Africa

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, May 16 2024 (IPS)

As the ancient Greek saying goes: those whom the Gods wish to destroy, they first drive them mad. Perhaps destruction is too far-fetched here, but madness is closer home—in Washington DC

With the 7-month-old Israeli-Gaza conflict showing no positive signs of a permanent solution, there is a lingering sense of growing political craziness in Capitol Hill, the seat of the US government, once described as Israeli-occupied territory.

Last week Lindsey Graham, a senior Republican senator from South Carolina, who once chaired the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, implicitly advised Israel it should drop nuclear bombs over Gaza—perhaps ignorant of the fact that a nuclear fallout will also destroy parts of Israel.

In a TV interview, Graham advised Israel: “Do whatever you have to do to survive as a Jewish state”—as he compared Israel’s war on Gaza to the US war with Japan during World War II.

“When we were faced with destruction as a nation after Pearl Harbor, fighting the Germans and the Japanese, we decided to end the war by bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki with nuclear weapons,” Graham said in an interview with NBC News’ Meet the Press.

Meanwhile, Tim Walberg, a Republican House member said wiping out Gaza “should be like Hiroshima and Nagasaki” “Get it over quick”, he advised Israel.

Ramzy Baroud, a journalist and Editor of The Palestine Chronicle told IPS: “Sure, Israel is yet to drop a nuclear bomb, but it has dropped enough US bombs over the besieged Strip to create the impact of nuclear weapons.”

He pointed out that 75 percent of Gaza has been destroyed, and about 5 percent of the population have been killed or wounded. This was done by Biden and his supposedly softer approach, if compared to Graham, to the war.

“This is indeed madness, but, in a sense, it also reflects a degree of desperation,” said Baroud.

Meanwhile, 12 US Republican senators, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, have openly threatened the International Criminal Court (ICC) with sanctions if they target Israeli officials.

The threat is directed at both ICC officials and their family members — if and when, the Court moves forward with international arrest warrants against Israeli leaders over the war in Gaza.

“Target Israel and we will target you. If you move forward with the measures indicated in the report, we will move to end all American support for the ICC, sanction your employees and associates, and bar you and your families from the United States,” read the April 24 letter.

“You have been warned,” the letter added.

Norman Solomon, executive director, Institute for Public Accuracy, told IPS the goal posts on the USA’s political field have been dragged rightward since last autumn by the combined forces of standard militarism, craven political jockeying, biased mass-media coverage and ferocious pro-Israel messaging.

The countervailing force in the United States is coming from grassroots opposition to Israel’s mass murder and rejection of its support provided by the U.S. political establishment.

Often led by activists in such organizations as Jewish Voice for Peace and If Not Now, the highly visible protests last fall and winter seeded the ground for the upsurge in student-led protests in recent weeks on U.S. college campuses, he said.

This nonviolent grassroots resistance to Israeli genocide and oppression of Palestinian people has shocked the traditional American Zionist establishment and its allies in the leadership of the Democratic Party.

“The growing resistance has also provoked an extreme reactionary response from right-wing media outlets such as Fox News and many dozens of Republicans in Congress who have vocally and mendaciously denounced efforts to end the slaughter, which is subsidized by U.S. taxpayers to the benefit of both the fascistic Israeli government and military contractors based in the United States”, he argued.

“The flagrantly racist and ethnocentric reactions of Republican leaders, combined with the rhetorical Democratic vacillation that continues to support the Israeli-inflicted carnage in Gaza, comprise the two wings of U.S. governance. Most young Americans, in particular, are now emphatically opposed to both wings enabling the genocide,” he noted.

This is an ongoing political struggle over whether the U.S. government will continue to support Israel as it pursues its systematic slaughter of civilians in Gaza, declared Solomon, national director, RootsAction.org and author of, “War Made Invisible: How America Hides the Human Toll of Its Military Machine.”

https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/campus-protests-gaza

Meanwhile, according to the World Nuclear Association, the Chernobyl nuclear accident in 1986 was the result of a flawed reactor design that was operated with inadequately trained personnel.

The resulting steam explosion and fires released at least 5% of the radioactive reactor core into the environment, with the deposition of radioactive materials in many parts of Europe.

The United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation concluded in 2006 that, apart from some 5000 thyroid cancers (resulting in 15 fatalities), “there is no evidence of a major public health impact attributable to radiation exposure 20 years after the accident.”

“And some 350,000 people were evacuated as a result of the accident, but resettlement of areas from which people were relocated is ongoing”.

In their letter to Karim A. Khan, ICC Prosecutor, the 12 Senators say: “We write regarding reports that the International Criminal Court (ICC) may be considering issuing international arrest warrants against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli officials. Such actions are illegitimate and lack legal basis, and if carried out will result in severe sanctions against you and your institution”.

By issuing warrants, you would be calling into question the legitimacy of Israel’s laws, legal system, and democratic form of government. Issuing arrest warrants for the leaders of Israel would not only be unjustified, it would expose your organization’s hypocrisy and double standards.

“Neither Israel nor the United States are members of the ICC and are therefore outside of your organization’s supposed jurisdiction. If you issue a warrant for the arrest of the Israeli leadership, we will interpret this not only as a threat to Israel’s sovereignty but to the sovereignty of the United States.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

A Kenyan mother's desperate attempts to save her son who is on death row in Saudi Arabia.

President Ramaphosa approves a law that seeks to provide universal health care for all - but not everyone is happy.

Protesters demonstrate outside the Columbia University campus in New York City. Credit: UN Photo/Evan Schneider
 
The campus protests across the US aren’t primarily about the Israel-Hamas war but stem from other, deep-seated issues: alienation and radicalisation.

By Jeremi Suri
AUSTIN, Texas, May 15 2024 (IPS)

The campus protests that have spread to universities in every part of the United States are not about the war between Israel and Hamas, despite the heated rhetoric around this topic. Most of the students who are protesting know little about the conflict, its history and its ramifications for international politics.

Few of them cared deeply about the issue before the horrifying Hamas attack on Israelis on 7 October 2023 and the militaristic response of Israel’s government. What motivates the protests are two historical dynamics that long pre-date the current moment: alienation and radicalisation.

College students in the United States and other countries are more alienated from older generations than their recent predecessors. Crucial years in their social and emotional development were distorted by Covid-19, when they were forced to connect digitally rather than in-person.

They formed bonds with other young people in similar circumstances, but they did not build relationships with teachers, coaches, employers or other adult mentors. Many feel on their own, abandoned.

And the collective desire in so many societies to forget about Covid-19 means that they cannot talk about how it affected them. The denial of their reality by most adults makes students cynical. I see it in my own students who are talented, but somewhat hopeless.

Under attack

Cynicism and hopelessness have seeded anger (and sometimes violence) because struggling students feel that they are frequently under attack from politicians in the US. As I have written elsewhere, the Republican Party has waged a war on universities for at least a decade.

Elected officials like House Speaker Mike Johnson, Representative Elise Stefanik, Senator Ted Cruz, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and Texas Governor Greg Abbott have attacked faculty and students for pursuing racial and gender justice, for demanding forgiveness of exorbitant tuition loans and for seeking access to safe abortions. Republican policy positions run against the views of the vast majority of college students.

For this reason, Republicans across the United States have created barriers to political participation for young people. Republicans simply do not want them to vote, and when they vote, Republicans often allege ‘fraud’. Some obvious examples of voter suppression stand out.

States like Florida and Texas require voters to register a month in advance with a proof of permanent address, which is often difficult for students to document. These and other states also place voting locations close to older voters, farther from universities and downtown residential areas.

Gerrymandering means that rural areas with older voters are overrepresented; dense urban areas with younger voters are underrepresented. And Republicans across the United States are seeking to limit early and absentee voting — flexible voting options that young people who work and study full time value.

Alienation from Republican politicians has contributed to widespread student distrust of university leaders who frequently succumb to the pressures of Republicans (as happened with the firing of the presidents of Harvard and the University of Pennsylvania) or the demands of donors aligned with Republicans. Students almost universally blame university leaders for giving in to the interests that have disrespected and disenfranchised young, educated citizens.

Unfortunately, the Democratic Party has failed to draw the support of young people either. For the Democrats, the problem is not offensive positions, but a party structure that is dominated by older, mainstream politicians. They are boring for young people, they lack any connection to their world, and they seem too compromised and unprincipled.

In the case of President Biden, students see a decent but old man who is more of a political operator than a moral leader on issues that matter to them — including climate change, social justice and humanitarianism.

A feeling of homelessness

That is where the Israel-Hamas war influences the protests so urgently. Despite the extreme violence and suffering in the Middle East, many college students see a consistency in US support for Israel, with few conditions, that frustrates them. Why isn’t a Democratic president able to exert more influence to change the behaviour of the Israeli government in Gaza, where civilians are currently starving?

Why isn’t a Democratic president able to press Arab allies, especially Egypt and Saudi Arabia, to help civilians? For students who do not appreciate the complexities of foreign policy, the White House appears to be playing an old game in a world with urgent new problems.

Between Republicans and Democrats – the only two choices in the US political system – young people feel homeless. They have become radicalised because they believe that they must find new ways to get around the parties and express their demands. Campus protests today, as in the 1960s, are a form of extra-political opposition.

The students want to side-line Republicans and force Democrats to move far left. The arguments for ‘divestment’ are efforts to reduce the power of banks and financial interests in the Democratic Party and restore influence to ordinary citizens.

The demands for abandoning support to Israel are part of an agenda to shift US foreign policy away from traditional allies and Realpolitik.

Tragically, the radical impulse frequently manifests itself as anti-Semitism, which is reprehensible. In their naivete, many of the campus protesters see American Jews as a central element of the mainstream Democratic Party and, therefore, a source of the party’s resistance to their more progressive impulses.

Biden’s long ties to Israel appear to corroborate this mistaken point of view. Jews appear to be the powerful people in Washington and Jerusalem, and, therefore, they are to blame, according to protesters, for blockage on change that young people so desperately want. Students often articulate this judgement with language that is personal, offensive and threatening to all Jews.

Liberal and conservative Jews are revolted by what they see from campus anti-Semitism. Republicans take advantage of protester anti-Semitism to condemn, yet again, students and universities as a whole.

They pressure campus leaders to deploy force against the protesters, and they extol the bravery of police officers who break-up student encampments. The crackdowns lead to further student alienation and radicalisation, and the cycle of protest and reaction continues to spiral toward more anger, anti-Semitism and violence.

For historians, this is all very familiar. The cycles of protest and reaction are common in moments, like our own, when the basic conditions for the rising and educated members of society do not match established institutions of power and influence. Young people feel locked out, unrepresented and trapped.

They feel they can only make change by challenging institutions. And that is what they are doing. The older, established figures in society might sympathise at times, but they still hold tight to existing institutions, they resist major reforms, and they ultimately call in the police.

The cycle only breaks when a new generation gains power and pursues real reforms, as happened in numerous societies after the 1960s — with the end of the Vietnam War and the rise of détente and Ostpolitik. We need comparable reforms in policy and power today. We cannot turn back the clock to before Covid-19 or October 7.

Jeremi Suri holds the Mack Brown Distinguished Chair for Leadership in Global Affairs at the University of Texas in Austin. He is a professor in the University’s Department of History and the LBJ School of Public Affairs. Professor Suri is the author and editor of several books, most recently: Civil War By Other Means: America’s Long and Unfinished Fight for Democracy.

Source: International Politics and Society (IPS)-Journal published by the International Political Analysis Unit of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Hiroshimastrasse 28, D-10785 Berlin

IPS UN Bureau

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

By Jomo Kwame Sundaram
KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia , May 15 2024 (IPS)

The IMF warns of a decade ahead of ‘tepid growth’ and ‘popular discontent’, with the poorest economies worst off. But as with inaction on Gaza, little is being done multilaterally to avert the imminent catastrophe.

Grim IMF prognosis
Noting the world economy has lost $3.3 trillion since 2020, International Monetary Fund (IMF) Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva announced this grim warning before last month’s Spring meetings of the Bretton Woods institutions.

Jomo Kwame Sundaram

Instead of prioritising economic recovery, finance ministers and central bank governors in Washington agreed to continue policies worsening the situation. After all, curbing inflation helps preserve the value of financial assets.

Current policies suppressing demand are justified as necessary for financial stabilisation. They do nothing to address the various ‘supply-side disruptions’ mainly responsible for ongoing inflationary pressures.

These include the ‘new geopolitics’, the COVID-19 pandemic, wars, illegal unilateral sanctions, and market manipulation. Thus, ostensibly counter-inflationary measures have worsened pressures perpetuating stagnation.

Brave new world!
The new Cold War of the last decade and other geo-political considerations increasingly shape economic and financial policies worldwide. Powerful nations have weaponised their formulation, implementation and enforcement.

Years of economic stagnation have diminished productive and competitive capabilities. Meanwhile, recent geopolitics has changed geoeconomic relations, hegemony and its discontents. Laws, regulations and judicial processes are increasingly deployed for political – and economic – advantage.

Thus, Western governments have generated inflationary pressures with their economic and geopolitical policies, even if inadvertently. Perceptions of strategic decline are mainly attributable to the ostensibly market-based policies pursued.

The European Central Bank has followed US Fed interest rate hikes from 2022. Both still maintain high interest rates, ostensibly to keep inflation in check. Unsurprisingly, most developing country monetary authorities have had to raise interest rates to reduce capital flight and bolster their exchange rates.

Such interest rate hikes by central banks have raised the costs of funds, squeezing both consumption and investment. Raising interest rates has proved blunt and limited, while more appropriate measures have curbed inflation more effectively.

Instead of checking inflation due to supply disruptions, higher interest rates have squeezed both investment and consumption spending by both the private sector and government. Such cuts have hurt demand, jobs and incomes worldwide.

Although interest rate hikes worldwide have been contractionary, other US macroeconomic policies since the 2008 global financial crisis have maintained full employment in the world’s largest economy, with limited gains for most others.

Policymakers’ hands tied
Many developing country governments borrowed heavily in the late 1970s, mainly from Western commercial banks. But after the US Fed sharply raised interest rates from 1979, severe sovereign debt distress paralysed many heavily indebted governments in Latin America and Africa for at least a decade.

Much more government borrowing, increasingly from bond markets in the decade before 2022, exposed many developing economies to debt stress. This can be much worse than in the 1980s, as debt levels are higher, with more diverse creditors.

With borrowing exposure much higher and more market-based, with less from banks, debt resolution is much more difficult. Many governments have also guaranteed state-owned enterprise borrowings, with some even doing so for well-connected private enterprises.

Meanwhile, policymakers in developing countries today are even more constrained by their circumstances. Vulnerable to market vicissitudes and with fewer macroeconomic policy instruments available, they face pro-cyclical policy biases due to market pressures and supportive institutions.

Besides financial market pressures for fiscal austerity, multilateral financial institutions like the IMF impose such conditions on countries seeking emergency credit and other debt relief.
All this has led to deep government expenditure cuts, especially for public investments, crucial for recovery of the real economy. Hence, governments commit not to spend despite the urgent need for such counter-cyclical expenditure.

Voluntary vulnerability?
Central bank independence typically implies greater sensitivity to market pressures and private financial interests rather than national and government policy priorities.

Instead of strengthening national capacities and capabilities, central bank independence and autonomous fiscal policy authorities have disarmed developing country governments in the face of greater external vulnerability.

This toxic mix may well keep vulnerable governments in protracted debt peonage, unable to free themselves from its yoke, let alone give them the room to create conditions for renewed growth.

Economic liberalisation and globalisation have irreversibly transformed developing economies, with lasting consequences. Export opportunities have become more limited, not least due to the weaponisation of economic policies.

Meanwhile, most developing countries have turned to private creditors despite higher interest rates and borrowing costs. But even private market lending to the poorest nations has dried up since 2022 after the US Fed raised interest rates sharply.

With higher Fed interest rates, finance has abandoned developing countries for ‘safety’ in US markets. As debt service costs soared, distress risks have risen sharply.

Hence, many economies in the Global South are barely growing, especially after earlier collapses of commodity prices, which later worsened due to falling demand as supplies rose due to earlier investments.

IPS UN Bureau

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');   Related Articles

• Developing Countries’ Government Debt Crises Loom Larger
• Global South Stagnating under Heavier Debt Burden
• North Ignores ‘Perfect Storm’ in Global South
• Onerous Debt Making Poorest Poorer
• Rich Nations, IMF Deepen World Stagnation
• Inflation Phobia Hastens Recessions, Debt Crises
• 1980s’ Redux? New context, Old Threats

Delegates say the survival of humanity is interlinked with the sustainable use of ocean and marine biodiversity resources. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS

By Joyce Chimbi
NAIROBI, May 15 2024 (IPS)

The oceans are as fascinating as they are mysterious. Home to the largest animals to ever live on Earth and billions of the tiniest, the top 100 meters of the open oceans host the majority of sea life, such as fish, turtles, and marine mammals. But there is another world far below the surface. In the belly of the ocean, there are seamounts—underwater mountains that rise 1,000 meters or more from the seafloor.

It is within this context that negotiations on critical science, technical skills, and technology deepened on the second day of the 26th session of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical, and Technological Advice (SBSTTA) of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). Putting ocean action on the global agenda is a top priority to ensure conservation and sustainable use of marine and coastal biodiversity. Emphasizing an urgent need for further work on ecologically or biologically significant marine areas.

“The survival of humanity is interlinked with the sustainable use of ocean and marine biodiversity resources. We rely on the ocean for food, relaxation, and inspiration. But now the ocean is under threat, and that threat is being passed on to our lives on land. We have to invest time, money, and every resource possible to save our oceans and, by doing so, save ourselves. Our biggest revenue comes from fisheries, and now we have to worry about rising sea level as we are a low-lying island,” Eleala Avanitele from the Forest Peoples Program in Tuvalu told IPS.

Scientists warn that Tuvalu, the fourth-smallest country in the world, is sinking due to its vulnerability to rising sea levels, as the nation comprises nine low-lying coral atolls and islands. Across the globe, the world is in a crisis as oceans provide 50 percent of all oxygen on Earth and 50 to 80 percent of all life on Earth. This life is now at stake.

Thus far, the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, also known as the Biodiversity Plan, has been front and centre during ongoing negotiations, as it is a strategic plan for the implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), a global agreement that covers all aspects of biological diversity and is considered a framework for governments and the whole of society.

Harrison Ajebe Nnoko Ngaaje from Ajemalebu Self Help (Ajesh) in Cameroon told IPS that his organization is a CSO registered in Cameroon, Ghana, Tanzania, and the USA to create synergies and collaboration within and beyond the continent for the restoration, protection, and sustainable management of key biodiversity areas.

“Conservation and sustainable use of marine and coastal biodiversity is very critical to Cameroon due to its vast and unique ecosystem and biodiversity. Limbe Beach, for instance, has shiny black sandy beaches made of lava sand from the Mt. Cameroon eruptions, an active volcano in the south-west region of Cameroon. We have mangroves under serious threat of degradation. Ajesh is strongly focused on marine protected area management and the conservation of marine aquatic ecosystems.”

More than half of all marine species could be in danger of extinction by 2100. Nearly 60 percent of the world’s marine ecosystems have been altered or handled unsustainably. Marine, coastal, and island biodiversity were discussed within the context of the Biodiversity Plan. Target 3 of the Plan aims to ensure and enable that by 2030 at least 30 percent of terrestrial and inland water areas, and of marine and coastal areas, especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services, are effectively conserved and managed.

The main goal of the SBSTTA discussions was to find and fix areas that need more attention under the Convention in order to help carry out the Biodiversity Plan for marine, coastal, and island biodiversity.

Despite the Conference of the Parties adopting the program of work on marine and coastal biological diversity at its fourth meeting in 1998 and the program of work on island biodiversity in 2006, the world is significantly behind schedule when it comes to the conservation and sustainable use of marine and coastal biodiversity. Nevertheless, CBD continues to prioritize and facilitate cooperation and collaboration with relevant global and regional organizations and initiatives with regard to marine and coastal biodiversity.

“It is very important that civil society, youths, and Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs) are part of the SBSTTA process, observing and being allowed the opportunity to make remarks. Parties make decisions but these actors also implement and are at the forefront of facing the consequences of biodiversity loss,” Ngaaje says.

Onyango Adhiambo, a youth delegate from academia and research under the International University Network on Cultural and Biological Diversity, supported Ngaaje’s remarks.

“Young people will need to understand the science, technical skills, and technology at play in saving our planet, for soon we will need to step in and step up. The future, which is now at stake, belongs to us, and when called upon to intervene on what the parties agree to, we must do so efficiently, effectively, and sustainably to save natural resources for future generations,” Adhiambo said.

Highlights from the session included a recognition of the importance of science for decision-making and that there are many areas of the programmes of work on marine and coastal biodiversity and on island biodiversity that have not been fully implemented and for which enhanced capacity-building and development, in particular for least developed countries and small island developing states, are needed.

The 2022 Biodiversity Plan says that we can get back on track by creating “ecologically representative, well-connected, and fairly governed systems of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, recognizing indigenous and traditional territories, where applicable, and integrating them into larger landscapes, seascapes, and the ocean, while ensuring that any sustainable use, where appropriate in such areas, is fully consistent with conservation outcomes, recognizing and respecting the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities, including over their traditional territories.”

Equally important is the agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction, which was adopted on June 19, 2023.

Collaboration in ocean conservation beyond national boundaries was strongly encouraged on issues such as marine genetic resources, including the fair and equitable sharing of benefits; measures such as area-based management tools, including marine protected areas; environmental impact assessments; and capacity-building and the transfer of marine technology.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');   Related Articles

• SBSTTA and SBI—Biodiversity Meetings Crucial for the Global South Begin
• Biodiversity Masterplan: Negotiations on Crucial Science, Technology for Implementation Underway
• We Should Aim to be at Peace with Nature, Says David Cooper of UN Convention on Biological Diversity

Illegal shipments of rosewood continue and some of the profit ends up with jihadists, research says.

By Yasmine Sherif
NEW YORK, May 14 2024 (IPS)

The words above, by the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle, serve as a reminder that we still have a long way to go to in educating ourselves. In doing so, we will naturally ensure that the young generation can access an inclusive quality education and use their knowledge to build a world of justice, equity, peace and security.

Yet, with brutal atrocities and horrific conflicts relentlessly spreading in Eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, Gaza, the Sudan and Ukraine – in addition to another 50 devastating conflicts taking place around the world – we cannot say in all honesty that we are using our hearts. It would also be dishonest to claim that since the proclamation of the UN Charter in San Francisco we have built a world based on human rights, peace and security.

Instead, the gulf between the rule of law and today’s wicked reality is only widening. In this dark abyss, millions upon millions of vulnerable and innocent children and youth are pleading for humanity and crying out for respect of their inherent human rights, starting with the foundational right to an inclusive quality education in a protective learning environment.

We have created a divided, bitter world reminiscent of a bloody battlefield. A world of destruction, disregard for human life and the earth itself. One begs to ask the question whether it really matters if we have advanced in technology while we are losing our humanity. Or, as Martin Luther King Jr said: “Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men.”

Consequently, over 226 million children and adolescents currently living in these battlefields cannot access a quality education – with many also losing their mothers, fathers, siblings, limbs, homes and future. It is quite astonishing how destructive the mind can be in the absence of emotional intelligence or the education of the heart.

Schools, teachers and students are purposely and blatantly targeted, adolescent girls are subjugated and pushed into the shadows, and both girls and boys are victimized by wars and systematic violations of their inherent human rights. It has been going on for so long now that the abnormal has almost become normal. This cannot continue.

When will we respond to the universal and collective commitments outlined in the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Sustainable Development Goals? When will we realize the right of every child to an education in a safe learning environment?

It will only come the day that we begin to educate our hearts as well as our minds.

An educated heart cannot turn a blind eye to the unrelenting destruction of human life or nature. An educated heart acts to prevent the growing inequities in the world. An educated heart finds it unbearable to ignore the right of 226 million children to a quality education.

According to Education Cannot Wait’s strategic partner Educo, humanitarian appeals to meet education demands have dramatically increased more than sevenfold in the last decade – from US$517 million to US$3.785 billion – while contributions have only increased fourfold over the same period, from US$190 million to US$805 million.

The gap is daunting and the consequences for children caught in emergencies and protracted crises are beyond devastating. Indeed, this growing funding gap will result in dangerous consequences for the world. According to Educo’s analysis, “88% of the countries and territories in humanitarian crises have significant or fundamental challenges for achieving the SDG goal (SDG4) for education.”

In forgotten crises, such as Bangladesh, the Central African Republic, Chad, Lebanon, Yemen and beyond, we have instead contributed to creating a generational gap and perpetuating cycles of violence, poverty, forced displacement and further inequality.

There is also a significant gap between the Global North and Global South. In OECD countries, around 7% of GDP is spent on primary and secondary education per student every year. In some countries, such as Luxembourg, it rises to as much as US$25,000 a year per student.

On the other hand, according to the IMF: “In sub-Saharan Africa, the median education budget was equal to about 3.5% of GDP in 2020 – below the international recommendation of at least 4% of GDP. Recent IMF analysis reveals that achieving the key Sustainable Development Goal of universal primary and secondary school enrollment by 2030 may require doubling education expenditures as a share of GDP, including from both public and private funding sources.”

An educated heart cannot accept these figures and leave millions of young lives and the potential of their futures behind. The resources exist. Referring to Martin Luther King Jr’s quote above, the question is how we choose to use these resources. We can either continue on the path of destruction or take a more constructive and responsible approach.

By crowding in resources from the public and private sectors, we have the chance to educate both the hearts and the minds of an entire generation. A generation that may be the one establishing human rights, peace and security for all, while creating a world of shared values that rests on the rule of law, rather than the rule by force.

In this month’s high-level interview with Amy Clarke, Co-Founder and Chief Impact Officer for Tribe Impact Capital LLP, we explore a promising new modality to connect private sector capital to sustainable results, environment and building a better world. In joining forces with Education Cannot Wait, Amy Clarke says: “As ECW works tirelessly to address the immediate educational needs of these children, it’s crucial we also forge a path toward a future that promises fairness, justice and equity.” As such, Tribe Impact Capital LLP stands out as one of our private sector partners that lead with both their heart and mind. They show us that it is indeed possible.

It has been said that the longest journey we can make is the one between the mind and the heart. At this point in time, when the world is engulfed in utter destruction, when nearly a quarter of billion children and teachers are losing limbs, life and hope under the rubble of their targeted schools, it is time for us all to set sail on that journey.

Yasmine Sherif is Executive Director Education Cannot Wait (ECW)

IPS UN Bureau

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

The American music icon has long been an admirer of the west African country.

The world’s longest cruise has been forced to amend its route and is now calling at nine African ports.

The world’s longest cruise has been forced to amend its route and is now calling at nine African ports.

Over 1,400 delegates, including 600 representing parties or signatories from over 150 countries and a significant delegation of Indigenous Peoples and other observer organizations, including women’s groups are attending two crucial biodiversity meetings in Nairobi, Kenya. Credit: Stella Paul/IPS

By Stella Paul
NAIROBI, May 14 2024 (IPS)

The 26th meeting of the Subsidiary Body of Scientific, Technical, and Technological Advisors (SBSTTA) of the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (UNCBD) started in Nairobi, Kenya, on Monday. Over 1,400 delegates, including 600 representing signatories or parties from over 150 countries, are present for the seven-day meeting at the headquarters of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). A large number of members from Indigenous Peoples and other observer organizations, including women’s groups, are also attending the meetings.

SBSTTA will be followed by the meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Implementation (SBI), another subsidiary body of the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). The SBI will take place from May 20–29 at the same venue.

Opening the meeting on Monday morning, David Cooper, the Acting Executive Secretary of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, called on the delegates for a successful meeting.

“A key part of ensuring the implementation of the Global Biodiversity Framework is to monitor the progress and that’s why finalizing a monitoring framework includes authenticators for the parties to report on. I would like to give my sincere appreciation to all those working on putting together a comprehensive set of authenticators. I encourage you to make full use of what we have achieved so far and let’s make this meeting a success,” Cooper said.

IPS, which is exclusively covering the meetings, has insights into the meetings and presents here the brief history of both the meetings and their significance in larger global biodiversity protection, especially in the global south, including the implementation of the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), the legally binding international biodiversity treaty adopted by the nations in December 2022

SBSTTA: History, Mandate and Role in the COP

SBSTTA was established 30 years ago, in 1994, as a subsidiary body of the CBD during the first meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the CBD in Nassau, Bahamas. Article 25 of the CBD, which mandated its creation, tasked it with giving the COP timely advice regarding the application of the Convention.

Since then, SBSTTA ‘s main role has been providing assessments of scientific, technical, and technological information relevant to the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity. It typically meets once or twice a year to review and assess relevant scientific information, including reports submitted by Parties, relevant organizations, and stakeholders. Its discussions cover a wide range of topics, including biodiversity loss, ecosystem services, invasive species, genetic resources, and biotechnology.

The main output of SBSTTA meetings is a set of recommendations to the COP, which are based on the scientific and technical assessments conducted during its sessions. These recommendations provide guidance to Parties and other stakeholders on key issues related to the implementation of the CBD.

For example, in 2007, SBSTTA recommended that the biodiversity COP consider the potential impacts of synthetic biology on biodiversity and ecosystems and encourage Parties to undertake further research, risk assessments, and regulatory measures to address any potential risks associated with the release of synthetic organisms into the environment.

This recommendation was later taken up by the CBD COP, leading to the adoption of decisions on synthetic biology, including Decision XIII/17, which encouraged Parties to continue their efforts to address the potential positive and negative impacts of synthetic biology on biodiversity, and take a  precautionary approach.

A more recent example is the SBSTTA’s recommendation from 2018 that the COP should encourage Parties to mainstream biodiversity considerations into sectoral and cross-sectoral policies, plans, and programs, including those pertaining to agriculture, fisheries, forestry, tourism, energy, and infrastructure.

The CBD COP later agreed with this suggestion, which led to the adoption of decisions and guidelines on mainstreaming biodiversity across sectors. One of these was Decision XIV/4, which asked Parties to do more to mainstream biodiversity into relevant sectors and to encourage synergies between the goals of sustainable development and biodiversity conservation.

SBSTTA and Genetically Modified Mosquitoes

SBSTTA-26 has a large number of issues on its agenda. Most prominent among them are: 1) creating a monitoring framework for the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework; 2) synthetic biology; 3) detection and identification of living modified organisms; and 4) biodiversity and health.

It is expected that under the detection and identification of living modified organisms, genetically engineered mosquitoes for Malaria prevention will be discussed. Research on genetically engineered mosquitoes for malaria control has been an area of interest and investigation for several years, although little information is available on it in the public domain.

Scientists in many countries, including in the United States and Brazil, have been exploring various genetic modification techniques to create mosquitoes that are resistant to the malaria parasite or are unable to transmit the disease. One approach involves genetically modifying mosquitoes to produce antibodies that neutralize the malaria parasite when it enters their bodies.

The other approach is to use “Gene Drive Technology,” which involves modifying mosquitoes in a way that ensures the modified genes are passed on to a high proportion of their offspring. Already, many field trials of genetically engineered mosquitoes have been conducted or are underway in different parts of the world, most notably those conducted by the company Oxitec in Brazil and the Cayman Islands.

At the SBSTTA, scientific and technical advisors will look closely at the important environmental and ethical considerations related to GE mosquitoes. According to the World Health Organization’s 2023 World Malaria Report, there has been an increase in malaria infections all over the world as a result of climate change. However, several countries and organizations have serious reservations against the release of GM mosquitoes, which they believe may have an irreversible and devastating impact on local biodiversity. One of the most vocal organizations against GE/GM mosquitoes has been Friends of the Earth, a US-based environmental advocacy group. Dana Perls, senior program manager at Friends of the Earth, said, “Significant scientific research on genetically engineered mosquitoes is still needed to understand the potential public health and environmental threats associated with the release of this novel genetically engineered insect.”

The SBSTTA is expected to witness passionate discussions, especially from environmental NGOs and faith-based organizations, including the need to ensure that communities are properly informed and engaged in decision-making processes, especially in the global south.

The agenda for the meetings includes creating a monitoring framework for the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, synthetic biology, detection and identification of living modified organisms, and biodiversity and health. Credit: Stella Paul/IPS

SBI: Most Crucial Agenda Items

The SBI was established under the CBD during the third meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the CBD in 1996. The SBI’s mandate includes providing guidance and recommendations to the COP on matters related to the implementation of the CBD as well as identifying obstacles and challenges that may hinder effective implementation.

Like SBSTTA, SBI also typically meets once or twice a year to conduct its work. Its discussions cover a wide range of topics related to the implementation of the CBD, including national biodiversity strategies and action plans, financial resources and mechanisms, capacity-building, and technology transfer.

Chaired by Chirra Achalender Reddy of India, the SBI in Nairobi has placed several items on its agenda. However, the most crucial ones among them are: 1) resource mobilization and financial mechanisms; 2) a review of the progress in national target setting; and 3) the updating of national biodiversity strategies and action plans.

As IPS recently reported, only a handful of countries have so far been able to submit their updated biodiversity action plans, while the rest are said to be facing multiple challenges in doing so, including a lack of capacity. In fact, Kenya, the host country of these meetings, has not been able to submit their updated action plan yet.

On Monday, in her inaugural address during the opening ceremony of SBSTTA, Ingrid Andersen, the Executive Director of UNEP, acknowledged that a lack of capacity to revise and update their action plans has been reported by several member states. “Capacity building is a serious issue and at the SBSTTA and SBI, this will be seriously discussed,” Andersen said.

David Ainsworth, the Communications Director of UNCBD, said that the capacity is lacking in several areas, including communications (where countries do not know how to communicate to different ministries the need for working together to develop their biodiversity action plans), finance (lack of funding, budgetary constraints), and knowledge.

“Perhaps the most crucial of these is finance and this will be seriously discussed at the SBI,” Ainsworth said.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');   Related Articles

• We Should Aim to be at Peace with Nature, Says David Cooper of UN Convention on Biological Diversity
• Biodiversity Masterplan: Negotiations on Crucial Science, Technology for Implementation Underway

Excerpt:

More than 1,400 delegates are present at two crucial meetings, where the topic of preserving the planet's ongoing biodiversity for the benefit of humanity is under discussion. Under the spotlight are the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, synthetic biology, the detection and identification of living modified organisms, and, critically, biodiversity and health.

New technology in harvesting and preserving rain water has helped farmers in Kenya grow more and healthier crops year-round even in a changing climate. Credit: FAO/Christena Dowsett

By Dan Drollette Jr
NORTHAMPTON, Massachusetts, May 14 2024 (IPS)

Food systems—how we grow, transport, prepare, and dispose of the food we eat—are responsible for roughly one-third of all global greenhouse gas emissions. And those gases are changing the climate, which in turn is disrupting the food supply. It would seem to be a classic vicious circle.

To compound the problem, the intertwined fates of food and climate change have taken remarkably long to be recognized: It was only last December that the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) unveiled its non-binding “food systems roadmap” for bringing the world’s food production in line with global climate goals.

Why it took so long for food to be “on the table” at international conferences about climate change is something that Emile Frison delves into for the special issue of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. In his article “We cannot afford another lost year for food and climate action,” Frison says that part of the problem so far has been imagery: “When we think of climate change … [w]hat we almost certainly don’t think of is the burger sitting juicy on the dinner plate, the cow in the barn, or the ready-made lasagna steaming fresh from the microwave.”

Along similar lines, an interview with food systems expert Catherine Bertini focuses on the difficulties of reconciling the United Nations’ twin (and perhaps not entirely compatible) goals of eliminating global hunger and stabilizing global climate.

But while the problems involved in creating more sustainable food systems may have taken a long time to be recognized and be large in size, they are not insurmountable. In fact, there are many approaches to solving them.

One is to use the latest in high-tech genetic editing tools to make crops with increased yields, greater resiliency to extreme weather, and more resistance to the new diseases introduced as formerly temperate zones become warmer and the reach of what were formerly exclusively tropical pests and diseases expands.

“Appropriately enough in the Century of Biology, that means turning to genetic tools such as CRISPR,” write the authors of “We need to act now to ensure global food security and reduce agricultural greenhouse gas emissions.”

A whole other tack involves looking to the past and bringing back some traditional, indigenous food sources—many of which are extraordinarily well-suited to the Global South but over time fell by the agricultural wayside.

In “What if potatoes grew on trees,” Diane Ragone, founder of Hawaii’s Breadfruit Institute, describes the organization’s successful effort to bring back the low-cost, sustainable, locally grown foodstuff known as breadfruit.

She highlights the importance of several projects, years in the making, to interview people across the Pacific Islands about their traditional cultural practices regarding this food’s planting, cultivating, harvesting, and storing—and to document their knowledge in photographs, recordings, and videotapes.

This type of holistic approach is also a key part of what has come to be known as “regenerative agriculture,” which deals with not just food production but also with how agricultural practices can enrich the soil and the environment.

In “Regenerative agriculture sequesters carbon—but that’s not the only benefit and shouldn’t be the only goal,” Jessica Villat, a researcher affiliated with the Harvard University Extension School, explains how practices aimed at better sequestering carbon—including the planting of cover crops, using non-chemical fertilizers, applying integrated pest management, and not tilling cropland—can succeed.

Not only that; these practices go to the heart of efforts to increase biodiversity, better control wildfire, and improve water quality and availability, as well.

Human society faces tremendous challenges in remaking its food system in an age of climate change, but it has some powerful tools at hand and a number of different approaches to take in possibly transforming a vicious circle into a virtuous cycle.

Source: Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

IPS UN Bureau

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

Hector Alan Valdes Suarez from the Global Youth Biodiversity Network speaks about the youth perspective being an invaluable asset in the implementation of the Biodiversity Plan. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS

By Joyce Chimbi
NAIROBI, May 13 2024 (IPS)

The triple planetary crises of climate change, biodiversity loss, pollution, and waste are escalating. At the current pace, the world is on track to lose one quarter of all plant and animal species by 2030, with one species already dying out every 10 minutes. One million species face extinction. Human activity has already altered three-quarters of the land on Earth and two-thirds of the ocean.

Against this backdrop, the 26th session of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice (SBSTTA) of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) opened today in Nairobi, Kenya.

Hector Alan Valdes Suarez from the Global Youth Biodiversity Network told IPS that SBSTTA “seeks to build momentum to achieve global and national ambitious goals to halt and reverse the ongoing monumental biodiversity crises.”

Multidisciplinary and open to participation by all parties to the convention, SBSTTA comprises government representatives competent in the relevant field of expertise to ensure that policies are informed by the best available science at the time. SBSTTA has met 25 times to date. The ongoing 26th meeting will acknowledge contributions to the implementation of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework—also known as the Biodiversity Plan—hashed out at meetings in Kunming, China, and Montreal, Canada, in 2022.

As an open-ended intergovernmental scientific advisory body set up to provide the Conference of the Parties (COP) and, as appropriate, its other subsidiary bodies, with timely advice relating to the implementation of the CBD, SBSTTA “provides a platform for actors outside the Convention, such as youths, women, non-government organizations, and Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs), to observe negotiations on crucial science and also assess how they are or could contribute to, the Convention on Biological Diversity. The Convention is unique as actors outside the CBD can lobby for their views to be included through a Party to the Convention,” he says.

The Convention, which entered into force in December 1993, is the first global agreement to cover all aspects of biological diversity. Senka Barudanovic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Chair of the SBSTTA Bureau, said the 26th meeting of SBSTTA is “especially important as we are at a critical moment in time to ensure that our actions are guided by a robust foundation of scientific and technical knowledge, tools, and guidelines.”

“The good news is that there is a wealth of knowledge and experience for us to use and build on as we walk this journey together for effective conservation, sustainable use, and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits from the use of biodiversity.”

The six-day meeting seeks to forge agreement among delegates from 196 parties to the CBD on issues pertaining to the implementation of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, also known as  The Biodiversity Plan. Hard science and a multi-disciplinary approach are high on the SBSTTA 26 agenda as pertains to the implementation of the plan, specifically how the scientific and technical needs of all parties, including the Least Developed Countries (LDCs), among other developing countries, will be met.

Suarez said as parties to the CBD resume negotiations on crucial science and technology, “it is to develop and agree on a monitoring framework to track progress and implementation of the Biodiversity Plan. There are four goals and 23 targets so the indicators are globally uniform to track whether these targets are being achieved and they should be flexible and adaptable to the national context. In my view, many of these indicators are addressing actors outside the convention, such as youths, women, and Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs), and their representation at the meeting to hear what the parties are saying is critical.”

“These actors are contributing to the goal of the Biodiversity Plan at local levels, and their contributions ought to be recognized too, so they matter, and the decisions taken by the parties affect these actors the most, especially women and young people. The process is much more than agreeing on the right science and technical skills to reverse biodiversity loss. Increased accountability and transparency are key even as we gather to agree on how to measure success towards reaching set goals and consistency of reporting at the global level, hence the need for parties to continuously consult,” she said.

The gathering recognizes these concerns, as there are at least 80 representatives of Indigenous Peoples and local communities, as well as observer organizations, participating in the meeting. Indigenous people’s voices are key, as they suffer disproportionately from loss of biodiversity and environmental degradation. Their lives, survival, development chances, knowledge, environment, and health conditions depend on the successful implantation of the plan.

Cyri Wafula Nyongesa from the International University Network on Cultural and Biological Diversity agrees, telling IPS that even as scientists hash out hard science, technical, and technological knowledge to support the implementation of the Biodiversity Plan, there is a need to look at existing gaps in its implementation framework. These gaps include the need for capacity building and reporting frameworks that are simple and also draw connections between global and national plans.

As agreed in a landmark decision of CBD COP 15 in December 2022, the UN-driven strategy is the world’s masterplan to halt and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030, and sets out a pathway to reach the global vision of a world living in harmony with nature by 2050 using four goals and 23 targets. The goals are to protect and restore nature, to prosper with nature, to share benefits fairly, and to invest in and collaborate for nature’s benefit.

“One year and a half after the Biodiversity Plan was historically adopted, parties to the CBD must now fine-tune the important details that will take the world from agreement to action,” said David Cooper, Acting Executive Secretary of the CBD. “The subsidiary body is leveraging science and technology to help the parties to the CBD deliver on their commitment to people and nature.”

Ongoing discussions are firmly framed within the CBD overall agenda to address all threats to biodiversity and ecosystem services, including threats from climate change, through scientific assessments, the development of tools, incentives, and processes, the transfer of technologies and good practices, and the full and active involvement of relevant stakeholders.

Delegates have resolutely set the ball rolling towards reporting on the monitoring framework, the national status of implementation, and the mobilization of financial resources for the Biodiversity Plan. The ultimate goal is to fast-track the implementation of sustainable solutions to biodiversity loss, restore ecosystems, and protect indigenous rights.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

 

Related Articles

• We Should Aim to be at Peace with Nature, Says David Cooper of UN Convention on Biological Diversity
• Harnessing Science-Policy Collaboration: The Vital Role of IPBES Stakeholders in Achieving Global Nature Targets
• UN Live’s CEO Katja Iversen Talks About the Power of Popular Culture and ‘Sounds Right’

Credit: IMF

By Danny Bradlow
PRETORIA, South Africa, May 13 2024 (IPS)

South Africa will play an important international role in 2025 as president of the G20. The G20 is a group of 19 countries as well as the African Union and the European Union. Between them they represent 85% of global economy, 75% of world trade and 67% of global population. The G20 defines itself as the premier multilateral forum for international economic cooperation.

During its G20 presidential year, South Africa will host a summit of heads of state and government. It will also be responsible for organising and chairing about 200 meetings of ministers and officials. These will come from the G20 members, invited countries and international organisations like the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

The meetings will focus on issues such as the challenges facing the global economy and whether the current arrangements for global economic governance are able to respond effectively.

The G20 presidency, therefore, presents South Africa with an opportunity to promote reforms in global economic governance. But there are constraints. It will inherit an agenda from Brazil, the current G20 chair. And it will have to respond to developments in the current dynamic and complex global environment.

Danny Bradlow

The IMF/World Bank spring meetings held in April in the US suggest some achievable objectives for the G20 next year. There was a great deal of discussion about the inability of current arrangements to adequately address global challenges like climate, public health, inequality, poverty and digitalisation.

There’s not necessarily agreement on how to prioritise these challenges. And, unfortunately, the views of the rich states, which prioritise issues like carbon emissions, dominate the discussions. For example, the World Bank highlighted the fact that, in the 2023 financial year, it increased the funds loaned for climate-related purposes by more than 20%, allocating 41% of all its lending to climate.

But its own survey of its borrower countries shows that climate ranks number 11 on the list of priorities of its borrower states. Health, education, agriculture and food security, and water and sanitation rank much higher. Nevertheless, at least two gaps became evident in the discussions.

The first relates to IMF reform. The second concerns the relationship between international organisations and their member states.

South Africa should aim to fill these gaps. It should encourage the G20 to commission two studies on the scale and scope of the challenges that the international community faces, and propose some responses. Ideally, it should convince the G20 to commission these studies in 2024 so that it can begin discussing policy responses in 2025.

This kind of approach has been effective. Over the last few years, the multilateral development banks have been the subject of G20-commissioned studies. This has led to proposals designed to make them “bigger and better”.

Shortcomings

The need for IMF reform is becoming more urgent. It is adapting its operations to deal with the macro-economic impacts of issues like climate, gender and inequality. The IMF has created a Resilience and Sustainability Trust that is providing financing to 18 countries, primarily for adaptation. It is reviewing its Debt-Sustainability Framework for Low-Income Countries so that it incorporates these “new” issues.

These changes are being made in an opaque and unpredictable way, however. The IMF has not made publicly available the principles and procedures it uses when deciding what aspects of these “new” issues to take on.

It can’t accurately assess the full impacts of these issues unless it understands how communities, workers, businesses and civil society organisations will respond to the social and environmental impacts of specific policy and fiscal initiatives with macroeconomic implications. It cannot gain this information without consulting these groups.

This means it must engage more with a broader range of stakeholders than it did when it focused exclusively on more traditional macroeconomic and financial stability concerns. These new issues, therefore, raise questions about the appropriate form for the relationship between the IMF and its member states.

At the spring meetings, the Development Committee of the World Bank and the IMF “reiterated the importance of accountability mechanisms in enhancing development outcomes and stimulating internal learning and feedback.”

Yet the IMF remains the only international financial institution without an independent accountability mechanism.

The second gap relates to the fact that developing countries are spending more on external debt service than on health and education. This is undermining their efforts to deal with climate change, inequality and sustainable development goals. Some discussants also regretted that there was a net outflow of funds from the global south to the global north.

As some have noted, the amount of funding committed to new development financing initiatives by rich countries is paltry compared to what’s needed. This has led, for example, economic ministers from Brazil, Germany, South Africa and Spain to call for a global tax on billionaires.

This is an important and creative idea. But the proposal raises difficult questions about state sovereignty and about the design of the institutions of global governance.

What’s needed

While multilateral development banks have been the subject of G20-commissioned studies, the IMF has not undergone a similar examination.

South Africa should commission a group of experts to study how the IMF should change to take on these new issues. The study should look at IMF governance, operational policies and practices, and its financial needs. The purpose would be to identify the current shortcomings in structures and functions.

Experts should also think of ways to make the IMF more responsive to the needs and priorities of all its member states and their citizens.

Second, South Africa should call for a study of how best to divide responsibility between states and the international financial institutions. This is particularly important when it comes to the environmental and social impacts of operations.

The purpose would be to understand how the roles and functions of these institutions are evolving and how this is affecting their relations with their member states. The study could propose ways to ensure that the structure and functions of institutions are both respectful of state sovereignty and appropriate for the responsibilities that the institutions are assuming.

Raising a global wealth tax for developmental purposes could be one example used in this study.

Danny Bradlow is a Professor/Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancement of Scholarship, University of Pretoria. In addition to his position at the University of Pretoria, he is also a Compliance Officer in the Social and Environmental Compliance Unit of the UNDP and Co-Chair of the Academic Circle on the Right to Development, which advises the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Development.

Source: The Conversation– a nonprofit, independent news organization dedicated to unlocking the knowledge of experts for the public good. The University of Pretoria provides funding as a partner of The Conversation AFRICA.

IPS UN Bureau

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

Results of the General Assembly's vote on the resolution on the status of the Observer State of Palestine. 10 May 2024. Credit: UN Photo/Manuel Elías

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, May 13 2024 (IPS)

The United States and its closest political and military ally, Israel, once again found themselves isolated last week when 143 of the UN’s 193 member states approved a resolution enhancing the role of Palestine providing it with new diplomatic privileges.

And the US, meanwhile, has implicitly threatened to cut off funding– if and when the UN provides legitimacy to Palestine. But that legitimacy is not likely to be achieved as long the US continues to exercise its veto to deny Palestine the status of a full-fledged UN member state.

Currently, Palestine is “a non-member observer state”– a recognition granted by the U.N. General Assembly back in 2012. But any application to become a full U.N. member needs to be approved by the Security Council and at least by two-thirds of the General Assembly.

Ian Williams, President of the New York-based Foreign Press Association (FPA) told IPS: ”I have observed the Israeli reaction to Palestinian approaches for three decades. Israel derides and devalues the UN but is fervent in its opposition to a Palestinian presence. But Israel never walks out, They know that the UN resolutions are their sole legal claim to legitimacy.”

One has to rephrase Groucho Marx’s comments on being excluded from an exclusive club, why would Palestine want to be part of the Club that allows a criminal disreputable member like Israel a platform? The best answer is that it exposes the criminality of Israel and the duplicity of the US.

Sadly, he said, every unprincipled US veto for Israel erodes Washington’s diplomatic standing and lends support to tyrants in Moscow, Damascus and elsewhere, making the US an accomplice to genocide in general not just in the Middle East.

“One suspects that if Israel declared that pi equals three, the State Department would wield its veto to support it, and have its diplomats prove it with maps and diagrams,” said Williams.

The US, which has consistently vetoed Security Council resolutions on UN membership for Palestine, voted against last week’s General Assembly resolution, along with Israel, Argentina, Czechia, Hungary—and four small island developing states, namely., Micronesia, Nauru, Palau and Papua New Guinea—probably under US pressure.

Perhaps so did some of the 25 countries that abstained from voting: Albania, Austria, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Fiji, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Malawi, Marshall Islands, Monaco, Netherlands, North Macedonia, Paraguay, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Sweden, Switzerland, Ukraine, United Kingdom, and Vanuatu.

Sarah Leah Whitson, Executive Director, Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN), told IPS the US government’s threat to cut funding to the UN if it recognizes Palestinian statehood is a shameful effort to bully a global body into submission.

“Blocking Palestinian self-determination for no reason other than to pacify a rogue Israeli government is the rock bottom of a moral bankruptcy decades in the making,” she said.

According to the UN, Palestine’s new status will include:

1. To be seated among Member States in alphabetical order
2. Make statements on behalf of a group
3. Submit proposals and amendments and introduce them
4. Co-sponsor proposals and amendments, including on behalf of a group
5. Propose items to be included in the provisional agenda of the regular or special sessions and the right to request the inclusion of supplementary or additional items in the agenda of regular or special sessions
6. The right of members of the delegation of the State of Palestine to be elected as officers in the plenary and the Main Committees of the General Assembly
7. Full and effective participation in UN conferences and international conferences and meetings convened under the auspices of the General Assembly or, as appropriate, of other UN organs

Michael Schaeffer Omer-Man, Israel Palestine Research Director at DAWN, told IPS the General Assembly vote makes it clearer than ever that the United States is the last remaining barrier blocking Palestinians from any measure of self-determination.

“America is facing growing isolation in the world due to its unquestioned backing of Israel and refusal to support Palestinian rights”, he noted.

Elaborating further, Williams said, apart from annoying (Israel’s Ambassador Gilad) Erdan, an interesting side effect of Palestine’s new privileges is that the delegation moves from a seat in the gallery to the main body of the General Assembly, sandwiched between Panama, which supported Palestine’s bid, and Palau, which never has, and whose ambassador is also the Pacific Atoll’s recently accredited representative to Israel.

“Let us hope, Palestinian representative Riyad Mansour’s team is hospitable to their new neighbor and has time for informative chats about shared histories since ironically the US had thwarted Palau’s own statehood with a threatened veto for many years because the islanders refused access to US nuclear weapons on its territory!’

Presumably Palau’s staunch anti-nuclear stance is flexible enough to accommodate Israel’s nuclear weapons and refusal to sign the NPT, declared Williams, a former President of the UN Correspondents Association (UNCA).

According to a transcript of the Security Council meeting, Riyad Mansour, Permanent Observer of the observer State of Palestine, recounted the devastating impacts of the ongoing war in Gaza, with over 35,000 Palestinians killed, a further 80,000 injured and over two million displaced.

“No words can capture what such loss and trauma signify for Palestinians, their families, their communities and for our nation as whole,” he said.

He added that the Palestinians in Gaza have been pushed to the “very edge” of the Strip “to the very brink of life” with “bombs and bullets haunting them”.

Mansour said despite the attacks and destruction, the flag of Palestine “flies high and proud” in Palestine and across the globe, becoming a “symbol raised by all those who believe in freedom and it’s just rule”.

“It is true that we will not disappear, but the lives lost cannot be restored,” he stated.

Mansour said after holding observer status for 50 years, “we wish from all those who invoke the UN Charter to abide by the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination guaranteed by the Charter.”

Ambassador FU Cong of China, a permanent member of the Security Council, said Palestine should have the same status as Israel– and that Palestinian people should enjoy the same rights as Israeli people.

“It is the common responsibility of the international community to support and advance the process of Palestinian independent Statehood, and provide strong support for the implementation of the two-State solution and a lasting peace in the Middle East,” he said

He pointed out that the United States has repeatedly used its veto “in an unjustified attempt” to obstruct the international community’s efforts to correct the “historical injustice long visited on Palestine”.

“It is not commensurate with the role of a responsible major country,” he said.

He also recalled the overwhelming support for the General Assembly resolution, reaffirming the right of Palestinian people to self-determination, and recommending that the Security Council reconsider favourably its application to join the United Nations

“China welcomes this historic resolution, which reflects the will of the international community,” Ambassador Fu declared.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex unveiled a partnership with Giants of Africa, an NGO which uses sport to empower young people.

At least 19 people are still unaccounted for and 33 construction workers are confirmed to have died - and more stories

The Duchess of Sussex describes the "eye opening" experience of learning about her Nigerian ancestry.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been welcomed by a charity which helps service personnel in Nigeria.