Africa’s laboratories need to step up testing to aid in fighting Anti-Microbial Resistance. This photo is a 3D computer-generated image of Mycobacterium tuberculosis bacteria, the pathogen responsible for causing the disease tuberculosis (TB). Credit: CDC/Unsplash
By Francis Kokutse
ACCRA, Nov 3 2022 (IPS)
African countries must find a way of fighting Anti-Microbial Resistance in the healthcare system to avoid unnecessary deaths.
A few months ago, the President of the Ghana Public Health Association, Amofah George, narrated how he saw a patient die after failing to respond to all the available antibiotics used for managing her septicemic condition, blood poisoning, especially caused by bacteria or their toxins. He attributed the situation to antibiotic resistance, or Anti-Microbial Resistance (AMR) which he said has become a growing pandemic.
The problem is simple: Africa’s healthcare system does not routinely rely on laboratories to produce tests for treatment. AMR programme manager of the African Society for Laboratory Medicine (ASLM), Edwin Shumba, told IPS, “Ghana, like other countries on the continent, rely on a few medical laboratories to conduct bacteriology testing as part of the routine clinical services.”
“This means that doctors are flying blind when prescribing a treatment to their patients, and public health experts do not have an insight of what is ongoing in terms of AMR, at hospital and national level,” Shumba said.
“The growing threat of AMR has implications for patient care: the antibiotics that used to work will not be able to cure the infections caused by resistant bacteria anymore. This means more that infections might take longer to cure, might be more severe (mortality, morbidity), and will cost more to the society.”
Worried by the increasing cases of AMR, the African Society for Laboratory Medicine (ASLM) has spearheaded a study, and data from 14 sub-Saharan countries show that only five out of the 15 antibiotic-resistant pathogens – a bacterium, virus, or other microorganisms that can cause disease –designated by the World Health Organization (WHO) as a priority are being consistently tested, and that all five demonstrated high resistance.
Across the 14 countries, clinical and treatment data are not being linked to laboratory results, making it hard to understand what’s driving AMR. Out of almost 187,000 samples tested for AMR, around 88% had no information on patients’ clinical profile, including diagnosis/origin of infection, presence of indwelling devices (such as urinary catheters, feeding tubes, and wound drains) often associated with development of healthcare-associated infection, comorbidities, or antimicrobial usage. The remaining 12% had incomplete information.
The multi-year, multi-country study was carried out by the Mapping Antimicrobial Resistance and Antimicrobial use Partnership (MAAP), a consortium spearheaded by the African Society for Laboratory Medicine (ASLM), with partners including the Africa Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC), the One Health Trust, the West African Health Organization (WAHO), the East, Central, and Southern Africa Health Community (ECSA-HC), Innovative Support to Emergencies, Diseases, and Disasters, and IQVIA. It provides stark insights into the under-reported depth of the AMR crisis across Africa and lays out urgent policy recommendations to address the emergency.
MAAP reviewed 819,584 AMR records from 2016 to 2019 from 205 laboratories across Burkina Faso, Ghana, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Malawi, Eswatini, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Gabon, and Cameroon. MAAP also reviewed data from 327 hospital and community pharmacies and 16 national-level AMC datasets.
The researchers found that most African laboratories are not ready for AMR testing. Only 1.3% of the 50,000 medical laboratories forming the laboratory networks of the 14 participating countries conduct bacteriology testing. And of those, only a fraction can handle the scientific processes needed to evaluate AMR. Researchers also found that in eight of the 14 countries, more than half of the population is out of reach of any bacteriology laboratory.
The study results provide insights into the AMR burden and antimicrobial consumption in the 14 countries where most available AMR data is based only on statistical modeling. The effort by MAAP is the first of its kind to systematically collect, process, and evaluate large quantities of AMR and antimicrobial consumption (AMC) data in Africa.
The WHO has repeatedly stated that AMR is a global health priority—and is, in fact, one of the leading public health threats of the 21st century. A recent study estimated that, in 2019, nearly 1.3 million deaths globally were attributed to antimicrobial-resistant bacterial infections. Africa was found to have the highest mortality rate from AMR infections in the world, with 24 deaths per 100,000 attributable to AMR.
ASLM’s director of science and new initiatives, Pascale Ondoa, said, “Africa is struggling to fight drug-resistant pathogens, just like the rest of the world, but our struggle is compounded by the fact that we don’t have an accurate picture of how antimicrobial resistance is impacting our citizens and health systems.”
The research also found that only four drugs comprised more than two-thirds (67%) of all the antibiotics used in healthcare settings. Stronger medicines to treat more resistant infections (such as severe pneumonia, sepsis, and complicated intra-abdominal infections) were unavailable, suggesting limited access to some groups of antibiotics.
ASLM’s chief executive Nqobile Ndlovu said, “Across Africa, even where data on antimicrobial resistance is collected, it is not always accessible, often recorded by hand, and rarely consolidated or shared with policymakers; as a result, health experts are flying blind and cannot develop and deploy policies that would limit or curtail antimicrobial resistance.”
“The disconnect between patient data and antimicrobial resistance results, coupled with the extreme antimicrobial resistance burden, makes it incredibly difficult to provide accurate guidelines for patient care and wider public health policies,” said Dr Yewande Alimi, Africa CDC AMR programme coordinator. “Hence, collecting and connecting laboratory, pharmacy, and clinical data will be essential to provide a baseline and a reference for public health actions.”
“Collectively, the data highlights a dual problem of limited access to antibiotics and irrational use of those that are available,” said IQVIA’s head of Public Health (Africa and Middle East) and Real-World Evidence (Middle East), Deepak Batra.
“As a result, people don’t get the right treatment for severe infections, and irrational use of antibiotics drives antimicrobial resistance for existing available treatment options. Routine monitoring of antimicrobial consumption could help monitor the limited access and irrational use,” he added.
Based on the findings, MAAP calls for a drastic increase in the quality and quantity of AMR and AMC data being collected across the continent, along with revised AMR control strategies and research priorities.
For Shumba, Ghana, like the rest of Africa, can fight AMR by including critical interventions in revised versions of the national AMR Action plans, essential medicine Lists, laboratory strategies, and standard treatment guidelines.
“This heavy toll on the health systems poses a major threat to progress made in health and in the attainment of Universal Health Coverage, the African Union’s Agenda 2063: The Africa We Want and the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals,” he added.
Shumba said the AMR coordinating committee of Ghana could assist other policymakers in using the evidence gathered by the MAAP project to refine their strategies for AMR containment. In addition, they can plan to increase the number and capacity of medical laboratories to conduct bacteriology testing in the country.
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
UN Security Council Meets on Maintenance of Peace and Security of Ukraine. October 2022. Credit: UN Photo/Eskinder Debebe
By Joseph Gerson
NEW YORK, Nov 3 2022 (IPS)
On November 1, a statement of solidarity with Russians opposed to the Ukraine War was published. It was signed by more than 1,000 U.S. men and women who had opposed the U.S. invasions of Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq.
At a time when the Ukraine War increasingly resembles the trench warfare of the First World War and the spiraling escalation of the Cuban Missile Crisis, leading U.S. peace organizations co-sponsored the statement, which also called for negotiations to end the catastrophic Ukraine War.
The announcement was first sent to a friend in St. Petersburg Russia who must remain unnamed. He is a humble and dedicated scientist who lost his job years ago after revealing independent radiation measurements that he took following the Chernobyl meltdown.
On the day following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, this man had signed and was publicizing a petition signed by more in a million Russians condemning the imperial invasion of Ukraine and calling for those who had ordered it to be tried as war criminals. In public and discrete ways, he and others continue to oppose the war despite the risk of serious imprisonment.
The second person to receive our statement was a Russian psychologist who fled Russia shortly before the war. She uses social media to connect with and organize people left behind and others in the Russian diaspora. And, before the statement went to the press and out via social media, it went to Yurii Sheliazhenko, a courageous Ukrainian professor and pacifist who has been speaking inconvenient truths about the futility of war and who had earlier translated our statement into Russian and Ukrainian.
Despite the risks involved, each committed to share the statement, especially among the estimated 500,000 men who have risked fleeing Putin’s increasingly militarized Russia.
What is the value of an expression of solidarity, even one as modest as a computer click?
For many across the world, there was immediate identification with the images of the hundreds of thousands of Russian young men fleeing to impoverished and remote countries like Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, as well as to Kazakhstan and Germany to avoid the war.
They left families and careers behind, possibly never to return. They face the challenges of finding places to sleep and to finding work to feed themselves in unknown nations and cultures. And we have learned to our sorrow and outrage across the West, desperate refugees are not always welcomed or long tolerated.
Yet, as one Russian woman wrote from exile, she suffers under the weight of people thinking that all Russians support Russia’s aggression. It helps, she wrote, to know that she and other Russians are being recognized as different. That makes it easier for her to face the demands of each uncertain day. To this, I would add, it illustrates the potential for peaceful and mutually beneficial relations between our peoples.
Of course, more than solidarity is needed. Our statement also called for a ceasefire and “negotiations leading to a just peace, including respect for Ukrainian sovereignty as a neutral state”. As we did in the early years of our opposition to the nationally self-destructive invasions of Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq, the statement was designed to add weight to growing calls for a national policy change.
The Biden and Zelensky commitments to fight this war to the last Ukrainian in order to weaken Russia (which will remain a nuclear power) and to retake all of historic Ukraine including Crimea are worse than futile. The savaging of Ukraine begins to resemble Beirut and Grozny at the end of those civil wars.
And Russian nuclear doctrine informs us that it can resort to nuclear attacks when the survival of the state – read Putin’s political career – is in jeopardy. Pressing for diplomacy to stop the killing and to prevent the war’s spiraling escalation, as well as expressing solidarity, has become imperative.
Our solidarity initiative has roots in experiences and lessons that some of us took from the Vietnam War as from Margaret Mead’s dictum that a small group of people can change the world. The initiative grew from a collaboration of veterans of the Vietnam era peace movement, Terry Provance, now of the United Church of Christ and Doug Hostetter, a Mennonite pastor and Pax Christi International’s Associate UN Representative, and me.
It was during the Vietnam War that I first experientially learned the value of solidarity. After considering a Canadian exile, I became a draft resister facing possible imprisonment and served as a leading organizer against the war in the intellectual and moral wasteland of what was then the Phoenix Valley.
Talk about isolation and alienation. I was an aspiring East Coast intellectual disoriented and making his way in Barry Goldwater’s Arizona. That was before fax machines, before the Internet, and when Phoenix was dominated by a John Birch Society extreme right-wing monopoly newspaper that limited and distorted what people could know, and which used its pages to instruct its readers where to find our small community of war opponents and how to beat us.
Back then, despite constitutional guarantees, it was possible to be arrested and to suffer what more recently has become known as the Eric Garner chokehold at the hands of the police and be sentenced to six months in jail for the “crime” of distributing anti-war flyers on the public sidewalk – an action ostensibly protected by the Constitution.
We and other war resisters experienced the salve and inspiration of solidarity in many forms, from local religious leaders who demonstrated that they cared, from activists back East who sent bail money, and from the distant moral courage of Swedish Prime Minister Olof Palme whose courageous denunciation of the war made its way around the world – even to the Arizona desert.
Since then, I have learned the sustaining value of even small expressions of human solidarity: from Palestinians whose homes were demolished in illegal Israeli collective punishments; from the suffering and courageous of Japanese, Marshall Islanders, and U.S. downwinder A-bomb survivors, and from Okinawans who have endured and resisted eight decades of Japanese and U.S. military colonialism. In each case, international support and solidarity have played critical roles in their continuing struggles for justice.
Is solidarity enough? Of course not! Thus, our call urges U.S. policy change. It is possible to support Ukrainians without urging and funding another war without end. In recent weeks, we have been reminded of Gandhi’s truth that “When the people lead, the leaders will follow.” The withdrawal of the letter signed by thirty members of Congress urging President Biden to make negotiations a priority will long stand as a profile in cowardice.
Except for several members of Congress including Ro Khanna and Jamaal Bowman who stood their ground, others who support Ukraine but also diplomacy, lacked confidence that they had public backing and withered in the face of threats from Speaker Pelosi.
Our solidarity statement is but one of ways that people are beginning to break the silence, opening the way for rational and humane discourse, and providing off ramps for bellicose U.S., Russian, Ukrainian and European leaders.
A Cuban Missile Crisis redux or a replay of World War I redux must be avoided. Negotiations may not bring an immediate end to the war, but we should have learned from the diplomacy that avoided nuclear annihilation over Russian missiles in Cuba fifty years ago, which brought us the armistice the ended the First World War, and that led to arms control agreements during the last Cold War that war is not the answer.
Pope Francis, U.N. Secretary General Guterres and a growing number of people have it right: human solidarity and diplomacy!
Dr. Joseph Gerson is President of the Campaign for Peace, Disarmament and Common Security and author of With Hiroshima Eyes and Empire and the Bomb.
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Illegal fishing is not only affecting the environment but impacting on the livelihoods of millions of fishers are also at stake, according to a new report. Here residents wave to fishers on boats in Saint Louis, Senegal. Credit: Carsten ten Brink/Flickr
By Ed Holt
BRATISLAVA, Nov 2 2022 (IPS)
As a new report lays bare the massive financial costs to developing states of illegal fishing, campaigners are hoping that drawing attention to the practice’s devastating economic effects will help push governments to greater action against the illicit trade.
Research by the Financial Transparency Coalition (FTC) released at the end of October showed that states are losing up to 50 billion US Dollars per year to the trade, with almost half of all vessels involved in illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing plundering African waters.
The massive ecological damage of IUU fishing has made headlines in recent years, but the report’s authors say they believe by focusing on the financial aspect of the practice, governments will have more incentive to deal with the issue.
“Until now, IUU fishing has been seen mostly as an environmental issue and a food security issue. But what we’re trying to do, almost for the first time, is to show that this is a serious financial issue, that countries are losing billions of dollars because of IUU fishing, so the issue moves from fisheries ministries to finance ministries,” Alfonso Daniels, lead author of the report, told IPS.
“Fisheries organisations are beginning to recognise that this is a financial issue, of money lost to illicit financial flows. Once this is established, there will be more incentive for countries to act because they are losing money,” he said.
The ecological damage of IUU fishing has been widely documented. The UN has warned that more than 90% of global fishing stocks are fully exploited, overexploited or depleted, describing the situation as an ‘ocean emergency’. IUU fishing is a key contributor to overfishing, accounting for as much as one-fifth of global fisheries catches.
But the report from FTC – a group of 11 NGOs from around the world – draws attention to the economic costs of IUU fishing, which disproportionately affects poorer coastal states.
It says IUU fishing accounts for as much as one-fifth of global fisheries catches, representing up to 23.5 billion USD every year, with overall economic losses estimated to be 50 billion USD, making it the third most lucrative natural resource crime after timber and mining.
Meanwhile, Africa concentrates 48.9% of identified industrial and semi-industrial vessels involved in illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing, with 40% in West Africa alone, which has become a global epicentre for these activities.
But it is not just the direct financial losses that are creating economic problems in poorer states. The UN estimates that globally, 820 million people rely on fishing for their livelihoods, while in west Africa, as much as 25 percent of the labour force are involved in fishing.
IUU fishing is destroying key local fishing industries, driving communities into poverty and in some cases, malnutrition – the FTC report points out that fish consumption accounts for a sixth of the global population’s intake of animal proteins, and more than half in countries such as Bangladesh, Ghana, Indonesia, Sierra Leone and Sri Lanka.
“Illegal fishing and overcapacity in the Ghanaian trawl sector is having catastrophic impacts on coastal communities across the country,” Max Schmid, CEO of the Environmental Justice Foundation, told media earlier this year.
The group said in Ghana, for example, 80-90 percent of local fishers had seen a fall in income over the last five years.
The FTC report focuses on the financial secrecy behind IUU fishing that drives it.
It paints a picture of a practice being enabled by lax global legislation, poor international co-operation, and weak enforcement measures, coupled with a lack of resources for local bodies to fight it.
Much IUU fishing involves large foreign distant water fishing (DWF) fleets from industrialised countries. These work especially in Global South countries which cannot effectively monitor their waters and enforce regulations, and are prone to corruption, the report highlights.
It also underlines how IUU operators use complex, cross-jurisdictional corporate structures such as shell companies and joint ventures, and flags of convenience, to mask links to owners, allowing them to operate with virtual impunity.
Ending the financial secrecy around the practice is key to stopping it, say experts.
“[Solving the issue of ultimate beneficial ownership] is critical because it allows law enforcement to track ownership and go after individuals more effectively.” Lakshmi Kumar, Policy Director at the Global Financial Integrity NGO, told IPS.
But campaigners say that tackling financial secrecy alone is not going to bring an end to IUU fishing and that more measures need to be implemented, with the world’s richest countries taking the lead.
“Local governments are unable to crack down on this. Officials in West Africa have said they don’t have the means to patrol their borders and western countries are not prepared to give them that means.
“The only way there will be any change is through pressure from the main seafood markets, which is Japan, the US and EU. The G7 countries must force change by not opening their markets to anyone involved in IUU fishing, and provide the means to local governments to patrol their waters,” Daniels said.
Kumar said China also needs to be involved.
The study showed that 10 companies involved in IUU fishing were responsible for nearly a quarter of all reported cases, and that of those ten, eight were from China.
“In countries like China where most of these vessels originate, the government only gives vessels allegedly involved in IUU fishing a slap on the wrists and in other cases the vessels are part of a Chinese state-owned enterprise,” he said.
In its report, whose authors claim it is the largest analysis of IUU fishing ownership data to date, FTC calls for a number of steps to be taken.
It wants to see, among others, fisheries included in national beneficial ownership registries in all jurisdictions, with information made available to the public, fisheries included as an extractive industry in key initiatives including the Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative (EITI).
It also wants governments to publish an up-to-date list of IUU vessels allowing the use of fines and sanctions on the companies and real owners which would be collated internationally under IMO-FAO auspices to allow institutions focusing on fisheries management and Illicit Financial Flows to work together and wants to see more external support to boost monitoring capacity by coastal state governments.
The group is planning to present its findings to the European Parliament in November, and hopes to organise a high-level event in early November with representatives from the African Union and other institutions to discuss the report.
But FTC officials and other campaigners against IUU fishing are under no illusions about how quickly governments might begin to ramp up any efforts to stop their practice.
They say though that a combination of growing crises may soon force their hands.
“A combination of crises makes me think governments will be pushed into doing something. The UN has talked of an ‘ocean emergency’ because of overfishing and with the current combination of a cost of living crisis, a food crisis, the rise of the fishmeal industry in west Africa – the situation is not sustainable in ten years, or even in five or six years from now,” said Daniels.
And it would be in rich countries’ long-term interest to make sure they do address the problems IUU fishing is causing in Global South states, he added.
“All the money being lost by African countries through illicit financial flows is being lost to these other [richer] countries. They may think why should we care so much about this? But that’s a very short-sighted view, because if you mistreat fisheries grounds in West Africa then you will encourage the loss of fishing jobs and fishermen will want to migrate to Europe, then you have a migration crisis,” Daniels said.
“This is not something theoretical – you go to coasts and ports in Senegal, for example, and many people cannot catch fish, so what else are they going to do? I spoke to some people who tried to go to Spain. They failed, but this phenomenon is happening now. The approach [from these richer countries] is so short-sighted, they’re not taking this seriously.”
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
There are over 8,500 coal power plants in the world, with over 2,100 GWs of capacity. These plants generate about 10 gigatons of CO2 emissions per year, nearly 30% of the global total. Credit: Bigstock
By Philippe Benoit and Chandra Shekhar Sinha
WASHINGTON DC, Nov 2 2022 (IPS)
Report after report highlights that we can only achieve the greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions required by the climate goals of the Paris Agreement if much of the existing coal power generation capacity is retired early. To this end, one concept that deserves greater consideration is conducting an auction for early retirement of coal power plants worldwide: a global coal retirement auction. This article sets out the broad outlines of how this global auction might operate.
The International Energy Agency (IEA) has estimated that there are over 8,500 coal power plants in the world, with over 2,100 GWs of capacity. Although these plants are concentrated in a limited number of countries (notably China, followed by India and the U.S.), there are coal plants running in over 100 countries with over 2,000 owners.
These plants generate about 10 gigatons of CO2 emissions per year, nearly 30% of the global total. This level of emissions from coal is incompatible with either the “well below 2oC” or the more ambitious ”1.5oC” temperature targets set out in the Paris Agreement.
Accordingly, climate/development organizations, like the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the World Bank, the IEA and RMI, are exploring programs to effect the early retirement of these coal plants.
The International Energy Agency has estimated that there are over 8,500 coal power plants in the world, with over 2,100 GWs of capacity. Although these plants are concentrated in a limited number of countries (notably China, followed by India and the U.S.), there are coal plants running in over 100 countries with over 2,000 owners
But closing these plants presents two important challenges. First, retiring these plants removes electricity production that many countries rely upon for their economic development … production that would need to be replaced with preferably low-carbon sources. Second, owners are generally unwilling to shutter revenue-generating plants and want financial compensation for the returns they would forego from the premature retirement of their asset. This article addresses this second constraint.
There are various regulatory mechanisms that can be used to push early retirement, such as mandating closure of plants or imposing a carbon tax or other cost that makes operating the plant uneconomic.
A completely different tack is to entice closures by paying the owners to do so. This is the premise of, for example, the ADB’s innovative Energy Transition Mechanism.
But what’s a fair price? Perhaps, however, that’s not the right question. Rather, at what price are the owners willing to shutter their plants? Given that there are more than 8,500 coal power plants operating with different technical and revenue characteristics, and over 2,000 plant owners in diverse financial situations following distinctive corporate strategies (including numerous state-owned enterprises), the answer will vary.
A technique that has been used in this type of context of multiple actors is an “auction”. While in the traditional context, a seller looks to get the highest price from multiple possible buyers through an auction, in this case, we have a buyer that is interested in paying the lowest price to different plant owners (i.e., the sellers) for the retirement of their coal plants.
This is referred to as a “reverse auction”. This tool has been used to acquire new power production, including renewables, at low prices, and specifically in the climate context to attract cost-effective investments that reduce methane emissions.
The reverse auction mechanism could be used to solicit proposals from coal power plant owners as to the price at which they would be willing to close their plant. Conceptually, this could be done on the basis of MWs of installed power generation capacity. Under the auction, an interested coal plant owner would offer to sell — more specifically, to shutter — their MWs of plant capacity by a fixed time at a proposed price.
Importantly, the climate benefit sought by the auction is not from the decommissioning of MWs of capacity itself, but rather from the GHG emissions that would be avoided by retiring that capacity. Accordingly, for any coal retirement tender, it will be necessary to estimate the level of emissions that would be avoided.
This determination will be based on several factors, including the particular plant’s efficiency, remaining operational life and other technical characteristics, the type of coal used, and the amount of electricity production projected to be foregone through early retirement given the power system’s expected demand for electricity from that plant.
Tenders should include sufficient information to evaluate these items and, by extension, the level of avoided emissions and related climate benefit to be produced from the proposed retirement. This, in turn, will drive how much the auction buyer should be willing to pay for the tender.
Moreover, because it would be largely counter-productive from a climate perspective to pay to retire existing coal plants to see that money used directly (or indirectly) to build new fossil fuel generation, the tender by the plant owner would need to be accompanied by an undertaking not to reinvest in new fossil fuel generation.
As has been repeatedly explained, CO2 emissions have a global impact that is essentially unaffected by the geographic location of the emitting plant. Given this global nature of emissions, the auction would likewise be conducted at a worldwide level as a global auction. From India to Indonesia, from South Africa to South Korea, from Poland to Australia, any plant anywhere would be eligible to participate in the global auction.
Given this scope, an international organization like the United Nations or a multilateral development bank would be well positioned to provide the platform for this auction. One could imagine a system where the auction bidding process sets out eligibility criteria for projects, the methodology for estimating GHG emission reductions, and other key bid-submission parameters.
Significantly, while the bidding process would be managed on an integrated basis, the funding and selection of winners need not be. Rather, a system that allows for the matching of interested coal retirement buyers with individual plant owners could be used.
For example, buyers and their funding could be mobilized on a plant-by-plant basis based on information submitted by the plant owner through the auction process. Indeed, many potential funders have areas of focus that could lead them to be attracted to retiring coal assets only in certain countries (e.g., funders interested in a targeted set of developing countries). The proposed auction structure could accommodate these preferences. Moreover, the global auction could also operate in association with country-specific approaches.
One potential source of funding for coal retirements tendered under the auction is the potentially large amounts of capital to be mobilized through expanded carbon credit mechanisms under development. Tapping into these mechanisms might require establishing defined project eligibility criteria, frameworks for calculating GHG emissions reductions, and associated monitoring and verification systems to enable payments for emission reductions at the time of decommissioning based on a price for emission reduction (“carbon”) credits.
It is also important to recall the first constraint noted earlier, namely that countries, and particularly developing countries, will need more electricity to power further economic and social development. Accordingly, any global auction to retire coal plants needs to be coupled with a program to fund new renewables electricity generation.
Climate change is a global challenge affected by GHG emissions from anywhere. We need to reduce emissions from coal power generation and that requires some program to encourage and entice owners to shutter their plants. A global auction, conducted by the United Nations or a similar international organization, would help to identify opportunities where willing plant owners and interested funders can make a deal.
Philippe Benoit has over 20 years working on international energy, finance and development issues, including management positions at the World Bank and the International Energy Agency. He is currently research director at Global Infrastructure Analytics and Sustainability 2050.
Chandra Shekhar Sinha is an Adviser in the Climate Change Group at the World Bank and works on climate and carbon finance. He previously worked at JPMorgan, TERI-India, UNDP, and the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.
Human rights defenders from Latin America join Front Line Defenders staff and UN Special Rapporteur Mary Lawlor during a candlelight vigil at the Human Rights Defender Memorial monument in Iveagh Gardens, Dublin, on 27 October 2022. Credit: Alex Zaradov for Front Line Defenders
By Andrew Anderson
DUBLIN, Ireland, Nov 2 2022 (IPS)
Before she was murdered in Honduras in 2016, the Lenca Indigenous woman and human rights defender Berta Cáceres poignantly said: “They are afraid of us because we are not afraid of them.”
It is a measure of the continued effectiveness of human rights defenders around the world that autocrats, bigots and powerful economic interests continue to invest significant resources to try and silence them or disrupt their work.
Sophisticated surveillance, brutal violence, expensive smear campaigns, significant time and energy from security services and police forces, endless judicial proceedings, new restrictive laws – the efforts of the oppressors pay a kind of tribute to the courage, tenacity and impact of human rights defenders.
Whilst human rights academics debate the relevance of a weakened UN system, the reality on the ground, in countless countries across all regions, is that communities continue to mobilize around a struggle framed in rights.
Sudan’s revolution united under the banner of “freedom, peace and justice,” while “women, life, freedom,” has become the slogan of the protests in Iran. And as Sonia Guajajara, head of the Articulation of Indigenous Peoples of Brazil (ABIP), said at the UN Climate Conference, “if there is no protection of indigenous territories and rights, there will also be no solution to the climate crisis, because we are part of that solution.”
The human rights defenders we work with every day at Front Line Defenders are an inspiration to all of us.
Liah Ghazanfar Jawad continues to work to support women and women’s rights in Afghanistan under brutal Taliban rule even though she has the option to be with her family outside the country.
Andrew Anderson, Executive Director of Front Line Defenders opens the Dublin Platform at Dublin Castle on 26 October 2022. Credit: Kamil Krawczak for Front Line Defenders
Obert Masaraure and Robson Chere of the Amalgamated Rural Teachers Union of Zimbabwe choose to continue their struggle even as they are detained, ill-treated and released. And many human rights defenders continue, in spite of the bombings and missile strikes, to document war crimes and provide support to victims in Ukraine.As Diana Berg, artist and human rights defender from Donetsk, told a packed conference room in Dublin, Ireland last week, “until I get killed by a Russian Iranian drone I will help survivors [and] deported teenagers and [help to] evacuate museums.”
The first Dublin Platform for Human Rights Defenders took place just over 20 years ago in January 2002. Our visionary founder, Mary Lawlor – now the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders – was determined that the organization would be driven by the needs expressed by defenders themselves. With a tiny team she worked wonders to bring over 100 human rights defenders to that launch of Front Line Defenders.
Two decades later, providing rapid and practical support for the protection of human rights defenders at a global level remains the core focus of the organization’s work. In 2021, for the first time we provided more than 1,000 grants to human rights defenders in 105 countries.
We are committed to the struggle. Our work is built on our profound respect for human rights defenders; for their work, their courage and their knowledge. We stand with them, and will provide support in every way that we can.
At the recently finished 11th Dublin Platform, we convened more than 100 at-risk human rights defenders from scores of countries for three days in iconic Dublin Castle. Among many other issues, we discussed how authoritarian regimes use counter-terrorism and security laws to target human rights defenders, the backlash against feminists and LGBTIQ+ human rights defenders, and the role of human rights defenders in the context of protests and social movements.
As we gathered in Dublin, we were acutely aware of those human rights defenders who were not with us. In 2016 we helped to set up a HRD Memorial Project to gather information on the cases of defenders who are targeted and killed because of their human rights work; to illustrate the scale of the phenomenon, to emphasize the systematic nature of these attacks, and to provide a space to pay tribute.
Following on from this, we worked with the Irish Department of Foreign Affairs to create a HRD Memorial monument in Dublin – a unique space where we recently held a poignant candlelight vigil to commemorate the hundreds of human rights defenders who have been killed while carrying out their peaceful work.
There are also many human rights defenders we would like to have welcomed to Dublin but whose governments prevented them from being there. These include long-term imprisoned human rights defenders such as Narges Mohhamadi in Iran, Dawit Isaac in Eritrea, Maria Rabkova in Belarus, Trần Huỳnh Duy Thức in Vietnam, Pablo López Alavez in Mexico and Ilham Tohti in China.
In particular I want to highlight my friend and former colleague Abdulhadi Al-Khawaja, who was abducted, tortured and sentenced to life in prison after a sham trial over 11 years ago. We continue to work for Abdulhadi’s release and for the release of all human rights defenders who are in prison.
The Iranian woman human rights defender Atena Daemi – also unable to be with us in Dublin because of the ongoing protests in Iran – nonetheless shared a powerful message about her motivation in dark times: “Humanity is our common love and fight. Human rights is the goal of all of us. It is the ultimate human joy and freedom and happiness.”
Such strength of conviction is what motivates us at Front Line Defenders to continue to protect and support human rights defenders worldwide and stand with them in their struggle against oppression.
Andrew Anderson is Executive Director of Front Line Defenders
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Urgent immediate actions must be taken now, both to address the crisis in the short-term and long-term. Credit: James Jeffrey/IPS
By Esther Ngumbi
URBANA, Illinois, USA, Nov 2 2022 (IPS)
The statistics are stark. The crisis is unprecedented. Yet again, according to the United Nations, famine looms in Somalia, with hundreds of thousands already facing starvation. In addition, droughts, and catastrophic hunger levels have left over 500,000 children malnourished and at risk of dying. This is already nearly 200,000 more than the 2011 famine. Urgent immediate actions must be taken now, both to address the crisis in the short-term and long-term.
Circumstances have been building up for the last four years to create this current crisis. Rainy seasons have failed for the last four years which has left many farmers without livestock or crops. Further, compounding the impact is the fact that the drought has coincided with a global rise in food, fuel, and fertilizer prices, the Ukrainian war, and the COVID-19 global pandemic.
The future isn’t promising either. According to the World Meteorological Organization, the forecasts reveal high chances of drier-than-average conditions in the horn of Africa. Other issues that are likely to persist in the future include food crises, civil war, and political instability.
Fixing the hunger crisis at the horn of Africa will require much more than emergency aid. Stakeholders must also roll out long-term solutions. For each dollar spent on humanitarian aid, 50 cents should go to long term solutions
Not only can the famine lead to untimely deaths, but hunger can affect people in other ways, particularly children. A recent systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that malnutrition was linked with cognitive development. In Ethiopia, a recent systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that malnutrition affected the academic performance of elementary school children. Another review also linked malnutrition with impaired brain development.
In a study that compared children of average nutrition with their malnourished peers, it was shown that malnourished children had lower IQs, lower school performance and less cognitive functioning. Left unchecked, malnutrition can be far-reaching and have a devastating and incalculable impact on children’s future potential.
What can be done differently now and in the coming years?
Immediately, there is need for humanitarian aid. Thankfully, organizations including the UN World Food Programme (UN-WFP), UNICEF and other NGOs are doing everything they can to provide food to the people that are suffering the most. UN-WFP, for example is delivering life-saving food and cash assistance. UNICEF is delivering ready-to-use therapeutic foods to treat children with severe acute malnutrition. It has also deployed mobile teams to find and treat children with severe malnutrition.
But, as we have repeatedly seen, providing aid is like putting on a band-aid. It is a temporary fix. Often, the international community and stakeholders react to crises in this way. After many years- it should be clear that short fixes in the form of humanitarian aid, including bursts of cash and food assistance to those most affected, are unsustainable.
Clearly, given how often drought and famine are issues, fixing the hunger crisis at the horn of Africa will require much more than emergency aid. Stakeholders must also roll out long-term solutions. For each dollar spent on humanitarian aid, 50 cents should go to long term solutions. For example, the UNICEF appeals for US$222.3 million dollars to provide humanitarian services to 2.5 million people in Somalia. Out of the entire amount, half of that should go to long-term projects that solve the root causes of hunger.
Undoubtedly, droughts are recurrent because of failed rainy seasons. There is need to roll out water projects to meet the water needs of growing crops for food for the impacted communities and their livestock. It is a no brainer. Just like the gas stations in America and other developed nations are present in every corner, there should be water stations every 10 or 20 miles.
This would be water sourced from aquifers and underground sources. Half of the funds received by the UN agencies, for example, could go towards actualizing this bold effort of drilling these water stations across Somalia. For example, out of the $222.3 million UNICEF is asking for, $111, should go to drilling water in Somalia.
With water, Somalia and other African countries that consistently are impacted by recurrent droughts, can diversify the crops they produce. More importantly, they can be able to implement climate smart practices and other local solutions.
Simultaneously, as water projects are rolled out, African countries including Somalia need to have clear, systematic, and holistic plans of how to solve climate linked extremes including drought, extreme temperatures, frequent insect outbreaks that are inextricably linked.
Planning should go hand in hand with strong documentation of what was done, how it was done, and how successful or unsuccessful it was in solving the crisis. At the moment, Somalia and other African countries lack accountability and transparency about what initiatives and strategies are implemented following early warnings. We will never make headways into solving these recurring crises, if we are not documenting what has been done, what worked and what failed.
Importantly, like any other crises, there is need to keep thinking of new solutions to roll out. As such, think tanks – that draw from in-country experts, diaspora, public, private, NGO and other stakeholder coalitions – need to research concrete strategies that can be implemented, tracked, and scaled.
We must invest in long-term solutions if we are to solve once and for all the recurrent drought, hunger and famines in Somalia and other African countries. Investing in long-term initiatives will not only solve hunger, but it will also reignite sustainable development and bring prosperity to communities. It is a win for all.
Dr. Esther Ngumbi is an Assistant Professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, and a Senior Food Security Fellow with the Aspen Institute, New Voices.
The laying of the Mayan Train along 1500 kilometers through five states in the south and southeast of Mexico, mostly through the Yucatan Peninsula, will damage the fragile jungle ecosystem, with the removal of vegetation and animal species. The photo shows an area cleared of vegetation near the municipality of Valladolid, in the state of Yucatan. CREDIT: Emilio Godoy/IPS
By Emilio Godoy
MEXICO CITY, Nov 2 2022 (IPS)
A beige line slashes its way through the Mayan jungle near the municipality of Izamal in the southeastern Mexican state of Yucatán. It is section 3, 172 kilometers long, of the Mayan Train (TM), the most important megaproject of President Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s administration.
The metal scrape of the backhoes tears up the vegetation to open up arteries in the jungle for the laying and construction of the five stops of this part of the future railway network, which is being built at a cost currently estimated at more than 15 billion dollars, 70 percent more than initially planned."Everything that is happening in the Yucatán peninsula is affecting the Mayan people, damaging the trees, the water, the animals. It is a part of our territory that is being destroyed. Those who don't produce their own food have to depend on others." -- Pedro Uc
Pedro Uc, an indigenous member of the non-governmental Assembly of Defenders of the Múuch’ Xíinbal Mayan Territory, summed up the environmental impact of the TM in an area of milpa – a traditional system of cultivation of corn, squash, beans and chili peppers – and poultry farming.
“Everything that is happening in the Yucatán peninsula is affecting the Mayan people, damaging the trees, the water, the animals. It is a part of our territory that is being destroyed. Those who don’t produce their own food have to depend on others,” he told IPS from Buctzotz (Mayan for “hair dress”), in Yucatán, some 1,400 km from Mexico City.
Without land, there is no food, stressed the activist, whose organization works in 25 municipalities on the peninsula, which includes the states of Campeche, Quintana Roo and Yucatán, and is home to the second most important jungle massif in Latin America, after the Amazon.
Despite multiple complaints of environmental damage, the Federal Attorney’s Office for Environmental Protection (Profepa) has yet to resolve these complaints, more than two years after construction began.
“It has never carried out its role. It has not addressed the issue, it is merely ornamental. Profepa should attend to the complaints,” said Uc, whose town is located 44 kilometers southeast of Izamal, where one of the railroad stations will be located.
Profepa, part of the Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources (Semarnat), received two complaints in 2020, one in 2021 and 159 in the first five months of this year for “acts or omissions in contravention of environmental laws,” according to public information requests submitted by IPS.
Profepa oversees the megaproject through its “Mayan Train Inspection Program, in the areas of environmental impact, forestry, wildlife and sources of pollution”, the results of which are unknown.
In December last year, the agency carried out an inspection of hazardous waste generation and management in the southern state of Chiapas, which, together with the states of Campeche, Quintana Roo, Tabasco and Yucatán, is part of the route for the railway.
In addition, in June and July, two other visits were made to verify measures to mitigate pollutant emissions and waste management. Profepa is still analyzing the results of these visits.
The environmental prosecutor’s office has carried out exploratory visits in nine municipalities of section 2, eight of section 4 and 16 of section 5. The laying of lines 6 and 7 began last April, but the agency has not yet inspected them. The megaproject consists of a total of seven sections, which are being built in parallel.
The TM, to be built by the governmental National Tourism Fund (Fonatur), will cover some 1,500 kilometers, with 21 stations and 14 stops, according to López Obrador, who is heavily involved in the project and is its biggest supporter.
To lay the railway, whose trains will transport thousands of tourists and loads of cargo, such as transgenic soybeans, palm oil and pork, 1,681 hectares of land will be cleared, involving the cutting of 300,000 trees, according to the original environmental impact study. The laying of sections 1, 2 and 3, which require 801 hectares, began without environmental permits.
The government sees the megaproject as an engine of social development that will create jobs, boost tourism beyond the traditional tourist attractions and bolster the regional economy, which has sparked controversy between its supporters and critics.
The construction of the Mayan Train has involved logging in several jungle areas in southeastern Mexico. The photo shows a breach opened by a backhoe on the outskirts of Playa del Carmen, in the state of Quintana Roo, in March 2022, without the required intervention by the environmental prosecutor’s office. CREDIT: Emilio Godoy/IPS
Free way
In November of last year, López Obrador, who wants trains running on the peninsula by the end of 2023, classified the TM as a “priority project” by means of a presidential decree, thus facilitating the delivery of environmental permits. On Oct. 25 the president promised that the test runs would begin next July.
This classification reduces Profepa’s maneuvering room, according to Carlos del Razo, a lawyer specializing in environmental cases, of the law firm Carvajal y Machado.
“Some of the early complaints could be filed for works where permit exemptions were issued because they were done on existing rights-of-way. But if it decides not to act, it has to argue that decision. The environmental prosecutor’s office will not have a particular interest in approving government works,” he told IPS.
In its authorizations, Semarnat ruled that Fonatur must implement programs for integrated waste management, soil conservation and reforestation, air quality monitoring, flora management and rescue and relocation of wildlife.
Profepa must supervise that these measures comply with the General Law of Ecological Balance and Environmental Protection, in force since 1988 and which environmentalists say has been violated.
López Obrador denies that there is deforestation, and promised the construction of three natural parks in eastern Quintana Roo and the reforestation of some 2,500 hectares in the vicinity of the railroad route.
In a tacit acknowledgement of logging in the project area, the Ministry of National Defense will plant trees, at a cost of 35 million dollars, according to an agreement between Fonatur and the ministry contained in the massive leak of military emails made by the non-governmental group Guacamaya and consulted by IPS.
Viridiana Mendoza, Agriculture and Climate Change specialist for Greenpeace Mexico, criticized “the lack of action” by Profepa.
“They had already deforested without an environmental impact assessment, which is a crime. We are not surprised, because it is part of the dynamic that has characterized the Mayan Train: illegalities, omissions, false information, violation of procedures. There is a conflict of interest because Profepa answers to Semarnat,” she said.
The international non-governmental organization has found “insufficient, false and inaccurate” information on sections 5, 6 and 7, so it is not possible to assess the dangers and damage to local populations and ecosystems.
Parts of the jungle of the Yucatan peninsula, in southeastern Mexico, have been cut down to make way for the construction of the Mayan Train. But the environmental prosecutor’s office, failing to comply with its legal duty, has turned a deaf ear to complaints of alleged ecological crimes. CREDIT: Guacamaya Leaks
Risks
The project is a paradox, because while the government promises sustainable tourism in other areas of the peninsula, it threatens the very attractions of this influx of visitors, such as the cenotes – deep, water-filled sinkholes formed in limestone – cave systems and the entire ecosystem in general.
The TM endangers the largest system of underground and flooded grottoes on the planet, a complex of submerged caves beneath the limestone terrain.
The porous (karst) soil of the peninsula sabotages the government’s plans, as it has forced Fonatur to change the route of the megaproject several times. For example, section 5 has experienced three modifications between 2021 and January 2022.
Faced with the wave of impacts, the last hope lies in organization by local residents, according to the Mayan activist Uc.
“Between the possible and the impossible, we inform people so that in their own community, they can make the decision they want to make. People do not have the necessary information. Let them take up the struggle from their own communities and make the decisions about what comes next,” he said.
But attorney Del Razo and environmentalist Mendoza said the courts are the last resort.
“The judiciary continues to be the most independent branch of power in Mexico. Interested parties could seek injunctions that order Profepa to correct the process. A strategy of specific details is needed to demonstrate the infractions. The effective thing is to go into the details of the challenges,” explained Del Razo.
Mendoza said there is a lack of access to information, respect for public participation and environmental justice.
“Profepa should have stopped the works for the simple fact of not having the environmental authorization when the removal of vegetation began,” she said. “We don’t see it as likely that it will seek to stop the construction, because we have seen its reaction before. Semarnat supports the project, regardless of the fact that it has failed to comply and is in contradiction with the laws.”
While its opponents seek to take legal action, the TM runs roughshod over all obstacles, which are dodged with the help of the Environmental Prosecutor’s Office, at least until now.
Related ArticlesView of the bulk fuel plant in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. Because the kingdom needs oil prices to remain high to balance its budget, it pushed OPEC and its allies to decide on a production cut as of Nov. 1. CREDIT: Aramco
By Humberto Márquez
CARACAS, Nov 1 2022 (IPS)
The decision to cut oil production by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and its allies as of Nov. 1 comes in response to the need to face a shrinking market, although it also forms part of the current clash between Russia and the West.
The OPEC+ alliance (the 13 members of the organization and 10 allied exporters) decided to remove two million barrels per day from the market, in a world that consumes 100 million barrels per day. The decision was driven by the two largest producers, Saudi Arabia – OPEC’s de facto leader – and Russia.
The cutback “is due to economic reasons, because Saudi Arabia depends on relatively high oil prices to keep its budget balanced, so it is important for Riyadh that the price of the barrel does not fall below 80 dollars,” Daniela Stevens, director of energy at the Inter-American Dialogue think tank, told IPS.
The benchmark prices at the end of October were 94.14 dollars per barrel for Brent North Sea crude in the London market and 88.38 dollars for West Texas Intermediate in New York."Notwithstanding Mohammed bin Salman's sympathy for Putin, the cut was due to his concern about the balance of the world oil market, and not to support Russia." -- Elie Habalián
“At the time of the cutback decision (Oct. 5) oil prices had fallen 40 percent since March, and the OPEC+ countries feared that the projected slowdown in the global economy – and with it demand for oil – would drastically reduce their revenues,” Stevens said.
With the cut, “OPEC+ hopes to keep Brent prices above 90 dollars per barrel,” which remains to be seen “since due to the lack of investment the real cuts will be between 0.6 and 1.1 million barrels per day and not the more striking two million,” added Stevens from her institution’s headquarters in Washington.
A month ago, the alliance set a joint production ceiling of 43.85 million barrels per day, not including Venezuela, Iran and Libya (OPEC partners exempted due to their respective crises), which would allow them to deliver 48.23 million barrels per day to the market.
But market operators estimate that they are currently producing between 3.5 and five million barrels per day below the maximum level considered.
The alliance is made up of the 13 OPEC partners: Algeria, Angola, Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and Venezuela, plus Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Brunei, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Mexico, Oman, Russia, Sudan and South Sudan.
The giants of the alliance are Saudi Arabia and Russia, which produce 11 million barrels per day each, followed at a distance by Iraq (4.65 million), United Arab Emirates (3.18), Kuwait (2.80) and Iran (2.56 million).
In July, U.S. President Joe Biden met with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, with whom he discussed human rights and abundant oil supplies for the global market. A few months later Riyadh led the decision for an oil cut that has been seen as a betrayal by Washington. CREDIT: Bandar Algaloud/SRP
United States takes the hit
U.S. President Joe Biden was “disappointed by the shortsighted decision by OPEC+ to cut production quotas while the global economy is dealing with the continued negative impact of (Russian President Vladimir) Putin’s invasion of Ukraine,” a White House statement said.
The price of gasoline in the United States has soared from 2.40 dollars a gallon in early 2021 to the current average of 3.83 dollars – after peaking at five dollars in June – a heavy burden for Biden and his Democratic Party in the face of the Nov. 8 mid-term elections for Congress.
Biden visited Saudi Arabia in July, while the press reminded the public that during his 2020 election campaign he talked about making the Arab country “a pariah” because of its leaders’ responsibility for the October 2018 murder in Istanbul of prominent opposition journalist in exile Jamal Khashoggi.
The U.S. president said he made clear to the powerful Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman his conviction that he was responsible for the crime. But the thrust of his visit was to urge the kingdom to keep the taps wide open to contain crude oil and gasoline prices.
Hence the U.S. disappointment with the production cut promoted by Riyadh – double the million barrels per day predicted by market analysts – which, by propping up prices, favors Russia’s revenues, which has had to place in Asia, at a discount, the oil that Europe is no longer buying from it.
Biden then announced the release of 15 million barrels of oil from the U.S. strategic reserve – which totaled more than 600 million barrels in 2021 and just 405 million this October – completing the release of 180 million barrels authorized by Biden in March, following the Russian invasion of Ukraine, that was initially supposed to occur over six months.
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and President Vladimir Putin chat cordially during a visit by the Russian leader to Riyadh in October 2019. The two major oil exporters lead the 23-state alliance that upholds production cuts to prop up prices. CREDIT: SPA
Shift in Washington-Riyadh relations
Karen Young, a senior research scholar at the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University in New York, wrote that “oil politics are entering a new phase as the U.S.-Saudi relationship descends.”
“Both countries are now directly involved in each other’s domestic politics, which has not been the case in most of the 80-year bilateral relationship,” she wrote.
“….(M)arkets had anticipated a cut of about half that much. Whether the decision to announce a larger cut was hasty or politically motivated by Saudi political leadership (rather than technical advice) is not clear,” she added.
Saudi leaders could apparently see Biden as pandering to Iran, its archenemy in the Gulf area, with positions adverse to Riyadh’s in the conflict in neighboring Yemen, and would resent the accusation against the crown prince for the murder of Khashoggi.
Young argued that “the accusation that Saudi Arabia has weaponized oil to aid Russian President Vladimir Putin is extreme,” and said “The Saudi leadership may assume that keeping Putin in the OPEC+ tent is more valuable than trying to influence oil markets without him.”
Gasoline prices in the United States, while down from their June level of five dollars per gallon, are still at a high level for many consumers ahead of the upcoming midterm elections. CREDIT: Humberto Márquez/IPS
More market, less war
OPEC’s secretary general since August, Haitham Al Ghais of Kuwait, said on Oct. 7 that “Russia’s membership in OPEC+ is vital for the success of the agreement…Russia is a big, main and highly influential player in the world energy map.”
Writing for the specialized financial magazine Barron’s, Young stated that “What is certainly true is that energy markets are now highly politicized.”
“The United States is now an advocate of market manipulation, asking for favors from the world’s essential swing producer, advocating price caps on Russian crude exports and embargoes in Europe,” Young wrote.
For its part, the Saudi Foreign Ministry rejected as “not based on facts” the criticism of the OPEC+ decision, and said that Washington’s request to delay the cut by one month (until after the November elections, as the Biden administration supposedly requested) “would have had negative economic consequences.”
In its most recent monthly market analysis, OPEC noted that “The world economy has entered into a time of heightened uncertainty and rising challenges, amid ongoing high inflation levels, monetary tightening by major central banks, high sovereign debt levels in many regions as well as ongoing supply issues.”
It also mentioned geopolitical risks and the resurgence of China’s COVID-19 containment measures.
The two million barrel cut was decided “In light of the uncertainty that surrounds the global economic and oil market outlooks, and the need to enhance the long-term guidance for the oil market,” said the OPEC+ alliance’s statement following its Oct. 5 meeting.
Oil analyst Elie Habalian, who was Venezuela’s governor to OPEC, also opined that “notwithstanding Mohammed bin Salman’s sympathy for Putin, the cut was due to his concern about the balance of the world oil market, and not to support Russia.”
Latin America, pros and cons
Stevens said the oil outlook that opens up this November will mean, for importers in the region, that their fuels will be more expensive but probably not by a significant amount, and net importers in Central America and the Caribbean will be the hardest hit.
Exporters will benefit from higher prices. Brazil and Mexico have already increased their exports of fuel oil, and Argentina and Colombia have hiked their exports of crude oil. And higher prices would particularly benefit Brazil and Guyana, which are boosting their production capacity.
Argentina could have benefited if it had begun to invest in production years ago, but its financial instability left it with little capacity to take advantage of this moment. And Venezuela not only faces sanctions, but upgrading its worn-out oil infrastructure would require investments and time that it does not have.