocating for permanent contracts is not a retreat into comfort; it’s a strategic investment in the UN’s human capital – the bedrock of its effectiveness. It fosters the expertise, loyalty, and long-term perspective needed to tackle generational challenges.

Simultaneously, obsessing over internal restructuring while the mechanisms for global peace and security remain fundamentally broken is a dangerous distraction.

The UN was born from the ashes of catastrophic failure. Its reformers must have the courage to confront the structural impediments – including the unchecked veto enabling atrocity and the erosion of staff stability – that threaten to lead it down the same path.

Let’s prioritize permanent expertise and permanent purpose. The world, beset by crisis, demands nothing less than a United Nations capable of fulfilling its promise.

IPS UN Bureau

 

Excerpt:

Naïma Abdellaoui, Concerned International Civil Servant and Staff Representative. Member of the Executive Bureau of UNOG Staff Union

By CIVICUS
Jun 27 2025 (IPS)

 
CIVICUS discusses autonomous weapons systems and the campaign for regulation with Nicole van Rooijen, Executive Director of Stop Killer Robots, a global civil society coalition of over 270 organisations that campaigns for a new international treaty on autonomous weapons systems.

Nicole van Rooijen

In May, United Nations (UN) member states convened in New York for the first time to confront the challenge of regulating autonomous weapons systems, which can select and engage targets without human intervention. These ‘killer robots’ pose unprecedented ethical, humanitarian and legal risks, and civil society warns they could trigger a global arms race while undermining international law. With weapons that have some autonomy already deployed in conflicts from Gaza to Ukraine, UN Secretary-General António Guterres has set a 2026 deadline for a legally binding treaty.

What are autonomous weapons systems and why do they pose unprecedented challenges?

Autonomous weapons systems, or ‘killer robots’, are weapons that, once activated by a human, can select and engage targets without further human intervention. These systems make independent decisions – without the intervention of a human operator – about when, how, where and against whom to use force, processing sensor data or following pre-programmed ‘target profiles’. Rather than using the term ‘lethal autonomous weapons systems’, our campaign refers to ‘autonomous weapons systems’ to emphasise that any such system, lethal or not, can inflict serious harm.

The implications are staggering. These weapons could operate across all domains – air, land, sea and space – during armed conflicts and law enforcement or border control operations. They raise numerous ethical, humanitarian, legal and security concerns.

The most troubling variant involves anti-personnel systems triggered by human presence or individuals or groups who meet pre-programmed target profiles. By reducing people to data points for algorithmic targeting, these weapons are dehumanising. They strip away our inherent rights and dignity, dramatically increasing the risk of unjust harm or death. No machine, computer or algorithm can recognise a human as a human being, nor respect humans as inherent bearers of rights and dignity. Autonomous weapons cannot comprehend what it means to be in a state of war, much less what it means to have – or to end – a human life. Enabling machines to make life and death decisions is morally unjustifiable.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has noted it is ‘difficult to envisage’ scenarios where autonomous weapons wouldn’t pose significant risks of violating international humanitarian law, given the inevitable presence of civilians and non-combatants in conflict zones.

Currently, no international law governs these weapons’ development or use. As the technology advances rapidly, this legal vacuum creates a dangerous environment where autonomous weapons could be deployed in ways that violate existing international law while escalating conflicts, enabling unaccountable violence and harming civilians. This is what prompted the UN Secretary-General and the ICRC president to jointly call for urgent negotiations on a legally binding international instrument on autonomous weapons systems by 2026.

How have recent consultations advanced the regulatory agenda?

The informal consultations held in New York in May, mandated by UN General Assembly (UNGA) Resolution 79/62, focused on issues raised in the UN Secretary-General’s 2024 report on autonomous weapons systems. They sought to broaden awareness among the diplomatic community and complement the work around the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW), emphasising risks that extend far beyond international humanitarian law.

The UNGA offers a crucial advantage: universal participation. Unlike the CCW process in Geneva, it includes all states. This is particularly important for global south states, many of which are not a party to the CCW.

Over two days, states and civil society explored human rights implications, humanitarian consequences, ethical dilemmas, technological risks and security threats. Rich discussions emerged around regional dynamics and practical scenarios, examining how these weapons might be used in policing, border control and by non-state actors or criminal groups. While time constraints prevented exhaustive exploration of all issues, the breadth of engagement was unprecedented.

The Stop Killer Robots campaign found these consultations energising and strategically valuable. They demonstrated how UN processes in Geneva and New York can reinforce each other: while one forum provides detailed technical groundwork, particularly in developing treaty language, the other fosters inclusive political leadership and momentum. Both forums should work in tandem to maximise global efforts to achieve an international legally binding instrument on autonomous weapons systems.

What explains the global divide on regulation?

The vast majority of states support a legally binding treaty on autonomous weapons systems, favouring a two-tier approach that combines prohibitions with positive obligations.

However, roughly a dozen states oppose any form of regulation. Among them are some of the world’s most heavily militarised states and the primary developers, producers and likely users of autonomous weapons systems. Their resistance likely stems from the desire to preserve military superiority and protect economic interests, and the belief in inflated claims about these weapons’ supposed benefits promoted by big tech and arms industries. Or perhaps they simply favour force over diplomacy.

Whatever their motivations, this opposition underscores the urgent need for the international community to reinforce a rules-based global order that prioritises dialogue, multilateralism and responsible governance over unchecked technological ambition.

How do geopolitical tensions and corporate influence complicate international regulation efforts?

It is undeniable that geopolitical tensions and corporate influence are challenging the development of regulations for emerging technologies.

A handful of powerful states are prioritising narrow military and economic advantages over collective security, undermining the multilateral cooperation that has traditionally governed arms control. Equally troubling is the expanding influence of the private sector, particularly large tech companies that operate largely outside established accountability frameworks while wielding significant sway over political leaders.

This dual pressure is undermining the international rules-based order precisely when we most need stronger multilateral governance. Without robust regulatory frameworks that can withstand these pressures, development of autonomous weapons risks accelerating unchecked, with profound implications for global security and human rights.

How is civil society shaping this debate and advocating for regulation?

Anticipating the challenges autonomous weapons systems would pose, leading human rights organisations and humanitarian disarmament experts founded the Stop Killer Robots campaign in 2012. Today, our coalition spans over 270 organisations across more than 70 countries, working at national, regional and global levels to build political support for legally binding regulation.

We’ve played a leading role in shaping global discourse by highlighting the wide-ranging risks these technologies pose and producing timely research on weapons systems evolution and shifting state positions.

Our multi-level strategy targets all decision-makers who can influence this agenda, at local, regional and global levels. It’s crucial that political leaders understand how autonomous weapons might be used in warfare and other contexts, enabling them to advocate effectively within their spheres of influence for the treaty we urgently need.

Public pressure is key to our approach. Recent years have seen growing weapons systems autonomy and military applications, particularly in ongoing conflicts in Gaza and Ukraine, alongside rising use of technologies such as facial recognition in civilian contexts. Public concern about the dehumanising nature of these technologies and the lack of regulation has grown online and offline. We frame these concerns along the whole spectrum of automated harm, with autonomous weapons representing the extreme, and highlight the critical need to close the gap between innovation and regulation.

We also collaborate with experts from arms, military and technology sectors to bring real-world knowledge and credibility to our treaty advocacy. It is crucial to involve those who develop and deploy autonomous weapons to demonstrate the gravity of current circumstances and the urgent need for regulation.

We encourage people to take action by signing our petition, asking their local political representatives to sign our Parliamentary Pledge or just spreading the word about our campaign on social media. This ultimately puts pressure on diplomats and other decision-makers to advance the legal safeguards we desperately need.

GET IN TOUCH
Bluesky
Facebook
Instagram
LinkedIn
Twitter
Nicole/Bluesky
Nicole/LinkedIn

SEE ALSO
Facial recognition: the latest weapon against civil society CIVICUS Lens 23.May.2025
Weaponised surveillance: how spyware targets civil society CIVICUS Lens 24. Apr.2025
Technology: Human perils of digital power CIVICUS | 2025 State of Civil Society Report

 

Credit: United Nations

By Stephanie Hodge
NEW YORK, Jun 27 2025 (IPS)

I’ve spent much of my life in the machinery of international development, navigating acronyms, crises, and committee rooms with stale coffee. Through it all—amid war zones, climate summits, and remote island consultations—one institution has remained constant: the United Nations.

Revered, ridiculed, relied upon.

But here’s the uncomfortable truth: the UN, in its current form, is not fit for purpose.

That’s not a call to abandon it. It’s a call to fix the house the world built before the roof collapses entirely. Because while the UN remains the only institution with near-universal legitimacy, its structures are badly outdated.

The world it was built for in 1945 no longer exists. Today’s threats—climate collapse, mass displacement, AI-driven inequality—demand a smarter, leaner, more inclusive United Nations. Reform is no longer a luxury. It’s an obligation.

So, how do we get there?

Start with Governance.

The Security Council is the UN’s most glaring anachronism. It reflects post-WWII power, not today’s multipolar reality. But full-scale reform has failed for decades. So let’s be pragmatic. Expand the Council to include regional permanent seats without veto, allowing Africa, Asia-Pacific, Latin America, and SIDS a permanent voice.

Introduce term-based rotation for new seats, and bind permanent members to veto restraint in the face of mass atrocities. These reforms won’t fix everything, but they’ll chip away at the legitimacy deficit.

Follow the Money.

One of the UN’s biggest problems isn’t policy—it’s how it’s funded. Over 70% of UN development work is paid for by earmarked, donor-driven funds, creating a patchwork of pet projects and weakened country ownership. The solution? Cap earmarked funding. Reinvest in core funding mechanisms.

Introduce a Global Solidarity Contribution—a small levy on air travel or financial transactions—to create independent funding for global public goods. Because right now, the people who suffer most from climate collapse or pandemics have the least say in how UN funds are spent.

Empower the Country Level.

Ask any government where the UN matters most, and the answer is the country office—not New York. Yet the UN Development System remains fragmented and turf-driven.

It’s time to give Resident Coordinators real authority across agencies, consolidate back-office functions, and scrap duplicative structures. One-UN should mean one plan, one budget, one voice. Let’s stop pretending otherwise.

Reclaim Technical Integrity.

The UN’s comparative advantage was never its bureaucracy. It was its expertise. But too often, technical roles are politicized or handed to parachuted consultants with little country context. We need a Global Technical Corps—a pool of deployable UN experts drawn from all regions, especially the Global South.

We need to enforce merit-based hiring and ensure at least 30% of senior posts go to nationals from least developed countries. Diversity shouldn’t be window dressing—it should drive decisions.

Make It Democratic.

The UN Charter begins with “We the peoples”—not “We the diplomats.” Yet citizens have little say in the institution that governs global rules. We need a UN Parliamentary Assembly—an advisory body elected or nominated by regional blocs.

We need to formally include civil society in decision-making and ensure transparency in how leaders are chosen and money is spent. If the UN doesn’t reflect people’s voices, it risks irrelevance.

These aren’t utopian dreams. They are strategic, staged, and long overdue reforms. Start small. Pilot in willing countries. Build coalitions across the Global South and reform-minded donors. Anchor reform in crisis moments, when political will opens a window for change.

Because the next time there’s a war the UN can’t stop, a climate emergency it’s too slow to respond to, or a famine it’s too bureaucratic to prevent—people won’t ask why the system failed. They’ll ask why we didn’t fix it when we had the chance.

The UN doesn’t need to be perfect. It just needs to work. For everyone.

Let’s get to work.

Stephanie Hodge is an international evaluator and former UN advisor who has worked across 140 countries. She writes on governance, multilateral reform, and climate equity.

IPS UN Bureau

 

The United Nations Office at Geneva (UNOG), housed at the historic Palais des Nations, is the second largest United Nations centre after the UN Headquarters in New York. The facility, an outstanding testimony to twentieth century architecture, is situated in the Ariana Park in Geneva, Switzerland.

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Jun 27 2025 (IPS)

In the US, the success of a business enterprise or the value of real estate is reflected in a repetitive and alliterative phrase: “LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION”.

As the UN continues its plans for system-wide restructuring– amidst a growing liquidity crisis– one of the key issues on the negotiating table is the re-location of UN agencies: a choice between high-cost and low-cost duty stations.

The two major UN locations, New York and Geneva, are described as “among the most expensive cities in the world”, making it challenging for the UN to operate within its current budget.

Besides the UN headquarters, New York city is also home to several UN agencies, including the UN Development Programme (UNDP), the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), UN Women and the UN children’s agency UNICEF.

The city of Geneva, considered “a hub for global diplomacy”, is hosting more than 40 international organisations and UN agencies, including the World Health Organisation, the World Trade Organisation, the International Labour Organization (ILO), the International Organization for Migration (IOM), the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), among others.

Reacting to a possible partial UN pullout from Geneva, the Swiss Government last week announced “a generous financial package of support to the United Nations presence in Geneva.”

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said he is “very much appreciative of the Swiss Federal Council for this decision”. The United Nations is determined to continue working in partnership with Switzerland to advance the cause of multilateralism.

“Our presence in Geneva remains an integral part of the UN system. The Swiss support is crucial for this continued endeavour”, said Guterres.

According to a report from Reuters, Switzerland will spend 269 million Swiss francs ($329.37 million) to support Geneva as a hub for international diplomacy.

The 269 million francs covers the period from 2025 to 2029, with the government requesting a credit of 130.4 million francs from parliament later this year, a 5% increase from the previous period. The government has already approved 21.5 million francs for urgent measures to help Geneva-based organisations.

Asked for his comments, UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric told reporters: “You know, we see it as an act of generosity on the part of the Swiss Federal Government to support the United Nations’ work in Geneva. The UN’s presence in Geneva is critical. It is also historical, and we very much welcome the efforts of the Swiss Government in that regard.”

Somar Wijayadasa, formerly Director and Representative of UNAIDS at the United Nations in New York (1995-2000), told IPS “It is a generous move– but to dole out about $60 million extra each year is “peanuts” for the Swiss Govt. considering the billions of dollars that the 40 UN Agencies in Geneva contribute annually to its coffers.”

In the “UN80” initiative to audit and merge overlapping bureaucracies across all UN agencies, it can move some programs to more affordable locations around the world.

A good example, he said, is the Joint UN Program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) that was created in 1995, in the height of the AIDS pandemic (with 3.3 million people with HIV and almost a million died) has successfully curtailed the spread of the HIV/AIDS pandemic – from a death sentence to a manageable disease with proven treatments.

“UNAIDS can be easily re-merged with WHO, and located in countries in the Global South – with lower operational costs – where the burden of behavioral transmission challenges of HIV/AIDS remain highest. A leaner, regional, behavior-focused program could maintain awareness, and continue essential work without the legacy overhead.”

Another example, he pointed out, is the UN Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA) in New York and its branch in Geneva. The UN cannot, or has failed, to disarm or reduce the annually-increasing military budgets of the US, Russia, India or China.

For example, the UN finally adopted the now legally binding TPNW Treaty but which country has given up its nuclear weapons or stopped other countries’ urge to create a nuclear weapon to protect themselves from hegemonic warmongers?

In this modern age of communications, there are many bloated UN departments in costly New York and Geneva that can effectively, and cost efficiently, function from any developing country, declared Wijayadasa.

Meanwhile, as part the UN’s relocation plans, there are reports that the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) and UN Women may be moved out of New York and relocated to the Kenyan capital of Nairobi, described as the fourth-largest UN headquarters and the only one in the Global South.

Currently Nairobi serves as the global headquarters for UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme) and UN-Habitat. Besides these, several other UN agencies have offices in Nairobi, including UNICEF, UNDP, FAO, UNIDO, UNODC, UNV, and WHO.

But Kenya is currently embroiled in a political crisis. If the turmoil continues, the UN may have second thoughts on relocating more of its offices in Nairobi.

A New York Times report June 26 and titled “Kenyans Battle the Police a Year After Deadly Tax Protests” says at least 8 people were killed and hundreds injured amid nation-wide protests “laid bare the anger at President William Ruto’s government”

On June 26, the UN Human Rights Office said: “We are deeply concerned by reports of several deaths of protesters and many more injuries – of protesters and police officers – during demonstrations in Kenya on Wednesday.”

“We are concerned by reports that some protesters had gunshot wounds. Under international human rights law, lethal force by law enforcement officers, such as firearms, should only be used when strictly necessary in order to protect life or prevent serious injury from an imminent threat.”

Asked about the death toll and injuries in Nairobi, Dujarric told reporters June 26 said: “We’re obviously concerned about the violence that we’ve seen in Kenya. We’re closely monitoring the situation, very saddened by the loss of life”

“We look forward to an independent and transparent investigation. And it bears reminding that under international law, under human rights law, lethal force by law enforcement such as firearms should only be used when strictly necessary in order to protect life or prevent serious injury of an imminent threat,” declared Dujarric.

Additionally, some of the other European countries hosting UN agencies include:

• Austria: Vienna hosts the United Nations Office at Vienna (UNOV), the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC).
• Netherlands: The Hague is the seat of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), one of the principal organs of the UN.
• France: Paris hosts the headquarters of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).
• Italy: Rome is home to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the World Food Programme (WFP), and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD). Brindisi hosts the UN Global Service Centre (UNGSC), including the UN Humanitarian Response Depot.
• Germany: Bonn hosts several UN organizations, including the Secretariat of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), the United Nations Volunteers (UNV) program, and the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR).
• Denmark: Copenhagen houses the headquarters of the United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS).
• United Kingdom: London is home to the International Maritime Organization (IMO).
• Spain: Madrid hosts the World Tourism Organization (UN Tourism).
• Belgium: Brussels hosts the United Nations Regional Information Centre (UNRIC), a Regional Office for Europe of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), and a Liaison Office of the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA).

Besides Nairobi, the UN is also exploring three other possible relocation sites: Doha, Qatar Kigali, Rwanda and Valencia, Spain.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Cases of repression in Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania have fuelled concerns about possible collaboration.

Cases of repression in Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania have fuelled concerns about possible collaboration.