Africa

By Yasmine Sherif
NEW YORK, Feb 16 2024 (IPS-Partners)

As we lead into the Africa Year of Education, and under the leadership of Africa, world leaders have an opportunity to solidify commitments to ‘Educate an Africa Fit for the 21st Century’. That means to empower Africa to deliver on the goals outlined in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, Paris Agreement and Convention on the Rights of the Child, and to invest in an end to inequity through the power of quality education and lifelong learning.

With the right opportunities, the current accomplishments and future potential of Africa are limitless. Sadly, inequity accompanied by armed conflicts, climate change, forced displacement, poverty traps and other factors continue to derail development gains and push children to the margins.

Approximately 54% of crisis-affected children worldwide live in Sub-Saharan Africa, according to Education Cannot Wait’s Global Estimates Study. The region has experienced a multi-million increase in the number of children affected by crises, primarily driven by large-scale droughts in Eastern Africa and the increasing intensity of several conflicts. We need to give Africa’s resilient young generation a chance equal to everyone else and an opportunity to blossom.

While the out-of-school rate is steadily decreasing across Sub-Saharan Africa, the absolute number has reached the alarming global estimate of 98 million. Put simply, about half of the crisis-affected children in Sub-Saharan Africa do not attend school.

In African countries where you see high-levels of armed conflict, combined with the push-on effects on climate change, forced displacement and extreme poverty – including countries such as Ethiopia, Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Mali, and Nigeria – we are witnessing a concerning spike in the number of children that are out of school.

Quality is also an issue, as a result of lack of opportunity. “The share of children who cannot read a simple text with comprehension by age 10 was the highest in Sub-Saharan Africa before the COVID-19 pandemic, at 86%. This rate is likely to have worsened after the pandemic, estimated now at 90%,” according to the African Union. “This means that 9 out of 10 children cannot read a simple text with comprehension by age 10.”

To address this challenge, we must take a multilateral approach and responsibility, pool in resources, tap local, national and regional talents, and embrace a new way of working. This includes substantially increasing international funding support for education – especially on the frontlines of Africa’s emergencies and protracted crises.

This year’s G7 provides a remarkable opportunity for global leaders to step up. Education in Africa is taking center stage in the Italian Government’s Mattei Plan. Italy joined Education Cannot Wait’s group of strategic donors with an initial contribution of US$2.1 million at last year’s High-Level Financing Conference. As Italy assumes leadership of the G7 this year, we look forward to renewed support from Italy and all members of the G7 to invest in education for the young people of Africa.

In the United States, we also urge leaders to pass the READ Act Reauthorization. The commitment towards universal education makes it clear that access to quality education strengthens economies and reduces inequality. According to UNICEF, “it contributes to more stable, resilient societies that give all individuals the opportunity to fulfill their potential. Further, girls who receive an education are less likely to marry young and more likely to lead healthy, productive lives. They earn higher incomes, participate in the decisions that most affect them, and build better futures for themselves and their families.”

All governments must take firm steps to increase their own commitments to education, as we’ve seen through ECW’s Multi-Year Resilience Programmes in places like Chad, Nigeria and Uganda. With these innovative investment models, we have the power to crowd-in resources, to tap local organizations and to deliver as one for those left furthest behind.

This goes beyond building classrooms and providing learning materials. To address the challenges of Africa and beyond, we must make available a full assortment of holistic educational supports, including training teachers, improving access to mental health and psychosocial services, and ensuring young children are able to learn through play and older learners are able to continue on to secondary education and beyond.

By 2026, Education Cannot Wait (ECW), as the global fund for education in emergencies and protracted crises within the United Nations, has committed to mobilize a total of US$1.5 billion to reach 20 million crisis-impacted children and adolescents. In Ethiopia, through our innovative investments, we are ensuring children with disabilities like Rewda Abdi are able to access accelerated learning programmes. In Somalia, we are building safe spaces for girls like Bisharo. And in Chad we are providing a lifeline for girls and boys fleeing the conflict in Sudan to continue their studies in quality learning environments, where they can find a sense of safety and hope in a world turned upside down by war and chaos.

For far too long, progress toward sustainable development across much of Africa has been faced with obstacles for generations after generations. The time has come and education cannot wait. Africa deserves to achieve its unlimited potential.

 

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');  

Excerpt:

ECW Executive Director Yasmine Sherif Statement on the Launch of the Africa Year of Education

UN Human Rights Council, Geneva

By Louis Charbonneau and Widad Franco
UNITED NATIONS, Feb 16 2024 (IPS)

A cash crunch and hiring freeze at the United Nations threaten to hinder UN human rights investigations in places like Sudan, Ukraine, and Syria.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned UN member countries on January 25 that if those with outstanding dues do not pay up soon, the UN will be broke by August.

In the meantime, the UN would take various cost-cutting measures, including reducing the number of meetings and lowering energy expenses at UN headquarters. The UN’s regular budget for 2024, which doesn’t include peacekeeping and some other UN activities, is US$3.6 billion.

The United States owes the most but continues to make partial payments. According to UN sources, the US owes $1.1 billion to the UN’s regular budget for 2023 and 2024 plus additional arrears. The Biden administration wants to pay, but Congress has not passed a budget that would allow it to do so.

“The Biden administration is committed to working with Congress to ensure that the US fully pays its dues to the UN,” said Chris Lu, US ambassador for UN management and reform.

The US isn’t the only member country that has been slow to pay – 50 others hadn’t paid as of the end of 2023. China, the second biggest contributor, didn’t pay its dues until November, which exacerbated the UN’s liquidity problems.

UN management was forced to impose a hiring freeze last year. All UN departments are affected, including the handful of human rights investigations, most of which have relatively small staffs and budgets.

For example, the UN Independent International Fact-Finding Mission for the Sudan, established four months ago has a one-year mandate to investigate widespread atrocities, but still lacks investigators to carry out the mission.

And while the freeze is supposed to allow exceptions for hiring essential staff, UN officials and diplomats told Human Rights Watch there was confusion about how to get those exceptions.

Delegations from China, Russia, Cuba, and others have been trying for years to defund UN human rights work in the General Assembly’s Fifth Committee, which oversees the budget.

Their attempts in December to block funding for investigations into grave human rights abuses in Sudan, Syria, Ukraine, Russia, Nicaragua and elsewhere failed.

The UN leadership and member countries should ensure that the UN’s human rights teams have funding and staff to fulfill their mandates. And governments that haven’t paid their assessed contributions should pay up.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/02/13/uns-financial-troubles-jeopardize-critical-human-rights-work

Louis Charbonneau is United Nations Director, Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Widad Franco is UN Advocacy Officer, HRW.

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');  

Shanti Decinis, one of 30,000+ participants expected at the 2024 World Social Forum, which advocates for a just world for all people. She described how in her village in Bihar, India, farmers are dealing with climate-induced unpredictability. Credit: Tanka Dhakal / IPS

By Tanka Dhakal
KATHMANDU, Feb 16 2024 (IPS)

Kiprotich Peter from the East African country of Kenya is trying to convey his climate crisis message using the platform of the World Social Forum (WSF) taking place in the mountain nation of Nepal, which has also been battered by the impacts of climate change.

Youth activist Peter, who works for Green World in Kenya to promote environmental education and reforestation, is holding a placard that reads: “The World’s Poorest Countries are being forced to take out loans to respond to a climate crisis not of their making,” on Thursday, Day 1 of the WSF in Nepal’s capital Kathmandu.

“I am here to raise my voice against loans to deal with the climate crisis. Small countries like Kenya and Nepal need grants to fight and mitigate the climate crisis, not loans,” he added. “The climate change is a real-time crisis in Africa, and I think in Nepal and other parts of the global South too.”

Low and mid-income countries like Nepal and Kenya have contributed just tiny amounts of the greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change, but they are on the frontlines of its impacts, in the forms of droughts, flash floods and other extreme weather events.

According to the 2023 Kenya Country Climate and Development report, to maintain gains in poverty reduction, the country must act on climate change. “Inaction against climate change could result in up to 1.1 million additional poor in 2050, in a dry and hot climate future scenario.”

 

“Humanity of people is taken away”

Far from Kenya but close to Nepal in South Asia, one third of Pakistan was submerged because of a massive flood in 2022, affecting 33 million people. Pakistani historian and youth leader Ammar Ali Jan described the aftermath of that flood and the international community’s treatment as an ugly image of humanity.

“Almost a province was wiped out; we haven’t seen a flood like that. The way people were attacking food trucks, it was almost as if the humanity of people was taken away,” said the founder and president of the Haqooq-e-Khalq Party addressing a session called, Towards a Global Movement for Climate Justice, on Friday.

“People were in hunger without having anything to eat; they were stuck. It’s as if these people are becoming disposable human beings, and their deaths will not be mourned because their lives are not valued enough,” added the leader of his country’s new ‘Green’-inspired party.

Ali blamed an International Monetary Fund loan for the economic deterioration that followed the disaster. “The IMF’s loan was given after six months, not by saying ‘we will give you this grant and forgive your debt because you are affected by a crisis not of your making.’ They said ‘you must pay every penny to the international creditor.’ We need support, not loans.”

The party leader argues that a large chunk of humanity is lacking empathy, while retaining resources and political power. “To achieve climate justice, we need to find ways to make our agenda, the people’s agenda, heard,” he added. “Progressives need to take power.”

Shanti Devi was listening to Ali and nodding her head. “It’s what’s happening in our village in Bihar, India. We don’t get rainfall when needed, and floods hit at the time of harvesting,” said Devi, adding that she was attending the WSF to make her voice heard.

 

Kenyan youth climate activist Kiprotich Peter calls for grants instead of loans, for countries grappling with climate-induced crises at the World Social Forum in Kathmandu on 16 February 2024. Credit: Tanka Dhakal / IPS

 

“No Forum Left Uncontested”

Indian researcher and science activist Soumya Dutta called for continuous pressure to make the voices of the frontline communities that live with the consequences of climate-induced changes heard in every forum. “We have long crossed climate change; we are in a climate crisis,” he said during a discussion on climate justice. “We need to elevate the social movement to create a larger political discourse.”

Other speakers and participants called for collaboration and support to address the world’s crises, including climate change. United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Gutters also urged unity in his message to the WSF: “We need global solidarity to rescue the Sustainable Development Goals – and reform an outdated, dysfunctional and unfair global financial system. We must also rally together to address the climate crisis.”

While laying out the stark reality of climate change’s impacts on communities, water and climate change researcher Ajaya Dixit proposed a way forward. “We are still taking nature for granted, which needs to changed,” said the Nepal-based researcher, who collaborates with other researchers in South Asia. “To understand climate change, we have to understand the water and hydrological cycle, because the crisis we are facing is all connected with water one way or another.”

According to Dixit, to understand the ground reality of climate change, science and community must come together. “We still hesitate to recognize community knowledge, especially the historical knowledge of Indigenous people. Natural science, physical science and community knowledge need to be combined in our education systems; then we will be able to better understand climate change and act accordingly.”

Do non-profits genuinely embody the causes they champion, or do they become pawns in a larger game of influence? Credit: Shutterstock.

By Debra Nhokwara and Tafadzwa Munyaka
NEW YORK, Feb 16 2024 (IPS)

In the realm of public discourse, non-profit organizations often serve as the torchbearers of societal change, championing causes ranging from environmental conservation to social justice. Yet, beneath the altruistic facade lies a complex interplay of interests, where non-profit funding emerges as a potent tool for shaping the narrative and driving the agenda.

As we delve into the depths of this seemingly benevolent sector, it becomes evident that the allocation of funds to non-profits is far from arbitrary.

Rather, it serves as a strategic maneuver by various entities, each seeking to advance its unique vision and influence public opinion. Our contention, as many have opined, is to explore how non-profits, fueled by financial support, navigate the delicate balance between advocacy and the potential distortion of public discourse.

At the heart of the matter is the question of intentionality. Do non-profits genuinely embody the causes they champion, or do they become pawns in a larger game of influence?

By examining case studies and patterns in funding distribution, we can uncover the motivations behind the financial support that drives these organizations. This exploration will underscore the significance of transparency and accountability in ensuring that non-profits remain true to their mission and avoid unwittingly becoming instruments of agenda-driven manipulation.

As nations strive for progress and prosperity, the international donor community’s approach to providing aid and development assistance reveals a disconcerting inconsistency–one that sets different rules and conditionalities based on the regions involved

How does the selective support of certain causes over others shape the national discourse? What implications does this have for marginalized voices and underrepresented issues? By analyzing the ripple effects of non-profit funding on the agenda-setting process, we can better understand the mechanisms at play and work towards a more equitable and inclusive public dialogue.

In confronting these challenging questions, this article invites readers to reconsider their perceptions of non-profits as mere conduits for positive change.

Instead, we encourage a nuanced examination of the funding mechanisms that underpin these organizations, emphasizing the need for a vigilant and discerning public to safeguard the integrity of the causes they hold dear. As we navigate the landscape of non-profit activism, let us peel back the layers and unveil the intricate dance between funding and agenda setting that shapes the narratives of our time.

 

How are funders influencing non-profits programming?

In the labyrinth of non-profit landscapes, financial sustenance is the lifeblood that allows organizations to translate their ideals into tangible action. However, the allocation of funds is not a mere administrative task; it is a deliberate and calculated strategy that often aligns with the interests of donors, thereby shaping the trajectory of public discourse.

To the potential recipients of the funding, they have to strategically position themselves, selling their projects or programs as best fits for the stated funding criteria, oftentimes, way off the mark of their missions or values. Consider, for instance, the funding patterns in environmental advocacy.

Nonprofits dedicated to climate change may find themselves in a delicate dance, balancing the imperative to address the impending ecological crisis with the preferences of their financial backers.

Corporations with vested interests in certain environmental policies may selectively fund organizations that align with their profit-driven agendas, inadvertently steering the narrative away from holistic, sustainable solutions. This dynamic underscores the critical need for transparency within the nonprofit sector, as the sources of funding can significantly influence the prioritization of issues on the public agenda.

Moreover, the intentional or unintentional distortion of advocacy goals becomes apparent when examining the delicate relationship between nonprofits and government funding.

Organizations reliant on governmental grants may find themselves navigating a minefield of compliance, where the agenda-setting power of funding extends to the very policies that shape their advocacy landscape.

In such instances, the risk of inadvertent co-option is palpable, as the alignment of non-profit objectives with government priorities may compromise the independence necessary for effective societal change. Such scenarios lead to a mismatch between the advocacy issues and development aspirations of the community on one hand with the nonprofits funding desires on the other.

To truly comprehend the implications of non-profit funding as an agenda-setting tool, we must also turn our gaze inward, examining the choices made by individual donors.

Philanthropists, driven by personal convictions and values, may channel their resources toward causes that resonate with their worldview. While this may foster diversity in advocacy, it also introduces an inherent bias that echoes through the public discourse, emphasizing certain issues at the expense of others.

Popular views without financial backing are discarded for the fashionable ones dangled by those who wield the purse or strings to the funding so coveted by nonprofits.

As we grapple with these intricacies, the urgency of fostering a culture of accountability within the non-profit sector becomes paramount. Organizations must not only be transparent about their funding sources but also actively scrutinize the ethical implications of their financial relationships.

By doing so, they can ensure that their advocacy remains genuine and aligned with the true needs of the communities they serve. Furthermore, in light of many documented scandals involving donor international organizations in Africa, we need to ask ourselves tough questions, like, whose interests are being advanced and how we arrived at agreeing to champion them.

 

What does History tell us?

The history of non-profit organizations in Africa is intricately woven into the fabric of the continent’s socio-political landscape. As Africa navigated its post-colonial era, a burgeoning need for social change and development gave rise to a diverse array of non-profit entities.

These organizations, fueled by a commitment to addressing pressing issues, have played a pivotal role in shaping the continent’s destiny, identity, and standpoint(s) regarding access to funding mechanisms.

The dynamic relationship between African non-profits and international organizations in agenda setting to address, inter alia, poverty, healthcare, education, and governance issues in Africa has been complex, multifaceted and largely one-sided.

This begs the question that has been asked by several others before us without satisfactory answers, “what are NGOs really doing in Africa?” Historically, the power dynamics have often leaned towards international organizations, even though the roles and influence of African non-profits have evolved over time.

It is common cause that in the aftermath of colonial rule, African nations grappled with the challenge of nation-building and establishing robust governance structures.

Nonprofits emerged as instrumental agents of change, serving as conduits for both local and international support. As the New African puts it, this international support appears as “a prominent part of the ‘development machine’, a vast institutional and disciplinary nexus of official agencies, practitioners, consultants, scholars, and other miscellaneous experts producing and consuming knowledge about the ‘developing world’”.

During this period, grassroots movements and community-based organizations proliferated, fueled by the desire to address the unique challenges faced by diverse African societies marked by an exponential increase in the presence of Western NGOs as well in Africa. Challenges faced by these burgeoning non-profits relating to funding and agenda setting are essentially still the same, just different days but same problems.

The latter half of the 20th century to present times, has seen a surge in international solidarity and aid efforts directed towards Africa. Non-profit organizations are conduits for this support, channeling resources to address pressing issues.

The relationships formed during this era have presented a continuity of the dependency syndrome and a stark realization that the Global North lacks the moral and political will to constructively assist Africa address her myriad of problems.

Maybe, we need to revisit the development discourse to unravel how agenda setting has been an instrument used to determine how African non-profits access funding. Understanding this discourse and historical journey is crucial for unveiling the power play inherent in non-profit or development funding as a strategic tool for agenda setting on the continent.

 

A tale of varied rules and conditionalities

The realm of international development, ostensibly guided by principles of equality and global cooperation, often belies a stark reality of double standards. As nations strive for progress and prosperity, the international donor community’s approach to providing aid and development assistance reveals a disconcerting inconsistency–one that sets different rules and conditionalities based on the regions involved.

When it comes to human rights and governance, the double standards within international development become even more glaring. Conditions related to democratic governance, human rights, and rule of law are inconsistently applied, often reflecting the geopolitical interests of the donor countries.

Some non-profits in specific nations receive aid with a blind eye turned to issues of governance and human rights abuses, while others face stringent scrutiny, fostering a sense of injustice and reinforcing the perception that the principles guiding international development are, in fact, malleable.

We have seen this happen with staff of organizations that have violated the very people they should be serving without a reciprocal free in funding or access to it. Yet, if tables were turned and a local non-profit organization is found wanting, “how these issues are handled varies wildly”.

Addressing these double standards within international development requires a collective reevaluation of the principles guiding aid and assistance.

It calls for a commitment to equity, transparency, and consistency in applying conditions. Only through a more just and impartial approach can the international community hope to foster genuine global development that transcends geopolitical considerations and prioritizes the well-being of all nations, regardless of their geographical location or economic standing.

 

The way forward

Who gets to determine what issue is worth funding? The one with the money will want to exert control over how their funds are utilized. The community facing a particular issue would want to prioritize solving that problem, albeit without resources to do so.

We believe this is one of the conundrums local non-profits are faced with on a daily basis. The result is always the same, dance to the tune of one who pays the piper! However, ideally, we envisage a move towards participatory grantmaking or better still, access to unrestricted funding.

Due diligence still has to be done to ensure recipients are fiscally responsible. The removal of restrictive conditionalities might give local non-profits and the communities they serve the willpower to address their most pressing and urgent needs as defined by lived experiences. Again, it is a discourse that we are ready to engage in and learn from others too as we advocate for improved funding mechanisms.

As engaged citizens, advocates, and stakeholders in the pursuit of positive change, it is imperative that we actively participate in reshaping the landscape of non-profit activism. We encourage readers to scrutinize the sources of funding supporting the causes they hold dear and demand transparency from the non-profit sector.

By engaging in conversations about the influence of funders on non-profit programming and agenda setting, we can collectively foster a culture of accountability within the sector. As we advocate for a shift towards participatory grantmaking and unrestricted funding, we should empower local non-profits to address their communities’ most pressing needs authentically.

This calls for a reevaluation of the current funding structures and a commitment to equity, transparency, and consistency in applying conditions, particularly within the realm of international development.

By doing so, we can work towards a more just and impartial approach that prioritizes the well-being of all nations, irrespective of their geographical location or economic standing. By championing transparency, accountability, and equitable funding practices, we can contribute to a more authentic and impactful non-profit sector that truly serves the needs of the communities it aims to uplift.

The nexus between non-profit funding and agenda setting is a multifaceted phenomenon that demands our attention. To preserve the integrity of the causes championed by these organizations, we must remain vigilant, questioning the motivations behind funding decisions and advocating for transparency.

Only by unraveling the complexities of non-profit financing can we pave the way for a more equitable, inclusive, and authentic public discourse—one that transcends the strategic play of funding and genuinely addresses the pressing issues of our time.

 

Debra Nhokwara is a multi-disciplinary content creator who works in the social impact industry.

Tafadzwa Munyaka is a nonprofit/social change professional with crosscutting expertise in fundraising, program management, and child rights advocacy.

Credit: United Nations

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

The United Nations is heading towards a severe cash crisis forcing the world body “to implement aggressive cash conservation measures to avert a default in meeting the legal obligations of the Organization”.

Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has drawn attention to “the unfortunate deteriorating financial situation of our regular budget operations”.

UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq told IPS that in order to ensure liquidity for paying staff salaries, certain difficult steps will be necessary. Hiring restrictions will need to be maintained during 2024, he said.

Restrictions in non-post spending will also be critical to bridge the liquidity gap. As a result, until the situation improves, official travel will need to be limited to the most essential activities, he said.

“Purchases of goods and services will be postponed, unless absolutely critical. Hiring of consultants and experts will be minimized to the extent feasible”.

And most construction and maintenance projects will be suspended, except where the slowing down of major construction projects would result in significant future additional expenses.

“We will implement energy-saving and other measures to reduce utility bills and curtail expenses on managing facilities. Non-essential security expenses will also be curtailed, as long as they do not impact the safety of our premises, assets and of our personnel and delegates,” said Haq.

The crisis is blamed on most member states who have either delayed or absconded on their annual dues – called assessed contributions— to the world body.

UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric told reporters, as of February 15, only 58 out of 193 Member States have paid in full.

The main cause of the liquidity crisis: not all Member States pay their assessments in full. In 2023, the UN collected 82.3 per cent of the year’s assessment, the lowest in the last five years. Only 142 Member States paid their dues in full – again, the lowest in the last five years. As a result, year-end arrears climbed to $859 million, up from $330 million in 2022.

A secondary cause of the liquidity crisis relates to a shift in the payment patterns of Member States, including the unpredictability of both the timing and the amounts of anticipated collections. In 2023, collections trailed estimates throughout most of the year. The UN ended the year $529 million short of anticipated collections.

The cash crunch is also having a negative impact on Geneva, home to several UN agencies.

According to the UN, Geneva houses around 40 international organizations, 180 permanent missions and more than 400 NGOs. In addition to the UN entities headquartered there, most UN funds, programmes and agencies maintain regional offices or liaison offices there.

Ian Richards, an economist at the Geneva-based UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and former President of the Coordinating Committee of International Staff Unions and Associations, told IPS the UN had to close its Geneva campus for three weeks over Christmas and “we are told that further closures are likely”.

“Meanwhile some translation staff have been told they can’t take any leave at all until August, which we believe is more a symptom of poor management. Of great concern is that staff, mainly young, with temporary contracts, are being let go,” said Richards.

In his letter to staffers, Guterres said: “We expect the regular budget liquidity situation to be far more challenging in 2024, as we are starting with very little cash. In order to avoid a payment default throughout the year, while dealing with the unpredictability of intra-year collections, our initial estimates are that we will need to conserve around $350 million in cash by slowing down and reducing spending until we have certainty that we have enough cash to meet our obligations each month.”

This means, “ we will have to introduce spending restrictions right away or risk running out of cash by August, including the liquidity reserves and the surplus cash of closed tribunals.”

“Protecting staff from the liquidity crisis to the maximum extent is a priority for me. I have repeatedly made every effort to do so over the years and I will not relent in doing everything possible to mitigate any pressure on you”.

However, the reality is that personnel costs account for more than 70 per cent of the regular budget. In order to ensure liquidity for paying staff salaries, certain difficult steps will be necessary. Hiring restrictions will need to be maintained during 2024.

“I am keenly aware that this will have a knock-on effect. High vacancies put an added burden on staff – especially those who work in entities with high vacancy rates. This step is essential if we are to have any hope of ensuring sufficient cash inflows,” declared Guterres.

Meanwhile, in a joint statement released early this week, Louis Charbonneau, United Nations Director, Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Widad Franco, UN Advocacy Officer, HRW, warned that a cash crunch and hiring freeze at the United Nations threaten to hinder UN human rights investigations in places like Sudan, Ukraine, and Syria.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/02/13/uns-financial-troubles-jeopardize-critical-human-rights-work

Delegations from China, Russia, Cuba, and others have been trying for years to defund UN human rights work in the General Assembly’s Fifth Committee, which oversees the budget.

Their attempts in December to block funding for investigations into grave human rights abuses in Sudan, Syria, Ukraine, Russia, Nicaragua and elsewhere failed.

The UN leadership and member countries, HRW said, should ensure that the UN’s human rights teams have funding and staff to fulfill their mandates. And governments that haven’t paid their assessed contributions should pay up.

Guterres has also written to Member States to inform them of the situation and to alert them that the UN will be forced to implement aggressive cash conservation measures to avert a default in meeting the legal obligations of the Organization.

He also reminded them that the ultimate responsibility for our financial health rests with Member States, and he encouraged them to pay in full and on time.

“I have asked relevant senior managers to engage with Member States and outline the potential impact on our ability deliver on our mandates, including support to intergovernmental meetings across duty stations. The Department of Management Strategy, Policy and Compliance will work with senior managers to help deal with the impact of these measures. We will monitor the cash flows carefully and adapt to the evolving liquidity situation”.

“Member States have been very supportive of my proposals regarding the budget for 2024 and have made positive decisions on initiatives, such as establishing two new offices for Anti-Racism and for Data Protection, increasing funding for core activities of UNRWA, increasing resources for development and human rights activities and strengthening the Peacebuilding Fund with assessed contributions from 2025”.

However, budgets approved without adequate cash to execute them undermine the essence of the process, declared Guterres.

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');  

Ambassador Symone Betton Nayo at the premiere of "Bob Marley: One Love" in Brussels. Credit: A.M./SWAN

By SWAN
BRUSSELS, Feb 15 2024 (IPS)

Judging from the audience reactions at a screening of Bob Marley: One Love in Brussels, the music may touch international viewers, but the memories and some of the “insider” comments belong to Jamaicans and those closely connected with the country.

It was clear from discussions after the premiere that attendees who had lived in Jamaica understood the context of the songs, and got certain jokes, while others felt adrift, even as they appreciated the world-famous tracks such as No Woman, No Cry and, yes, One Love. This may account for some of the less-than-positive reviews that have started to emerge.

“The film was surprisingly authentic,” said Stefanie Gilbert-Roberts, a Jamaican communications and culture professional who resides in Belgium. “But perhaps so authentic that it might seem out of this world for those not connected to the culture.”

Bob Marley: One Love, directed by Reinaldo Marcus Green and coming nearly 43 years after the iconic singer’s death, focuses on the Seventies and on two concerts that Marley and his band performed in Kingston, the Jamaican capital. Both events took place amid surging political violence on the island and were aimed at unifying the population. But before the first concert, gunmen stormed Marley’s home and shot him, his wife Rita, and his manager Don Taylor – an assault that shocked Jamaicans and international fans.

The film depicts the attack quickly, without dwelling on what must have been deep trauma for Marley’s family. Watching it, one can’t help but wonder at the effects on those who have now gone on to co-produce this movie: his widow Rita, their children Ziggy and Cedella, and the other family members involved such as Stephen.

Bob and Rita performed with their wounds at the Smile Jamaica concert in December 1976, and then left the island: he eventually for London, and she with the children to the United States.

The film shows Marley’s time in England, which is perhaps the least interesting part of the story – as viewers don’t really get an idea of how he dealt again with life away from “home” (he had lived in London before, in the early Seventies, signing to Chris Blackwell’s Island label). Instead, we’re given scenes of him jogging, playing football with his bandmates, joking with record executives, and getting inspiration for the title of the album Exodus, a global hit after its release in 1977.

Marley’s “relationships” are also not dwelt upon, as a viewer remarked after the screening. The most well-known of these, with Cindy Breakspeare (Miss World 1976 and mother of Damian Marley), is shown fleetingly in a scene where she watches him perform in a studio. Breakspeare is named in the credits as a consultant to the film.

Following his self-imposed exile in England, Marley would return triumphantly to Kingston to play the One Love Peace Concert in 1978, when he brought Michael Manley and Edward Seaga, leaders of the opposing political parties, together on stage to clasp hands.

It was a message again to Jamaicans to unite. By the time of the next general election in the country, in 1980, more than 800 people had been killed, and citizens were leaving the island in droves, taking their grief with them.

In the film, Rita (played by British actress Lashana Lynch) refers to one of the most shocking incidents during this period, when attackers set fire to a charitable institution, with residents inside burned alive.

For those who experienced these turbulent years, the film brings the memories crashing back, of both the horrific incidents and the music. Marley recorded his island’s troubles in song after song: Johnny Was, Concrete Jungle, Rat Race, Ambush in the Night, Them Belly Full (But We Hungry) and others.

In addition, there were the more playful tunes such as Roots, Rock, Reggae (with the opening lyrics “Play I some music”), and then the love songs, which the film highlights as well: Turn Your Lights Down Low being among them.

In the movie, Marley is seen playing this on the guitar to Rita, and it is then that one realizes that the whole biopic might actually be a love song to her, formulated by her children.

As portrayed by Lynch, Rita is a force, an artist in her own right, who needs to be both a backing singer for Bob and a parent to their children (as well as to his “outside” ones) – a situation she angrily describes in one argument scene. Lynch’s performance is perhaps the most memorable, and the writers could have given her greater scope by including more of Rita’s story.

Playing Marley, British actor Kingsley Ben-Adir works hard to capture the intensity and charisma of the singer, and he gives a credible performance. But the script needed more substance for a complete portrayal. Not shown, for instance, is Marley’s stance on relationships.

At an early interview in Kingston, he was once asked about these views, and his response was: if a woman loved him, she would love his other women. When questioned whether this might be acceptable were the situation reversed, he replied: She don’t do that. Still, he adopted the two children Rita had with other partners.

So, yes, artists are complex people, and certain aspects of his life might have been depicted, alongside the far-reaching and undeniable impact in addressing injustice, inequality, and marginalisation. This is a minor criticism, however. The film is worth watching – for the man, the music, the memories… and the question of how far the world still has to go in solving major ills.

At the screening in Belgium, co-organized by Paramount Pictures, Sony Brussels and the Jamaican Embassy, Marley’s importance was summed up by Ambassador Symone Betton Nayo, who gave a short speech before the film began.

“His ability to connect with people through his music, transcending cultural and geographical boundaries, has made him a symbol of unity, strength and hope,” Betton Nayo said. “He was not only a prolific writer of music, and a talented performer, but an inspiring messenger. Many of his anthemic compositions such as One Love, Get Up, Stand Up, Redemption Song remain relevant as we reflect on current global realities.”

With “Reggae Month” being celebrated in February, the film’s release is timely, paying tribute to an iconic Jamaican artist whose music lives on, with the call for peace, love, hope, and justice, Betton Nayo added. – AM/SWAN

Bob Marley: One Love (Paramount Pictures) is currently in theatres.

 

These are the worst of times, but they can become the best of times, said speaker Dr. Walden Bello, seeking to inspire thousands of progressives who gathered for the World Social Forum (WSF) in Kathmandu on Thursday with the planet under clouds of armed conflict and assaults on democracy. “We have a climate catastrophe facing […]

The island of Mayotte becomes the latest battleground in France over the laws on immigration.

After scoring, footballer Heritier Luvumbu expressed solidarity with war victims in his home country.

By Anis Chowdhury
SYDNEY, Feb 14 2024 (IPS)

Israel continues to defy its strongest backer the US and its western allies in its quest to control the land from the “River to the Sea”, and in the process ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian population. Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is determined to push ahead with a ground offensive against Gaza’s southernmost town of Rafah despite mounting warnings from aid agencies and the international community that an assault on Rafah would be a catastrophe. He also snubbed the US on the latest hostage release and ceasefire deal brokered by Qatar and Egypt. The interim order of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to take all effective measures to stop “plausible” genocide in Gaza seems irrelevant to Israel. Josep Borrell, the EU’s foreign policy chief admits that Netanyahu “doesn’t listen to anyone”.

Anis Chowdhury

Israel’s impunity

One should not be surprised at all at Israel’s defiance. It has been enjoying impunity ever since it was established in 1948. When David Ben-Gurion, the head of the Jewish Agency, proclaimed the establishment of the State of Israel on 14 May, 1948, the US President Harry S. Truman recognised the new nation on the same day. Israel has violated 28 resolutions of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) which are legally binding on the UN Member States.

Between 1972 and February 2023 the US has cast a veto 53 times in the UNSC against anti-Israel resolutions or condemnations of Israel. An opinion piece in Israel’s reputable newspaper, Haaretz asked, “When Will the U.S. Get Tired of Helping Israel With UN Vetoes?” It vetoed every attempt by the UNSC for a permanent ceasefire in Israel’s latest onslaught on Gaza, following 7 October Hamas attack on Israel that have resulted in nearly 30,000 deaths most of whom are children and women.

When Joe Biden met with Benjamin Netanyahu and his war cabinet during his visit to Israel, immediately following the Hamas attack, President Biden assured them: “I don’t believe you have to be a Jew to be a Zionist, and I am a Zionist”. Faced with global outcry and domestic pressure, especially within the Democratic Party and growing dissent of administration staff, President Biden expressed some frustrations, saying Israel’s bombardment of Gaza is “indiscriminate” or Israel’s reaction to the 7 October Hamas attack was “over the top”.

But the US and its allies’ military, financial and diplomatic supports for Israel continue unconditionally. The US and its Western allies, especially Germany and the UK, are critical of South Africa’s case against Israel at the ICJ seeking an interim injunction against plausible violations of the Genocide Convention. They dismissed it as “meritless, counterproductive, and completely without any basis in fact whatsoever”, or “wrong and provocative”, rushing to defend Israel at the ICJ, while Israel’s President called it “atrocious and preposterous.”

The West has failed to stop Israel’s illegal settlements in the occupied land of Palestine. Occasionally the US and its Western allies have used some stronger words like “deeply dismayed”, “deeply troubled” and “strongly opposed,” not to mention banal expressions such as “against unilateral steps” and “calls for restraint and stability”, reiterating their “commitment to a 2-State solution”.

As the Haaretz opinion piece observed, “These bland themes carry no consequences. They’re not much different from the “thoughts and prayers” that American politicians offer after a mass shooting. These hollow statements from Washington have become the foreign policy version of “nothing to see here, carry on.”

The US and its Western allies condemn “form the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free” as anti-Semitic. But fail to mention the Likud Party’s manifesto which says “The right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is eternal and indisputable and … [the land, i.e., Judea and Samaria] between the Sea and the Jordan [River] there will only be Israeli sovereignty”. No one raised any concerns when Netanyahu in September 2023 gleefully displayed at the annual UN General Assembly Session the new Middle-East map with Israel from the “River to the Sea”, less than a month before the 7 October Hamas attack.

Why should one be surprised when Israel’s influential finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, accused President Joe Biden of engaging in an “anti-Semitic lie” in reaction to Biden’s administrative order of sanctions against violent Zionist settlers in the occupied West Bank? Is it not ironic that a self-declared non-Jew Zionist is accused of anti-Semitism? Netanyahu termed the US sanctions as “drastic” and declared “there is no place for drastic steps on this matter.”

Ariel Sharon spoke the truth

Ariel Sharon, the former prime minister of Israel, said in an acrimonious argument with his Foreign Minister Shimon Peres, “Every time we do something, you tell me Americans will do this and do that. I want to tell you something very clear; don’t worry about American pressure on Israel; we, the Jewish people, control America ….”.

Supporting Israel has historically been incredibly politically popular in the US, bolstered by a well-funded pro-Israel lobby in Washington, such as the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). James Petras in his “The Power of Israel in the United States” (2006), provided detailed analysis and documentation of the power of Israel via the Israeli, Jewish or Pro-Zionist Lobby. He explored the extraordinary extent of US political, economic, military and diplomatic support for the state of Israel, along with the means whereby such support is generated and consolidated.

Petras’ book sheds light on the AIPAC spying scandal and other Israeli espionage against America; the fraudulent and complicit role of America’s academic “terrorist experts” in furthering criminal government policies, and the orchestration of the Danish cartoons to foment antipathy between Muslims and the West. James Petras argued that Zionist power in America ensured unconditional US backing for Israeli colonisation of Palestine and its massive uprooting of Palestinians.

Frankenstein’s fate?

In Mary Shelley’s 1818 novel Frankenstein, the scientist Victor Frankenstein creates a monster. The monster attempts to fit into human society, but finds itself rejected; thus, becoming vengeful, especially against its creator.

The monster killed Frankenstein’s younger brother, best friend and bride on their wedding night, whereupon Frankenstein’s father died of grief. Finally, Frankenstein dedicated himself to destroying his creation. But the monster goaded him to pursuing him the North, through Scandinavia and into Russia, staying ahead of him the entire way. Suffering from severe exhaustion and hypothermia, Victor Frankenstein died at the end.

As Israel tramples over all the international institutions, including the UN, the US and its Western allies have become complicit in the destruction of the rule-based world order that they themselves created. Israel’s open defiance of the US and its Western allies is a clear sign that it is too late to reign in the monster they created. As the US and its Western allies are losing influence and credibility in the Global South, one wonders whether the US-led West is facing Frankenstein’s fate.

Anis Chowdhury is Adjunct Professor, School of Business, Western Sydney University. He held senior United Nations positions in the area of Economic and Social Affairs in New York and Bangkok.

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');  

Social media is awash with events enabling men to get away from the "pressures" of Valentine's Day.

Tendayi Westerhof was one of the first celebrities in Zimbabwe to disclose their HIV-positive status.

By Ed Holt
BRATISLAVA, Feb 14 2024 (IPS)

UNAIDS Executive Director, Winnie Byanyima, recently made an impassioned call for governments to support women and girls from marginalized communities at the frontlines of the defence of human rights, to help ensure, among others, that global health is protected.

This comes as the latest data from UNAIDS shows that:

• Globally, 46% of all new HIV infections were among women and girls in 2022
• In sub-Saharan Africa, adolescent girls and young women (AGYW) accounted for more than 77% of new infections among young people aged 15–24 years in 2022.
• In sub-Saharan Africa, adolescent girls and young women (aged 15–24 years) were more than three times as likely to acquire HIV than their male peers in 2022.
• Every week, 4000 adolescent girls and young women aged 15–24 years became infected with HIV globally in 2022, with 3100 of these infections occurring in sub-Saharan Africa.
• Only about 42% of districts with high HIV incidence in sub-Saharan Africa had dedicated HIV prevention programmes for adolescent girls and young women in 2021.

Tendayi Westerhof, national director of the PAN-African Positive Women’s Coalition Zimbabwe (PAPWC-ZIM), was one of the first celebrities in Zimbabwe to disclose their HIV-positive status and is one of the most prominent figures in the fight against HIV/AIDS in her country.

IPS spoke to the former model turned HIV activist about defending the rights of people living with HIV and the key role women and girls can play in the AIDS response.

IPS: Do you think that, globally, governments have failed to do enough to support women and girls from marginalized communities who are defending the rights of people living with HIV (PLHIV) and if so, why have they not done enough?

Marking World AIDS Day 2023 in Chinotimba Township, Victoria Falls, Tendayi Westerhof meets Winnie Byanyima, UNAIDS Executive Director, and others from UNAIDS and the National AIDS Council Zimbabwe.

Westerhof: First and foremost is to understand what the rights of people living with HIV are and to ascertain if both women, girls and people living with HIV know their rights. The AIDS response must centre around human rights at every level. PLHIV have the right to treatment access for HIV, they too have sexual and reproductive health rights and are not a homogenous group. It is important to recognize that aspect of diversity among women, girls and PLHIV and ensure that their universal human rights are protected at country level. Laws that criminalize PLHIV and key populations fuel the spread of HIV and AIDS and continue to put the significant many in these groups at risk of HIV, and fuel stigma and discrimination.

IPS: What kind of support should governments or other international bodies be giving to women and girls in marginalised communities who are defending rights for PLHIV?

Westerhof: Women and girls in marginalized communities must be recognized as equal partners in the response to end AIDS and that they too have human rights. They need support in terms of inclusion in leadership and decision-making spaces and not tokenistic appointments. They need both technical and financial resources to effectively defend the rights of PLHIV.

IPS: From your experience as an HIV activist working with PLHIV, why do you think women and girls from marginalised communities specifically should be leading the fight to defend the rights of PLHIV?

Westerhof: I believe in the mantra ”nothing about us without us”.  The Greater Involvement of People Living with HIV (GIPA) principles are clear in calling for the greater and meaningful involvement of people living with HIV in all our diversities.  PLHIV are vectors of the disease but must be seen as equal partners who are bringing the realities of living with HIV to ensure that the planning, design, and implementation of HIV programmes are tailored to address their needs. They are also experts on various aspects [of HIV] especially peer support, issues of treatment literacy/adherence, HIV prevention and awareness, with the main focus being to address stigma and discrimination. 

IPS: As someone living with HIV for a number of years, and an HIV activist, what have been the greatest challenges you have faced in trying to defend the rights of PLHIV?

Westerhof: My greatest challenge has been sometimes working in silos without a collective voice towards defending the rights of PLHIV.  Also limited resources: most defenders are driven to do their work by the experiences they have been through, and by their passion, and end up working as unpaid volunteers. Getting burnt out and sometimes forgetting self-care and other mental health issues. The big issues of inequality, gender-based violence, in particular intimate partner violence, stigma and discrimination. There have been socio-economic challenges, but other challenges of funding and new emerging issues such as climate change, and disasters are shifting the focus from the fight against HIV and AIDS and resources keep dwindling. We are still recovering from the impact of COVID-19 and we need to continue empowering women and adolescent girls with information about HIV/AIDS and other pandemics.

IPS: Adolescent girls and young women (AGYW) have a disproportionate risk of acquiring HIV, compared to male peers, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) for a number of reasons, including biological, socio-economic, religious, and cultural factors. Some experts have suggested these factors could be addressed through stricter sentences for sexual offenders, economically empowering AGYW, improving the provision of sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) education and services to AGYW, and better access to HIV prevention and treatment. But do you think these measures would be enough to significantly reduce the disproportionate risk of acquiring HIV that AGYW face, especially in SSA countries?

Westerhof: A lot is happening in my country to address issues of gender-based violence (GBV), and in particular sexual violence. There is a need to keep bringing GBV matters into the spotlight through the media.  Men’s/boys’ engagement in the response to end all forms of sexual violence must be intensified. Getting to boys at a younger age can help. Making use of our traditional and cultural leaders can also help to reduce GBV. AGYW still remain more vulnerable to HIV and AIDS and GBV than adult boys and young men (ABYM), and there is a need to continue with strategies that protect them.

IPS: Introducing any of the above measures, and ensuring their continued practical implementation would require the support of a number of state institutions, including not just judicial bodies, but health and economic institutions too. Do you have much confidence that these bodies and institutions would ensure that any laws passed, such as stricter sentences for sexual offenders, or guaranteeing better rights and access to HIV treatment for AGYW, would also be properly implemented in practice?

Westerhof: Most countries have these measures and law but the problem is operationalizing them. AGYW need continuous empowerment through these laws, and in how they can report cased of GBV. Victim-friendly courts are there, but sometimes they are not fully utilized. Perpetrators of GBV and sexual violence sometimes walk away scot-free in the absence of compelling evidence beyond reasonable doubt and other factors. Nevertheless, there are many perpetrators of GBV and sexual offences who are behind bars.

IPS: Stigma around HIV continues to play a significant role in fuelling epidemics as it puts many women off seeking treatment or accessing other services for fear their status may be disclosed. What should governments be doing to eliminate this stigma?

Westerhof: In my country the law prohibits stigma and discrimination of PLHIV, including women and AGYW. Also, a national study on stigma was conducted which provides guidance on how to plan, design and implement programs that aim to eliminate stigma and discrimination.

IPS: Do you think your own story as someone who publicly disclosed your HIV status despite the stigma around it at the time, your continued advocacy for PLHIV, and good health, is a good example for women and girls with HIV of the role they can play in helping to eliminate this stigma, and lead healthy, successful lives?

Westerhof: Disclosure helps to break the stigma and discrimination of HIV and AIDS. It encourages others to see that there is still life after a positive HIV test, as living with HIV is today a condition that can be managed with anti-retroviral therapy (ART). PLHIV have continued to play major roles in various communities, such as advocacy for better treatment, care, and support, community mobilization for HIV testing, cervical cancer screening, TB screening and others. Their testimonies have made it easier to make HIV and AIDS a normal  subject and increase the acceptance of PLHIV. My public disclosure of my HIV+ status opened new doors for me.

IPS: You have previously spoken of how important it is that people in local communities are educated about HIV, its treatment and its prevention, and that everyone has access to that education and treatment and prevention services. But in communities where strong patriarchal attitudes are prevalent, and stigma around HIV is high, what measures can be taken to ensure women and girls get that education and access to services?

Westerhof: Community leaders can play a role to ensure that patriarchal attitudes are eliminated. This is an ongoing process whereby people’s attitudes are eventually changed through behaviour change.

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

• Trapped and Trafficked—Fishers Tell of Forced Labor Horror
• Fear as Russian Anti-LGBT Law Comes into Effect
• War on Drugs’ Failed and Policies Need Major Overhaul – Report

Equatorial Guinea striker Emilio Nsue is suspended indefinitely for 'serious indiscipline' during the 2023 Africa Cup of Nations.

Five days after being seized, a Polish doctor is saved despite the rescue helicopter coming under attack.

Air strikes on Rafah city in the southern Gaza Strip have caused widespread damage. Credit: UNICEF/Eyad El Baba

By Joseph Chamie
PORTLAND, USA, Feb 14 2024 (IPS)

Together religious identity and demographics play an important role in the decades-long conflict between Israelis and the Palestinians. If the Palestinians, who are largely Muslim and Christian, had been Jewish, they would have been allowed to live in their homes on their lands and be entitled to be Israeli citizens.

According to Israel’s Law of Return (חוק השבות, ḥok ha-shvūt), passed by the Knesset on 5 July 1950, people, including Palestinians, with one or more Jewish grandparent and their spouses have the right to relocate to Israel and acquire Israeli citizenship, assuming they pose no threat to the country and are not dangerous criminals.

 

The British Mandate Past

The British Mandate for Palestine, or Mandatory Palestine, was approved by the League of Nations in 1922. The religious composition of the population of Mandatory Palestine was predominantly non-Jewish. Among the resident population at that time, approximately 11 percent were Jewish, 78 percent were Muslims, and 10 percent Christians (Table 1).

 

 

As a result of Jewish migration to Mandatory Palestine, largely from Eastern Europe, the religious composition of the resident population underwent noteworthy change. The estimated numbers of Jewish migrants to Mandatory Palestine during the 1920s, 1930s, and from 1940 to 1945 are 100,000, 223,000, and 45,000, respectively, resulting in a total of 368,000.

By 1945, the Jewish population in Mandatory Palestine had increased tenfold and the proportion Jewish nearly tripled to 31 percent. Also, the non-Jewish population in Mandatory Palestine doubled and the majority of the population continued to be non-Jewish, i.e., 60 percent Muslim and 8 percent Christian.

Becoming a politically active movement at the end of the 19th century, the Zionist movement recognized that their dream of creating a “Jewish” state in historic Palestine would need to be unencumbered by the native population of non-Jews. In other words, the establishment of a Jewish state would necessarily involve the displacement or expulsion of the land’s current non-Jewish residents.

After decades of violent confrontations between the Jewish and non-Jewish populations in Mandatory Palestine and various attempts by the British and others to resolve the conflict, the Palestine problem was turned over to the United Nations to resolve. In 1947, the United Nations adopted the Solomonic proposal terminating the Mandate and dividing Palestine into two states, largely resulting demographically in one Jewish and one non-Jewish, i.e., primarily Muslim and Christian (Figure 1).

 

Source: United Nations partition plan for Palestine, 1947.

Although in 1947 about one third of the population in Mandatory Palestine was Jewish, the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181 (II) allocated 55 percent of the land to the Jewish state. Consequently, neighboring Arab countries and the non-Jewish population of Mandatory Palestine rejected the proposal.

Following the United Nations proposal to partition Mandatory Palestine into two states and various actions that were undertaken for the creation of the Jewish nation of Israel on 14 May 1948, the demographic composition of the territory underwent significant changes with the displacement and dispossession, or the Nakba النكبة) ) , of an estimated 750,000 non-Jewish Palestinians from Israel.

In the newly founded nation of Israel with a population of 873 thousand, the proportion Jewish was 82 percent. If the non-Jewish Palestinian population had not been displaced but had remained in their homes, the Jewish population in Israel would have been about half of its actual 1948 level, or about 43 percent.

Following its establishment in 1948 and the war involving neighboring Arab states, the borders of Israel expanded to 77 percent of the original territory of Mandate Palestine, including the larger part of Jerusalem. Also, after the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, Israel’s population with the support and resources of each Israeli government began expanding Jewish settlements in the occupied territories of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip (Figure 2).

Source: World Atlas.

 

Today approximately 700 thousand Israeli settlers are living in 279 settlements across the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Recently, some Israelis and far-right Israeli lawmakers are rallying support in the country to reestablish Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip, which Israeli authorities and Jewish settlers vacated in 2005.

Most countries deem the Jewish settlements built on land Israel occupied in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war as illegal. The continued expansion of Israeli Jewish settlements remains among the most contentious issues between Israelis and the Palestinians as well as the international community.

 

Options to address the conflict

Seventy-five years after its creation, the Jewish proportion of Israel is approximately 73 percent. Again, if the current non-Jewish Palestinian inhabitants in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip were permitted to become Israeli citizens, the Jewish population in the demographically enlarged Israel would instead be approximately 48 percent.

Various options have been proposed to address the nearly century-long conflict that began following the establishment of the British Mandate for Palestine. Among those options are the one-state solution, a federation of Palestinian provinces, the transfer of the Palestinians from the occupied territories and the two-state solution (Table 2).

 

Same rights, justice and equality for Jews and non-Jews, which is generally the case among Western democracies. Some believe that a one state reality, or a de facto single state, already predominates in the territories controlled by Israel. Accordingly, they maintain that it’s time for Israelis and Palestinians as well as the international community to revise their attitudes to resolving the conflict.

A national poll conducted several years ago by the Pew Research Center found that most Israeli Jews, 79 percent, say Jews deserve preferential treatment in Israel. In addition, in 2018, the Knesset passed the Nation-State law that states, among other things, the Jewish people’s right to self-determination, which it restricts to the Israel’s Jewish population, establishes Jewish settlement as a national value and mandates that the state will labor to encourage and promote its establishment and development. Also importantly, as noted above, the one-state solution would result in the Jewish Israeli population becoming a minority of approximately 48 percent.

A federation of Palestinian provinces would not meet the needs and aspirations of the Palestinians. After decades of conflict, displacement and statelessness, Palestinians desire a full-fledged independent nation of their own.

Although objectionable to many, the expulsion, transfer or emigration of Palestinians to other countries has been proposed by some far-right Israelis and their supporters. That demographic change would be followed by Israeli civilians resettling the vacated territories including most recently the Gaza Strip area.

Also according to the national poll by the Pew Research Center, nearly half of Jewish Israelis indicated that Arab Israelis should be expelled or transferred from Israel. Many Jewish Israelis envision a return to ancient Greater Israel with the Jewish inhabitants being the overwhelming majority and the law enshrining Jewish supremacy over the entire geographic area.

The often cited two-state solution to resolve the conflict is the preferred option of many countries both inside and outside the region, including Israel’s main political supporter and economic benefactor the United States. However, the current Israeli government is against the creation of a Palestinian state.

In addition, a Gallup survey taken in the last few months of 2023 found a clear majority of Israelis, two-thirds of Israeli adults, do not support the existence of an independent Palestinian state. Also, only one in four Palestinians, 24 percent, supported a two-state solution when surveyed between July and September 2023.

 

Prospects for peace

Admittedly, achieving a just, equitable and comprehensive solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, including the two-state proposal, is indeed a formidable undertaking with many serious challenges. Those challenges have been heightened in the aftermath of the October 7 brutal Hamas attack on Israelis and Israel’s war in Gaza that has resulted in a great number of Palestinian civilian deaths and vast destruction of homes and infrastructure.

Nevertheless, despite the daunting challenges including salient demographic realities and ingrained religious identity, a negotiated peace between Israelis and Palestinians is certainly achievable in the near term and would lead to innumerable benefits.

An Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement would foster beneficial relationships, promote economic cooperation and advance mutual understanding in this strategically important region. The demographics of being Jewish or non-Jewish would then diminish as an underlying source for conflict and hostilities among Israelis and Palestinians. And importantly, Israelis and Palestinians would reap the rewards of peace, including the prospects for better lives for themselves and for the populations of future generations.

Joseph Chamie is a consulting demographer and a former director of the United Nations Population Division. He is the author of numerous publications on population issues, including his recent book, “Population Levels, Trends, and Differentials”.

 

A Nigerian court hears dramatic testimony in the corruption trial of the former central bank chief.

Emerse Fae says guiding Ivory Coast to the 2023 Afcon title feels like "revenge" after he was forced to retire from playing early.

Kelvin Kangethe escaped custody in Kenya, and is wanted by US police in connection with a murder.

SunCulture has raised over $40 million to equip rural farmers with solar-powered irrigation systems.

By Finbarr Toesland
NAIROBI, Kenya, Feb 14 2024 (IPS)

Often referred to as the “Sun continent,” Africa receives more hours of bright sunlight than any other continent. But even with 60 per cent of the world’s solar resources, Africa has only one per cent of solar generation capacity, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).

Due to energy production and infrastructure challenges, many African countries regularly deal with blackouts, brownouts and poor electricity supply. Then the COVID-19 pandemic hit the global economy hard, and commodity prices surged after the invasion of Ukraine, making energy even more difficult for poorer Africans to buy.

Increasingly, start-ups rather than established corporations are offering access to advanced solar energy solutions to the majority of people across Africa. By harnessing the sun’s power and transitioning to clean energy, Africans can expect major economic and social developments across the continent.

Solar energy brightens other industries

Headquartered in Nairobi, SunCulture has raised over $40 million to equip rural farmers with solar-powered irrigation systems. Instead of counting on rainfall or revving up diesel or petrol pumps, farmers can now rely on solar-powered systems that are cheaper, use renewable energy and need minimal maintenance.

Once the company installs a solar panel on top of a farmer’s house and connects it to a battery-powered water pump, the irrigation system can cover up to three acres.

“Solar is particularly attractive because of its positive environmental impact, job creation potential, and economic development potential,” said Mikayla Czajkowski, chief of staff at SunCulture.

“African nations have immense potential to benefit from utilizing solar energy – especially in remote and under-served regions where energy access is limited – and facilitates a reduction in the continent’s carbon footprint, making a valuable contribution to global efforts to combat climate change,” Ms. Czajkowski added.

In an impact survey of SunCulture’s customers, measurement company 60 Decibels [a US-based an organisation that offers customized assessments] found that SunCulture brought about significant improvements: 89 per cent of smallholder farmers experienced a boost in their quality of life, 90 per cent increased their production, and 87 per cent enhanced their earnings.

Ambitious start-ups

From GridX Africa, a firm that offers off-grid solar power to farms, safari lodges for tourists and construction projects in Kenya, Mozambique and Tanzania, to the pay-as-you-go solar company Bboxx and the Egypt-based solar power developer and electricity distributor KarmSolar, Africa has no shortage of original solar energy start-ups.

While the ambitions of these solar businesses are laudable, achieving high levels of growth is not easy.

Emily McAteer, founder and chief executive officer, of Odyssey Energy Solutions spent more than a decade working to finance and build distributed solar projects across Africa and India.

Her firm provides technology and finance solutions for distributed renewable energy businesses. At every stage of project development, she hit key bottlenecks that make it hard for solar companies like hers to scale.

By offering tools for solar developers to aggregate and pitch portfolios of projects to financiers, firms can access capital more effectively. To procure equipment more effectively, Odyssey streamlined the procurement process by negotiating directly with original equipment manufacturers for better prices and warranties and by working with developers for supply chain support.

“Operations and maintenance, especially in remote areas, can be a big hurdle,” Ms. McAteer said. “We offer hardware and software that sits on top of solar assets so that operators and investors can get deep insight into performance and optimize performance of their systems.”

Global initiatives need catalytic capital

More than 500 million people living in Africa have no access to electricity, according the IEA Africa Energy Outlook 2022. Governments and non-governmental organizations have launched many high-profile schemes to boost the solar energy sector in African countries, with mixed success. The continent needs a global response to address a challenge of this immense scale.

Launched in 2012, the US-Africa Clean Energy Finance (US-ACEF) initiative attempted to offset the costs of the early-stage development of clean energy projects, in a bid to draw investment to these ventures.

Solar is particularly attractive because of its positive environmental and economic impacts.

For Ms. McAteer, the US-ACEF model proved effective. Now innovators need higher levels of catalytic capital to continue scaling so that they can meet the UN Sustainable Development Goal 7, “Ensuring access to Clean and Affordable Energy.”

“Annual capital investment in renewables in emerging markets needs to reach $1 trillion per year if the world is to achieve the goal of net-zero emissions by 2050. US-ACEF set the model for how the industry can achieve that,” Ms. McAteer said. “Now the missing piece is continued investment from both public and private financiers.”

Innovation underway across Africa

So far, the US-ACEF has supported 32 projects, with country-specific investments in Ethiopia, Kenya, Morocco, Namibia, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, South Africa, Tanzania and Uganda.

Nijhad Jamal, managing partner of Equator, an early-stage venture capital firm focusing on climate technology in sub-Saharan Africa, agrees that Africa’s solar energy sector has benefited greatly from US-ACEF.

“There is a lot more impact to come from US-ACEF with projects like the Health Electrification Alliance, which aims to electrify over 10,000 health facilities in Africa,” Mr. Jamal said. “Most of the US-ACEF projects emphasize sustainability. In our opinion, this will have a lasting impact on the solar energy sector.”

Source: Africa Renewal– a United Nations digital magazine that covers Africa’s economic, social and political developments—and the challenges the continent faces and the solutions to these by Africans themselves, including with the support of the United Nations and international community.

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
KATHMANDU, Nepal, Feb 14 2024 (IPS)

A gathering ‘perfect storm’ – due to various developments, several quite deliberate – now threatens much devastation in the global South, likely to most hurt the poorest and most vulnerable.

Globalisation’s protracted decline
The age of globalization had mixed consequences, unevenly incorporating national markets for labour, goods and even some services. It ended gradually, with the trend far more pronounced following the protracted worldwide stagnation since the 2008 global financial crisis.

Jomo Kwame Sundaram

Sometimes still referred to as the Great Recession, Western central banks resorted to unconventional monetary policies, mainly ‘quantitative easing’, to keep their economies afloat. But easier credit enabled more financialization and indebtedness, rather than recovery, let alone sustainable development.

But the end of the era of globalization did not mean a simple return to the status quo ante. Most economies had been transformed irreversibly by economic liberalization, both nationally and internationally, with dire lasting consequences.

Market pressures for fiscal austerity were strengthened by conditionalities and advice from international financial institutions. This inevitably led to deep cuts in government spending, leaving little for public investments, which might contribute to the recovery of the real economy.

Interest rate hikes accelerate stagnation
The 2008 Wolfowitz doctrine, from late in the Bush Jr presidency, was revised by the Obama administration to launch the second Cold War. The COVID-19 pandemic and the last two years of war and sanctions have worsened supply-side disruptions exacerbating ‘cost-push’ inflation.

Some prices spiked due to opportunistic market manipulation by investors and speculators as well as deliberate disruptive interventions for political advantage. The rule of law – even once sacred property rights – has been sacrificed for political expediency, undermining trust, especially in states.

Hence, concerted interest rate hikes by influential Western central banks have proved to be an unnecessary, inappropriate and blunt demand-side tool to address contemporary inflation driven primarily by supply-side factors!

Instead of addressing inflation due to supply disruptions, higher interest rates have cut both private and government spending, resulting in less demand, jobs and incomes in much of the world.

In the US, successive presidents maintained full employment since Obama inherited the 2008 global financial crisis. Uniquely, its central bank, the US Fed, has a dual mandate to maintain full employment and financial stability.

All over the world, the deliberate and concerted interest rate hikes of 2022 and 2023 have proved to be both contractionary and biased against labour and jobs.

Global South’s hands tied
Policymakers in the Global South are greatly constrained by their circumstances. Exposed to global markets and with limited fiscal and monetary policy instruments at their disposal, they are captive to pro-cyclical policy biases.

The International Monetary Fund and other international financial institutions tend to demand fiscal austerity conditionalities in return for any credit relief provided.

Thus, recipient governments are subject to spending constraints instead of providing relief. Worse, many legislatures have imposed unnecessary spending constraints on themselves, supposedly to enhance government fiscal credibility.

Supposedly independent central banks have further compounded monetary policy constraints. Such central banks are primarily responsive to international and national financial interests rather than national policy priorities.

Following monetary and financial liberalisation in recent decades, developing countries are much more exposed to debt crises worse than those experienced in the 1980s.

Then, governments in Latin America, Sub-Saharan Africa and elsewhere had borrowed heavily, mainly from US and UK commercial banks. After US Fed chair Paul Volcker raised interest rates sharply from 1980, severe fiscal and debt crises paralysed many of these governments for over a decade.

The debt exposure level is much higher and borrowed from varied sources, significantly more market-based and non-bank. Governments have also provided guarantees for state-owned enterprises to borrow heavily, but less accountably than with sovereign debt.

New divides in post-unipolar world
The unipolar world moment after the end of the first Cold War briefly saw unchallenged US hegemony. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development developed policies for the global North in trade, investment, technology, finance, tax and other vital areas, typically at the expense of the South.

More recently, the ‘new Cold War’ or geopolitical policies, including illegal sanctions, have frustrated developing countries’ aspirations to reach the Sustainable Development Goals, adapt to global warming and its effects, and retrieve a fairer share of global corporate income tax revenue.

With most economies barely growing, and efforts by many governments to reduce imports, export opportunities have become more uncertain and constrained, ending a crucial premise for globalisation. With higher interest rates, even finance has abandoned developing countries in ‘flights to safety’ to the US.

Lacking the ‘exorbitant privilege’ of issuing the US dollar, still the world’s reserve currency, most developing countries lack monetary, fiscal and policy space. Unlike rich nations which borrow in their own currencies, most developing countries remain vulnerable to foreign exchange rate vagaries.

Poorest getting poorer
With Obama’s ‘Pivot to Asia’ launching US efforts to check China, its lending to developing countries, including in Sub-Saharan Africa, fell from around 2016.

Despite higher borrowing costs, many of the poorest countries turned to private creditors. But private market lending to poor nations dried up from 2022 as the US Fed raised interest rates sharply for almost two years.

As debt service costs soared, distress risks have risen sharply, especially in the poorest nations. While not obviously due to a conspiracy against the global South, there is little concern for the predicament of the worst off in the poorest countries.

Meanwhile, poverty in the poorest countries has not declined for over a decade.

With international disparities growing at the expense of the poorest people in the poorest nations, the desire to emigrate continues to rise although mainly unaffordable to the poorest.

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

• Onerous Debt Making Poorest Poorer
• Rich Nations, IMF Deepen World Stagnation
• Open Veins of Africa Bleeding Heavily
• Inflation Phobia Hastens Recessions, Debt Crises
• 1980s’ Redux? New context, Old Threats
• China Debt Traps in the New Cold War
• Prioritise Pandemic Relief, Recovery: No Time for Debt Buybacks
• Neoliberal Finance Undermines Poor Countries’ Recovery